best .40 S&W ammo for self defense

it ridiculous, all this .40 Short & Weak bashing that goes on with all the internoobs.


this test said it sucks, this story said it failed, bla, bla, bla!



the real world shooting results coming in indicate that the current premium rounds are increadibily devastating and effective, particularly the 165gr. versions . reports from witnesses indicate grusome wounds with the ranger-T and HST bullets


shot placement 1st

rounds selection 2nd

caliber 3rd


one just might find that many critics cant shoot it for beans. just a thought.


:D
 
Last edited:
I keep my GLOCK 23 packed with Gold Dots, but would certainly try the HST's if I could find them locally.

This rocks, my 666 post.
 
The Navy Seals would seem to think so, because a 9mm cartridge is what they use. Say the word and I'll back that up.
Click to expand...

The SEALs use a 9mm because that's what they're told to use. I believe it's some variant of the SIG p226, but I'm not 100% certain on that one. The military supply chain is loooooong and procuring a new round when you've got X,000,000 rounds of 9mm stocked up is expensive, and not something that the titan of bureaucracy that is the military is likely to do.

The reason the Coast Guard was able to switch to Sigs in .40 S&W is because they were sitting on top of a big fat pile of Homeland Security bucks, and wanted to get more in line with the "law enforcement" image.
 
The SEALs use a 9mm because that's what they're told to use.

Wrong. The Seals aren't treated like regular grunts. They get to use whatever, and I repeat WHATEVER weapon they choose to use, in whatever caliber. I can also back that up if you're interested. They use the nine because they know where/how to place them, with more firepower per magazine.
 
By all means, go ahead and try to back that up with cites from military/government sources; because what you're repeating a really, really common misconception about the SEALs, who are issues Sig M11 (9mm) or the H&K SOCOM in .45 ACP.
 
Last edited:
Protip: all that clip said was that the SEALs can pick any weapon from their "list of weapons". Their list of weapons only has two handguns on it, the Sig M11 and the H&K SOCOM. Also, all that guy said about the 9mm was "you won't think its ineffective when I shoot you with it", or something to that extent.

In the beginning, when they're talking about an operator choosing whatever he wants, what they mean is "we have X weapons that you're allowed to use, pick whatever you feel is necessary and fits the mission profile", not "pick whatever gun you want from all the guns on the market." As flexible as the SEALs are, they're still part of the military, and subject to the .mil rules on procurement and supply. They use a 9mm because 9mm and .45 ACP are the standardized cartridges, not because 124 grain ball round is the ultimate death ray.
 
Irrelevant. They have a choice whether or not to use the nine, and they choose to use it. You said they were forced to use it. They aren't. THEY CHOOSE TO USE IT. Case closed.
 
Wait, so because a 9mm pistol is the standard issue pistol for SEALs, that means that they choose to use the 9mm? They don't "pick" the 9mm any more than Joe Army "picks" his Beretta M9, it's called an "issue" handgun for a reason. The SOCOM is used for, I don't know, whenever the mission profile calls for a gun the size of a Colt Dragoon.
 
The 9mm is "standard issue" for SEALs? Show me your evidence for that. EVIDENCE. As far as that documentary is concerned, there is no "standard issue" for SEALs.
 
Right. I never said they didn't carry the 9mm. I always said they carried the 9mm. What I'm saying is that they carry the 9mm, and in limited cases a .45 ACP because those cartridges are standardized by the military, not because they tested a bunch of rounds and said "9mm is king."

It works like this - in the late 70s, early 80s, the military says "we need to replace all these 50 year old 1911s we have", so they have trials for a new gun. Before they have those trials, they say "the gun has to be a 9mm, because that's what everyone in NATO is using". So the only guns submitted to the pistol trials were chambered in 9mm, out of you end up with the M9, M10, and M11. All of them 9mms. The SEALs say something roughly to the extent of "We don't want these Berettas", so they pick the Sig. In 9mm. The caliber of the firearm was never a choice - the people with stars on their shoulders decided that 9mm would be the service caliber, and that .45 would remain as an "approved" round.

To repeat myself - I never said SEALs don't use the 9mm. In fact, I said that their standard issue sidearm is a 9mm. What I'm saying is that they didn't the 9mm over another a cartridge, they picked one 9mm handgun (the Sig) over another 9mm handgun (the Beretta).
 
Your other source says the P228 doesn't even come in .45, but is limited to 9mm, .357 Sig, and .40. This actually contradicts your latest statement about the "approved" .45.

So you see, you still have not provided the evidence we seek. Please provide the evidence that the Top Brass are who chose the 9mm rather than the SEALs themselves.

You only provided evidence they don't like the Beretta, not the 9mm caliber.
 
I never said the P228 or the P226 came in .45. I said the H&K Mk23 SOCOM (or whatever it's called) comes in .45. I also never said that the SEALs didn't like the 9mm.

This article from Defense Review actually has a pretty history on the adoption of the Beretta by the armed forces, including the adoption of the 9mm. The 9mm was selected by NATO as the standard caliber, so we, being sort of the "bosshoss" in NATO, decided it would be our standard caliber as well. You can look up the Joint Services Small Arms Program, and the XM9 trials if you'd like information on the selection of 9mm as the standard service cartridge.

