Why the growing dislike of the .40?

L

long shot

New member
Hello all, I'm posting this because it seems an increasing number of people are posting of their dislike for this caliber, just curious as to the reasons why?

It seems recoil & accuracy are two of the main reasons, and I'd like to address those issues as follows:

Many who say the .40's recoil is to sharp & snappy, carry 9mm+p+, 357 Sig, .45+p, 10mm, 357 Mag ect. Even the 9mm in lightweight guns w/ +p+ or +p ammo such as 115gr Corbon, can produce a decent snap, & the others produce similar, & in many cases more recoil than the .40.

Many have commented on the lack of training given to LE officers/agents, yet so many carry the .40, & are required to atleast qualify w/ it every year. It would seem that if the .40 had such snappy recoil & was that innacurate that LEA would have to make a switch just to qualify their people. Granted, many carry the 180gr jhp, which to me produces a more ".45 like" recoil sensation, being heavy & subsonic.

The FBI had legal action taken against them upon their adoption of the 10mm. Some small statured male & some female agent trainees simply could not handle these weapons, & felt it unfair the be disqualified from the academy for this reason. I have yet to hear of this w/ regards to the .40;)

I do favor the 180gr loads, reason being is that I can utilize a heavier bullet out of a shorter bbl. & still maintain a level of good performance. From tests I've seen, the 180gr .40 performs better than the 230gr .45 from say a 4in bbl., as it was designed for this, & both share the same sectional density.

However, I also from time to time practice w/ & carry the full pwr. 155/165gr loads, & while they produce more recoil, to me they are no worse than the others listed above w/ the exception of the 9. To me it serves a shooter well to find a gun that fits well w/ a given caliber or load within one's chosen caliber. For instance I don't care for the 357 Sig in a G-33, but it's not to bad in a P226/229, just as a 155gr Win. ST might prove to stout out of a G-27 or Kahr K40, but is more managable/comfortable in a Beretta Brigadier/ Sig P226/ *&* 4006 ect.

I normally carry a G-23, being a midsized lightweight pistol, I found the 180gr loads perform best for me w/ this particular weapon. It's not rocket science, couple a small/ lightweight gun w/ a high energy/ high pressure cartridge & recoil will be stout. When people state they've tried the .40 & found it's recoil to snappy, I often have to wonder what gun/load combination they used, as many times it's never mentioned. However, I realize it's not the caliber for everyone, nor does everyone like the same thing's I do;) Well, wait a minute, I also like the 9/45/357 Sig, so maybe others do like the same things I do I do:D

As far as accuracy, it seems combat is often confused w/ target. When TSHTF, is what's more accurate at 25 yds. in a controlled range envornment going to come into play in a life or death lethal force encounter? The .40 might not be the best choice for target/competition shooting, but IMO it is combat accurate.

All opinions are appreciated!
Best, {long shot}
 
I don't think that .40 S&W is the worst cartridge ever designed. However it does have some accuracy issues and to me just has some odd recoil. In my opinion I think .40 S&W was the answer to a problem that never existed.
 
I don't really understand why the 40 S&W has such a bad reputation. But I am the first to admit that everyone is entitled to there own opinion. It would indeed be boring if we all thought the same; the choice of firearms would also be awfull limited.

I own a 1911 chambered in 40 S&W. I also own 1911's in 45 ACP and 9x23 Win. The 45 ACP's are the ones that I have shot the most, and are still the most accurate. The 9x23 Win is almost as accurate, and I have managed to get about a thousand rounds downrange with it.

I have only shot about three to four hundred with the 40 S&W, but I have to say the accuracy is similar to the other 1911's. I haven't found the correct load for it yet, but it took a while with all of the other guns also. I use 135 gr and 165 gr JFP loads, and sometimes load with the 180 gr JHP's.

I think somone else gave a good description of the 40 S&w, it is a workhorse caliber. It's new, so it doesn't have the history a .357 Magnum, 45 ACP or 9x19 has. It isn't as unique as a 9x23 Win, 357 Sig or 400 Corbon. People will always compare it to it's "big brother" 10mm. But it is dependable, hard hitting and functional. If I ever have to use a pistol in self defense, it wouldn't be my first choice, but it wouldn't be my last, either.

