Why did homeland security buy millions of 135 grain .40?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Super-Dave

New member
Why did homeland security buy millions of 135 grain .40?

The bullet in question is the 135 grain ranger T.

135 grains at 1200 fps.


Why even have .40?

You can get the same results with 125 grain 9mm at 1250 fps:eek:


They could have saved millions by just using 9mm handguns and rounds.
 
Because US Border Patrol officers are issued handguns chambered in .40 S&W. In all likelihood, ICE, DEA, and other federal agencies are issued .40 S&W's as well.

Would they save enough to change out all the barrels, and then re-qualify their officers? Probably not.

They don't want something "almost as good", when it comes right down to it.

Daryl
 
The 40sw is a good round for many in the LE community... Once apon a time, the great 10mm was considered for FBI carry but people kept complaining about the recoil... I myself love my Glock 20- 10mm and in fact prefer it over my model 21- 45 auto.
 
SuoerDave, I would imagine that is what met their requirements for duty ammo. In general, US agencies at the state, local, and federal levels do not use 9mm handguns. A few still do, but not many. Most have moved away from George Luger's cartridge. Even if you could convince Homeland Security of the idea of going back to a cartridge they have already decided against, the savings in ammunition costs would be eaten away by the costs involved with rearming everyone.
 
Why did homeland security buy millions of 135 grain .40?

The bullet in question is the 135 grain ranger T.

135 grains at 1200 fps.

Why even have .40?

You can get the same results with 125 grain 9mm at 1250 fps
Click to expand...

Because it is dangerous to fire 9mm rounds in a 40.:)
 
Low recoil is generally achieved at the expense of velocity/power.

The .40 was originally a "low-recoil" 10mm.

Now we have "low-recoil" .40s.

At a certain point, you are better off with a "real" 9mm.
 
Last edited:
Now I'm curious about the recoil. I've shot .357, 44 mag. 9mm and .45acp of various bullet weights through time. Where does the .40 fit in. I hear of many people and LE's using them. Is the recoil a snap like a 9mm or a push like a .45acp? This would be used as CCW.
 
Its a snap, a pretty snappy-snap at that! I've thrown my lot in with .40 S&W but if I had to do it over again, I'd go with .45 ACP.
 
There's a training program going on around here involving urban youths and firearms instruction. The funding is coming from a federal agency. I don't know if these two situations are related but if I were going to teach a youngster to shoot a .40 this ammo would seem ideal.
 
Some information...

http://www.allbusiness.com/crime-law-enforcement-corrections/law/8915586-1.html

The 135 have also been improved on.

Why this particular weight bullet and what it's velocity is I don't know. Less recoil and muzzle flash could be a part of it but that's just speculation.

A variety of makers have ammo in this weight available with different bullets. Velocities have a range from Federal Hydra-Shok at 1190 fps to Double Taps 1375 fps. You can see some of them here...

http://www.midwayusa.com/browse/Bro...3&categoryId=7510&categoryString=653***691***

The reason the feds and many leos switched to the 40S&W in the 1990s was that it is a more powerful round than the 9mm and in guns with the same overall dimensions and has a larger magazine capacity than the 45acp. The round has proven to be a useful and versatile one. Different agencies use different weight bullets and loads.

tipoc
 
Because Big Sis was contemplating suicide and she was worried she might miss?

As for the .40 vs .45, I just got back from the range and firing my HK USP compact .40 and HK .45 compact. The .45 had a much nicer recoil. The .40 does have a snap to it and at times it really bothers my wrists. I can't remember why I went to a .40 from the 1911, maybe 'cause it was something different. Well I'm back to the .45 now. The .45 compact is really a great CCW gun for me.
 
I'm going to assume that it was just another corrupt government agency spending millions of tax dollars on the most foolish thing that they could think of.
 
Briandg, what verifiable evidence do you have that the DHS is a corrupt government organization? While I have my differences with Homeland Security, I fail to see them as a corrupt government agency. I also fail to see that buying ammo for use by those down in the trenches is a foolish move.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top