9mm +P ballistics = .40 ballistics?

AK103, why do you overlook the hottest DoubleTap 9mm offering which has 511ft/lbs of muzzle energy?
Click to expand...
I was comparing bullets of the same or similar weights, fired from the same or similar barrel lengths, or as close together as possible for all three. Seemed like a fairer comparison.

This is part of the problem with comparing numbers, you can always find something that may appear to be just a bit better, but if your not comparing apples to apples, it becomes something else, and not really a fair comparison. This is one reason I prefer to compare apples to apples, as much as possible. Like it or dont, the numbers are what they are.

If you want, we can compare the 115 grain 357SIG(614ft/pds) against the 115 grain 9mm +P(511ft/pds) or the .40S&W(which is still the 567ft/pds, as its still the lightest .40 loading). Did it get any better? :)

Oh, and I'd personally probably go with the .40 if I had to choose between those three. But thats just me.
 
AK, the point was regardless of the bullet weight we were looking for muzzle energy. The 115gr produces the highest muzzle energy of any 9mm loading. So picking the hottest 9mm and pitting it against the hottest .40 is comparing apples to apples in my view given the nature (ambiguous) of the question.
 
I kind of understand how 9mm and 45 Auto came to be. They're both the result of a combination of learning and tradition in the development of pistol loadings. The .40 S&W, on the other hand, seems like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, to coin a phrase.


In modern practice, it's a choice between the mass and diameter of 45 Auto or the magazine capacity of 9mm. In this matter, the market spoke, Congress intervened, and 45 Auto was reclaimed from the dust bin. Now that that government restriction has been removed, the market I think will slowly turn back to its preference for magazine capacity.


But state legislatures also intervened and created a market for very carryable guns. Size and weight for many people now trump magazine capacity and during the time that high cap mags were unavailable (and shortly thereafter), manufacturers learned to make some pretty small 45s which have magazines almost as capacious as the very small 9mms they also learned to make.


It may be that the micro 45 will outlast the full-size 45 in an era of high cap full-size 9mms.


At any rate, the .40 S&W is not the equal of 45 Auto and does not allow magazine capacity as great as 9mm. It's a frankensteinish cartridge of undistinguished provenance, a wimped out derivative of 10mm. It will do, of course, but why?


Carry 9mm if you want high capacity or 45 Auto if you want a big slug. .40 S&W will give you neither.
 
9 and .40 are two completely different As are .357 sig, 38 super. .45acp is totally different from the rest. The .355 bullet penetrates, they seem to travel much faster than .45 which is a total knock down round. The .40 is kind of a combination of both speed and knock down power. I would personally hate to get hit by either variant. I like .40 as capacity is better than .45, and a .40 is a great stopper like the .45 but it's cheaper to reload or purchase. 10mm.... Ugh I know why zero law enforcement don't carry it anymore. Because .40 is good enough and is so much more widely available. When sweeping up brass at the range, what do you find the most of? 9/40/45. How often do you see someone shooting 10mm? 1 in every thousand people that come to the range seem to have a 10mm. Wonder why that is???
 
Carry 9mm if you want high capacity or 45 Auto if you want a big slug. .40 S&W will give you neither.
Click to expand...

Clearly you have never seen a Glock 22, .40, with 15 round mag. Nor a Glock 23 with +1 mag and 14 rounds, nor a real nice Glock 27, with +1, and 11 rounds total.

May not be as many as the 9mm, but that's awful good.
 
I kind of understand how 9mm and 45 Auto came to be. They're both the result of a combination of learning and tradition in the development of pistol loadings. The .40 S&W, on the other hand, seems like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, to coin a phrase.
Click to expand...
I don't think you coined that phase as it has existed long before this post. :D

Carry 9mm if you want high capacity or 45 Auto if you want a big slug. .40 S&W will give you neither.
Click to expand...
While I agree the .40 is an unnecessary cartridge and I've long since abandon it, I disagree it gives you neither a big slug or capacity. Actually, that's exactly what it offers. It gives you within 1 or 2 rounds capacity of a 9mm (in the same pistol design) and it gives you the ballistic performance of a .45 ACP. The .40 can typically give you the power of a .45 in a pistol the size and weight of a 9mm... with a trade off... recoil.

