40S&W Accuracy

  • Thread starter Thread starter PreserveFreedom
  • Start date Start date
P

PreserveFreedom

Guest
I have been reading quite a bit here about people refering to 40S&W as "inaccurate". I don't believe a word of it. If all you can handle is 9mm or 45ACP, then 40S&W will seem inaccurate, whereas you are the inaccurate one. Despite what some people have stated, 40S&W is not a medium between 9mm and 45ACP. 9mm and 40S&W are both higher velocity cartridges while the 45ACP is a slower one. Now, don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with 9mm or 45ACP. 40S&W may just have a little more bite than someone that shoots the other two may be used to. When I first tried the round out, I swore I would never own anything chambered in it. Now, two pistols later, I wouldn't get rid of it for anything. If you carry and shoot it alot, and you tell yourself that it is an accurate cartridge, it becomes accurate. If you believe everyone that thinks otherwise, you will never have the ambition to master that power. If you try and have trouble with a 180 grain bullet that has a sharp recoil, try a 155 or 135 grain bullet and see if that helps. If you really think about it, after passing a hunk of lead through a rifled barrel, does the diameter or speed affect the trajectory that it passes through the air at? Now, a certain firearm may be inaccurate, but a cartridge?
 
I agree the .40 does have a nasty "snappy bite" of recoil. It is not a fun cartridge to shoot for target work IMO. Maybe I am not a good shot with a .40 due to its recoil (lets assume that for a minute). Now, explain why many "experts" in gun magazines IN GENERAL get WORSE groups with a "benchrested" .40 in general than with other chamberings? Explain why many "Master" and "Grandmaster" class competitors in my IPSC club refuse to use the .40 because of "inaccurate factory loads". In other words, it isn't just me and a few others who don't get good groups with .40's. An exception is the Glock 35, which is pretty damn accurate in my hands. Perhaps, the .40 can be made more accurate with homemade handloads, but I don't have the time to reload my own ammo.

Note: I get excellent to exceptional groups with the factory .45 ACP and good to very good groups with factory 9mm.



[This message has been edited by Quantum Singularity (edited September 27, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>An exception is the Glock 35, which is pretty damn accurate in my hands.[/quote]
My point exactly. If there is an exception, that means that the cartridge is not inaccurate. It is either the shooter or the pistol of choice.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
My point exactly. If there is an exception, that means that the cartridge is not inaccurate. It is either the shooter or the pistol of choice.[/b][/quote]

You make a good point. Could just be that the pistol makers produced .40 cal handguns so quickly, that they didn't make the necessary changes to assure accuracy in a fairly new caliber (its around 10 years old right)?

[This message has been edited by Quantum Singularity (edited September 27, 2000).]
 
It's a possibility. If so, that wouldn't make the cartridge itself inaccurate.
 
Agreed, it might just be the guns. Still, the .40 is NOT a pleasant round to shoot even for seasoned shooters like me. The .45 recoils straight back and is more gentle in nature despite being a heavier bullet(for me at least). The .40 tends to be more violent in nature with significant muzzle rise. I actually shoot the .357 mag better than most .40's which would tend to lead to the conclusion that the .40 guns are more to blame than the cartridge. I say this since it can't be the recoil alone that affects my accuracy (since I shoot the .357 mag well).



[This message has been edited by Quantum Singularity (edited September 27, 2000).]
 
I recently got into using the .40S&W, and I have two handguns chambered for it. I don't find the recoil to be too bad. The only handgun chambering that I find is too much for me to accurately control is the .44 mag. Nothing wrong with the .44, understand, it's just more than I like. I find that recoil to be abusive, and it induces me to flinch badly. I haven't fired my .40's enough to definitively say that they are more or less accurate than anything else. My Beretta is a DAO and the trigger is whipping my butt in the accuracy department. It will take a lot of practice for me to get good with it.

-10CFR
 
I have to agree with your premise. I recenctly bought an HKUSPc40 and a Sig P239 40S&W. I had been renting a P229 (9mm) from the range every time I visited.

To make a long story short...when I took my 40S&W guns to the range the first time, I was all over the place. My wife...a completely new shooter, shot very tight groups. I attribute her great performance to the fact that she didn't know the difference and just went to town with the 40S&W. I noticed the more snappy recoil/muzzle flip and was fighting the damn pistol. I am now "unlearning" the 9mm and learning how to handle the 40S&W. IMNSHO I believe people pick up the 40S&W and expect to shoot like Bruce Willis from the get go... I love my 40S&W pistols and am becoming better at shooting them every visit to the range.
 
I notice slightly sharper recoil with the 40 S&W than most other auto cartridges, including the 41AE.

But......there are only accurate guns.
My EAA Witness, using a factory match barrel, hard-fit by me, is capable of under 2" at 50 yards (on my good days!).

I have considerable experience with .400-caliber pistols, since so many are used by L.E. now.
With good ammo most pistols are as accurate as any other common auto cartridge.

------------------
"All my ammo is factory ammo"
 
My Beretta 96 Elite will print 1.5" groups at 25 yards, this is not what I would consider innacurate. Most of the accuracy problems with the 40 stem from 2 things:

1) The twist rate of 1 in 16 is not enough for the standard 180gr bullet at 980 fps, 1 in 14 would be much better. Also, the 180's are too heavy for this caliber, the 155-165gr bullets are much better in just about every respect.

