The forty cal round

G

Gator Weiss

New member
I want to make a new purchase. I am planning on adding another pistol to my locker this summer.

I am in the process of [once again] comparing cartridge performance. Paper provides information and there are tons of graphs and tables out there. Much of that paper information is good and informative. Experiences would be research of another kind, and that would be of equal or greater value than the charts, graphs and tables.

The .40 cal round is interesting to me. It is a caliber that I dont yet have in my collection, and I have fired several models of pistols in that caliber belonging to friends and acquaintances that frequent the range. I am deciding whether or not my newest purchase will be a .40 to use for personal defense situations.

Both modern .44, both modern .45, the hot .454 Casull, and the lumering .50, and the newer .500 Linebaugh seem to be the big bullet cartridges in the handgun world. There other calibers that belong in these categories that can be found as well. All are good cartridges in certain situations and I have owned and / or fired many of the above over the years.

9mm, .38 spl, .38 Super, both .357, the .40, the 10mm, and the .41 seem to be the low and high ends of the intermediate cartridge spectrum. Of course, there are other calibers that could be placed in this category as well.

I am mostly interested in the intermediate cartridges for personal defense, because I can achieve a higher magazine capacity with them. in the large calibers, it would appear there are some limiting factors to either a revolver or a magazine that holds less than those cartridges in the intermediate class.

i have owned a slew of 9mm pistols, and enjoy to fire them on the range. However, the cartridge seems to be a little bit light in a handgun for personal defense work. It has served well, and it is very deserving of recognition, but I want something with slightly more horesepower than the old 9mm. I went through a stage where all I did was fire .38 Super. I really enjoyed that cartrige, especially when I had access to tons of .38 super +p ammo. Wondferful caretridge. Great penetrator. Great for lots of things. But I would like to have more diameter.

The .41 mag was a fine piece of engineering, and I really enjoy the cartridge, but I think I will only consider that one for a hunting or back packing revolver.

That leaves for me the old .41 rimless - which is impossible now to find; the 10mm in a good autoloader; or the .40 in a good autoloader.

10mm ammo is getting hard to find. It seems to be a damn good cartridge. Very powerful, very effective. Great balance in energy and capacity. Both the Glock and the old Delta Elite are excellent platforms for this cartridge to be fired from. You can find those guns out there, but you cant get the ammo readily when you want it. When you do find it, it costs a pretty penny.

The .40 ammo is still plentiful on the shelves, and moderate in cost compared to some other cartridges. There are many good guns out there made for it. Many of them are very affordable guns, and well made. .40 might be the best choice, all things considered.

Will the .40 penetrate well? Will it arrive on target at moderate range with enough energy to expand the bullet on contact? I have heard "stories" on the range that the .40 is a weak cartridge. I have heard stories about HP ammo that would not perform on contact because of a lack of energy on target. I have had some people tell me that the .40 is better suited for target shooting than it is for combat. A few have told me that it is a good middle of the road bullet. Some lawenforcement officers have referred to it as a "compromise" cartridge because it was cheaper than the 10mm, but has less power. It was cheaper to buy, so cities, counties, and some States adopted the cartridge for lawenforcement issue based on cost and not necessarily on performance.

Can I please get some opinions on the .40? Is it worth investing in for a personal defense round in a handgun? Or would I be better off going with another cartridge? I am looking for hi-capacity in a magazine balanced with a somewhat "hefty" bullet that arrives on target with plenty of energy, and a little bit of convenience in the availability of ammo as well. If it is too weak for effective defense, then I have to consider another option.
 
Last edited:
I am looking for hi-capacity in a magazine balanced with a somewhat "hefty" bullet that arrives on target with plenty of energy, and a little bit of convenience in the availability of ammo as well. If it is too weak for effective defense, then I have to consider another option.
Click to expand...

"Hefty" is too much to demand from the .40, safely.

The .40 has a dangerous tendency to over-pressure when shooting 180gr bullets and the bullet is set-back due to repeated feeding, or even one particularly rough feeding session. It is best served, IMO, at 165gr and lighter projectiles.

The 10mm has a longer case and more room for internal capacity variance after some bullet set-back from seating. It can safely be used for 200gr and possibly heavier bullets.

