I'm sure this has been discussed a million times, is .40 cal that superior to 9 mm?
- Thread starter Cackmandu
- Start date
- Status
Oh this will be fun to watch the fireworks.
Might as well add my own fuel to the fire:
9mm Pros: greater magazine capacity, cheaper, better bullet selection and ballistic development (read expansion etc), more manageable recoil for follow up shots
9mm Cons: *maybe* stopping power (read velocity and bullet weight) (Most feel that shot placement and bullet performance matter more than foot pounds)
40 pros and cons: "Take the above, reverse it. Thank you"
Might as well add my own fuel to the fire:
9mm Pros: greater magazine capacity, cheaper, better bullet selection and ballistic development (read expansion etc), more manageable recoil for follow up shots
9mm Cons: *maybe* stopping power (read velocity and bullet weight) (Most feel that shot placement and bullet performance matter more than foot pounds)
40 pros and cons: "Take the above, reverse it. Thank you"
Model12Win
Moderator
There is a reason why many federal and state/local agencies are dropping the .40 and going to the 9mm.
Hardly any practical increase in effectiveness, with more benefits.
Hardly any practical increase in effectiveness, with more benefits.
I am a 9mm guy, but also have a .40 and .45acp. I think there is a place for the .40, ammo prices have become pretty reasonable, if there is a deal to be had it seems to involve a handgun chambered in .40, ballisticlly it does have a edge over the 9, rounds are abundant, pick up a .357Sig barrel and have some more fun.
Now to really stir the pot, the only reason I have a .45acp is because I had to have a 1911 and for me thats the only round for a 1911. Other than that, the .45acp is a overpriced, low capacity offering and I would take the 9mm and .40 over it all day long, that ought to get the worm can wiggling....
Now to really stir the pot, the only reason I have a .45acp is because I had to have a 1911 and for me thats the only round for a 1911. Other than that, the .45acp is a overpriced, low capacity offering and I would take the 9mm and .40 over it all day long, that ought to get the worm can wiggling....
Last edited:
You are right. This has been discussed countless times over the years. But, this is a gun forum and we have to discuss something.
I am no expert on the subject but I have worked as a paramedic full time for over 30 years, most of it in one of the busiest EMS systems in the world. I have seen quite a few shootings up close and personal. One observation I have is that most people GREATLY over-estimate the effectiveness of hanguns (any handgun). Statistics (not just my opinion) show that the vast majority of people who get shot in the US, live to tell about it.
My opinion, and my opinion only: I think that all the bandwidth discussing the effectiveness of one handgun cartridge over another or one bullet vs. some other bullet, or this velocity vs. that velocity.................is really really splitting hairs. Shot placement is everything when it comes to handguns. What the bullet hits matters FAR more than what bullet was fired. And when you take this to the next level and compare two cartridges that are very similar this is splitting the already split hairs.
I know that if you had a large sample size, and had very reliable methodology to study this you would probably find trends favoring one thing over another. Which again is splitting hairs. In the real world, with infinite possibilities and possible senarios that might take place; my opinion is that it is a waste of time.
I am no expert on the subject but I have worked as a paramedic full time for over 30 years, most of it in one of the busiest EMS systems in the world. I have seen quite a few shootings up close and personal. One observation I have is that most people GREATLY over-estimate the effectiveness of hanguns (any handgun). Statistics (not just my opinion) show that the vast majority of people who get shot in the US, live to tell about it.
My opinion, and my opinion only: I think that all the bandwidth discussing the effectiveness of one handgun cartridge over another or one bullet vs. some other bullet, or this velocity vs. that velocity.................is really really splitting hairs. Shot placement is everything when it comes to handguns. What the bullet hits matters FAR more than what bullet was fired. And when you take this to the next level and compare two cartridges that are very similar this is splitting the already split hairs.
I know that if you had a large sample size, and had very reliable methodology to study this you would probably find trends favoring one thing over another. Which again is splitting hairs. In the real world, with infinite possibilities and possible senarios that might take place; my opinion is that it is a waste of time.
I own, shoot and like both calibers, but not sure there’s much difference in bottom line performance. I will say that during the most recent ammo shortage a variety of merchants had no 9mm while most places had some .40S&W on the shelves. Now, not sure exactly what this means, but in the 2008 – 20012 time frame I shot a lot of .40S&W.