That's the draw, for some.

Personally, I'll just take a 9mm if I want capacity and plenty of power or I'll take a .45 if I want some good old fashioned American muscle. The .40 is pretty much useless to me. Back in the day I jumped on the bandwagon before all the LEO's jumped on it... but I soon realized it's one major detractor.... recoil. The .40 has more perceived recoil than a .45 ACP but doesn't offer any more power.

Example:

In a 1911 pistol the standard recoil spring weight for 9mm is 14lbs.
For a .45 ACP it's 16lbs.
For a .40 S&W it's 19lbs.

Personally, I'm more inclined to take the .45 ACP over the .40 as it gives me all of the power without as much recoil or muzzle rise. I can shoot full power .45's faster and more accurately than a full power .40 S&W. The .40 might give me an extra round or two, but that's hardly worth the trade-off for me.

If I want super fast follow-up shots with high capacity, I'll take the 9mm. .40 can't come close to being as controllable as 9mm.

As noted, it's a solution desperately in need of a problem.
 
numbers vs flung poop

I have 5" 1911s chambered in 9x19 and 40 S&W.
I have one 9x19 Witness I can also install its 40 S&W top end on.

I have 135g bullets for both the .355" and .400" bores.

I can load them to the exact same velocity.
Does that mean because their energy is the same that I can expect --based on all that scientific-like math-- the same terminal performance?



Sorry to throw logic into this discussiion; I have little energy for it....
 
The .40 can typically give you the power of a .45 in a pistol the size and weight of a 9mm... with a trade off... recoil.
Click to expand...

Generally I agree with you, but also this just goes to show you how subjective felt recoil is.

When I bought my USPc I tried the .45 and the .40, literally side by side. The difference in recoil was negligible. I mean if someone had done a blinded test, I am not sure I'd have been able to tell the difference at that point. If anything I thought the .40 snapped back on target more quickly than the .45. Again, in that particular gun platform.

Anyway I went with the .40 and I can shoot that USPc almost as fast as I can shoot my all steel 1911 in .45. The 1911 is still easier to shoot of course, but mainly because of the superior trigger, longer sight radius, better ergonomics (in my hands at least), and increased weight.

It might be the recoil buffer in the USPc, but like I said, I can shoot that sucker pretty darn fast, fast enough for my tastes anyway. Could I shoot an all steel 1911 Commander in .45 faster? Actually, yes, I think so, but my personal power to weight ratio equation seems to favor my USPc. I personally like having 13 rounds of 180 grain Ranger T's in .40, as opposed to 7-9 rounds of .45.

I do think that the .45 can be more effective, but since the best rounds in .40 are close, I think the close to 40% gain in ammo capacity (when going from 8 rounds to 13) is a good compromise, for me anyway.

I will say that I tried full house 165 grain Gold Dots, and they noticeably overwhelmed my ability to shoot fast (but still keeping a shotgun pattern in the A zone). I definitely would need more shooting practice to shoot that load as well as I can the 180 grainers, and since I like the heavier bullets anyway (I think that the original FBI 10mm specs of 180 grains going at around 960fps isn't shabby at all) I won't worry about it.
 
GunRus


9mm +P ballistics = .40 ballistics?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any opinions?
Click to expand...

Yes, why do you ask? Apple's taste like apple's, orange's taste like orange's.

Sorry, I'm to lazy to explain that.
 
I shot a sig P226 elite in .40 and it shot just about as soft as the glock 17 and smith M&P 9. As far as capacity, even my XD 45 can hold 14 rounds. My glock can hold 18 though. But if you really need 18 rounds before a break to reload, your in some pretty serious trouble. I kinda prefer my glock 17 just because I can shoot more accurately with it so even though my XD 45 might be a better stopper, If i can get a headshot off with the glock, but not the XD then....
 
