The power of the .40 S&W

Justice06RR said:
40S&W is a good handgun round. I've carried 2 pistols in .40cal and felt pretty good with their performance.

What I doubt is their superiority to rifle rounds like 5.56NATO, as those rounds are definitely powerful in the appropriate ammunition.
Click to expand...

.40 is not superior to 5.56 and my tests were not proving one cartridge over the other.
The .40 does have an edge on close range penetration due to its weight and velocity, especially through barriers but not always armor.
This test concludes that .40 S&W-among other calibers tested-have plenty of umph to defeat modern armor plates made of spectra/dyneema/UHMWPE
 
Some clarifying questions (not bashing, just want more details):

What brand was your .40 180 FMJ ammo? Are we talking WWB from WalMart or something more exotic like BuffaloBore or DoubleTap?

What brand of .40 pistol were you using and what was the barrel length? I have Beretta 96 with a 4.9 inch barrel, curious if I'd get the same results.

I'm a little surprised at your results, but if you consider Federals 180 JHP HST round will go through a car windshield, expand to .75 inch and STILL penetrate 11 inches of ballistic gel; well if JHP can do that what can a FMJ do?
 
I shot my old level 2 vest from 10 feet with my Glock 22 .40 cal about 20 times. Using 165 and 180 grain fmj. None of the bullets came even close to penetrating that old vest that was 5 years out dated. I love the .40, its accurate but my G33 in 357 SIG has way more power.

Sent from my PB99400 using Tapatalk 2
 
Falcon642 said:
Some clarifying questions (not bashing, just want more details):

What brand was your .40 180 FMJ ammo? Are we talking WWB from WalMart or something more exotic like BuffaloBore or DoubleTap?

What brand of .40 pistol were you using and what was the barrel length? I have Beretta 96 with a 4.9 inch barrel, curious if I'd get the same results.

I'm a little surprised at your results, but if you consider Federals 180 JHP HST round will go through a car windshield, expand to .75 inch and STILL penetrate 11 inches of ballistic gel; well if JHP can do that what can a FMJ do?
Click to expand...

Ammo for the .40 was blazer target loads. My brother is an officer and that's what they issue him for training.

We used a SA XDm 5.25 for the test.

The .357 Sig ammo was WWB 125gr out of my Glock 33 compact.

9mm, 45 and most of the .223's were the only rounds stopped.
 
"Tis why I was testing a rifle plate "

I just wondered why you were testing a handgun cartridge when I assume most folks who have prepared for the end of the world will be shooting rifles.

"The power of the .40 S&W " "in case things get bad"
 
johnbt said:
"Tis why I was testing a rifle plate "

I just wondered why you were testing a handgun cartridge when I assume most folks who have prepared for the end of the world will be shooting rifles.

"The power of the .40 S&W " "in case things get bad"
Click to expand...

You do know I tested rifle rounds too, don't you?

I tested different rounds because I am not easily convinced that armor will stop all treats, particularly when there are thousands of modern bullets out there that are manufactured using state of the art materials and components.
There are so many variables to how effective armor really is, so I tested this plate as much as possible, with the limited resources of cartridges I had on hand.
 
Very interesting. I'd love to see further tests with 180 grain 40S&W HP used. (I'd be tickled to see the results of using lead and plated bullets as well.)

Thanks
 
Sheepdog, though your finding(s) does not coincide with my experience with the .40 Smith, I never did what you did specifically so I can't judge. I do try to keep an open mind though, especially with things that are "ballistic" in nature, and I appreciate the time,expense and effort you took for this "project". I look forward to hearing more from you on this and related topics.
 
Sheepdog - let me chime in with a lot of the others and say thanks posting the results of your test.

There is no way I could personally buy a vest and then test it out so I appreciate seeing your results.
 
This is interesting and surprising as well. :)

I'd suggest that you test the pistol rounds at closer range like 15 yards as in SD situations. Also do three round tests for each caliber so your results will be consistent.
 
Now I am worried

"With all of the instability in our country right now, . . . in the event stuff gets bad."

Interesting experiment and results. I like my 40 S&W too. The quoted phrase worries me. What stuff will get bad? Is our country any more unstable now than in previous times? Do we need to prepare greater home arsenals? Must I increase my reloading capability with a progressive press? Will I need body armor in addition to my carry weapon when I visit Home Depot?
 
Folks here should have lived through the 1960s and 1970s. Even earlier there were dread fears of, I imagine, foreign invasions by godless (fill in the blank). I read a letter to the editor recently in an old gun magazine where a guy was buying what he could to put aside, just in case. I think he had a Springfield rifle and a .38 revolver.

For all I know he's making posts on this forum now.
 
Code: 
I have shot a .40 at 1/4 inch steel and it just dented it.

I have done this myself. I have shot a 165 grain and 180 grain fmj 40 S&W at 1/4 inch steel and they both just dented it. It did dent it pretty dang good but did not go through.
 
To the OP-

I really appreciate your time and money put into this. Though anecdotal, I always appreciate seeing what will happen. Thank you for posting even though some might attack your post. (there is always someone who will disagree though)
 
Interesting data. Thanks for doing this.
Maybe now people will stop heckling me about taking my "underpowered" .40 into the woods.... Ok, no one heckles me, but everyone starts suggesting woods guns of .357M size and larger...

I do have a question about this (that I didn't see anyone else ask):

6.5 MPC 107gr SMK (similar ballistics to an AK 7.62x39mm, 2400fps 1400-1500ft lbs)
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that you chrono'd the speed of the bullets on a different day? What length barrel was this shot from? My next question, if the 6.5Ms were shot from a 16" barrel would be "maybe with a big more speed when fired from a 20" barrel, they would do more damage"?

thanks again.
 
Interesting data. Thanks for doing this.
Maybe now people will stop heckling me about taking my "underpowered" .40 into the woods.... Ok, no one heckles me, but everyone starts suggesting woods guns of .357M size and larger...

I do have a question about this (that I didn't see anyone else ask):


Quote:
6.5 MPC 107gr SMK (similar ballistics to an AK 7.62x39mm, 2400fps 1400-1500ft lbs)

I'm guessing that you chrono'd the speed of the bullets on a different day? What length barrel was this shot from? My next question, if the 6.5Ms were shot from a 16" barrel would be "maybe with a big more speed when fired from a 20" barrel, they would do more damage"?

thanks again.
Click to expand...

Yes I chrono'd these on a different day.
Barrel length is 14.5"

Yes if the round was going faster, obviously the damage would be greater.
 
Seems like a fluke, to be honest.

Additionally, a 180-gr. .40 S&W FMJ, even if it actually does consistently penetrate that type of armor that you tested, is still a poor choice for CCW or duty purposes, as the same characteristics that make it penetrate well (on the heavier end of available bullets for the caliber, FMJ profile, lack of expansion) would make it grossly overpenetrate against an unarmored person.

Since only a tiny percentage of crimes involve criminals wearing body armor, much less trauma plates, it seems unwise to base your ammo choice on the exception instead of the rule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top