9mm Or 40S&W, which way to go?

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NexusLexus

Inactive
Hi there,

I need your help. Im kinda new to guns. Thinking about buying my first hand gun, not neccesarilly for protection, just always wanted a gun. I was considering the HK USP , since I heard so many good things about it.
The problem I have is choosing which caliber, 40S&W or 9mm. Both has its advantages and disadvantages.
I like the 9mm its cheap, universal, and has greater round capacity. The 40S&W has more stopping power.
I'm favoring the 40 but I afraid of the recoil and magazine capacity. But on second thought, the 9mm should have enough stopping power since the military uses 9mm on most handguns.
Overall which caliber do you think is best?, when considering price, accuracy, recoil, stopping power, noise, etc...
 
I have struggled with this question for years and finally gave up. I own pistols in both calibers. It is ultimately the only way you will get some peace of mind.
 
Ohhh, brother.

By that I don't mean it's a bad question...on the contrary. Just that it's likely to stir up some unresolvable debate.

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited August 30, 1999).]
 
Greetings, sir. If you are new to handguns, perhaps you'd be better served with a good .357 magnum revolver, a mid-sized weapon with a 4" bbl would meet many requirements. It could also be loaded with light-recoiling .38 wadcutters right on up through the full-house magnums if and when you wanted that level of performance. That said, if you want the semiauto, based on your post, I'd go with the 9mm. As you note, it's cheaper and you'll be wanting to put many rounds through it in practice and learning the weapon. With proper loads, the nine can be a good "stopper" and it's recoil is less than that of the forty. I own 9mm, .40, and .45 acp pistols and do not feel undergunned at all when I choose a nine for serious puposes. Best.
 
Another vote for the 9mm. I had a forty once and it just didn't impress me. I've found most 9s (and 45s for that matter) to be more accurate in box stock guns. Frankly, I'm just not a big fan of the 40 S&W. The 9mm is good. If you want more, go straight to the .45acp. The middle ground is just a compromise. JMHO.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go don my asbestos underwear before the local 40 fans get rabid. :)
 
I like the .40, but the loads I use are high pressure and could be discocerting to a newer shooter - who would be less troubled by a 9, fired from oh, say... an HK USP... http://www.streetpro.com/usp/

:D

------------------
"America is a melting pot, the people at the bottom get burned while all the scum floats to the top."


RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
The Critic formerly known as Kodiac

[This message has been edited by George Hill (edited August 24, 1999).]
 
NexusLexus; I've had alot of guns come and go but I just can't seem too keep a .40 cal pistol. 9mm ammo has come a long way in the last few years. Go with the nine!
 
The trend has been to go smaller and faster in the last 100 years of pistols.
For a real man-stopper gun I would go for a .45ACP in a 1911 and for a useful all purpose a 4" S&W stainless in 38SPL/357Mag...why..well, it is easy to reload to high or low velocities and really is a very easy and nice first centrefire.
If new to sport, why not buy a Ruger auto .22 and really have some low-cost fun and learn a lot at the same time?! Watch those back-stops though...

------------------
***Big Bunny***
 
I'm not a real fan of the .40 S&W, but since that is what my department issues, I carry a .40 off duty so I only have to stock one kind of ammo.

The .40 S&W has an awful lot of pressure inside of the chamber; so, I wouldn't buy a .40 that didn't have a fully supported chamber. I had already bought the Glock 27 before I learned of such things. If I were going to buy another .40, I would probably go with a Sig.

I'm not a big fan of the H&K USP. I find that it is too complicated and the trigger is awful. If you're going to spend that much money, buy a Sig.

I personally think that the 9mm is good enough for self defense. If you can't hit what you're aiming at it doesn't matter what you're shooting. I'd go with the 9mm in your case, especially if recoil concerns you.

------------------
"God grants liberty only to those who love it and are always ready to guard and defend it." --Daniel Webster
 
Definitely a personal choice. See if you can shoot your prospective weapons in any availiable calibers before you decide. Personally, I chose a USP40 after narrowing my cartridge choice to 40-something.

<a href="http://greent.com/40Page/">CALIBERS</a> has a good breakdown of the different handgun calibers and some advocacy articles, as well. The article on why 180gr may not be the best choice for .40 is very interesting. I've got some articles by Ayoob comparing/contrasting the 9mm, .40, and .45, and his conclusion is that the .40 is the best overall. I could dig them up and mail you copies if you want to go so far.
 
Oh, don't forget to read "Choosing Defensive Ammo" on CALIBERS. Cuts through a lot of the crap you see in Peterson Publications magazines.
 
I don't know how to fully explain it without being able to show you, but I can give you some examples so that you could look for yourself when you have the chance.

Glocks have unsupported chambers, S&W's, excluding Sigmas, have supported. (NO THIS IS NOT A GLOCK FLAME!!! I carry one myself.)

Now I'll try to explain it, but I fear that I won't be able to do an adequate job without showing you. Being shown was the only way that I understood it.

