Is the .40 S&W REALLY dying?
- Thread starter DirtyHarold
- Start date
- Status
Yep,
.45 ACP shoe-horned into a compact double-stack 9mm frame.
Good as it ever was.
...which is outstanding.
Red
Not to belabor this, but unless I'm reading wrong. In bare gelatin.
9mm
115 gr. 9mm +P+ 10.5" of penetration
147 gr. 9mm 12.58" of penetration
40 S&W
165 gr. 13.32" of penetration
180 gr. 12.19" of penetration
How is 13.32" less than 12.58"?
In both cases the 40 does what it does with a heavier bullet and expansion at least comparable to the 9mm. Total of 23.5" of penetration vs. 25.51".
This comes from bullets designed to penetrate to the same depths and expand along the way. That is bullets designed to meet the FBI's protocols. Also includes a 115 gr. +P+ loading for the 9mm.
If you read across you get similar results.
Why use a +P+ 9mm at all? Because it provides more energy and thus the potential to penetrate deeper and expand more over standard velocity 9mm. It also may hit harder than standard velocity 9mm. If that is true then why believe that a more powerful cartridge like the 40 S&W is incapable of also doing that or bettering that?
tipoc
Another thing that gets overlooked with ballistic gel testing between calibers is that the bullets used, all of them no matter the caliber, are designed to perform the same. They're only designed to pass certain tests and to penetrate so far, so they engineer for that and they perform as intended. My point is that reason most perform very similarly is because they're designed to, it's not about any one cartridges ability vs. the another.
TruthTellers
New member
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/357-sig-gel-test/
(scroll down for .45)
https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/
You'll see with the Sig that the overpenetrating bullets are Hornady and one Federal load. The Hornady's are not loaded fast/hot enough to get proper expansion and the Federal is just a cheap bullet.
The .45 used for the test was a 3.6" barrel and while 5 inch or longer barreled .45's are available, most people are going to be using a 4 inch barrel, so velocity is about the same.
.45 needs speed to create expansion and that means either +P or a lighter bullet. Premium ammo like HST, Ranger-T, etc. works fine because they're premium bullets. Without it, it sails through everything like an FMJ.
I think this is a very important and well-stated point. Inside all the applicable data sets, each round is designed to do something relevant to the demands of the situation. And inside all of those predicable, statistically pertinent situations, the variation in performance stays minimal. So to a certain extent, the debate ends up being about the outliers that no one can predict.
A lot of energy for hypothetical, hopefully non-existent occurrences.
Even if one were to grant that statement as true and ignore any debate about it couldn't the same be said for any advantage the .40 holds over the 9MM?
For the record this is my statement in post 68
And before anyone gets ahead of themselves and thinks this means I for some reason think the .40 is now some "bad" round and dying this is also from that same post
TruthTellers
New member
Yeah, that's very true. Even today we still see rimmed cartridges like .32-20, .44-40 continuing to endure, yet I haven't seen many guns chambered in those made today, Henry's original repro Henry in .44-40 being the exception.
I like the .40 because high performing JHP can be got for under 50 cents a round and when on sale the price for FMJ is only a couple bucks more per box than 9mm. The main reason I bought .40 pistols years ago was it was still the main police caliber used by so many departments and it still is used by quite a few. People think that the rural Sheriff's departments are going to be spending all that money on new 9mm guns because, "Oh, it works better now, so no need for the .40 anymore. I'll just spend 10 grand of our limited budget buying new guns, mags, ammo, etc."
One downside to .40 that persisted for years that's been fixed some recently is there were no 30 rd mags for them like 9mm. Now there are some companies that have made Glock mags for .40 that hold 30 rds, so that's no longer an issue, but outside of Glock I'm sure it's still the case.
