Game over for the 40 S&W. Say it ain't so!

Around here, it's the .357 Sig you don't see as much of.

I doubt .40 is going to die out anytime soon. In fact, I don't think it will die out at all. It's fairly entrenched in the cannon of standard defensive calibers at this point. As lee pointed out, manufactures are still putting out new production guns in that caliber and there are a lot of them floating around the market, used, that are good deals.
 
Why does it always have to be either/or? I have 9, .40, & .45 and like them all, for different reasons. And when the next ammo shortage comes around (and it will) you may just find that .40 is a lot more get-able than 9. There's no way I'm going to limit myself to one caliber.
 
gun shops stock what they can sell and what sells in their area. not stocking .40cal handguns does not necessarily mean they wont order one if a customer wants one.... there is a pawn shop near me that stocks new guns. most of the new guns are cobra 380s, and hi-point 9mm because that's what the people in that area buy regularly. they will have plenty of police quality service pieces that are used, but if you want a new glock, they will have to order it.
 
I generally carry a 9mm. When I carry a .45 it's a HKCompact and yes I own a .40S&W. It's a HK full size USP and handles really well. When my youngest son goes to the range with me it's the pistol he wants to shoot. I own pistols in all major calibers and then some. I've never owned a .357Sig. I see no use to it. I own and shoot .22s, .25ACPs, .32ACPs, .380s, 9mm single and double stack, .40S&W, .45ACPs and some day soon I'll have a 10mm for hunting. The .40S&W is here to stay. It makes a reasonably large hole and the recoil isn't bad at all. You want a .40 go for it. Just find a manufacturer that makes one that is comfortable in your hand and go for it. JMHO :D
 
Thank you all so very much! I love what you all bring to the table in terms of intellect, experience and tact.. It's well worth periodically addressing this issue - does my current EDC caliber fully meet what the demands of my environment. THAT is the critical issue.
 
When I took my daughter to several LGS's to look for her next handgun we got the same speech over and over again. "You don't want a 40! With the advancement of the cartridges the 9mm is as good as the 40 and it's cheaper to shoot."
My response was "Which is better if you fire the same advanced ammo in both the 9mm and the 40?" And "I handload, 9mm is $6.70/50 rnds, 40 is $8.00/50 rnds so I don't care!"
I can see the mag capacity argument but here in Kalyforrnya we can only have 10 so I want the 10 that stops better.

It was her choice and after shooting my 45, 40 and 9mm she bought the 40. ;)
We pick it up tomorrow...
 
The thing is... All ammo advancement has been to meet a certain standard.

Meaning there is no "if 9mm gained so much performance, surely the 40 gained just as much performance"...

No that is not what happened. Well, not completely.

9mm gained more reliable penetration and expansion, it gained barrier performance.

40, needed less effort to meet specs, and got less effort.


The myth of 40 being vastly better, or even a little better is... A myth. It may have a few advantages in some performance points, but it has disadvantages in others.

People think the difference between 9mm, 40, and 45 is like getting hit with a golf ball, a baseball, and a softball.

The reality is, the difference is like a ping pong ball, a nerf ball, and a wiffle ball...

The difference in energy is ultimately meaningless, there just isn't enough of it to do any significant damage outside the direct wound path.


All the research from the past few years points to there being no difference between the three calibers, shot for shot, bullet for bullet...

So if that's the case, accuracy, quick follow-up shots, and having more rounds is simply more important.

40 isn't a bad round, it's just that it's advantages over 9mm have shrunk to nearly nothing, but it's disadvantages have not decreased.
 
I love my 40 caliber 1911. It is fun to shoot, and if there is an ammo shortage I probably won't have much trouble finding ammo for it.
 
Handgun ammo, at least in the usual calibers for carrying, aren't all that powerful as compared to lots of other things.
Knockdown power and such seem more attributable to something else more deserving of the terms.
Back in my full power .44 magnum days, I had a round skip off the ground in front of a stack of car tires and stop in the tread of one.
No penetration whatsoever.
Now, the 12 gauge slug that followed was impressive.
Expecting a .40 or .45 to show a big advantage over a 9mm might be disappointing.
Just a thought.
 
I just feel better having my handguns start with a 4! Some end with a 5 and the ones I carry end with a zero.
 
marine6680,

You forgot one huge aspect of shootablity and that is the user.

I shoot a lot of .45 and .40. I have a lot of big handguns (both size big and recoil big) that I shoot often. I'm very used to managing recoil.

The downside of this?

I tend to throw shots with 9mm until I get into the groove. Which is no big deal on the range, but when it comes to a defensive weapon, I know my faults as a shooter and I want something with the recoil I'm in the habit of dealing with.

I know a lot of people complain about the "snappy" .40. I complain about the whip on a 9mm. When it comes to practice, I'm more likely to pick up the .40, because I simply prefer the recoil.

And this, the shooters preferences and habits, are the *BEST* argument for having a range of options in good, solid defensive rounds and the primary reason all these 9mm vs .40 S&W vs 357 Sig arguments are pointless.
There is no disadvantage to the caliber you shoot best.
 
I wonder just how many thousands of 40 cal pistols are in the hands of law enforcement throughout the nation. I'm sure the bean counting officials are not going to read this forum and quickly order 9mm pistols for their department's personnel. The pistol and caliber have been doing quite nicely for twenty years so why take a step backward and mimic the FBI (who does not have a clue which is the best issue pistol they simply bow to the complaints from within that the 40 is too harsh for their manicure) an agency that has changed numerous times and is still not satisfied.
I was responsible for transitioning my former department to the 40 cal Glock over twenty years ago, to my knowledge they still carry that combination. I have numerous 9mm pistols (no 40's) that I thoroughly enjoy shooting and the round is quite adequate for Law Enforcement officers but if they are already carrying a pistol and ammo that is satisfactory (either 9 or 40) why change?
 
A person is free to shoot the caliber they like.

If you shoot it well, all the better.


My statement was more about the actual capability of the round itself outside variables of the shooter.
 
So if that's the case, accuracy, quick follow-up shots, and having more rounds is simply more important.

40 isn't a bad round, it's just that it's advantages over 9mm have shrunk to nearly nothing, but it's disadvantages have not decreased.
Click to expand...

Except two out of those three things in the first sentence directly relates to the abilities of the shooter, and the second assumes 9mm is the superior round in all three aspects.
 
I see enough 40 cal weapons out here in AZ. Plenty of ammo too. From observation here it's 3rd behind 9 / 45 but by no means rare like 357 sig and 45 gap which I only see associated with agency issue.

I really do not see the 40 going anywhere anytime soon

I have never liked the 40... But to each their own. I know several families that do 40 / 9 for carry guns. In my hands the 40 is Snappy and more demanding of gun / ammo in my experience. For that effort I will go 10 mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top