I don't mean to start another 9mm vs .40 S&W war, but...

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TruthTellers

New member
The .40 is designed to shoot a bigger, heavier bullet at faster speeds than the 9mm can. The whole kerfuffle with 9mm isn't that it's a superior cartridge to the .40, it's that it's cheaper to shoot, has less recoil in smaller pistols, doesn't wear out the same sized frame pistols as .40 does, and it's not "that bad" for defense.

I can agree with the first three points, but never have I read ANYWHERE that said 9mm is superior to .40 S&W.

Anyway you look at it, 155, 165, or 180 grain, the .40 S&W respectively beats the 9mm in 115, 124, or 147 grain. If all you want is a "get off me gun" or something at point blank range, then sure, you don't need a .40 S&W and you may not even need a 9mm either, .380 will do the job, but if you want something that can punch through barriers, something law enforcement and federal agents are required to do time to time, the .40 S&W is still the better choice.
 
Yeah, and 10mm beats them both. So what?

Thing is, barrier penetration isn't a reasonable concern for a civilian.

Ammo cost, however, is. 9mm (practice) ammo is tremendously cheaper than .40.

There's several times as many carry pistols in 9mm than in .40, and lower recoil makes a significant difference in a small pistol.
 
This is the same old same old. If you reload the 9 isn't much cheaper, if you save your brass. As far as recoil a properly held weapon shouldn't have much recoil at all. I shoot my 40 better than my 9. Bottom line as always whatever you like the best is what you should shoot.
 
TruthTellers said:
I don't mean to start another 9mm vs .40 S&W war, but...
Click to expand...
And yet, this is exactly how caliber wars get started . . . .

TruthTellers said:
The whole kerfuffle with 9mm isn't that it's a superior cartridge to the .40, it's that it's cheaper to shoot, has less recoil in smaller pistols, doesn't wear out the same sized frame pistols as .40 does, and it's not "that bad" for defense.

I can agree with the first three points, but never have I read ANYWHERE that said 9mm is superior to .40 S&W.
Click to expand...
There's a big difference between claiming that "9mm isn't that bad," and claiming that "9mm is superior to the .40 S&W." I don't think I've ever seen the latter claim. Of the two, I carry a 9mm. I'm sure that the .40 is better with barriers, but at the time of purchase, I was far more concerned about: (a) ammo cost; and (b) recoil (in the event that Mrs. McGee needed to use my pistol); than (c) barrier performance. Now that I have my 9mm, 3 good holsters for it, ~10 magazines, and a decently-sized ammo supply, I'm not interested in switching calibers.
 
When it comes to ammo prices I scratch my head, yeah 9mm is the cheap ammo but I'm not letting that be my deciding factor in caliber choice.

I like .380 for pocket carry and .40 for a belt gun, in either category the 9mm would be a distant second because it doesn't come in a "real" pocket gun and I want at least a 180gr bullet from a belt gun.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Someone with a 9mm can shoot faster splits than with a .40.

Pistols are not shotguns, you're going to need more than one round to stop the threat. Unless you're comparing a howdah pistol, then the whole argument is pretty meaningless.

But whatever works for you bro. Don't see the point of the thread other than trolling.
 
Yeah same old song and dance. .40s&w does have the energy advantage, at the expense of ammo capacity and recoil. I personally believe it's about a wash.

but never have I read ANYWHERE that said 9mm is superior to .40 S&W.
Click to expand...

Superior in what way? Energy alone? No intelligent source would argue as much. Most arguments center around there being no hard scientific evidence stating that .40, or .45 for that matter, has significantly more wounding ability than 9mm. "Significant" is the key word there. Obviously there is a difference, it's just that the argument goes that the difference isn't enough to justify less capacity.

I don't care, I don't have a favorite caliber. Well, 10mm probably will be when I join that club but I won't be trying to convert everyone to carry a 10mm for SD.
 
I feel like in the age of the internet and big data we analyze and over analyze everything.

Plenty of folks have defended themselves with cap and ball .36 caliber revolvers or .32 caliber vest pocket pistols or .45 1911s or or ....

Point is we REALLY get hung up on caliber, speed, reloads, etc. etc. when the reality is shoot what you are proficient with, anything worth shooting is worth shooting again.......and again. All the modern martial calibers are fine defensive tools each with its own pros and cons.

Pays your money, take your chances.
 
but if you want something that can punch through barriers, something law enforcement and federal agents are required to do time to time, the .40 S&W is still the better choice.
Click to expand...

