.40S&W Why the haters?

It doesn't do anything that 9mm and .45acp can't do better.
Click to expand...

Well, it is more powerful than the nine, with close to the same mag. capacity. It's as effective as the .45 on Bubba, and better against barriers. And even better against barriers by simply dropping in the .357 SIG bbls.

I carry the P220 a lot because I like it--single stack and all. Good ergonomics, and I shoot it well. I don't have to irrationally convince myself that .45 is superior to the .40 and psychologically demote the latter to justify it.:cool:
 
I was offered a Sigma for 99 bucks, so I had to choose between the 40 and the 9mm. I kicked it around a bit, and decided on the 40. It is a very sweet shooting round, imho, but I enjoy recoil. I liked the caliber enough to replace that Sigma with a Sig P226 Equinox. I don't carry, so I have no opinion about carry guns or calibers. I have been a revolver shooter most of my shooting life, but I am starting to warm up to the autos. I still don't like chasing brass around, though.
 
I carried a 9mm Glock for years with a local police agency and then they switched to the 40sw. After shooting it and carrying it for the past 8 years I really don't feel much difference in either one. I shoot it quit a bit through out the year and feel shooting wise it is very similar to the 9mm. My CW carry gun is usually my XD compact in 40 and I really like it as well. I'm not a Glock fan but I have to have it for the department. The forty I feel is a great round but it all comes down to is what you like, can afford and want. I don't necessarily go after a gun for the round it shoots so much as the gun it's coming out of. My XD is a lot easier to carry than my 1911 and I believe the round is a good choice.
 
I love my 40 S&W and my 45. My attachment to the 45 is more emotional:rolleyes:, as that is what I carried as an Army MP and I grew up on the myths of "Shoot them in the arm with a 45 and it will take their arm off".

The reality of it is that the 45 ACP is pretty anemic when compared to other cartridges. The 357 magnum and the 44 magnum just plain smoke it. Of course, when comparing apples to oranges we must also remember that the apples and oranges come in different flavors. Is a 185 grn 45 ACP semi wadcutter equal to a 230 grn +p hydroshock?

Back in the 70's and 80's in law enforcement there were few options for duty guns. I had the choice, I carried a 357 wheelgun over a 45. Even in the 90's I chose the 357 wheelgun.

In 1996 my agency converted to 40 S&W. We are very happy with the performance of the 155 grn HP at 1250 FPS. I do not see that load as a compromise to anything, same power as a 158 grn 357 with twice the ammo capacity. :D

Both the 9mm and the 45 ACP are 100 year old cartridges and the old dogs do not like Johnny come lately.

If we compare the 9mm, 45 and 40 S&W with the best bullets for each caliber for whatever situation, the 40 will come out on top, by what margin? Who knows, I doubt it would be enough to make a decisive difference.
 
I'll admit, I haven't yet warmed up to the .40 S&W. I like 9mm and 10mm. Maybe it's the "S&W" that I don't like...or maybe I don't like it because it doesn't have an "mm" in the title.:D

I'm just one of those guys that will only buy a flat screen TV once they've been out for more than 10 years.
 
Glad to know there are no REAL reasons why is is a "bad" range or SD round. I am thinking of buying an XD compact for use back home for CC
 
"In 1996 my agency converted to 40 S&W. We are very happy with the performance of the 155 grn HP at 1250 FPS. I do not see that load as a compromise to anything, same power as a 158 grn 357 with twice the ammo capacity." Nanuk.

Thank you.

That and it is a wider diameter bullet too. ;)

I think it does come down to nostalgia with the .45 ACP for many. Either that or they see a new competitor that might just take the crown away and it scares them a good bit. If you were king and a slightly smaller, younger, equally strong and more aggressive person comes along to take your crown, you'd get a little disturbed by it. I suppose that is why Old .45 ACP is taking steroids aka +P to keep up these days. :rolleyes::p:D;)
 
.40 vs .45 recoil

Several have noted that if the .40 and .45 are shot from the same type of gun the recoil of the .40 is less. Technically this may be true, but the .40 is a higher pressure round and the recoil and sound is different. Sort of like the difference between a newer high reviving small V8 engine and a big block V8 of the 60's and 70's. It is possible to get the same hp from each, but much harder to get the same torque. One of those engines also has a much more pleasing sound to most. Also so far as cars go the big block came typically in a large heavy car vs. the smaller lighter cars of today.

