Considering ditching my .40 in favor of several 9MMs

P

prater

New member
I currently have one .40 pistol that has been my nightstand gun for years, before that I had a different .40. .40 has been my defensive caliber for almost ten years.

I'll be getting my CHL soon and decided on a compact 9MM for EDC.

That got me thinking about ammo prices and keeping practiced with both my EDC and my full size nightstand gun. I've also got my eye on adding a 92FS to my collection which would be 9MM.

Since my EDC will be 9MM I'm considering swapping my nightstand gun out for a 9MM as well so I just have to maintain a stockpile of one caliber, a cheaper caliber and I can get more practice with both guns.

I know the .40 has performed better in some tests and many police forces still use it. But I've also been reading about the .40 diminishing in popularity with LEO in favor of 9MM.

It seems to me if 9MM is good enough for me on the streets it is good for me at home.

Should I keep the .40 at home?

Get a compact .40 for carry?

Ammo price and the convenience of keeping up with one primary pistol caliber is my main concern.
 
If you like your gun in .40 S&W, keep it. Some people think it's a pain to stock two calibers but I always have to ask. Why? Don't they sell it at the same stores? Better yet, what if they are out of one but not the other? That won't ruin your day if you can use both.
 
More guns, more fun!

Probably more efficient to deal with just one caliber but where's the fun in that? Doesn't sound like you have to make a decision right away so keep them both for a while.

Disclaimer: I subscribe to Cheapshooters rule of guns---Never sell or trade any of them.
 
If I don't keep my .40 I would just replace it with a like model in 9MM. The only change would be the caliber.

I subscribe to the rule that I will never decrease my number of guns but I am willing to trade or sell them as long as I replace them.
 
I'd go with both. .40 isn't bad in a full size gun and 9mm is more suitable for compact firearms.

If you shoot your. 40 well, why ditch it? I got rid of my M&P 40 in a similar situation and I regret it.

Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk
 
I no longer own a 40, but a big part of my decision is because I do own a couple of 10mm pistols. I'm in the camp that believes the better 9mm loads are good enough for 2 legged threats. On paper 40 S&W looks somewhat better, but in the real world not enough to matter. If in the woods 10mm is enough of a step up to be a legitimate large predator defense round. I couldn't justify keeping both 40 and 10mm.
 
I carry a 45 shield and prior to it a 40.
When9 was scarce 40'was around and price point is no reason to change calibers at least not for me.

I shoot about 400/500 rds a month mostly 45 now.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The only reason I have anything in .40 is that, when I purchased my first semi-auto, the only ammo to be found anywhere was .40. That was in early 2009. 9mm and 45 ACP were gone.

So, I agree with Cosmo. Keep the bird in the hand (if only for the reason that it is an alternative) Stock a decent amount of ammo for it forget about it you'd like. Then go ahead and get whatever 9mm(s) you want to have, too.
 
Last edited:
40 S&W is a great SD round. There is a lot of good ammo available and with the proper ammo, it has good ballistics out of a short barrel handgun. LE have used it with good effect for decades. Personally I prefer it to 45ACP as an SD round (though I prefer 45ACP as a "shooting for fun" round)

9mm also has a lot going for it. It's not generally inferior to 40 S&W terminal ballistics wise, it costs less and is easier to shoot fast strings of fire with accuracy. It makes a lot of sense to use a gun chambered in 9mm for a CCW.

I would not 'ditch' a perfectly good gun chambered in 40 S&W if I already had good experience with it and can shoot it well. I similarly would not turn down a really good deal on a 40 S&W gun.

I recently took two identical guns to the range, one chambered in 40 S&W (an SD40VE) and the other in 9mm (an SD9VE). I shot them alternatively with various ammo at steel gongs and paper targets from 15y to 25y. I didn't find that I shot either of them any better or worse than the other. I had to really think about it to even discern a difference. Maybe if I was shooting smaller guns there would have been a more apparent difference.
 
Keep the 40!

A wise old LEO gave me some advice years ago - " If you are going to carry make sure it starts with a 4"

I plink with 9, carry 40. and defend the home turf with 45.
 
Go for it! I have a small, yet brisk business collecting guns people get tired of and sell for deal. I count on you guys!

I made a killing when y'all went from 9's to 40's.

The ones I enjoy the most are the 45 acp people that think they need a new 9mm.