2) Have you slugged your barrel? most of the 40s&w barrels I have seen are .402-.403" this is not good when bullets are .400-.401".

It's not the cartridge that's inaccurate, just the gun that shoots it. Unfortunately in the case of the 40s&w, that covers most of the guns. I would really like to see both of these problems addressed by the manufacturers, but I won't be holding my breath.

------------------
NRA, GOA
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice"-Neil Peart
Vote in November.
 
The bottom line is that anything that is used overwhelmingly by law enforcement will be dissed just to try to out-psyc the authorities. This has got nothing to do with science IMHO. .40 is a fine calibur. It has got the right combination of of size and velocity.
 
Now you guys have me wondering... I currently own a 45 and have been planning on getting a 40sw. Main reason is that I can get the 40 in a more compact gun (Witness steel compact, narrower frame in 40 than 45). Some of the posts on here have me concerned. In a real lightweight gun (poly or alloy), I can see recoil as an issue. The one I'm considering is about 30oz-is recoil likely to be a issue? I haven't shot a 40sw yet. Thanks for any info.

Bri
 
Please read the link below: http://ubb.hkpro.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000048.html

Looke for this quote:

"probably an interesting to post here for discussion - we've shipped out about 18-20 USP 40 std length bbls and done about 14 O ring conversions on orig HK USP 40 std bbls -out of that population, I have had about seven customers how indicate they are printing or do print one hole groups (the few I thought to ask indicated at the seven yard line)"

Do you want it to be more accurate than that? ;)
 
I shoot a 40S&W Sig 226. In the past year i have put about 3500 rounds of various ammo thru it. From a rest at 50 ft. it will shoot a 2"group with almost any 155gr. ammo. When i use 180 gr., the group opens up to about 3". If I swap barrels to .357Sig, the groups are cut in half. I feel that the 180gr. .40 cal. is the best Defensive load of them all, even though the least accurate. Just my humble opinion, tho.
 
No accuracy problems with the Glock 27. In
the past, I got rid of a Sig-Sauer P229 in
.40S&W; mostly due to the muzzle flip and
short grip, more so than accuracy.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
BrianIdaho,

To answer your recoil question: going from a .45 to a .40 is very noticeable. The .40's recoil is much sharper than the .45's. The .40 also has more muzzle flip. Even on heavy guns, you can tell the difference. I find the .45 very comfortable to shoot, but after years of shooting the .40 (mostly rented .40's and friends' .40), I have never learned to like the snappy & sharp recoil. Because of this, I only buy .45 cal pistols (or 9mm). My advice is RENT ONE BEFORE YOU BUY. Most people can shoot a .45 much better than a .40. I used to work at a shooting range in my spare time, so I know firsthand. I will say this, of the people that actually rented both a .45 and a .40, the majority bought .45's. Same held true for people who rented 9mm's and .40's--the 9mm was bought more often. Only those who didn't rent first bought the .40 based only on its stopping power--not on whether they could shoot it comforably or not).

[This message has been edited by Quantum Singularity (edited September 27, 2000).]
 
I find it difficult to believe that any straight walled (or .001" taper)handgun case of any caliber would be inherently more or less accurate than any other. Particularly at ranges of 50 yards or less. Given an equal playing field, ie. handguns with "identical" dimensions and tolerances, I'd presume that there would be no statistically significant accuracy variance between the 9, 40 and 45. I would humbly suggest that the scaling up of 9mm-platform guns to .40 S&W may have been a contributing factor, with all of the attendant "visions and revisions" necessary to iron out the wrinkles. I think the .40 may stress the structural integrity of the 9mm-based platforms, especially barrel ridgidity and slide-barrel lockup. Increased real or perceived recoil may be a factor for some shooters as well. Personally, I find the .45 to have more recoil with any bullet weight, while I experience the .40 as having little more recoil than the 9mm, regardless of the gun/load combo. I know that many shooters perceive the .40 as having a "snappier" recoil than its competitors, however. Anyway, nothing new in my post- it's all been said or thought of before. The .40 S&W is, what, 10 years old? And the 9 and 45 are 98 and 95 respectively? Let's give the .40 and the guns (and shooters) a chance to catch up.
vanfunk

------------------
semper ubi sub ubi
 
I`ve only had 2 .40s and neither was terribly accurate but I blame that on the guns not the cartridge. One was a little Astra A-75, with it`s short barrel and heavy trigger it was hard to shoot small groups with. The other was a Sigma 40V,it was super reliable over 4000 or so rounds but I never could shoot any really good groups with it. I blame it on the somewhat funky trigger more than anything. Recoil of both guns wasn`t "bad" but it was "brisk". The A-75`s tang used to rip a small hole in the knuckle of my thumb (ouch) if I fired more than a mag. or 2 through it at a time,especially with hot loads. Shooting the Sigma (now owned by a friend of mine) and my P-97 side by side,their recoil feels roughly the same but the .40 is a bit "sharper" feeling. .45+Ps have a similar feel but with more overall recoil. That`s how it feels to me anyway. :) Marcus
 
I don't find the .40 has much recoil. I used to have problem with recoil even with 9mm. I started doing wrist exercises and lifting some weights. Recoil problem gone. One of my buddies, a petite woman, packs a g23 and she's a formidable shot.

------------------
"Get yourself a Lorcin and lose that nickel plated sissy pistol."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top