Use what you are best comfortable with and can shoot well.
Usually the .40 frame is beefed up which translates to more weight.
When conceal carrying, this means a lot.
The 9mm ammo at that time didn't do what the F.B.I. wanted it to do. The .40 was the F.B.I.'s answer to the 10mm which had too much recoil for them.
The 9mm ammo today is much better.
Usually the .40 frame is beefed up which translates to more weight.
When conceal carrying, this means a lot.
The 9mm ammo at that time didn't do what the F.B.I. wanted it to do. The .40 was the F.B.I.'s answer to the 10mm which had too much recoil for them.
The 9mm ammo today is much better.
It offers more stopping power at the expense of capacity and shootability.
It's a compromise. Every decision is a trade off.
Since police tend to be moving away from it, there are some real deals on police trades. Sigs especially.
Absolutely. It would probably be better to stockpile ammo in your calibers, but a .40 barrel (or cheap police trade pistol!) wouldn't be a bad idea either.
It's a compromise. Every decision is a trade off.
Since police tend to be moving away from it, there are some real deals on police trades. Sigs especially.
Absolutely. It would probably be better to stockpile ammo in your calibers, but a .40 barrel (or cheap police trade pistol!) wouldn't be a bad idea either.
Flfiremedic
New member
I've had a pretty varied career, and have seen several sides of this argument...if you want a guaranteed 1 shot stop, use an RPG...everything else is a gamble, but requires shot placement.
The current trend is towards 9mm....you can expect that to change (again) when the current group of trainers, writers, and LEO leaders change...in a few years, either speed and weight (40 cal and 357 SIG) will be king, or slower and heavier (45acp)...
9mm with 124 gr bullets, you have good penetration, and good speed-and a higher capacity.
40 cal you can play with speed vs penetration a bit more, but at the expense of recoil and lower mag capacity...same goes for the 357 Sig...I'd give the edge to the 357, but with both, you are getting more very snappy recoil.
45acp a bit slower, a lot heavier bullet, and good penetration...heavy recoil, but a good bit slower and gentler recoil.
So it comes down to...more recoil and fewer rounds, with the potential for better penetration on bone...or car doors....OR less recoil and more rounds. Or do what the FBI and current trainers are doing and choose the easiest to shoot well with less training and practice...as in how much can you afford to shoot in practice.
For me, I carry either a 1911 in 45 acp, or a G19...depends on where I'm going and what is going to conceal better.
The current trend is towards 9mm....you can expect that to change (again) when the current group of trainers, writers, and LEO leaders change...in a few years, either speed and weight (40 cal and 357 SIG) will be king, or slower and heavier (45acp)...
9mm with 124 gr bullets, you have good penetration, and good speed-and a higher capacity.
40 cal you can play with speed vs penetration a bit more, but at the expense of recoil and lower mag capacity...same goes for the 357 Sig...I'd give the edge to the 357, but with both, you are getting more very snappy recoil.
45acp a bit slower, a lot heavier bullet, and good penetration...heavy recoil, but a good bit slower and gentler recoil.
So it comes down to...more recoil and fewer rounds, with the potential for better penetration on bone...or car doors....OR less recoil and more rounds. Or do what the FBI and current trainers are doing and choose the easiest to shoot well with less training and practice...as in how much can you afford to shoot in practice.
For me, I carry either a 1911 in 45 acp, or a G19...depends on where I'm going and what is going to conceal better.
Yep, heavily discussed. The differences in ballistic gel are minor, and yes, I understand that ballistic gel is not an accurate representation of all tissues of the body, and probably doesn't represent any realistic bullet path, but it is a way to standardize data for terminal ballistics.
Shot placement is therefore key, and since no common handgun caliber gives us a reliable one-shot stop, the accuracy and speed of the second and third shots could easily be the key to the outcome of a defensive shooting. My followup shots are faster and more accurate with 9 mm than with .40 (or .45, for that matter, although .45 is better in my hands than .40) so I choose it for carry and defensive purposes.
If you shoot something else better, you should choose it, but lots of folks - perhaps a majority - will shoot 9 mm better than other common calibers except perhaps .380 ACP, and not everyone is comfortable with the stopping power (whatever that is) of the latter cartridge. Don't look for a magic bullet; pick one and practice.