Same hp and maybe the same torque, but a big difference in the "feel".

So far as guns go, not the cartridge, the typical .40 is a polymer DA or DA/SA. The typical .45 is a full metal frame 1911. So while some might not think it's fair to compare one platform to the other, the truth of the matter is that the platforms are different. The original poster asked about .40 caliber pistols and compared them to .45 caliber pistols.

Bottom line, the .45 caliber 1911 has been around for what, 100 years? How long you you think the .40 caliber polymer will be around? What popularity the .40 has is almost exclusively because of it's former adoption by the FBI, not because it is or was a "good" round. It was only created because someone(s) wanted to blame a gun for their shortcomings in training and performance.

ljg
 
I had a HK USP .40 and now have a HK45. I also have a Colt 1911. Different platforms, same bullet. It's not really about the platform.
 
I can't tell you why I hate the 40...I just do. There's nothing wrong with having choices and I believe in the free market and all, but do we really need all these calibers. I mean really, we could probably be just fine with about 10 handgun calibers...and 40 ain't one of them! :D
 
It was only created because someone(s) wanted to blame a gun for their shortcomings in training and performance.
Click to expand...

When the 10mm demanded a larger grip than the average LE hands can hadle deftly, it is the gun that's the problem. It doesn't have to do with training and performance. A firearm was needed that would fit the greatest percentage of LE hands. The 10mm limited their possibilities, not LE training (or lack thereof).
 
The answer to a question nobody asked for? Oh, really?

Posted before:

Why the .40S&W?

It has been essentially called for for some time, and for good reason.

1870s - Catridges looking a lot like the .40 S&W and 10mm began to be worked on. The .38/40, as an example, pushed a 180 grain bullet at approx 950 feet per second. Not bad for black powder.

1960s - Folks started looking for what they considered "the ideal" revolver cartridge, a .40 cartridge which could push 200 grain bullets between 900 and 1000 feet per second. Folks like Jordan, Keith, and Skelton, mind you. (They didn't get it, instead getting the more powerful .41 Magnum; a great cartridge relegated mostly to field use having been deemed too powerful by most for every day carry and defensive use.)

1970s - Col. Jeff Cooper, Mr. .45acp, called for "the ideal" semi automatic cartridge, one delivering a .40 caliber 200 grain bullet at 1000 feet per second. The 10mm began to take hold. (He didn't get it, instead getting a more powerful 10mm; a great cartridge... deja vu... deemed too powerful by most for every day carry and defensive use.)

The 10mm began to be loaded in two varieties; the magnum variety which has proven popular with 10mm advocates, and the variety often referred to as the "down loaded" and "light" 10mm. (The weaker cartridges look an awful lot like what the greats had called for, but what did they know?)

1980s - the FBI adopted the 10mm in the form of a 180 grain JHP at approx 950 feet per second. There never was a stronger one or a weaker one. That was it, and the agents apparently liked it. (The whole "they went to the .40 S&W because agents couldn't handle the 10mm is incorrect: the .40 S&W they shoot today is marginally more powerful than the 10mm load that they moved away from.)

Meanwhile, other folks had been experimenting with cartridges capable of duplicating the FBI spec'd 10mm's ideal; a nearly hundred year ideal. And someone asked: can it be done in a more size-efficient package than the 10mm? The answer was yes and in 1989 the a .40 S&W load was introduced pushing a 180 grain bullet just shy of 1000 fps.

The .40S&W currently dominates the US law enforcement market and is very popular in gaming circles.

Why?

LEO wise: Many law enforcement agencies took note of the FBI's declaration that a 10mm 180 grain JHP at approx 950 was "best" for LEO/SD purposes. And some of those folks were gunnies who remembered what the greats had called for all along.... They also took note that the .40 S&W fit into 9mm sized frames, and liked the capacity offered by a round beginning with "4." Good performance, smaller pistols, and increased capacity? Winning combinations.

Gamer wise: 180 grain bullets at 1000 feet per second make major. Making major while affording more capacity? A winning combination.

Non-LEO/SD wise: These folks, many of them at least, pay a lot of attention to the afore mentioned folks; greats, LEOs, and gamers. They began to see more and more pistols chambered for .40 S&W, and that's all that it took.

