BTW, by "inherently inaccurate", I mean in terms of precision like you might be looking for out of a PPC gun, bullseye gun, etc. The cartridge is obviously more than adequate for the purpose for which it was designed (but then, so are the .45 ACP and 9mm).
So, the question is if anyone has actually seen/shot a handgun in .40 S&W that had that level of target accuracy?
One of our board members is a fairly accomplished PPC shooter. His comment is that he couldn't get any of his .40 S&W handguns to deliver target accuracy (including a S&W Model 610 revolver). At the worlds, he talked with the S&W guys from the Performance Center who were in attendance. They told him that they didn't have much luck wringing target accuracy out of that particular caliber either. So where there are pistols out there in .38 Super, 9mm, etc that will shoot 10 shot groups at 50 yards that will have all shots touching each other, the .40 S&W doesn't seem to be able to do this.
This brings up the comment "inherently inaccurate cartridge". But really, the internal dimensions of all pistol cartridge are roughly the same - a cylinder - except for scale. The 357 Sig is a bit of an anomoly.
The .38 Super used to often be termed "inherently inaccurate", but obviously nobody would say that now. The same could also be said of a few other pistol cartridges. It seems to usually be about getting chamber dimensions standardized/just right, mechanical issues, availability of quality bullets, etc.
Given the lessons learned in the past with making other pistol chamberings that were never intended for target work deliver match grade accuracy, what's the problem with the .40 S&W? The cartridge was developed long after the knowledge of how to make .45 ACP, 9mm, .38 Super, etc deliver bullseye accuracy had been developed. And yet, even the S&W Performance Center (and after all, S&W developed the cartridge) will privately tell you they don't have a lot of success in the target accuracy department with the .40 S&W themselves.
So, why is that? And are there indeed some "inherently inaccurate" chamberings: chamberings that won't deliver accuracy even if fired out of a test barrel in a machine rest?
So, the question is if anyone has actually seen/shot a handgun in .40 S&W that had that level of target accuracy?
One of our board members is a fairly accomplished PPC shooter. His comment is that he couldn't get any of his .40 S&W handguns to deliver target accuracy (including a S&W Model 610 revolver). At the worlds, he talked with the S&W guys from the Performance Center who were in attendance. They told him that they didn't have much luck wringing target accuracy out of that particular caliber either. So where there are pistols out there in .38 Super, 9mm, etc that will shoot 10 shot groups at 50 yards that will have all shots touching each other, the .40 S&W doesn't seem to be able to do this.
This brings up the comment "inherently inaccurate cartridge". But really, the internal dimensions of all pistol cartridge are roughly the same - a cylinder - except for scale. The 357 Sig is a bit of an anomoly.
The .38 Super used to often be termed "inherently inaccurate", but obviously nobody would say that now. The same could also be said of a few other pistol cartridges. It seems to usually be about getting chamber dimensions standardized/just right, mechanical issues, availability of quality bullets, etc.
Given the lessons learned in the past with making other pistol chamberings that were never intended for target work deliver match grade accuracy, what's the problem with the .40 S&W? The cartridge was developed long after the knowledge of how to make .45 ACP, 9mm, .38 Super, etc deliver bullseye accuracy had been developed. And yet, even the S&W Performance Center (and after all, S&W developed the cartridge) will privately tell you they don't have a lot of success in the target accuracy department with the .40 S&W themselves.
So, why is that? And are there indeed some "inherently inaccurate" chamberings: chamberings that won't deliver accuracy even if fired out of a test barrel in a machine rest?
