9MM Ammo / .40 Cal

S

SIG

Moderator
Does anyone out there fire the 9MM cartridge with no problem, and just not prefer the .40 cal???

I bought a HK USP 40 Compact and for some reason, I just did not like shooting it (so I sold it). It had a lot of recoil (many types of ammo) and I shot very unusually innaccurately with it (i'm a decent shot). Anyone else have any similar experiences with any Firearm????

"Get rid of that Nickel Plated Sissy Pistol, get yourself a Glock" Tommy Lee Jones

[This message has been edited by SIG (edited December 08, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by SIG (edited December 08, 1999).]
 
Well, I've shot a P226 in .40, and found the recoil to be sharper than my P220 in .45. It is my opinion that the .40 fad is nothing more than marketing. With today's bullets, you can do anything with a 9 that you can do with a .40, and you get more chances to do it.

It's not that I don't like the .40. I will probably buy one some day.

------------------
“The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals. ... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.” -Alexander Addison, 1789
 
In defense of the best auto load out there : ), check out the ballistics... .40 caliber Silvertips in 155 grain produce 500 ft lbs of energy. Even with the .45, you'd be hard pressed to come up with numbers like that. I guess recoil is subjective as they say because I feel hardly a thing firing my P229. Accuracy is phenominal.
 
Yeah - but with the .40 you can do it with a larger diameter bullet and with heavier bullets too.

------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
Hey - have you seen the new Ultimate Super Tactical Match Gun?
 
I owned a S&W 4006 for a very short time. I didn't find the recoil heavy or sharp, but strange rather. It's hard to describe but it felt slow or delayed somewhat. My wife, who has little shooting experience, shot it very well. Maybe I should have given it to her, instead I traded it for a Sig 228. The main reason I got rid of it had nothing to due with the caliber but with the gun itself. I don't like the trigger on most Smith autos for a reason that is also hard to explain. I own several 9mm autos and one 9mm revolver. I really don't see what advantages a .40 S&W would offer me that justifies buying and reloading for another caliber.
The nine seems capable of decent accuracy and power, is cheap and available anywhere in the free world, is the chambering of many, many reliable and user friendly guns of different types(auto pistol, revolver, SMG) including classic designs, and produces reasonable recoil and blast. While .40 auto approaches the size, weight, and magazine capacity of the 9x19, the Parabellum usually has a slight but noticable advantage. Any given model of firearm also seems to function better with the cartridge for which it was originally chambered and designed. In most cases, the nine came first. Just a few of my thoughts. Oh, and I still own the Sig.
 
I shoot both 9mm and .40S&W, and I don't really notice the difference in recoil. Like they say everybody perceives recoil differently though. Last week I was out practicing with 9mm+p loads and I wouldn't say it was less recoil than the .40S&W. I do believe the .40 will be getting an excellent street reputation, take a look at Tritons Quick Shok load-155gr. at 1250 fps. with 538 foot pounds of energy. Thats right there with .357 mag performance.
 
I've had a .40 for some time (HK USP of course), and I'm not really thrilled with the cartridge. It's OK, but doesn't seem to do anything 9mm or .45 won't do. It shoots well out of this gun, but no better than my .45s for the most part. It's not particularily cheap to reload, though cases are MUCH cheaper than they were. It's a temperamental cartridge in my experience. What can I say? If .40s suddenly disappeared tomorrow, I sure wouldn't miss them. Personally, I prefer 9mm because it's so incredibly cheap to shoot. I get lots more trigger time/dollar with 9mm than .40. I think that about says it all.
 
I have 2 .40 S&W autos. One is the S&W 4006 (duty weapon/no choice) and the other is a Glock 27 that is my off duty carry gun. The only reasons that I bought the G27 instead of a 9mm is that I got a phenominal deal ($325 with less than a box of ammo through it and the finger extensions and a holster)and because we shoot the .40 S&W on duty.

With all of that being said, I'll be picking up a 9mm in the next week or so. I'm not a fan of the .40 S&W. It is marketed as a compromise between the capacity of the 9mm and the power of the .45 ACP. In my opinion, it does a poor job of both.

If you think you need more power than a 9mm and want more capacity than a .45 ACP, get yourself a 10mm.
 
Wow! A lot of negative responses to the 40S&W. I personally like it for the following reasons: It's got a bigger cross-section than the nine(for better stopping power, I can't say how much), it doesn't need as big a frame as the 45, it's easy to load(larger shells are easier to manipulate in the loader), shells are abundantly available, and bullet styles and weights are abundantly available.

My experience is the accuracy is good enough for self defense purposes but with a little work a more accurate target load is achievable for competition. I'm not the greatest shot but with a rudimentary rest I have developed some medium loads that stay within 4" at 25 yds. I own 2 40s; a USP40C(which I am extremely confident in) and a Glock 23 which I'm a little less confident in.

I have nothing against the 9mm and as a matter of fact might buy one as the next purchase(looking hard at the P7M8).

------------------
 
I shoot 9mm instead of .40 because it is cheaper ammo. With cheaper ammo, I can practice more, and if I practice more, I can hit better.

