.40 vs .45

40 vs 45 vs 9

Quick story: Owned a Browning HiPower 9mm and Springfield Armory 1911 45acp...left with the army for a one year tour of Korea. When I returned I went to the range and found the 1911-45acp much more controllable after a year without shooting.....sold the Browning.

Also owned a Colt 10mm and S&W Sigma 40, liked the Colt, didn't like the S&W. I recently purchased a ParaOrd P16-40 (40S&W) for competition use. Would have preferred a 45acp, but in IPSC limited class, mag capacity helps and got 3 extra rounds with the 40S&W.

Overall, a 45acp in a "heavier" 1911 pistol is my favorite and very controllable. I've shot 152gr screamer rounds (1180 fps)to the docile 230gr @ 850fps. All were very controllable in the 1911.
 
Don't shortchange the 9mm.

+P and +P+ 9mm ammo will give you similar ballistics to .40 cal. And I've read that +P 9mm delivers only slightly more kick, if any, than standard 9mm loads.

That way you can cycle cheap, standard load 9mm by the bucket at the range and load some +P's when you get home as a defensive round without worrying about the added recoil fouling your follow-up shots when they count most. In other words, you don't have to practice with a ton of $0.50/round ammo at the range just to have confidence that you can handle +P 9mm loads against a bad guy. You shouldn't have a problem with added recoil.

Plus .40 cal. ammo doesn't come in +P or +P+. It's one bang fits all. :D

I'm researching guns and ammo for my own first handgun purhcase. I'm leaning toward Sig's (P228, P229 or Pro) or a Steyr M; all in 9mm. Wheel guns don't impress me personally. Too primitive.

Recoil is near-negligible with the P228. The 9mm is a much more easily controlled round compared to either the .40 cal or .45. I can fire fourteen rounds in under five seconds and hit a man-sized target at fifty feet with ease.
Click to expand...

http://www.remtek.com/arms/sig/model/228/228.htm

Sounds good to me. :D

Happy shootin'!
 
I have found 45's to be more comfortable in terms of recoil.
Imo the 45 is perfectly controlable . I have never liked 40's
they seem to be louder than most calibers , and the ammo cost
more . I also have found that the 45 has a smoother recoil , the 40 has too much bite for me. I would reccomend the 45 , but probably not as your 1st gun. For a first gun i would start with
a 38 special , or a 9mm . If you havent shot much the 45 isnt
a good first gun . Just my opion .
 
As been stated, it depends on the gun style, shape, material, etc. Let me start just my sharing my own personal two cent view on this, hehe. I personally like 9mm or .45 cal. It's not so much that I don't like the in betweens, but I don't see the practicallity in them othe than option and fun. Don't get me wrong, they are good calibers, they just don't attract me at all. The .357sig is about the same size as a 9mm but has a bevelled front shape which makes it a great fun ammo or caliber. It has more stopping than a 9mm though, very accurate, and comes sneaky close to a .45's power and it is all due to the shape on the cartridge. But they are hard ammos to find and pretty expensive. The .40cal is sized between a 9mm and a .45. Has about the same stopping power...almost as a .45 and is reasonably cheaper than the .357sig ammo. But does not seem to be as accurate and does recoil a bit less than a .45 but not by very much, and is a bit snappy. That being said, I would consider a .45 over it. The .40 has a bit less recoil than a .45, but the perceived recoil seems or feels more about the same as a .45. But again, this has alot to do with the size and materials made of the gun. A 9mm has about half a recoil of a .45 but not as much stopping power. But 9mm being tamer can be considerably more accurate. To me, the .357 and .40 are like hybrids of the 9 and 45. Compute your good and bad points to each caliber and go from there. But don't forget that each gun no matter if same caliber, will shoot, feel, and handle differently.
 
Hmmm. I wont throw out numbers...just my take on this subject...maybe even get into the 9mm issue too.
I have fired lots of 40's and 45's..the worst kicking gun I have owned in a s-auto was a .40. One of the mildest kicking guns was a 45...Actual percieved recoil is much different than you might expect...there are no rules...well a couple, but you know.

My .380 has a very sharp hit....sudden and quick...honestly the same recoil as my 9mm...just in a different way.

My 9mm has a quicker snap to it...but is softer than the .380...as the guns mechanism is taking part of the recoil and converting it to torque or twisting force....making it very livable.

My 40 was a recoil monster...it was light and with 180 gr target loads in it..it had twice the percieved recoil of my 9mm......very sharp and hard snap- up and back...

The 45's regardless of 1911, Glock or Taurus..etc. Had a much softer "hit" and seemed to recoil much slower...not bad at all.
Even +P ammo in a light gun, it wasnt near as bad as my old 40...
which I am getting another...I like the gun alot.

There really is no such thing as 40s&w +P....as most 40 ammo is loaded towards the pressure ceiling as it is...many state differently...but I have yet to see it. 40,000 PSI is +P+ territory
and thats where 40's are already.....

45's are a low pressure round and are nicer on most guns than 9 and 40 ammo that are higher pressure, pressure really has little to do with recoil...but the weight and layout of the gun and the bullet weight being fired will effect if more.

Shoot well
 
I didn't want to get something so big as a .45 because of recoil

Have you tried a .45? Jeez, my 104 pound wife LOVES her .45 because of such a low amount of recoil. It's a slower moving bullet in a heavier gun, so there's not quite as much snap in the recoil as the .40.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top