As an aside... "hefty" bullets deliver less "energy" to target than light bullets at higher velocities. Heavy bullets deliver more momentum, however, and it is momentum that provides penetration. Not energy.

If your goal is mid-sized woods critter penetration with reasonable expansion (deer, possibly elk, mtn lion or bear), then the 10mm is your best choice.

If your goal is urban 2-legged protection ranging from malnourished meth heads to 300 pound Samoans, then the .40 in a mid-weight loading is fine.
 
Thanks hawk, good information.

I appreciate your information.

What personal defense round do you reccommend? I have shot gold dot and other loadings in the .40 from a glock belonging to an associate.

Many people at the range rave about the hyrdashok. I am not totally convinced on hyrdashok. Several of the hyrdashoks did not expand in the dirt back stop and others did fairly well. I dont know why this is. The dirt was uniformly damp from rain, not really any rock mixed therein to speak of. Perhaps there were soft and hardspots in the dirt. The gold dots performed fairly well, all expanding reasonably. Is the copper on the gold dot softer or maybe thinner gauge than that used on the Hyrdashok? Is the lead possibly softer? Not sure what happened there.
 
I have 44mag, 45LC, 38, 357, 40, and 9mm.... I love my two 40s... I have heard lots of figures stating bad penetration... I dont see it myself in my shooting.
 
I can't recommend any personal defense load for any particularly good reason... other than to say you should stick with Federal, Remington, Winchester, Speer, Hornady, Cor-Bon or another respected manufacturer.

My .45's all carry ball, but that's partly because I also carry them in the back woods sometimes and I'm happy with a half-inch hole as long as I get good penetration.

One of my 9's is loaded with Remington golden sabers. The other is loaded with Speer gold dots. My .38 snub is loaded with gold dots. I don't own a .40.
 
I've owned a couple of different .40 S&W handguns. Unfortunately, I let them get away from me at one point or another. Back then, I swapped guns out without too much thought to it.

That's not to say that it isn't a great cartridge. IMO, it is.

As far as penetration, or performance on target...

The only living things I ever shot with a .40 S&W was a couple of javalinas, and three or four coyotes. I'd hoped to recover a bullet from a critter at some point, and intentionally shot one particularly large javalina through both front shoulders to see if it would stop it.

It didn't, and the coyotes didn't either. So, I can't say for sure what kind of expansion, if any, those bullets gave.

If I remember correctly, I shot one with a 155 grain Hydra-shock, and the other with federal JHP's of some kind. Like I said, I don't know how well the bullets expanded, but they killed the javalinas well enough. One dropped dead on the spot (the one through both shoulders), and the other was shot at very close range, rolled down the hill 'till it almost bumped into me, and I shot it again as it attempted to get up. It didn't make it.

Some call it weak, perhaps in comparison to the 10mm, but "Weak" isn't how I'd describe a .40 S&W. That's my opinion, of course, but I have a few thousand empty brass in my loading room to base it on. One day soon I'll pick up another handgun chambered for the cartridge, and give myself a reason to load them back up.

Daryl
 
IMO the .40S&W is an excellent Personal-Defense cartridge. It's stronger than the (IMO 'wimpy') 9X19 but has less recoil than full-power 10mm, even with the latter in heavier guns. The .40 has taken over the majority of LE use for good reason--it works very well as a stopper of BGs.

I've tested many .356, .40, and .45 PD bullets for expansion using waterjugs; the Speer Gold Dot ALWAYS expands well and NEVER comes apart. Here are some examples--.40 left, .45 center, and .356 (two different versions from a 357SIG) right.
GoldDots6expanded_1000w.jpg


I've tested a bunch of .40-cal PD bullets in addition to the GDs, and performance varies hugely. E-mail me at jeffreybehr(at)cox(dot)net and I'll send you a larger image than this one.
20Nov20_8expandedbullets_1200w.jpg


I believe that of those bullets I tested, the GD and the Winchester PDX1 are the best. While I understand many persons' criticisms that testing bullet expansion in water is NOT indicative of how the bullets will perform in the bodies of badguys, I still believe strongly that I'd rather trust my life to a bullet that expands well and does NOT come apart in water, v. one that comes apart (or doesn't expand), and several have performed that poorly.