A .40 will get you the same power as a .45?

Everyone realizes that if the goverment didn't have women working for them, you'd probably be talking about a 10 right now, right?

What I can tell you is that the choice over in the sandbox is the .45, not the .40.
 
duke,

I didn't know our government issued .40s in the Military. I doubt 'in the sandbox' they have many, at list military ones. I'm sure they get what is available and cheep, and 9mm is the most available and cheep. .45s are second cause they are in the supply pipeline. I doubt .40s are.

Not to mention I don't think to much JHP ammo has made it over there (and BTW, I'd pick the .45 if FMJ is all they got!)
 
The .40 S&W, on the other hand, seems like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, to coin a phrase.
Click to expand...

Boy, a lot of people like that solution!
While this silly argument may have had some merit in 1991, it is way off the mark today. If there was no merit to the .40, it would have disappeared like so many other rounds. There is absolutely nothing wrong with choice, and the .40 has many points that leads many people to choose it over both the 9mm and the .45.
 
Boy, a lot of people like that solution!
While this silly argument
Click to expand...

And while it may be a silly argument, I gotta jump in and share MY experiences with all three 9mm, .40, and ,45 ACP.

I have shot a Keltec PF9 - a compact 9mm. It kicks like a mule and, to me, would be unmanageable in either .40 or .45.

I have shot a Keltec P-40. It was horrible and almost painful.

I have shot a Steyr S9 and a M9-A1. Both have negligible perceived recoil and are a joy to shoot.

I have shot a Steyr S-40, M-40, and a M40-A1. All three are easy to shoot and to keep on target for followup rounds.

I have shot a Springfield V10 and I inherited a Colt Defender from my wife. The recoil of both seems like more than the Steyrs.

It's not so much about calibers, but about gun platforms.

All three calibers offer good ballistics, as has been shown in this thread.

As others have mentioned, all three calibers offer something for each shooter IN THE PROPER PLATFORM.
 
Given the choice between the 9 and the 40, I'd have to choose the 40. A few years ago, a buddy of mine (who was in law enforcement) and I went out plinking one day. He had his issue .40 and I had a 9mm. We decided to do a comparison of impact energy by shooting bowling pins at about 15 feet. I was shooting 147gr handloads and he was shooting 155gr factory loads. When the 9mm would hit, the pin would wobble around, think about it for a while, have a cup of coffee, scratch itself a while, and then lay down to take a nap. When the .40 hit, the pins would respond without hesitation and immediately play dead. :D

At first we thought maybe the 9mm's were hitting off center in a glancing fashion, but looking at the pins, they were mostly all good solid center hits, just like with the .40. I promptly entered the market for a good .40, figuring I'd carry the 9 when going light and the .40 when I felt I might need a little more. The 9 ended up being left at home quite a bit, so I finally decided to just go with the .40 and have two different guns.
 
I carry 9mm.

I'd carry 40 S&W but it usually makes for a bigger gun
Click to expand...

That's odd. My .40 is the same size as the 9mm from the same maker.

Oops. You goofed. The whole point of the .40 was to make a more powerful round in a 9mm sized gun.

Carry 9mm if you want high capacity or 45 Auto if you want a big slug. .40 S&W will give you neither.
Click to expand...

I have a .40 for double the capacity of a single stack .45 with little extra fatness and a greater than 9mm width and weight slug that zings along.

I prefer .45, but I would take .40 over the 9 at any time given a choice of gun for any scenario.

At any rate, the .40 S&W is not the equal of 45 Auto and does not allow magazine capacity as great as 9mm. It's a frankensteinish cartridge of undistinguished provenance, a wimped out derivative of 10mm.
Click to expand...

If you truly understood the history of the reason for the .40's existence then you might realize that it was a the solution to the FBI's requirements for a light 10mm load that also allows for smaller hands to shoot and uses less resources.

Uncle Sam doesn't reload...Duh!...Some people....