Shot placement is therefore key, and since no common handgun caliber gives us a reliable one-shot stop, the accuracy and speed of the second and third shots could easily be the key to the outcome of a defensive shooting. My followup shots are faster and more accurate with 9 mm than with .40 (or .45, for that matter, although .45 is better in my hands than .40) so I choose it for carry and defensive purposes.
If you shoot something else better, you should choose it, but lots of folks - perhaps a majority - will shoot 9 mm better than other common calibers except perhaps .380 ACP, and not everyone is comfortable with the stopping power (whatever that is) of the latter cartridge. Don't look for a magic bullet; pick one and practice.
I always thought of .40 as a matter of politics, not ballistics.
Some people insist on big bullets, and some insist on lots of bullets.
.40 was a means of giving both groups "something", when an agency was deciding what gun and round to adopt.
Since I get to decide for myself which guns and rounds to carry, I don't have to concern myself with compromise or appeasement.
Some people insist on big bullets, and some insist on lots of bullets.
.40 was a means of giving both groups "something", when an agency was deciding what gun and round to adopt.
Since I get to decide for myself which guns and rounds to carry, I don't have to concern myself with compromise or appeasement.
I shoot and carry both, you need to decide for yourself which suits your needs. Make no mistake that the .40 S&W is a more energetic round, compare the ballistics for yourselves.
http://www.ballistics101.com/
http://www.ballistics101.com/
9mm is everything that 40 is, if you are ok giving up 0.05" diameter and 56 gr of bullet weight....if you are willing to give that up, realize that you a giving up only 0.096" and 106 gr to the 45 auto.
The trouble between 40 and 9 is you only gain ~ 2 rands in like size guns. 9 to 45 realistically takes you + 7 ends in similar guns.
Make mine a 45 or 40, if I'm gonna count on it. Shootability ranks 9mm the best and should be the driving factor in most gun choices.
The trouble between 40 and 9 is you only gain ~ 2 rands in like size guns. 9 to 45 realistically takes you + 7 ends in similar guns.
Make mine a 45 or 40, if I'm gonna count on it. Shootability ranks 9mm the best and should be the driving factor in most gun choices.
Tactical Jackalope
New member
No. Not at all.
The only thing that the .40S&W is superior in is harsh recoil.
The only thing that the .40S&W is superior in is harsh recoil.
I can't tell the difference in recoil when the best loads are used. I know the 40 recoils more, but they are so close any difference is in the head of the shooter or they are shooting anemic 9mm loads.
The best 9mm loads will almost match 357 mag loads from 4" or shorter barrels when both are using 125/124gr bullets.
The best 40 S&W loads will almost match 357 mag loads from 4" or shorter barrels when both are using similar 155-180 gr loads.
For human threats the 9mm is good enough for me. But I can see the need for heavier bullets at times. But for me, I'll go straight to 10mm if 9mm isn't enough.
The best 9mm loads will almost match 357 mag loads from 4" or shorter barrels when both are using 125/124gr bullets.
The best 40 S&W loads will almost match 357 mag loads from 4" or shorter barrels when both are using similar 155-180 gr loads.
For human threats the 9mm is good enough for me. But I can see the need for heavier bullets at times. But for me, I'll go straight to 10mm if 9mm isn't enough.
Flfiremedic
New member
Two issues that gel doesn't take into account....1) What is truly in front of a threat you are firing at? By that I mean you probably won't be shooting at someone standing straight up, arms at their side...if the threat has their arms at chest height...holding a weapon, or just in some sort of fighting stance, your eyes and front sight are likely going to lock in on that...so potentially, you will have to break bones several inches in front of the torso...I don't personally think that ballastic gel adequately takes that into consideration. Additionally, their are those that emphasize breaking the pelvic girdle as a "fight stopper". I do occasionally carry a 9mm, but have concerns as stated above.
That depends a lot on the gun, I'm sure a small Kahr CW40's recoil is harsh compared to a CW9 but in a medium sized service pistol shooting performance ammo it's not and in a better designed 40 IE the FN FNS where the machined cuts in the slide aren't as deep on the 40 making the slide an ounce or so heavier the recoil difference is down right negligable.
I solved the small gun problem simalarly as my Walther PPS 40 is 20% heavier than my Ruger LC9, so when I can I pack the slightly larger and heavier 40.
Ain't freedom great.
- Status