If you care to carefully review this source I believe that you will discover that in the FBI test protocol, the 9mm matched or exceeding the performance of the .40 S&W in all but one category of barrier penetration.

http://www.hornadyle.com/assets/site/files/Hornady-LE-Military-Application-Guide.pdf
 
This is the same old same old. If you reload the 9 isn't much cheaper, if you save your brass. As far as recoil a properly held weapon shouldn't have much recoil at all. I shoot my 40 better than my 9. Bottom line as always whatever you like the best is what you should shoot.
Click to expand...

Recoil force is determined by bullet weight, velocity, powder charge weight, and the weight of the gun.
 
A well placed shot from either will drop a bad guy.

A poorly placed shot from either will not.

If the goal is to stop a bad guy, then either is sufficient.

The Math says so:

The muzzle energy from both are generally between 350 and 500 ft-lbs, a little more than getting hit in the head by a major league player's bat at full speed, 250-300 ft-lbs.

Bottom line: Physics says there's no appreciable difference.
(A S&W .500 on the other hand, has about 8 times the muzzle energy of either 9mm or .40.)
 
The concerns for LE organizations are cost and the ability to control recoil. Some people have a difficult time with the recoil of the 40 but can better handle the 9mm.
Since ammo needs to be shared you can't have some cops using 44 magnum and others using 380 autos. In deference to the small framed, weaker wristed, men on the force LE typically goes with the 9mm in a near full sized gun. And because weight is a concern they typically use a plastic gun with a life expectancy about the same as the average recruit. The military follows similar concerns in their pistol selections and add easy maintenance on the end.

I am still of the mind that 38 Special +P rounds are a better comparison to the 9mm than are 40 S&W. I have carried a 357 all my adult life and never recognized the 9mm as a "capable" defensive round. I seem to be mellowing in my old age and am beginning to accept that there could be a time that I would accept the 9mm as an "adequate" self defense gun and caliber. In my personal pretend world the 40 is a good compromise between the 9mm and the 357 but a 45 is better than the 40.

Now this is an opinion that has been learned from the paper ballistics and the actual firing of these calibers and not any scientific double blind testing so it is only valid for me. Your opinions may differ and that is why they make guns in calibers from 10 caliber to 50 caliber.
 
The only thing the 9mm is better at is ammunition prices. The 40 wins with +P ammunition. I don't care what people shoot 9mm, 40 or 45. This topic has been beaten to death and OP should be scolded for knowing better to start one.
 
FBI test protocols are irrelevant. FBI people get whatever is issued to them just like any copper. And their firearms get carried more than fired just like any copper too.
LEO firearms are chosen based on the same principles as military firearm. Lowest bidder.
And there is no 9mm vs .40 S&W war.
 
I don't mean to dismiss your premise, but without data to support it is hard to view it as anything but an attempt to stir the pot and claim superiority. Life is too short to argue with those who are unwilling to consider any opinion but their own. Small framed, weaker wristed indeed...:rolleyes:
 
TruthTellers wrote:
I don't mean to start another 9mm vs .40 S&W war, but...
Click to expand...

...but why not?

Anyway you look at it, 155, 165, or 180 grain, the .40 S&W respectively beats the 9mm in 115, 124, or 147 grain.
Click to expand...

Baloney.

There's one way to look at it in which the 9mm beats the 40 hand's down; cost.

If you're going to adopt the screen name "TruthTellers" then you take on the obligation to objectively approach this sort of dispute and consider and present a comprehensive analysis of the factors involved.

The effectiveness of a weapons system is not found in computed metrics or cherry-picked scenarios in which it will be used. It is determined by evaluating its overall effectiveness in the hands of the people who will use it in the environment in which they will use it over the system's life. This includes not only considerations of terminal performance, but also training, acceptance by the operator base, longevity, and cost.

And when considered through Total Cost of Ownership analysis, few police departments (and no military that I am aware of) has moved to replace 9mm with the 40, although there have been a number of recently publicized defections from the 40 camp to 9mm.

So, No, any way I look at it, the 40 does not beat the 9mm. Both are weapons systems that are appropriate to particular situations and that's about all that can be definitively said.

That is, unless we're going to address the true champion semiautomatic handgun cartridge, 45 ACP.
 
TruthTellers said:
...I can agree with the first three points, but never have I read ANYWHERE that said 9mm is superior to .40 S&W.
Click to expand...

Probably because it would be hard to legitimately argue that a smaller diameter, lighter bullet is better than a larger diameter, heavier bullet traveling at comparable velocity.
 
Just for clarification I don't believe there is or has ever been +P .40.

I could certainly be wrong but I am pretty sure of this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top