.40 S&W falling out of favor?

[easyrider604]

Gentlemen, you do know that this forum has a feature called “ignore”. Very useful for liberating yourself from posters of rude, pointless responses and discussions.

I find that if we don’t feed the troll, they just go away.

 

[B]

Gentlemen, you do know that this forum has a feature called “ignore”. Very useful for liberating yourself from posters of rude, pointless responses and discussions.

I find that if we don’t feed the troll, they just go away.

It really seems like you are considering anyone with a differing view to be a troll. If you are going to run to the ignore feature every time you don't agree with someone I don't know why you bother coming here.

 

[hatman1793]

One of the best benefits of the 40S&W cartridge is ease of loading. Low charge amounts of fast buring powder can be seen easily in the case at stage two on my RL550 press.

147 grain 9mm bullets are still 36 caliber while 40 is 40 caliber. Fired at bowling pins, bigger bullets with more area have a better chance of not glancing off. 45 is even bigger, but you might have to reload with reduced mag capacity.
Im just thinkng that medium velocity 40 beats 9mm against pins, but not 45, but 40 has 10. 45 has 8.

 

[dogzilla]

My 45 has 10

 

[Avenida]

oh the 9 vs 40 debate will never end.

40 isn't popular in carry guns for many reasons, carry guns are too light for that caliber (glock, etc) the felt recoil is greater. However, the main reason why agencies changed to .40 have absolutely nothing to do with how the gun shoots. Agencies could not care less, officers practice very little (the majority) so they will suck with either caliber.

The reason is simply MONEY. It is cheaper.

Shot placement, blah blah blah, yes even a .22 in the head will kill you, I think so the whole shot placement debate is kind of a moot point, no?

If it is was me, unless i was carrying a very small pistol with the intentions of concealment, for example, undercover police (can't think of any examples for Canadians sorry) I think 9mm puts you at a disadvantage.

 

[Suther]

oh the 9 vs 40 debate will never end.

40 isn't popular in carry guns for many reasons, carry guns are too light for that caliber (glock, etc) the felt recoil is greater. However, the main reason why agencies changed to .40 have absolutely nothing to do with how the gun shoots. Agencies could not care less, officers practice very little (the majority) so they will suck with either caliber.

The reason is simply MONEY. It is cheaper.

Shot placement, blah blah blah, yes even a .22 in the head will kill you, I think so the whole shot placement debate is kind of a moot point, no?

If it is was me, unless i was carrying a very small pistol with the intentions of concealment, for example, undercover police (can't think of any examples for Canadians sorry) I think 9mm puts you at a disadvantage.

Im confused. It's all about money, that's why most agencies went to the 40 - which is more expensive than the 9 - many years ago???

9mm didn't have the terminal ballistics that the FBI wanted, and 10mm was too much recoil for most people to shoot effectively so they made the 40. Today, with better bullets, +p loadings, etc the 9mm has been able to deliver the terminal ballistics they require so it's back on the table as a viable option, and being cheaper many agencies are making the switch. The fact it gets you higher capacity and has less felt recoil also make the 9mm a better choice for them. However, if modern 9mm didn't have better terminal ballistics than 80s 9mm it still wouldn't be an option to them.

One is not better than the other, they both have their advantages and drawbacks. Weight of gun, capacity, momentum/kinetic energy, and felt recoil are all factors to be weighed when choosing one or the other...

 

[easyrider604]

It really seems like you are considering anyone with a differing view to be a troll. If you are going to run to the ignore feature every time you don't agree with someone I don't know why you bother coming here.

There you go. You don’t get it. There is a way to express disagreement without annoying the other parties.

Read other threads where the member I ignored has posted. See what other members say about him. Read their comments then rethink your position.

 

[gdawg]

There you go. You don’t get it. There is a way to express disagreement without annoying the other parties.

Read other threads where the member I ignored has posted. See what other members say about him. Read their comments then rethink your position.

Yes and that other member has been banned repeatedly under different user names. His next user name should be 'herpes' lol

 

[easyrider604]

IMO he who swings the bigger stick wins. Would you rather have a Manny Pacquiao punch, or George Foreman punch?

Another thing, 8 rds of .45 could drop eight zombies. Whereas common wisdom these days is two COM for 9mm or any pistol caliber.