This is extremely true. You know how many rounds of ammo a year you would have to shoot in training to make the switch worth it? You know how many rounds of ammo most officers (and thus departments) shoot in a year for training? The answer to the second is A LOT less than the answer to the first. We are not talking a situation where the price difference is so severe between 9MM and .40 that overcoming the initial investment in hardware is going to be realized quickly In some departments it may take decades. Most departments are not going to play "follow the leader" and instantly jump onto "well the FBI is using it so..." Some of them have been so slow to follow such a jump that the 9MM they were using long before the who 9MM to 10MM to .40 saga started has come back into favor. "We weren't slow to follow the lead we WERE the lead".
I think the whole ".40 is dying" is much ado about nothing. Many rural (and probably not rural) departments will continue to use the .40. Many will use the 9MM either because they never switched in the first place or will switch back next buying cycle. A select few will use the .357 SIG. I'm frankly surprised more rural western departments are not using 10MM where I expect FAR more shots are fired to dispatch wounded / problem animals than are used in defensive shootings.
From Lohman446
An odd turn of phrase... "functional difference". It can seem to mean a few different things depending on how one squints at it. The "functional difference" is nearly identical so why argue? The meaning of the phrase depends on how a person determines, squints at, "function". In this case Lohman446 is not looking at the ballistics of the two rounds and comparing them. If so than the 40 S&W is clearly the more powerful round. He's looking at something else.
When it comes to self defense and stopping a threat there is no proof that one round is superior to the other at that task, that the 40 S&W is better than the 9mm in stopping the threat. So no "functional" difference. It's the same as saying that at 150 yards there is no "functional difference" in taking deer between a 30-30 and a 30-06. Therefore the "functional difference...is virtually none." That's a circular and narrow argument. It proves that a 10mm is as useful as a .380 or 9mm in stopping a threat. "One is as good as the other if you put the shot in the right place!" We are told that often and it's true...unless you're hunting hogs and then the 10mm has the edge. Don't ya think?
Yes and no but that's another story. It had more to do with training (the shootablity of the guns), maintenance on the guns, and the cost and availability of ammo.
tipoc
An odd turn of phrase... "functional difference". It can seem to mean a few different things depending on how one squints at it. The "functional difference" is nearly identical so why argue? The meaning of the phrase depends on how a person determines, squints at, "function". In this case Lohman446 is not looking at the ballistics of the two rounds and comparing them. If so than the 40 S&W is clearly the more powerful round. He's looking at something else.
When it comes to self defense and stopping a threat there is no proof that one round is superior to the other at that task, that the 40 S&W is better than the 9mm in stopping the threat. So no "functional" difference. It's the same as saying that at 150 yards there is no "functional difference" in taking deer between a 30-30 and a 30-06. Therefore the "functional difference...is virtually none." That's a circular and narrow argument. It proves that a 10mm is as useful as a .380 or 9mm in stopping a threat. "One is as good as the other if you put the shot in the right place!" We are told that often and it's true...unless you're hunting hogs and then the 10mm has the edge. Don't ya think?
Yes and no but that's another story. It had more to do with training (the shootablity of the guns), maintenance on the guns, and the cost and availability of ammo.
tipoc
We hashed this argument and I probably should have defined function a little better in my statement.
It probably should have read: " For the vast majority of defensive handgun use, either for police or civilian carriers, the functional difference between 9MM and .40 is virtually zero."
Its a narrow argument I will give you that but most good arguments are. It is not technically circular as there is no premise in that is supported only by the conclusion and it seems, as stated, is only a conclusion. The word "virtually" disallows the use of single-point data to critically damage the argument to where it is not tenable. In the end I think the statement, modified through earlier argument, is pretty strong.
It probably should have read: " For the vast majority of defensive handgun use, either for police or civilian carriers, the functional difference between 9MM and .40 is virtually zero."
Its a narrow argument I will give you that but most good arguments are. It is not technically circular as there is no premise in that is supported only by the conclusion and it seems, as stated, is only a conclusion. The word "virtually" disallows the use of single-point data to critically damage the argument to where it is not tenable. In the end I think the statement, modified through earlier argument, is pretty strong.
It is much ado about nothing. .40 cal is going strong without a suitable replacement in many LEO circles.