Gotta love the free market!
 
I have been in a similar position and regret selling my G23, I got rid of it to reduce my calibers but realized its silly to try to reduce down to a few calibers when variety is the spice of life. When the ammo shortage happened it was clear there was no 9mm, 45acp to be found on the shelf's, plenty of 40 though. I ended up getting another 40 and just keep a few 100 rounds for it incase I want to shoot it. Its not really a big deal to keep the weapon and a few rounds.
 
I'm thinking about switching over to .40 for a full size home defense gun. I have a 9mm as my ccw and that's fine. I'll take the capacity advantage. Whenever I sort my 9mm, .40 and .45acp brass I'm reminded how much smaller 9mm is. The M&P .40 is 15+1 that's a lot of firepower.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have .40's in both a Sig P229 and a P226. What I did and you should do is simply buy .357 Sig Barrels. Then you will have another caliber to stock ammo for and shoot.

You are being too conservative. Loosen up and be a little more liberal. ;)
 
I would keep the gun. I don't shoot 40, but carry 9 mm and have a 45 acp for a night stand gun. As stated above more guns more fun and it is not a hassle to stock more the one caliber. Enjoy your new carry gun and be safe out there.
 
You are overthinking the differences between 9MM and .40. While those differences might be useful if you are buying one or the other they are all but meaningless in considering switching from one to the other.

Unless the gun you are looking at for EDC is not available in .40 I would simply buy it in .40 and move on.

That is assuming you feel you "must" settle on a single caliber. While I get the point (I don't own a .45 because I don't need "one more" caliber to keep up with) there is some validity in the idea of diversity in case ammunition becomes scarce.
 
I would keep the 40 and pick up a 9mm. I get the thought process of streamlining your ammo calibers and if I was going to war or carrying a backup to my duty weapon as a LEO that would certainly have its benefits. As for me, I enjoy having the choice of different chamberings for range fun.
Now if I just wasn't a fan of the 40 then I would get rid of it.
Another plus of the .40 is that you can find deals on firearms chambered for it.
You can find M&P40c compacts with night sights for under $400. Thats a good deal.
 
I have handguns chambered in 22LR, 9 mm Luger, 38 Special, 357 Magnum, .40 S&W, 357 SIG, and .45 ACP. I have been considering getting a 10 mm as well.

I guess having to stock more than one caliber might mean having to buy more ammo boxes. Some .40 S&W pistols have magazines that will accept and feed 9 mm Luger, so it is possible to get mixed up. The one time I shot a 9mm round through my .40 S&W SIG P229 nothing much bad happened. Ammo is cheaper when purchased on-line 1000 rounds at a time, and some folks might not be financially able to buy cases of ammo in multiple different calibers.

Other than those issues, I guess I don't see the great advantage of standardizing on one caliber. It would seem to me that the benefit of having pistols chambered in 2 or more calibers during an ammo shortage would outweigh any potential drawbacks.

As for prices of FMJ target ammo, .40 S&W does seem to have come down in price recently and I am generally able to buy 50 round boxes for only a couple of dollars more than comparable 9mm Luger ammo. Still, if you shoot thousands of rounds a year, the price difference can be significant.

I generally prefer 9mm Luger for subcompact carry pistols, .40 S&W for mid-size pistols, and .45 ACP for full-size, home defense pistols. But if you did decide to go with only one caliber for EDC and home defense, I guess my choice would be 9mm. The Beretta 92 FS with a Mec-Gar "plus 2" magazine will hold 20+1 rounds of ammunition that can be shot very quickly without reloading. That is quite a bit of firepower.
 
I am amazed at the amount of .40 cal love I'm seeing in this thread. That's not how the usual gunboard "9 or .40?" conversation goes.


Should I keep the .40 at home?

Get a compact .40 for carry?
Click to expand...

I echo the folks above. Keep the bedside .40. It works. You'll loose money liquidating and replacing it.

As to getting a compact in .40, that's going to depend on the gun, and on you. In the smallest sizes, a 9 is probably the safest choice. Are you looking for a little single stack, like an XDS or Shield in .40? That would probably be a bit too much for me. Something a little heavier and fatter would be easier on the hands.

Ammo price and the convenience of keeping up with one primary pistol caliber is my main concern.
Click to expand...

I myself am not real concerned with keeping multiple different calibers around, as long as they are standard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top