kidcoltoutlaw
New member
i hear no gun will group in the 40 any truth to it.will the p229 do 2 inches at 25 yards will any gun in the 40 do that.
the 40 s&w does it have an accuracy problem
- Thread starter kidcoltoutlaw
- Start date
Funny, there are a few rounds that are said to have "inherent accuracy". Of course they have been used for competition the longest. People have putting in a lot of time to find the ideal twist rates and velocities. The platforms themselves have been tweaked.
The 9 mm was considered to be an inaccurate round for a long time. People who said that conveniently ignored the SIG 210. Now there are a lot of accurate 9 mm handguns.
When the .40 S&W came out, manufacturers generally kept the same twist rates in the barrels that the 9 mm models had. A slower, heavier bullet than was intended lead to inaccurate handguns.
So no, people just haven't spent the time to make it as accurate as possible.
The 9 mm was considered to be an inaccurate round for a long time. People who said that conveniently ignored the SIG 210. Now there are a lot of accurate 9 mm handguns.
When the .40 S&W came out, manufacturers generally kept the same twist rates in the barrels that the 9 mm models had. A slower, heavier bullet than was intended lead to inaccurate handguns.
So no, people just haven't spent the time to make it as accurate as possible.
.40 can be very accurate
Whoever made that claim is full of hot air.
Don't listen to all the .40 bashers, because the truth lies in the middle.
Yeah, there are .40's that group that well. I don't know about the Sig P229 .40, but there are .40's out there that can group under 2" @ 25 yards. The Sig is very well made, so I see no reason why it couldn't group in that range. One example of a pistol that does group that well is the CZ 75B SA (single action only model) .
I'd agree that ON AVERAGE the .40 is a little less accurate than .45 ACP or 9mm. Not much of a difference anymore though, as the .40's have improved in accuracy significantly since when they first came out.
Another example of a very accurate .40 is my CZ 75B. I actually get better groups with my CZ 75B in .40 than with my Sig P226 which is in 9mm (the Sig is very accurate in its own right). I think the point I want to make is that there are accurate .40's out there, but you just need to look a little harder.
Finally, I'm not a .40 fan (I prefer .45 first and 9mm second), but at the same time I think the myth of its "poor accuracy" needs to end. Just my humble opinion.
Whoever made that claim is full of hot air.
Don't listen to all the .40 bashers, because the truth lies in the middle. Yeah, there are .40's that group that well. I don't know about the Sig P229 .40, but there are .40's out there that can group under 2" @ 25 yards. The Sig is very well made, so I see no reason why it couldn't group in that range. One example of a pistol that does group that well is the CZ 75B SA (single action only model) .
I'd agree that ON AVERAGE the .40 is a little less accurate than .45 ACP or 9mm. Not much of a difference anymore though, as the .40's have improved in accuracy significantly since when they first came out.
Another example of a very accurate .40 is my CZ 75B. I actually get better groups with my CZ 75B in .40 than with my Sig P226 which is in 9mm (the Sig is very accurate in its own right). I think the point I want to make is that there are accurate .40's out there, but you just need to look a little harder.
Finally, I'm not a .40 fan (I prefer .45 first and 9mm second), but at the same time I think the myth of its "poor accuracy" needs to end. Just my humble opinion.
I used to think the same thing. Now I don't.
About a month ago I was at the range when a cop shooting his SIG 239 in .40 let me shoot his gun (and he shot my 1911 and .357 mag). The 239 is a meant as a CCW or off duty police weapon, it is not a target sized gun. I shot it better than my .45 ACP 1911! This the first time I shot the 239. That is one heck of a gun and it was in .40.
I still prefer .45 and 9mm. The .40 is more expensive than 9mm ammo and as expensive or nearly as expenisive as .45 ammo. All can be effective self defense rounds, but in a small concealable gun I usually would prefer the added controlability of a 9mm and in a larger gun I'd prefer the extra power of a .45. But I do see the use of a .40. It is a compromise between size and power but it is a potent round that leaves a big hole in a 9mm sized gun. However, I have no question about its accuracy and now that I own a 9mm again and I own a .45 I will be on the lookout for a nice .40.
About a month ago I was at the range when a cop shooting his SIG 239 in .40 let me shoot his gun (and he shot my 1911 and .357 mag). The 239 is a meant as a CCW or off duty police weapon, it is not a target sized gun. I shot it better than my .45 ACP 1911! This the first time I shot the 239. That is one heck of a gun and it was in .40.
I still prefer .45 and 9mm. The .40 is more expensive than 9mm ammo and as expensive or nearly as expenisive as .45 ammo. All can be effective self defense rounds, but in a small concealable gun I usually would prefer the added controlability of a 9mm and in a larger gun I'd prefer the extra power of a .45. But I do see the use of a .40. It is a compromise between size and power but it is a potent round that leaves a big hole in a 9mm sized gun. However, I have no question about its accuracy and now that I own a 9mm again and I own a .45 I will be on the lookout for a nice .40.
Honestly the 40 is less accurate than most other rounds in most guns. But the situation is improving. When I first got a sig 229 it grouped 3 to 4 inches with 40 ammo then I bought a 357 sig barrel and the groups shrank to 2 inches. I have noticed simular results with Glocks and other pistols. Some 40's however shoot very well with certain loads.
PAT
PAT
In my hands, my TAURUS PT940 is one of the most accurate pistols I own, definetly on par with any of them - which includes a couple of very accurate Kimber .45ACP pistols.
I don't load my own, usually shooting the most economical FMJ loaded ammo I can put my hands on - & that includes commercial reoads.
I almost didn't buy the gun - who needs yet another caliber to contend with? But, after shooting it I am sold. For me, the only drawback to the .40S&W is the limited ammo selection & higher costs, although the situation seems to be improving.
I don't load my own, usually shooting the most economical FMJ loaded ammo I can put my hands on - & that includes commercial reoads.
I almost didn't buy the gun - who needs yet another caliber to contend with? But, after shooting it I am sold. For me, the only drawback to the .40S&W is the limited ammo selection & higher costs, although the situation seems to be improving.
I agree with weshoot2, this is a problem with any firearm be it a handgun or a rifle. If you want reliability regardless of caliber the tolerances have to be made looser if you want accuracy the tolerances have to be tighter. If a manufacturer decides to use loose tolerances then the gun will shoot under just about any conditions but accuracy will be affected the opposite is true for tight tolerances. Disregard the caliber and just practice shot placement you'll find that either a 22LR or the other extreme a 50AE will damage a medulla the same.
Pointblank2K
New member
My Ruger P94 in 40cal is the most accurate handgun I own...and that's out of .45, 9mm, .380
Tony.
Tony.