40S&W not so popular?

9mm is significantly cheaper, offers adequate stopping power, is easier to shoot, and offers higher capacity in the same gun.

You could also say that .45ACP costs more, offers adequate stopping power, is easier to shoot and offers lower capacity in a heavier gun. Yet it is still pretty popular, probably due to the large size.

If you could do something special with it to justify the cost then it would do better.
 
this is a bit of a funny thread. here's my take on it. my brother is a 40 guy... or was until he got into revolvers, now he never seems to shoot his 40s for some reason. other than him, I know 2 other people who prefer 40s, one is a cop, the other guy is a civi. the rest either lean to 9mm or 45acp. I shoot both the 9 and the 45, all my handguns are chambered in those, with the exception of one 22lr. I personally feel that there are two instances that you carry for, one where you need stopping power and one you need capacity for. for high capacity Ican pack my 9mms, for stopping power I can pack my 45s. 40sw is a compromise cartridge, not as much power as a 45 but not the capacity of a 9mm. if you just want to stockpile a single cartridge then 40 is great but there are better out there for every application.
 
I suspect a lot of people bought .40 S&W handguns back when it was the darling of many law enforcement agencies after the FBI had decided that the 9mm Luger was "inadequate". I also suspect that many of these folks bought 40 calibers without really having much experience with the round, or bought small pistols chambered in a caliber that was not really all that suitable for them.

Perceived recoil is a highly subjective thing and I think the key to becoming comfortable with .40 S&W is to have a pistol of sufficient size and weight to handle the recoil easily, maintaining an excellent grip, and just becoming more familiar with the recoil characteristics of the round. I do agree that the recoil of the .40 S&W cartridge does tend to be sharper than 9 mm Luger, or even .45 ACP, and it might not be the best choice for those with arthritic hands or wrists, or limited hand strength.

Many of us have become comfortable shooting .40 S&W, shoot it accurately, and don't plan to stop doing so.
Click to expand...

That's exactly where I land in this little recurring gun social media squabble. I've been around a good long time. I've seen the "Internet gun social media herd mind" move this way and that, on a lot of subjects. I've learned to mostly ignore it. "Sturgeon's Law", don't ya know.

I have 2 .40s now, both Springfield XD guns. They're heavy for their size, and pretty strongly sprung. They work.
 
Some how, can't remember the details, I came upon a Beretta Centurion 96D. I must have wanted a mate for the Beretta 92FS. I really don't enjoy the 92. It is to big and clunky for the 9mm. But the Centurion feels just right for the 40. My opinion is the 40 is more "comfortable" to shoot in a bigger gun. And it's accuracy out of the Centurion impressed me. My "arsenal runs from NAA 22 to DE 50AE so I have some experience. All said I will not be adding to my .40 inventory. I find the 45 acp and 38 Special just to accommodative to the firearm needs I have. Other than the .22, the 40 is the only caliber I do not load for though I have the equipment. If you run across a "deal", grab it. With the falling price of forty cal shoot cheap for a few years until your mood changes.
 
I have 3 40's ( sig 226, sig 239 and sig X five )....and I used to have a Wilson Combat 1911 in .40 ...

I don't shoot the .40 as much as I do the 9mm or .45 acp or .357 mag....and in general, for me, the .40's get left out...../ i find recoil is snappier and my followup shots are slower.....

I have Wilson 1911 in 9mm -- and sig 239 and 226 in 9mm as well ....and I just like shooting them better in 9mm ( in fact the Wilson 9mm is my primary carry and range gun )...less recoil, faster followup shots...

But everyone should buy & shoot whatever they want ....but yes, in my area sales on guns in .40 s&w are down...
 
First semi-auto I bought was a S&W Sigma in .40. Loved it but found a rockin' deal on a Glock 22 so the Sigma went.

Couple years with the Glock and I really wanted something with a manual safety. Enter my Stoeger Cougar 8040. Looking for an inexpensive 357 Sig barrel for it.

I like .40. Only semi-auto caliber I have. I don't find the recoil excessive. The guns I've owned have been accurate and very shootable.