Same as 30 yrs ago when I competed, it was double tap for all calibers. But that’s just gaming.

My late uncle and godfather who was a WWII guerilla fighter, was a 1911 .45 believer because he only needed one shot each to send Japs to Nirvana. A testament to the effectiveness of the pistol and the caliber.

 

[badboybeeson]

40 has been dead for years of it were not for ipsc then it would be uo there with the 38 stupid.
Police head shead have finally understood that shot place ovwr bullet weight is what it takes .

 

[Sinasta]

IMO he who swings the bigger stick wins. Would you rather have a Manny Pacquiao punch, or George Foreman punch?

Another thing, 8 rds of .45 could drop eight zombies. Whereas common wisdom these days is two COM for 9mm or any pistol caliber.

Same as 30 yrs ago when I competed, it was double tap for all calibers. But that’s just gaming.

My late uncle and godfather who was a WWII guerilla fighter, was a 1911 .45 believer because he only needed one shot each to send Japs to Nirvana. A testament to the effectiveness of the pistol and the caliber.

Cocaine is a helluva drug.

 

[BlackRam]

I have owned 3 9mm's, 2 40's and a 45 over the years. While I have nowhere near the pistol experience of many here, I found that I preferred the 40 in a CZ85 firing 180 gr ammo to be nicer to shoot than the 9mm in a CZ75's or the Baby Eagle firing the 124 gr loads or the 45 in a Kimber 1911 firing the 230 gr ammo.
In running the IDPA exercises at our local club every week in the summer, a few years ago, I found my times and accuracy were better with my 40 than with the other two.
I only have one now, and it is the CZ SP-01 Tactical in 40.

 

[veebooster]

oh the 9 vs 40 debate will never end.

40 isn't popular in carry guns for many reasons, carry guns are too light for that caliber (glock, etc) the felt recoil is greater. However, the main reason why agencies changed to .40 have absolutely nothing to do with how the gun shoots. Agencies could not care less, officers practice very little (the majority) so they will suck with either caliber.

The reason is simply MONEY. It is cheaper.

Shot placement, blah blah blah, yes even a .22 in the head will kill you, I think so the whole shot placement debate is kind of a moot point, no?

If it is was me, unless i was carrying a very small pistol with the intentions of concealment, for example, undercover police (can't think of any examples for Canadians sorry) I think 9mm puts you at a disadvantage.

What he said! I shoot .40 at work and love it. My personal pistol is 9mm for 1 reason = $. Whatever they do technologically for 9 mm they can do for .40 cal. But if you can't hit what you're shooting at you better practice more with whatever your preference is.

 

[Dave in Calgary]

Was out playing at the range yesterday. My SAM 1911 in 40 S&W rings the chimes very nicely on the steel plates. The 9mm pistols are OK, but the 40 is more fun.

 

[Avenida]

This would be a valid argument if we were giving handguns to proficient shooters which most police officers are not. It is the victim's best interest, in my opinion, it would be better that they carry the strongest bullet as they could possibly put LESS holes in the attacker before he goes down or how they call it : stop the threat.

I have practiced and competed against a handful of officers from many different agencies, and I can tell you, they never come up as top shooters on the boards. Some of them are a cringe worthy and it is unbelievable that they have the right to use a firearm to be honest. Some people are good at things, some are not good. I suck at playing soccer, my solution, I do not attempt to play soccer, simple.

But let's not start a debate about that, which I think I did. Sorry.

What I meant about the money is that, it is about the money now, they can afford more ammo, and perhaps practice more? I do not buy the 9mm is better now. It is the exact same bologna but it is not rocket science.
As mentioned already, physics are physics. 9mm is still a weaker choice no matter how you see it but it the best compromise.

Im confused. It's all about money, that's why most agencies went to the 40 - which is more expensive than the 9 - many years ago???

9mm didn't have the terminal ballistics that the FBI wanted, and 10mm was too much recoil for most people to shoot effectively so they made the 40. Today, with better bullets, +p loadings, etc the 9mm has been able to deliver the terminal ballistics they require so it's back on the table as a viable option, and being cheaper many agencies are making the switch. The fact it gets you higher capacity and has less felt recoil also make the 9mm a better choice for them. However, if modern 9mm didn't have better terminal ballistics than 80s 9mm it still wouldn't be an option to them.