The .40 S&W, on the other hand, seems like a solution to a problem that doesn't exist
Click to expand...

Someone else forgot to research their cartridge history....

The .40 is pretty much useless to me... but I soon realized it's one major detractor.... recoil. The .40 has more perceived recoil than a .45 ACP but doesn't offer any more power.
Click to expand...

I've shot 9's. I've shot 40's and Ive shot bunches of 45's.

I have never thought that .40 has more recoil...perceived or real....never...not once.

After looking at one stop shot reports for years it appears that the .40 is doing just as well as the beloved .45 (and I am biased toward the .45)

Everyone realizes that if the goverment didn't have women working for them, you'd probably be talking about a 10 right now, right?
Click to expand...

And that is just the garbage quote of the year. I've met plenty of wimpy men and lots of strong women throughout my lifetime.

Please crawl back under your rock.

I didn't know our government issued .40s in the Military.
Click to expand...

The Coast Guard issues Sigs in .40 and the last time I checked they were a military branch of the U.S. Armed Forces (and a lap dog of of the Homeland inSecurity).
 
Last edited:
Smith

My point is what the choice is/was other than the 9

For some reason, this "debate" always seems to get started by people shooting the .40
 
I've shot 9's. I've shot 40's and Ive shot bunches of 45's.

I have never thought that .40 has more recoil...perceived or real....never...not once.
Click to expand...
That's because you're trying to sell the world on .40 S&W.

Tell me, if we look at a 1911 why is it that a 9mm uses a standard 14lbs spring, a .45 uses a 16lbs spring and a .40 uses a 19lbs spring?

Would you argue a 9mm has the same recoil as a .45? There is a 2lbs difference between their spring weights and most people will tell you the 9mm has less recoil than a .45. There is a 3lbs difference between the standard spring weight of a .45 1911 and a .40 S&W. How do you rationalize this discrepancy if your argument is that the .40 never-ever-ever has more recoil than a .45?

It would seem physics are standing in the way of the validity of your perception.
 
funny

I have every .355-.356. Caliber pistol, even some rifles. I handload 9x19 9x21 and 9x23. Occasionally I will shoot .38sp or .357(mostly through a marlin lever action). As an avid uspsa/ipsc shooter, I can say all calibers mentioned in all your posts have "special jobs" and as a handloader an owner of a 10mm Safe queen, I completely understand why .40 is so popular. If you are so stuck on 10mm. Better buy all the brass you can or start machining your own. Same with .45GAP. I shoot NRA be, static steel and bianchi style games as well as the occasional pinshoot. I have guns to have a competitive edge over others and load accordingly based on what I need the gun to do. If I am shooting ipsc 165 powerfactor to make major PF in open div. I load up major. If I'm shooting steel or uspsa production division I load for minor. Shooting limited division ipsc I usually shoot the gun that has the highest PF and the most capacity. That would be .40s&w. When I shoot bullseye or pins I shoot a hot loaded .45acp either loaded w mousefarts in BE or hot to make sure I knock the pins off the table or I hit it hard enough to take out several pins or perhaps all of them in one shot. If I ever need to carry it's usually 9 major jhp's. Open carry I either carry my production division(highly modified) glock 34-35 or a shorty open gun in 9 0r .38sc with the same Zero or Montana Gold .355 124grains with about 9.2gr of VV n-105 as it burns slow n creates a lot of gass to properly work the comp. Sometimes I carry different .45 1911's or shoot single stack/ limited 10 div. My open rig and sb89(now ump) as well as a red dotted vang comp 1100 0r an 870 as well as an array of m4 rifles from a stock A1 carbine to my 3gun open billet gun. I won a Dpms panther .308 but I set her up for SASS. I took an armalight and threw a bunch of surefire & larue mounts for flashlights lasers, a meopta k dot scope etc etc. I'm sure with all my 3 gun rig will hold Rambo don't have a chance whether I hit em w mousefart 130pf minor loads or a major 200grain .45.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top