Despite the truth of the statement:
There are some very high budget organizations that there is a huge functional difference. I do not see .40 cal leaving the scene anytime soon.
Cosmodragoon
New member
I've been staying out of this one but now you got me. The claim of "solution in search of a question" gets thrown at pretty much any new cartridge. Should we just stop inventing new cartridges?
The story behind the .40 S&W may be messy but that doesn't mean the round is bad. The .40 is fairly versatile. It doesn't just take up the slack between 9mm and .45 acp. It performs well for what it is. I personally like the 165-grain loadings, which can match the velocity of standard-pressure 9mm but with an extra 50 grains of mass.
Sure, the .40 has a little more recoil than 9mm and can be snappy in smaller guns. So I don't use it in smaller guns. I like 9mm in smaller guns. I like .40 in full-sized guns that are ergonomic and mitigate recoil well. If anything, .45 acp has slowly disappeared from my carry rotation. I still like it on occasion at the range. It's just that the size and capacity restrictions of .45 are more severe than .40 S&W and the gains don't impress me as much.
The story behind the .40 S&W may be messy but that doesn't mean the round is bad. The .40 is fairly versatile. It doesn't just take up the slack between 9mm and .45 acp. It performs well for what it is. I personally like the 165-grain loadings, which can match the velocity of standard-pressure 9mm but with an extra 50 grains of mass.
Sure, the .40 has a little more recoil than 9mm and can be snappy in smaller guns. So I don't use it in smaller guns. I like 9mm in smaller guns. I like .40 in full-sized guns that are ergonomic and mitigate recoil well. If anything, .45 acp has slowly disappeared from my carry rotation. I still like it on occasion at the range. It's just that the size and capacity restrictions of .45 are more severe than .40 S&W and the gains don't impress me as much.
TruthTellers
New member
Cosmodragoon confirmed as my alt account.
I agree with pretty much everything you said, but when it comes to .45, it's not capacities that dissuade me from wanting to use it for defense, it's ammo price and lack of any real benefit to using it vs .40.
Cosmodragoon
New member
I'm definitely a real guy and nobody's alter. I'll add that in places where I want more power than .40 S&W in an auto-loader, I've been seeing 10mm as a better alternative than .45 acp.
As far as any practical difference between handgun calibers, it might not matter if it hits and appropriately penetrates a vital area. Heck, you could argue the same for ammo type. Where I think the difference between calibers and ammo types can matter is when that's not the case. I've shot enough stuff and seen enough meat targets to know that there are differences in destructive potential between calibers and ammo types.
If I'm ever entangled with a dangerous person or animal, and my only chance is putting a poor shot into some guts or an appendage, I'll be glad for some extra destruction. The key for me is finding balance between what destroys the most and is easiest to shoot well for a given carry situation.
I'll add that in places where I want more power than .40 S&W in an auto-loader, I've been seeing 10mm as a better alternative than .45 acp.As far as any practical difference between handgun calibers, it might not matter if it hits and appropriately penetrates a vital area. Heck, you could argue the same for ammo type. Where I think the difference between calibers and ammo types can matter is when that's not the case. I've shot enough stuff and seen enough meat targets to know that there are differences in destructive potential between calibers and ammo types.
If I'm ever entangled with a dangerous person or animal, and my only chance is putting a poor shot into some guts or an appendage, I'll be glad for some extra destruction. The key for me is finding balance between what destroys the most and is easiest to shoot well for a given carry situation.
As I noted, earlier, to me the main advantage to the .45 ACP is the opposite of one of the claimed advantages of the faster 9mm, .40 S&W, 357 Sig and 10mm: Lack of penetration.
I've found another advantage, at least for me: For some reason I'm accurate as all get out with that round out of both of the pistols I have chambered for it--especially the 1911.
I would be inclined to agree with that.
Agree on both counts. For me, personally, that had been the .40 S&W. Lately I have more often carried 9mm. But I'm idly considering reversing course, back toward .40 S&W.
I think I need to rent something the size & weight of my PPS M2 in .40 S&W and see how it works for me.
- Status