Now a days, there are a variety of choices, with the 155, 165, and 180 grain varieties being the most popular. Gaming and bipedal fighting wise, you could do worse. The two main federal labs (DOJ's and DHS's) currently spec the 180 at approximately 1000 fps as "ideal." (Just over from most duty pistols, iirc.)

Note: Not your cup of tea? Fine. But the the .40 S&W doesn't deserve half of the flak people like to send its way.

And it certainly seems that along the way folks asked for it; if not it, something similar enough to allow for it to fit the bill.
 
i have

experience with all three of them, like most others on this post have.
i love the nine and its high capacity, but hate the (imo) lack of knock down power.
i love the 45 and its (imo) immense knock down power.
but i personally love the 40 and its (imo) knock down and high capacity compromise.
like others have stated its just right in the middle, which makes it just right for me.
i dont have a problem with recoil or noise from any of them.
i also like the cost of the 40 in comparision to 45.
not to say nine isnt cheaper.
just my 2 cents.
 
I really like my XD40 and i can get just as good shot placement as with my glock 17 and dony really fell to much more snappyness. On the other had my older brother hated it because of the snappyness but then again he is quite wimpy with small hands. I happen to have bananna hands so that helps.
 
.40S&W Why the haters?


There is a distinct difference between "hate" and "lack of enthusiasm".

I have a .40 because the firearm I wanted came chambered in it and, at the time, nothing else. I would have preferred something else but I've since come to rather like the .40. Or at least tolerate it as well as anything else I might carry.

I can't get worked up over caliber wars. I doubt I'm the only one that bought a .40 (or anything else) for no better reason than liking the platform and not giving a wet slap (within reason) what it was chambered in - but sometimes I wonder.

Caliber threads remind me, probably without reasonable justification, of a group of folks debating at length over the relative merits of 91 vs 93 octane and Citgo vs Exxon then buying an automobile to suit their preference in fuel.

Personally, I buy a car that works for me - there's usually a sticker describing what it wants to be fed and I'm pleased to accommodate. Whether it's analogous to .40, 357SIG, .45ACP or whatintheheckever. I draw the line at .25 and .460 - most anything in between should serve though.

And this will be one of the three postings to caliber threads that I permit myself this calendar year. ;)
 
I'm not a "hater", but I can give you the answers you seek.

In the last 20 years I have owned at least six .40s. I currently own none. Why?

Most importantly, it does nothing that other calibers don't do better. My Kahr PM9 is smaller than any carry-able .40 (and yes, I know Kahr makes a PM40, but it's reliability record is unacceptable, and it holds one less than the PM9, which puts it at one round better than a j-frame). My Kimber Ultra Carry .45acp is as small as my G-23 was and carries a more powerful cartridge.

In other words, it is a compromise that offers no significant advantages.
 
I have different caliber handguns. The .40 IWI Desert Eagle is my home defense weapon. It is heavy, but I qualified with it. It has less recoil than my 9mms and .357s. It is a solid gun, and I went 50 for 50 inside the 9 ring on my CWP qualifier. In SC, you qualify at 3,5,7,10,12, and 15 yds from ready and holstered positions. I do not consider my self the greatest of pistol shooters - maybe above average. Awesome energy displacement, much more knockdown than a 9mm, many more rounds than a .45ACP. Solid results, dependable gun. I carry 180 GR Hydroshocks in it. That should stop any BG coming through the door.
 
I wouldn't say it's so much the round that people hate as it is the people who always claim the .40 to be the best round out there! We all know there is no best round and to blatantly bash others just because you carry one over another usually will perturb others!That said I really am not fond of the round mostly due to it's snappy recoil,which makes it a tad harder for accurate fast double taps as apposed to a 9 or 45,over penetration,and just feel that theres not anything the 40 can do that the 45 cant do a little better in my honest opinon.
 
I went with 9mm because I'd rather have a couple extra bullets and less recoil in exchange for marginally less stopping power. However, that's a personal choice, and there's nothing inherently bad about .40S&W.

Now, 10mm... there's a cartridge I could get behind. From what I understand, it has better mag cap than .45ACP, and hits harder, too. A shame it never caught on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top