One is not better than the other, they both have their advantages and drawbacks. Weight of gun, capacity, momentum/kinetic energy, and felt recoil are all factors to be weighed when choosing one or the other...

 

[BlackRam]

Not that we can carry our pistols or revolvers for personal protection or hunting (without a special permit for very specific occupations, that is very difficult to obtain), but it is interesting to note that the Conservation Officers in BC were originally issued 9mm's. One of the main duties that they did use their sidearms for was putting down animals injured in vehicle collisions.
The lightweight bullets in the 9mm was inefficient in dispatching the bigger ungulates such as moose and elk. They found that they would get 4" or less penetration.
They switched to the 40 S&W and the 180 gr ammo, and performance improved. They found that they were getiing up to 18" of penetration on a moose.

For me, I like the extra punch that the 40 give on the target. As Dave said above, it is more fun!

 

[easyrider604]

Not that we can carry our pistols or revolvers for personal protection or hunting (without a special permit for very specific occupations, that is very difficult to obtain), but it is interesting to note that the Conservation Officers in BC were originally issued 9mm's. One of the main duties that they did use their sidearms for was putting down animals injured in vehicle collisions.
The lightweight bullets in the 9mm was inefficient in dispatching the bigger ungulates such as moose and elk. They found that they would get 4" or less penetration.
They switched to the 40 S&W and the 180 gr ammo, and performance improved. They found that they were getiing up to 18" of penetration on a moose.

For me, I like the extra punch that the 40 give on the target. As Dave said above, it is more fun!

That’s what I was talking about. The “extra punch”, yeah!

I hope those who follow the FBI and other LEOs lead, switch their 40s for 9s. Please flood the market with cheap .40 pistols to help us .40 cal believers.

 

[Avenida]

You can reload 40 and it is fairly inexpensive.
BTW I have shot 9mm for many years in competition and discovered 40 not long ago and how much it is to shoot. It does require a decent foundation to be enjoyable as it is harder to shoot.

That’s what I was talking about. The “extra punch”, yeah!

I hope those who follow the FBI and other LEOs lead, switch their 40s for 9s. Please flood the market with cheap .40 pistols to help us .40 cal believers.

 

[Suther]

This would be a valid argument if we were giving handguns to proficient shooters which most police officers are not. It is the victim's best interest, in my opinion, it would be better that they carry the strongest bullet as they could possibly put LESS holes in the attacker before he goes down or how they call it : stop the threat...

No. You are looking at it all wrong. 9mm is the better option for individuals who are not a good shot, as it easier to learn to shoot decently. If they're already not great, why would you want to give them a gun that's harder to use effectively?

When someone asks "what should my first pistol be?" how many people say 9mm (or even 22lr)? Very few people recommend a 40 as someones first handgun.

 

[Avenida]

Been shooting for many years, and will disagree with you there, here is why:
Never saw anybody improving by using this method.
Shooting isn't rocket science, you lined things up and fire. Simple.

You can test shooters with just one round in the magazine, if they suck, they will suck with 22, with 9, with anything. With one bullet in the mag, the whole recoil argument is moot as there isn't a second shot, you first shot is gone, you sucked, game over, when you felt the recoil the bullet was long gone.
Bad shooters have preconceived fears (this is gonna blow up in my hand), anticipate recoil, twitches, squint, poor stance, poor muscle strength, poor posture (seen really good shooters with bad posture), bad hand eye coordination... Some people just can't. The caliber has ZERO influence in their competence for that one single shot.

If you cannot control a pistol, you need to workout and get stronger. Understand what is it that you are doing to improve. I am 1.69 meters tall (5.5ish feet) dwarf and can shoot decently any caliber, typically top against in my area and very close to other shooters that are nationally known. Not gonna give names lolol, In a nutshell: It is not about the pistol, it is about the person holding it.

No. You are looking at it all wrong. 9mm is the better option for individuals who are not a good shot, as it easier to learn to shoot decently. If they're already not great, why would you want to give them a gun that's harder to use effectively?

When someone asks "what should my first pistol be?" how many people say 9mm (or even 22lr)? Very few people recommend a 40 as someones first handgun.