That is my line of thinking.

If they were equal in price, I guess I would go .40, since the power is clearly superior.

JP

------------------
Nehemiah 4:18 " ... and each of the builders wore his sword at his side as he worked."
 
When the .40 first came out I fell for all the hype and bought a S&W 4006. To me it had a little sharper felt recoil than the .45acp and wasn't anywhere near as accurate as the 9mm or .45. The .40 S&W has been a compromise caliber since day one. Something less than the 10mm and somewhere between 9 and .45. Frankly, I don't really care for it. Of the two. I'd go with the 9mm.
 
Well it seems that the .45 and 9mm are sort of the sacred cows of autoloadrs; as such its understandable that there would be so much resistance to the .40 since it has no where near as much nostalgia attatched to it as the .45 or 9mm. Lets just say, hypothetically, that the .40 had been around for nearly a century before the 9mm. Upon introduction of the 9mm, people would have said it was a mouse gun and that its slight advantage in capacity was negligable compared to the loss one would suffer in firepower. The fact is that the .40 is a ballistically superior round compared the the 9mm. How many LE stories are out there about BG's getting shot multiple times with 9mm's and failing to go down? I personally know a guy that used to work out at my gym (who was about 270lbs--muscle) who was shot 6 times with a 9mm. All rounds failed to penetrate to vitals because of his leather jacket and thick musculature. Now the .45 is a different story. I'd prefer a .45 in a defensive situation anyday but the guns in this caliber just tend to be a bit big and heavy for easy carry. 9mm is a cheap and fun gun to shoot...but the numbers say the .40 is a better stopper.
 
After shooting .40cal, out of my Glock 27, and then seeing 9mm, the 9mm looked like .22's!! No matter what kind of hype there is about .40 i will always be a .40 man. On a final note, a police officer friend once told me "if you are going to carry any thing less than .40 cal save your self the hassle and don't even carry a gun."

------------------
when the govenment comes for you weapons, give them the ammo first
 
I always viewed the .40 as a "compromise cartridge"--a little more than the 9, a little less than the .45. Why compromise if you don't have to? The 9 is cheaper to shoot and is adequate (with the right load) for self-defense; the .45 is a better manstopper than the .40 IMHO, and since you're limited to a mag capacity of 10 rds, why not get the biggest, baddest 10 rds. of firepower available? (Now I'm gonna hear from all you 10MM fans!) I've never been drawn to the .40, and don't plan on ever purchasing one. My 9MMs are cheap and fun to shoot, and my 1911, while not being as cheap to shoot, is a well-proven manstopper with a verifiable track record. Where does the .40 fit in? I don't have anything against it, I just don't understand all the hype surrounding the cartridge. It is not (please forgive one more use of an unbearably trite expression) the best thing since sliced bread. But to each his own.

Sic semper tyrannis

freedomlover
 
Glock_man, since when are cops gun experts?
An ER surgeon that shoots with a buddy of mine carries a 9mm. His preferred load is a 155 grain Cor-bon. After working on several thousand gun shot victims he is extremely confident in the 9mm's deadly capabilities. I love shooting it because it's cheap, fun and accurate. If this surgeon has confidence in the 9 than maybe I do to.
 
I agree with wirenut in his belief to trust the surgeon and his experiences. What i have seen, working at the university of marylands shock trauma center is that by the time the shot victim hits the ER he has already been stopped by the round(or rounds). Of course after inspection of the wounds its going to tell a tale. But what after-effect inspection does not tell is,(keeping in mind the victim is a bad guy) how many shots did it take to put him down?
did he stop posing a threat after the 1st shot ?
would a bigger round have saved lives?

Being at the scene tells more of how a bullet performs than after-the-fact examination.

I would take the advice of someone who's seen alot of shootings over someone who fixes them up. No offense. but i would like to ask some L.A, D.C or Detroit cops what works over a surgeon who can only verify it tore their lungs out.....Too bad he got shot 6 times and killed 10 people in the process.

I hope that made sense :)



------------------
TIM : )
 
Wirenut - you'd better check your saftey pliers again ;). I've never seen a 155gr 9mm. Does your doc friend carry a .40 with 155gr CorBombs or a 9mm with something else?

Personally, I prefer a fourtysomething.
 
My dept recently switched to 40 caliber weapons. I like the forty as a defensive round and the research our dept conducted found the forty to be mor than capable of stoping a person should the need arise.

I however can not flame the 9mm. I own nine of them and love them all. My choice of a off duty weapon is a 9mm. I guess its differnt strokes for different folks. both calibers are good chioces
 
Guys, thanks for the reply's. I have to agree with wirenut on the medical point of view, although I am just looking for personal preferences to make sure i'm not odd ball out.

Keep em' coming

"Get rid of that Nickel Plated Sissy Pistol, get yourself a Glock" Tommy Lee Jones
 
As for price of shooting each calibre, I only pay a dollar more per box for my .40 than I do my 9. Price has changed a lot since the .40 first came out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top