Casey
 
Please tell me why you think there's a growing dislike of the .40? While there are many new cartridges on the market, the .40 remains hugely popular. .40s dominate new gun sales in medium to large calibers - look at how many guns the mfgs offer in .40. They make what sells.

Also, what is your evidence that the .40 is less accurate? If the caliber is capable of good performance in a match grade gun, it strongly implies there's no inherent deficiency in the cartridge, only that there are a lot of junk guns chambered for it.
 
Long Shot:

There is a unique phenomenon occuring througout the ranks of shooting America. The .40 Cal. works fine for LEO and is widely popular yet on the web and among civies, it is inaccurate and prone to KB's in certain makes, namely Glock.

Equally as amazing is the fact that many LEO's, except the ones that forbid changing to a larger caliber, have had problems with the 9mm penetrating and stopping fights. Thus, there has been a migration away from the 9mm in the LEO realm to the .40 with good results. Low and behold in webland, the .40 is not much different than the 9mm and in fact the 9mm may be better since there's not much difference.

You've dredged up a good topic that bears further research. The really incredible thing is that the .357 Sig is the be all, end all cartridge. Never mind the fact there are issues with bullet setback. Heck, all that is needed is to visually check each round and we all know that's very practical in a combat scenario. All LEO's need to do is keep bullhorns at the ready and when they need to reload in a firefight, they can all a time out.

Yes, there are some truly unusual phenomenons in webland and to say that the .40 is not effective makes about as much sense as my theme in the above paragraph relating to the .357 Sig. Okay, the .357Sig is a marvelous round but in all candor, handgun manufacturers benefit when they can convince a department to switch from say the .40 Cal. or .45ACP to the latest and greatest caliber to end all calibers.

The real reason that the .40 has been berated is simple: we don't have enough to occupy our time. Personally, the roughest weapon I have ever shot, bar none, is a Walther PPK .380 and in truth, the .380 is marginal at best. I must be different but I have grown accoustomed to the .40 and it is no problem. While we are on the recoil subject, I find it peculiar that some can stomach a .357 Snub yet find the flip of the .40 unbearable.

Gee, I wonder who'll be disparaging the .357Sig on TFL when the next Wunderkaliber surfaces.
 
I don't care much for the .40 S&W. I tried it and didn't like it. Accuracy was the issue for me, the recoil didn't bother me as much. I found that I could shoot much better with either a 9mm or .45acp than I could with a .40. So I dumped it and never looked back.
Now this doesn't mean I'm a forty basher. I don't go around cussin' and fussin' about how bad it is. If you like it, more power to ya.
I think alot of the problem is the way the .40 was marketed when it first came out. You know, 9mm capacity and .45 punch. THE perfect defense round, yadda, yadda, yadda. I think alot of people were just expecting too much out of it. I know I was and later I was disappointed with it. I think this hurt a little more because of the hype.
What I'm saying is that the .40 don't work for me. And with two other suitable defense calibers readily avalible, why should I try to make it work?
Seems alot of other people feel the same way.
 
Maybe I got lucky, but my Glock 27 shoots 2" ragged holes at 10 yards, which seems prety accurate to be.

Reciol is snappy, but not unpleasant.
 
I will confess to what is probably rather limited experience w/.40

I have personally owned only four guns chambered for it: CZ-75B, Sigma full-size, CZ-100 and Kahr K40. I have also shot the P229, Beretta 96, Glock 22, USP, *&* 4006, BHP, Witness full-size and Walther P99. Only two felt tolerable, to me, regarding both recoil and muzzle flip: Witness(ported), and CZ-75. All of the rest felt 'whippy' to me, save for the CZ100, which is also ported. The Kahr and Walther were unconfortable for me in both areas.

My subjective observations are based on shooting less than 180gr. bullet weights. In those guns, all such full power loads exhibited signs of overpressure. Namely, primer smear(or wiping), cratering, bulged heads where the feed ramp is unsupported or excessive staining on the outside of the casing. I may be wrong, but I understand the latter is from gas flowing back between the case and the chamber wall before the it has expanded into a tight grip of the chamber. The only loads which had 'normal' brass, were the 135gr.HS Personal Defense, and PMC 165gr. ball, both of which are less than max speeds attainable with their bullet weights. Well, those and the 180gr. loads.

