Looked all over online and made an attempt at finding the difference inbetween the 9mm and .40 s&w and apparently the only two differences are that the .40 is a police/military issued caliber so that the prices are jacked up higher because of the "reputation". As well for the bullet ballistics are very minimal. Any other points? Looking to buy my first handgun and wouldn't mind some input (thinking about the sig sauer p229 .40 S&W, or M1911 CQBP).
Very controvercial. 9mm vs .40 S&W.
- Thread starter MPJohn
- Start date
.40 S&W is more expensive because it uses heavier bullets and more powder, and there is probably 3-4x as much 9mm shot as .40S&W. The more expensive components and lower volume explain the price difference, not because of any "reputation".
Ballistically the .40 eats the 9mm for breakfast, but that really matters very little to us Canucks, as I have never yet seen 9mm fail to penetrate a paper target and that is all we get to do with our guns for the most part. I would recommend 9mm for your first handgun over .40S&W, because the ammo is cheaper and many find the .40 to be a very snappy round with enough recoil to cause flinching problems.
Mark
Ballistically the .40 eats the 9mm for breakfast, but that really matters very little to us Canucks, as I have never yet seen 9mm fail to penetrate a paper target and that is all we get to do with our guns for the most part. I would recommend 9mm for your first handgun over .40S&W, because the ammo is cheaper and many find the .40 to be a very snappy round with enough recoil to cause flinching problems.
Mark
You are just going to start arguments at which caliber is better.
Get the Sig 226 in 9mm with the 40cal kit and you'll have both to decide for yourself which is better. As an added bonus, you will be able to shoot 13 or 14 rds of 9mm in your 40cal magazine, legally.
Get the Sig 226 in 9mm with the 40cal kit and you'll have both to decide for yourself which is better. As an added bonus, you will be able to shoot 13 or 14 rds of 9mm in your 40cal magazine, legally.
I think the caliber you are looking for is .22LR.
I don't understand why people don't love it more. 555 rounds for $22(22LR) or 50 rounds for $19(9mm). Both poke holes in paper just as well.
But I guess most people don't realize that hand guns have a muzzle flash either.
I picked up a Glock 22 and picked up a 40-9mm barrel. So I can shoot 9mm or 40. The only reason I got a G22 (.40S&W) was because it was the only Olive Drab Glock around at the time. If I had my choice it would have been a G17 (9mm).
I don't understand why people don't love it more. 555 rounds for $22(22LR) or 50 rounds for $19(9mm). Both poke holes in paper just as well.
But I guess most people don't realize that hand guns have a muzzle flash either.
I picked up a Glock 22 and picked up a 40-9mm barrel. So I can shoot 9mm or 40. The only reason I got a G22 (.40S&W) was because it was the only Olive Drab Glock around at the time. If I had my choice it would have been a G17 (9mm).
Last edited:
I agree. I quit recommending .22LR because no one wanted to hear the truth and there were too many saying it was a sissy's round and OP would get bored with it.
Mark
Are you looking to make noise and have some giggles or to learn to shoot well and advance on to competitions and the like?
If you're after some giggles then why stop at .40? Why not simply buy a .45acp or even a .44Mag as your first gun? Giggles apleanty, I can assure you! ! ! !
On the other hand if you want to have some good fun AND learn to shoot well then seriously consider what the guys above said. They hit the nails all squarely on each of the heads. And if you just can't do it with a .22 as your first handgun then by all means buy a 9.
But if you buy a 9 for your first then your second SHOULD be a .22.
It's not that you can't learn on a 9. But typically most of us develop a good flinch issue then spend a bucket load of money on ammo learning to beat the flinch. Money which would have bought a nice .22 and fed it for about the same cost as the center fire ammo used learning to beat the flinch and other issues. And on top of that a rimfire handgun goes on and on to provide cheap fun both for serious target shooting skill aquisition as well as some very valid competition drills later on.
If you're after some giggles then why stop at .40? Why not simply buy a .45acp or even a .44Mag as your first gun? Giggles apleanty, I can assure you! ! ! !
On the other hand if you want to have some good fun AND learn to shoot well then seriously consider what the guys above said. They hit the nails all squarely on each of the heads. And if you just can't do it with a .22 as your first handgun then by all means buy a 9.
But if you buy a 9 for your first then your second SHOULD be a .22.