If you look at the feed ramp on the Glocks you'll notice that it is not a full ramp as on the S&W 4006, for example. Supposedly, the full length feed ramps help support the chamber and force all of the pressure out of the barrel. The blunt feedramps on the Glocks allow the pressure to back up into the chamber which could cause the gun to blow apart in your hand.

Since the .40 S&W has a large amount of pressure, the odds that guns with unsupported chambers will kaboom is greatly increased. 99% of the kaboom stories that I hear about involve the .40 S&W.

I hope that I was able to somewhat explain it. I'm sure that it involves much more than the feedramps, but the instructor who explained it to me taught me how to tell by looking at the feedramps.
 
If it is a choice of caliber I would go with the 40, especially if I will only have one gun. It is better than the 9mm in stopping power(though it's debatable how much better). Ammo in 40 is very prevalent, a box of 50 reloads by 3D I have seen as low as $7/box. FMJs by PMC, as low as $8/box. Getting used to the recoil is a matter of practice. Good earmuffs reduce sensitivity and involuntary flinching. A semi-auto just doesn't kick that much compared to a 357 magnum revolver. If you're concerned about unsupported chambers(to improve reliability, manufacturers have the ramp run up into the chamber eliminating chamber support at the 6 O'Clock position) I can tell you that the H&K USP40Compact is FULLY supported all around and is highly reliable as well. The possibility of case failure at the 6 O'Clock position in the USP40C is nil. Comparing the sidewall thickness of a USP40 and a Glock 23, you will see the USP is thicker.

------------------
 
NexusLexus:

The feel our your handgun is extremely important! (Can not stress it enough) I purchased a SigPro .40 not too long ago, and am extremely happy with it.

The Glock vs. Sig vs. H&K war will continue forever. As stated in some of the replies above state, go to a range and shoot a few 9mm's and 40's and make your decision based on your own experience.

Good Luck.

BC
NRA Life

[This message has been edited by BC (edited August 25, 1999).]
 
Get the 9m/m. Ammunition is available on a
world wide basis. .40S&W to the best of my
knowledge, is only available here in the U.S.
 
Sounds like you should go 9mm.

The 40 shoots a bigger, heavier bullet at the same speed that costs a little more and is a little harder to handle for some. The ammo/gun companies seem to be having more probs with the 40 (SIGs and USPs have blown too BTW in 40) than the 9. Not the choice for a worrier.

One size does not fit all, lloks like the 9 is a better fit for you.

------------------
>>>>---->
 
NexusLexus

You start by saying that you want a gun "not necessarily for protection, just always wanted a gun". Then you go on about "stopping power", "afraid of the recoil", "magazine capacity" and what does the "military use".

Whoa...soldier. Go back to the beginning. You want a gun just because you always wanted one - and that's a great reason. You don't need to justify it by its stopping power or military use. They're both deadly, and recoil and expense are not really big deals with either. Don't buy size 18 basket ball shoes just because Jordan wore them.

Look at the big picture, you'll want a holster, some kind of gun safe (or really good lock), cleaning equipment, some high grade handgun training, and to join the NRA. Then you want to get into reloading, and a shotgun for home security, and...

Don't worry about buying the be-all, end-all gun right off. Nobody agrees on anything in this business and you'll change your mind a dozen times after you start shooting. Buy one you like, is fun to shoot, and looks like a nice gun to hand down to your kids someday. Then jump in. Wait until you stabilize a little before buying a cannon.

For what it's worth, I have a Glock 23 (.40) with a 9mm conversion barrel.

[This message has been edited by mthoma (edited August 26, 1999).]
 
Like Grayfox said, the .40 is a compromise. In fact, all handguns are a compromise. The nice thing about the .40 is you can switch camps from light and fast to heavy and slow. The statistics for the .40 prove it is a better stopper than the 9mm or the .45, that is if you beleive the statistics. In my neck of the woods, the difference of price between 9mm and .40 is negligible.

As for recoil, practice and technique are just as important for a 9mm as a .40. Recoil is NOT punishing. In fact, some like the .40 recoil better than the 9 recoil.

I would suggest you shoot both and see. If you can shoot the .40, it is a better choice. Just make sure you make your caliber selection by shooting them in the same size and make of pistol to compare the cartridge and not the pistols.

The recomendation for a .357 Magnum (Taurus, Smith, Ruger) revolver is also one I would suggest. .38 spl can be fired in it and they are downright cheap. It will teach you some good basics and is a good reliable weapon.

------------------
Good Shooting, MarkCO
http://homes.acmecity.com/rosie/smiley/58/
 
My .02:

I prefer the 9mm for ammo availability and lower cost compared to the .40.

As far as the military usage question they carry both 9mm and .45, dpending on branch of service and duty combination.

I haven't heard of the military using .40 S&W although it is a very popular PD caliber (that doesn't mean the military doesn't use it, just I haven't heard of it).

Joe
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top