I picked up a used Taurus PT 24/7 PRO C in .40 for a VERY good price. Took it apart and it had barely been used, I doubt less than a box of ammo. Thinking about it, someone must have picked it up as a carry gun and re-thought their decision after the first box of ammo.

If .40 is really falling out of favor I can see picking up some hot deals on some used guns in the future.

All the Best,
D. White
 
I've had a very low-mileage barely-used SIG P229 with .40 and .357 SIG barrels, three mags (2 in factory wrap), and a brand new Galco concealment holster, listed on Gun Broker at $750 for about 6 months now.

Gun's been gone through by Bruce Gray.
Rubber Hogues.
Pre-MIM parts.

Cannot move it.
Two apparently very unpopular calibers right now. :)
Denis
 
A few posters already mentioned owning a 9mm pistol as well as another autoloader in a larger caliber.

To me, owning a 9mm and a .45acp, or a 9mm and a 10mm, makes sense - especially if that 10mm is a Glock, which then let's you also shoot the .40, .357Sig, or 9x25Dillon from the same gun with just a barrel swap.

Owning a 9mm and a .40S&W doesn't make sense, other than for having those calibers represented in your autoloader collection, or for casual use as a range toy (e.g., Sunday afternoon plinking).

For practical purposes, such as home or personal defense (EDC), the 9mm and .40 cancel each other out, ballistically speaking.
 
I'm not one who's switching away, because I never switched to. I figured I had 9mm, and I had 45 acp. I didn't see a need for anything in between.
 
I always have to laugh when guys say that the .40 is a compromise caliber. ALL pistol calibers are a compromise caliber. A 9mm compromises capability for capacity and a .45 is a compromise in capacity vs. capability. The .40 sits nicely between the two. It offers near the capability of the .45 but with near the capacity of the 9mm. What's not to love about that? Given the right pistol, it's a great shooting caliber.

It's also a lot easier to reload for. The 9mm tapered case can get tiresome when reloading a lot due to the heavier pull required on the reloading arm. .45 used to be the easiest to reload, but in an age of SPP .45, it's slipped to #2 behind the .40. The straight wall case on the .40 is a breeze to reload for and they are all SPP brass.

My favorite pistol for HD is a CZ P09 in .40 that's running factory +2 mag extensions. That gives a 17+1 capacity in a very soft shooting platform. With the TLR-1 on the gun, it feels like a .45 when shooting. For winter carry, I carry a CZ P07 in .40 with the factory +2 mag extensions giving a nice, compact 14+1 rounds of .40. As much as I may love my 1911s, the trigger guards are too small for carry when wearing gloves. The P07 works quite well for winter carry.
 
Last edited:
I always have to laugh when guys say that the .40 is a compromise caliber. ALL pistol calibers are a compromise caliber. A 9mm compromises capability for capacity and a .45 is a compromise in capacity vs. capability. The .40 sits nicely between the two. It offers near the capability of the .45 but with near the capacity of the 9mm. * * *
Click to expand...

That's what the 10mm did before they shortened it to make the .40, and the 10mm did it with more power than either the .45 or 9mm.

Capacity is a gun-design issue. That's why 15-rd Glocks can be had in 9mm, .40, and 10mm, with the .45s typically holding one or two rounds less.

The only reason for the .40 "compromise" was to stuff low-end 10mm stopping power into a 9mm-size pistol. The 10mm requires a .45-size frame, as both cartridges have nearly the same COALs. :cool:
 
My most common carry guns are a .22 and a .38 Special....

I recently purchased my first .40, an S&W 410 that was very lightly used. Couldn't pass it up for right around $300 out the door.

I've not shot it much, but consistently hits 2 to 3 inches low for me.

That could be the ammo I was using, or it could be how I grip the gun.

I'll figure it out later.

Its primary use is going to be as my living room gun.
 
Because I like the 40 I had to get a taste of 10mm to see what it's all about.

It's all I have now, my G29 10mm. I sold my 9mm and my 40sw pistols but I got a 40sw barrel for the G29. :p
 
There's a lot of LEO .40 trade-ins out there, but I bet most of the new guns are in the same caliber although 9mm is making a slow comeback and some guys have stepped up to 45.

40S&W isn't going anywhere for a long time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top