I've decided that the conventional chamberings of 9mm and .45 will do for me. But, I may wish to explore the .38 Super and 9x23 Win. a little bit.:)
 
Reason to not like the .40?
S&W makes a few cent$ every time you pull the trigger.
I personally like the round though.
 
As most of you all know by now, I dislike the .40Slick&willy for profound political reasons. Aside from that, I see the .40 Auto as a notch caliber. It was perceved as a solution to a political problem. The 9mm was attacked as the "villian" in the Miami shootout. It's successor was attacked as being to big for politically correct trainees to handle. (this is why the FBI had size requirements in the first place.) The policies of the FBI in regards to recruiting, and training were not at fault by definition. (The servant of the "People's Government" is NEVER wrong) So, real solution to the problem was quickly "discovered", and the .40Slick&willy was born. The only thing that surprises me about all this is that they did not name the round after Janet Reno, Louis Freeh, or even Algore!!!!!! ("Yeah, I invented that too. Used the internet to do it"---A.G. ;) )
 
The .40 S&W is fine.

but I prefer .45acp in pistols. All the talk about .40 S&W Kb's is hype. Factory ammo doesn't have a Kb problem from what I can gather. Is this possibly related to reloaders trying to squeeze a little more juice from an already high pressure cartridge or inadvertantly crimping to much? I had my G-22 long enough to know it was a well built, safe firearm -- I don't think that's the problem.
What it comes down to for me is that while the .40 may have replaced the 9mm for LEA's, it didn't replace the .45acp and I didn't and don't have a need for it.
 
I love the .40 and if I couldnt use the .45 then I would pick a .40 every time.
Accuracy isnt as bad as its made out to me - not by a long shot. The problem is that the .40 is oft loaded into smaller gun and it's high pressure adds up to the shooter not being able to wring out the accuracy that the .40 does have. I also thing that there is an rifling issue and if the .40 had the right rate of twist then it would be just as accurate as a 9MM. I think whats going on in the current rifling is like driving too fast around a curve on a muddy road. That super high pressure that the .40 generates is a factor.
My HK USP .40 that I wish I still had was plenty accurate. I think the HK's unique rifling helped it a great deal.

I'll take a .40 anyday.
 
Most of what I would say about the .40 has been said, so I'll only add this: I like the round. That's not meant to be an offhand slap at any other caliber, it's purely a personal-preference thing. I also like the 9mm, and I plan to buy a CZ75BD soon in that caliber. If/when I get around to getting a .45, or at least firing one, I'll probably find something to like about it also. This caliber snobbishness is great fodder for arenas like this, but can't we all just get along? You carry a 9mm, I carry a .40, he carries a .45, the important point is that you CAN and DO carry.
DAL

P.S. But these little debates/discussions are fun, aren't they?
 
kbear38S, I was simply using common examples some give for not liking the .40.

All you have to do is read posts & replies on various boards to see what I'm alluding to.
I'm not saying people are abandoning the .40 in droves, but it does seem a growing number of shooters for one reason or another dislike this caliber.

Also, read Will Beararms reply as he further illustrates what I'm speaking of, well said Will.:D

Something else I find of intrest is that many often argue the merits of the 357 Sig vs. the .40, I don't get this, as it's a moot point for civilian shooters. Swap bbl's & be done w/it, have the best of what both calibers offer.;)

Thanks for the replies so far!
Best, long shot!
 
For combat, a .40 is very good. It has enough accuracy for most combat situations out to 25 yards.

Having said that, for target shooting the .40 is useless for my needs. I've benchrest tested 9 mm, 40, and 45 together and the 40 has the least overall accuracy and sharpest recoil. For plinking, target shooting, or competition; sharp recoil and uninspiring accuracy just are not a good combination.

I am not trying to disrespect the .40 cartridge; however I am saying that it is just "not for me".
 
I love my .40. (G22)

I shot a friends Ruger 9mm the other day and it had much more felt recoil than the glock.. in a .40. It was louder that hell too...

I believe that peoples perception of a bulett is based upon what firearm they shoot it out of.

Shot a buddies Barretta .40 and it too had much more recoil that my glock.. yet it was still less that that Ruger 9mm.

My G22 shoots very accuratly at 25 yards considering I am not an experienced target shooter...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top