Recoil from the hi-velocity cartridges such as the .40S&W and the 357SIG (and especially the 10mm) is quicker...snappier...than from the .45 (ACP or GAP), but the .40 is certainly shootable comfortably. LOTS of competitive shooters use .40s, and not just with low-power loads, either.
 
Last edited:
I think the .40S&W is a good caliber - and I enjoy shooting it. In terms of comparison, I compare the ballistics on a defensive round with a .45 acp as my personal standard...and overall, I think the .40S&W compares fairly well / and in general better than a 9mm.

I have a number of guns in .40S&W / 3 Sigs - and a 1911, in a 5" barrel. Two of my Sigs ( an X-Five, and a 226 are both double stack 14 /12 rds respectively ) / then I have a 239 model sig that is a single stack ( 7 rds ) ... the 1911 holds 8 rds.

I reload - and I only shoot one bullet in my .40S&W's - a 180gr Montana Gold bullet, CMJ ...but if I carry one of my .40's for defense, I carry HydraShoks 180gr as well. I think the .40S&W is easy to load - but you do have to be careful ( and you should always be careful anyway on reloading ) because it is a higher pressure cartridge.

I carry a 1911 as my CCW weapon / a 5" in .45acp most of the time --- but for range practice, I often shoot 1911's in 9mm or once in a while the one I have in .40S&W. Its just economics - where my reloads in 9mm cost me about $5.25 for a box of 50 / .40's cost me about $6.75 and .45acp is about $ 7.25 a box ... and I like to shoot --- so I put 6 or 8 boxes a week thru my guns / maybe a box a week thru my carry gun ( but they're identical guns ) - all Wilson 5" 1911's - so its good trigger time with a 9mm, or a .40 or a .45acp ( in my opinion ).

A double stack sig, like the 226, is pretty heavy and bulky ....so I don't carry it ( I can, but I don't). The Sig X-Five is way too big to carry ( its a 55 oz gun with a full mag in it / its a competition gun - not for carry ). A 1911 is a trimmer gun to carry / and great triggers, etc ...and the gun I shoot the best/so I carry it. On the other end / when I want to go lighter for a carry gun / I go to a Sig 239 (single stack) as my carry gun in .40S&W.

So that's how I look at the .40S&W. I don't have or want a 10mm ... not to disupute its capabilities ...it has spectacular ballistics ... but at some point, you have to draw a line on your collection ( and I'm up to about 25 semi-auto handguns -- some in 9mm, some in .40 and some in .45 acp ...( and some revolvers, etc ) ....but the 3 calibers in semi-autos works for me.
 
You are looking for a higher capacity handgun in what you refer to as an "intermediate" caliber. The high cap requirement takes out revolvers and the revolver calibers, .38 spl, .357 mag, and .41 mag.

That leaves 9mm, .38 Super, .357 Sig, .40 SW, and 10mm. I disagree that the 9mm is "light" for a defensive handgun. All that nonsense started with the FBI shootout when one round stopped about 1/4 inch short of the heart when fired into the bad guy at a profile. Since then, ammo makers have developed bonded bullets that penetrate more deeply and expand more reliably than the 115 gr. Silvertips the FBI was using. The 124 gr, in particular, is a good round.

As for .38 Super, the only comment I'll make is that ammo is hard to find. You can reload but, personally, I would want factory ammo for defensive use.

The .357 Sig is a very interesting round for defense. It was developed to mimic the famed "stopping power" of the 125 gr. .357 magnum. While not as versatile as the revolver round, the .357 Sig would make an excellent defensive round. Ammo can be found, though not as readily as 9mm.

As you mentioned, the 10mm ammo is somewhat hard to find but is a viable defensive round.

As for the .40 SW, ammo availability seems to be good. The data on various 165 gr. cartridges indicate good penetration and good expansion. There are a number of guns out there from which to choose.

So, to me it comes down primarily to 9mm or .40 SW and, maybe, .357 Sig. I personally have chosen the 9mm to fill this role for a higher capacity handgun caliber for two reasons. First, I like 1911s in .45 acp in a semi-auto and if I want higher capacity, the 9mm gives more capacity than the others. Second, I shoot a 9mm better in a compact or sub-compact pistol when I'm going the other direction.