It's not that you can't learn on a 9. But typically most of us develop a good flinch issue then spend a bucket load of money on ammo learning to beat the flinch. Money which would have bought a nice .22 and fed it for about the same cost as the center fire ammo used learning to beat the flinch and other issues. And on top of that a rimfire handgun goes on and on to provide cheap fun both for serious target shooting skill aquisition as well as some very valid competition drills later on.
When my son started shooting(at 14) it was with a 9mm. Over the last 1.5yrs he regularly printed a "pushing" pattern in his groupings. I recently bought a .22lr semi-auto and had him shoot it exclusively for the last couple of months.
When he shoots the 9mm now his groups are not only tighter but have shifted to the middle of the target. He's starting to shoot that 9mm better than me....guess I should give the .22lr a go for a while
Don't overlook a good .22lr HG.
When he shoots the 9mm now his groups are not only tighter but have shifted to the middle of the target. He's starting to shoot that 9mm better than me....guess I should give the .22lr a go for a while
Don't overlook a good .22lr HG.
I was at the range shooting and there was a younger guy about the same age as me just joining the club. He was doing his supervised shoots. I overheard him say he only had 20 rounds of 9mm left and he couldn't buy another box until next payday. He loaded 10 into one mag and shot all over the target at 6 yards. Pretty average for a guy with a flinch I guess. When he was done I asked if he wanted to try my .22 semi auto pistol. A Norinco Colt Woodsman copy. He told me "no" because "he has no interest in that".
i have tried and tried to like .22lr...i just cant do it.
i have a .22lr pistol and a .22lr rifle. neither get any range time by me...both get handed off to newer shooters or whoever out of my friends runs out of centerfire ammo first.
but then again...i have put 80 slugs through my 12g rem 870 in 1 day....couldnt shoulder a gun for a few weeks after but i did it.
im happy with shooting 9mm pistols, i like shooting my .45 but its not cheap. i really want a .40 next (really want a beretta), but we will see what comes my way when the time comes.
ive shot the glock 17 and glock 22, and i cant decide how much snappier the glock 22 in .40 is but i havent shot them 1 right after the other...ill try that next.
easyrider604
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Greater Vancouver, BC
Have to go against the grain here. You don't need a .22 LR handgun to help eliminate or avoid flinch. I had a Ruger MkI, Browning Buckmark and two S&W .22 revolvers. They may have helped my flinch problem but cannot say for sure. Sold them. I think if I were to learn all over again, it would be possible to skip the .22 handgun phase. Many of my friends did and they were/are good shots.
IMO, buy the handgun of your dreams in the caliber of your choice that you can afford to shoot. I can afford to shoot because I reload and cast my heads as well.
To help eliminate flinch, all you gotta do is dry fire. Lots of it at home and at the range, before you even shoot the first live round.
When you finally shoot the first live round, keep on doing so, until you miss the bullseye, then go back to dry fire. 100 times.
But then again, who has the discipline to dry fire?
IMO, buy the handgun of your dreams in the caliber of your choice that you can afford to shoot. I can afford to shoot because I reload and cast my heads as well.
To help eliminate flinch, all you gotta do is dry fire. Lots of it at home and at the range, before you even shoot the first live round.
When you finally shoot the first live round, keep on doing so, until you miss the bullseye, then go back to dry fire. 100 times.
But then again, who has the discipline to dry fire?
I've read that .40 is better for IB penetration over 9mm. With regards for self defense, I've read that it is virtually identical to 9mm; especially with regards to better loads such as 124g +P hollow points.
Actually, with regards to the latter, I've read that they are the ballistic equivalent to an FMJ .45
Actually, with regards to the latter, I've read that they are the ballistic equivalent to an FMJ .45
I own CZ 75 in 9mm, Glock 22 in 40sw and Springfield XDm in 45. 9mm is very manageable and accurate round, ideal for affordable practice that has some recoil. It functions on some 35,000 psi of pressure, simmilar to 40sw. 40sw was developed in 80' at the request of FBI when they realized after major armed shoot out down in Florida they were underpowered with their 38cal revolvers. Consequently 40 cal sw was born. It is somewhere between 9mm and 10mm. Don't mix 10mm with 40cal, although they are the same diameter, 10mm is some 25% more powerfull which makes it suitable only for experienced shooter because of its recoil. 40 cal. in contrast is on the average only about 100fps slower than 9mm but because of the mass of the bullet, it has better stopping capability but consequently its recoil is heavier than that of 9mm. Accuracy is about the same. I've found it practical to start with 9mm and then progress to 40 and I must say, I like the kick of it. In contrast, my 45 kicks almost the same as the 40. There is a couple of reasons for that. First, 45 operates at only 21,000psi or if P+ at 23,000 but that is still way less than 35k so the recoil is inherently less violent, secondly, 45's are frequently but not always a little larger pistols and consequently a bit heavier and that helps to absorb the recoil. So now you have it. I love them all.