The point that I am laboriously trying to make is that yes, the SEALs use the 9mm, because they are issued a 9mm. The "other" SEAL handgun, the H&K Mk 23 chambered in .45 ACP is a "special purposes" gun. 9mm is the standard cartridge for the DoD, so their gun is a 9mm.
 
To the OP: 180g HST seems to be this years king of the dog pile as far as SD ammo goes. Check either www.ammunitiontogo.com or www.gunbroker.com to find some. Now, for something completely different...


Ok, I'll throw my hat into this weeks #1 top stupid conversation.

I know someone who took a 7.62x39 to the head and not only lived, but is perfectly fine/normal and went on to father a son (me). I guess the 7.62x39 really doesn't work well against people?

Here's a pretty good rule of thumb to follow.

Handguns suck for use against people, it's something to think about. I know of ZERO people who have experience shooting at real live human beings who would choose a handgun over a rifle or shotgun if they knew they were going to have to shoot someone. So all this talk of the SEAL's use this or that is ridiculous. NONE OF US ARE SEALS! You're talking about what an expert uses, not because of the gun's capability, but because of the expert's ability to deliver fast accurate fire with it. Mossad Agents used .22's quite extensively for their wet-work, does that mean we should all feel warm and fuzzy carrying .22's just because they use it? No. If you decide to carry a .22 it better be because that's what you're most capable/comfortable with. On top of all that...

ANY round can fail. There are people who have survived .50 BMG hits. Heck, I've seen FLIR video of 30mm being used against insurgents, and the Apache gunner had to finish one of them off with a 2nd burst. I guess the conclusion I should draw from this is that the depleted uranium round those things fire aren't an effective man-stopper? They work great against ARMORED VEHICLES but for people we better get something bigger.

We all need to grow up, seriously. Some of us for saying REALLY stupid things, and others for feeding into said stupid things (me included).

Also, anyone willing to make decisions based off of one reported instance, good or bad, is not practicing good decision making abilities. It's about as smart as trying to win an argument on an internet forum.
 
Notice there is nothing in this story about the man driving himself to the hospital...so it would seem the .45 is a LOT MORE EFFECTIVE than the .40 caliber....

>>>>Texas Man Shoots Himself in Both Legs While in Cubicle

FORT WORTH, TX (AP) -- A 47-year-old insurance company worker accidentally fired his gun in his office cubicle, shooting himself in both legs, police said.....
Detectives will wait until the man, who was taken to a hospital, had recovered from his apparently non-life threatening injuries before deciding whether to pursue charges, McGuire said.>>>>

Also notice that nobody has coughed up any incident where anybody took 11 rounds of .45 acp or .357 or .44 spl and had to be beaten into submission with a mag-light.

I can think of at least one incident where a biker soaked up about 17 rounds of 9mm and kept on. I have read of another incident where a guy on drugs was shot dozens of times with medium bores before finally bleeding out.
But I don't know of many more spectacular stopping failures than the ones local police have experienced in my neck of the woods.
For what it was worth, I saw one of those real life police video shows here awhile back where a guy soaked up nearly an entire mag of .40s from a Glock pistol and was wrestling around on the ground with the officer.

As for the Navy Seal deal, back when Seal Team Six was founded Demo Dick Marcinko and the boys carried S&W .357 revolvers. When Demo Dick wanted an automatic pistol, they were offered 1911s and chose Beretta 9mms instead.
They had a problem with the frames cracking on the front edge of the mag well which Marcinko complained about and Beretta beefed the gun up in that area, and he had no further complaints.
Its in his biography.
If you notice the Taurus gun is not beefed up there....

Later on the Seals asked for and got Sigs...

Most of the problems with Beretta slides were traced to people in the military using silencers which put extra pressure on the locking block.
Moral of the story, if you want a silenced roscoe, stick with the Model 59/Hush Puppy.
Last I heard, Seals were given the options of their Sig 9s or the HK Mark 23 .45 pistols.
Demo Dick is big on Glocks and HKs these days.
I have also heard of individual SEALS carrying privately owned and customized .357s....

The biggest problem with Sanow and Marshalls stats is that in the real world, guns don't show the differences in stopping power that paper stats would appear to give you.
And there are multiple reasons for that.
For example, intellectually, we may feel that the 240 grain .44 magnum hollowpoint HAS to have more stopping power than a 125 grain jacketed hollow point .357.
But on the street the 125 JHP has more one shot stops.
In addition to having a larger data base to work with, the 125 grain JHP is probably more controllable to the typical shooter than a full house Keith .44 load and a good center mass hit with it is better than a near miss with a .44.

In theory that could explain a LOT of the .40s stopping failures. It has a nasty muzzle blast and recoil compared to say a 9 or a .45.

Also, as Cooper pointed out of the full house .44 load, from the way it happily whistles through a man, it may not have the same terminal effect as a round that stops in the body and the body has to soak up all the momentum.
That may also explain why the .40 looks good on the ballistics charts and papers, but performs like the .25 acp on the street.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top