I certainly can't quibble with the other choices, especially the .40 SW. It no doubt is a bit better "stopper" than the 9mm. If you buy the full size Glock (can't remember the model number) or SW M&P in .40 SW, you can buy Storm Lake conversion kits in 9mm and .357 Sig for about $160 each. This may not be a concern for you, but it's something to think about. I've thought of buying the M&P myself but I seem to be in a 1911 buying trend. :)
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't mind having a 10mm, but I've looked for reloading supplies on the 'net and they are damned hard to find. I can find bullets for the .40 a lot more easily, and I've got about 4,000 rounds of brass. :D

Personally, I reload and shoot a lot of .40 S&W, and I always use 180 grain bullets. I've never had a problem.

I've seen a number of folks who say the 180 grain is difficult/hazardous to reload because the .40 is a high pressure - about 23,000-28,000 psi - load. I can't argue with that. But I'm careful to crimp each case, check case lengths and watch my powder load carefully. Hell, I do that with ALL the ammo I load.

I think a lot of the concerns over .40s going kaboom may stem from guns which have unsupported case heads.

I often load .357 magnums with about the same pressure (I know - apples and oranges).
 
Last edited:
This is very good information coming from this forum

Jeff, thanks for the images you sent. They were very informative, and yes, I strongly agree with the milk jug test.

Jim, I too, enjoy the 9mm. Carry a good quality round, and it would be a good cartridge to fight with in a sh_t storm with a BG. I have been a "9" shooter for over twenty years, and I agree with you. I just feel like a I want a slightly bigger bullet in my next purchase.

I have heard that if I go with the Glock in a .40 cal, I can actually buy a .357 sig barrel and it will interchange with the .40 and so will the magazines because the cartrige head diameter is the same size. Has anyone on this forum done anything like that? Have two calibers in one gun is appealing. The .357 sig is a good cartridge, and the information on the .40 is also panning out to be positive.
 
I shoot Beretta's PX4 Storm in .40 and I love the cartridge. Granted, my PX4's rotating barrel lug takes some of the snap out of the recoil, which makes it a softer shooter, but loaded with 155-grain Federal Hydra-Shoks it feels like a powerful weapon and my accuracy with it is excellent. I feel comfortable and well-armed with my PX4 .40
 
My personal choice for 40S&W after reading numerous articles with Massad's article making the most sense to me is using a 155-165 grain hollow point.
The articles mentioned the 155 grain extensively noting excellent results as to penetration.
 
The .40 is a very good defensive round when used on humans. Not good for bigger creatures. So is .45acp and higher powered 9mm. I'd feel comfortable carrying a handgun in any one of these three calibers.
 
I got a 40 cal, simpley becasue I didnt have a 40 cal. Wanted to see what it was all about. Found a Sigma on Tradio (radio want adds) for a good price so figured why not.

I've been having fun with it, I only shoot cast bullets except for the two boxes of factory stuff that came with it.

The only problem I have is that gun throws brass to heck and gone. You need a spotter just for the brass.

On an OT side note, I dont understand the complaints about the Sigma, my little VE works like a champ, of course I do a lot of DA revolver shooting so I didnt find the trigger objectionable.

I like the 40 cal. its fun to shoot. I haven't noticed the "bark" people talk about.

Looking forward to my road trip next month so I can steal my kids 40 cal brass he's been saving.

I cast the 175 gr from a cheap Lee mold. It shoots pretty dern good.

How ever, if I was to ever get back into LE I'd still prefer my Model 28 Smith.
 
180 gr. loads are the standard / original load for the 40 S&W, typically at 950+ fps. "White box" Winchester 180 JHP averaged 965 fps out of a Kahr PM40.

155 loads seem snappier even though they use a lighter bullet, produce more KE than the 180 gr. most are considered "full power". Gold Dot 155 gr. @ 1,134 fps / 442# KE from Glock 27.

165 and 135 loads are not all created equal, some are weaker than others.

The Winchester Ranger T 165 is a full power load, 1,116 fps / 456# KE out of Glock 27.

The Cor-Bon 135 is too much full power for me, 1,332 fps / 531# KE out of a Glock 27.
 
I bought a .40 a while back out of curiosity. Now every handgun I buy seems to be a .40. And ammo is affordable and easy to find. My favorite carry gun is my PPS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top