Welcome to CGN.
What for? Plinking ... as others have said, a 22 LR is hard to beat. My Ruger Mark II Target Stainless was manufactured in 1991. Has thousands of rounds shot through it every year, at about $20 / 500. It is by far the most accurate handgun I have ever had the pleasure to own (several 22, 38 special, 357 mag, several 9mm, etc...). I have also used it for friendly competitions at my gun club. Any friend of mine that wants to start shooting starts with the Ruger 22.
Are you thinking about getting into IPSC? If so, 9mm production division is the way to go. Glock 17, S&W M&P9 or CZ SP01 Shadow if you prefer a dual/single action. Ammo cost for factory loads is about $15-16/ 50 shots, reloads can be found at about $12/50. Or load your own at $6-8 / 50 (beware, the ROI on reloading equipment is about 4000-5000 rounds).
Some clubs are big on cowboy action shooting ... which of course requires a revolver!
I would suggest away from the Sig as a first pistol. Nice gun, very reliable and accurate in the right hands but the truth of the matter is that they aren't the easiest to shoot well. Same advice for a 1911. Sure they look good, are easy to hold because of the single stack magazine but they are like an Italian sports car, always in need of a tune up! Consider that the 1911 was designed at a time when everything was hand crafted and hand assembled. Craftsmen carefully matched and fitted each part. They weren't designed for massively automated assembly lines. That being said, you can spend good money ($2000 + ) and get a finely tuned 1911 but for the money most shooters throw at their first gun (500-1000), you're probably going to be disappointed with the result. There are approximately twice as many parts in a 1911 than in a M&P9.
What have you shot so far and what did you like about them? If you haven't shot any handguns ... you really need to spend some time at the range. Get to know the guys and they'll surely let you empty a mag or two.
My understanding is that for police forces, 40 S&W has an advantage when shooting through a barrier (wall, car door, etc...), but for contact with flesh, there is very little difference compared to the 9mm. What does James Bond use again, a tiny PPK? Seemed to do the trick!
Last edited:
Best way to overcome a centerfire flinch is by practice, dry firing and more practice. 22 doesn't really help that much with almost zero recoil. I bought and sold my rimfire pistol as I never shot it anymore after the 9mm/40/45 purchases.
If you're looking for a first centre fire pistol, 9mm makes good sense. The 9mm is quite easy to shoot well, and is the standard military service pistol calibre for most of the world and all of NATO. If you can afford a steady diet of 9mm ammo, go for it. If however you can't see yourself spending the money to shoot 9mm on a regular basis, Sig makes a 22 calibre "Classic" series that you can convert up to 9mm by replacing the slide/barrel assembly. You should be aware that Sig DA/SA pistols are harder to shoot well than a 1911, Glock or M&P. If you're looking at a 1911 style pistol, you can get 22 conversion units for a standard ("government") framed 1911, or you can get the GSG 22 which operates identically to a centrefire 1911 and pretty much weighs the same too. For around the price of a Sig 229 you should be able to find an STI Spartan in 9mm and a GSG in 22. The Spartan runs just under $800, the GSG runs just under $400. They use the same holster, should that be a direction you decide to head.
if you are considering a sig, and you are considering a .22 then get the sig classic 22 and buy the caliber excange kit.
the frame on the classic 22 and the center fires are identical...and the cost of buying the classic 22 and a excange kit is i think a little cheaper than buyng just the center fire version.
the frame on the classic 22 and the center fires are identical...and the cost of buying the classic 22 and a excange kit is i think a little cheaper than buyng just the center fire version.
If you really want a 40 then get a Glock 22, order Lone Wolf 9mm barrel for it and 22 LR conversion kit. That will allow you to use the same lower and trigger for all calibers. IMHO
P.S. And use CCI minimags for 22 lr conversion
P.S. And use CCI minimags for 22 lr conversion
