9mm or 40 S&W???
- Thread starter bWONGER
- Start date
Go with the 9MM. The M&P is an excellent platform and will serve you well. The 9MM guns will sell quickly if you decide later the gun or pistols are not for you. A 40 cal will sit on the shelve a lot longer. The 9MM is cheaper to shoot if you don't reload. For the casual shooter the 9MM is by far and away the better cartridge by any measurement. As an aside I have a FS and PRO in both calibers. the 40's are at home in the safe 99% of the time.
Take Care
Bob
Take Care
Bob
You can make minor power facotr with that?
hometownhero
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Toon Town, Sk
No idea. No idea what power factor is either.
While talking about cost I just cast 545 bolts for my 9mm material cost me $2.18. Gotta love free lead.
If you are doing a limited amount of shooting then choose whatever you find the most fun to shoot. If you are planning to develop into a better shooter, go with 9 for many of the reasons mentioned. Factory .40 will also wear your pistol more quickly and require more maintenance, especially if you decide to do a lot of shooting. I've done a fair bit of shooting with both and prefer 9.
Still alive
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Rainy mosquito infested part of BC
Listen to this guy! ^^^^^^
He KNOWS what he's talking about and he can back it up.
He KNOWS what he's talking about and he can back it up.
I own 22, 9mm, 38spl, 40 S & W, 45ACP. Get the 9mm. 40 is harder to shoot, more expensive and is harder on the gun. 40 is the one I like the least.
I own a M&P9 and like it more then the .40 my buddy owns. However if I was going to do it again, I would have bought the .40 and also a 9mm barrel for it. This way I could shoot both calibers if I wanted to, even though 90% of my shooting would still be 9mm.
Have both in virtually identical guns, SR9 and SR40, but shoot more 9mm because of having more brass to reload.
Loading both at the hotter end, the .40 definitely has more kick but that's part of its appeal.
If I could build up a good stash of .40 brass, I would probably shoot it a bit more but after a bunch of hot .44mag rounds, shooting a 9mm is restful while the .40 isn't.
Loading both at the hotter end, the .40 definitely has more kick but that's part of its appeal.
If I could build up a good stash of .40 brass, I would probably shoot it a bit more but after a bunch of hot .44mag rounds, shooting a 9mm is restful while the .40 isn't.
Harder on the gun.. I definitely want to see some evidence on that. Not some heresay.
I maintained a fleet of about 160 Beretta 96D's for several years. The failure rate on the .40 Beretta vs 9 was well documented in a number of police agencies in Canada and the US in the late 90's. I personally shot my issue 96 literally to pieces (documented round count). Went from those to Glock's and although the Glocks are far more resilient, they still take a beating from .40. More recoil impulse equals more maintenance and parts replacement. I shot a .40 Glock to pieces as well, but it took 4x longer than the Beretta. I carry a Glock 17 now and I'll do my best to shoot it to failure but I suspect I'll be retired before I can make that happen.
What piperdown said is correct, the .40 will be harder on the gun than the 9mm and the Glock was designed to be a 9mm as were most guns in that size category. However, some guns exhibit the failures faster such as the above stated Beretta, but when police agencies have issues, the manufacturers usually step up with either free or vastly reduced pricing on replacement guns.
These issues sometimes accelerate the movement away from the .40 to the 9mm which is a trend that will continue as the US federal agencies move to the 9mm from the .40 in the future. I am curious if qualification scores have improved by moving from the .40 to the 9mm in those agencies that made the change; mine is still using the .40 but has moved to Gen 4 Glocks from Gen 3 and the recoil reduction from the newer guide rod system is supposed to make the gun easier to control and perhaps extend the life of the frame.
These issues sometimes accelerate the movement away from the .40 to the 9mm which is a trend that will continue as the US federal agencies move to the 9mm from the .40 in the future. I am curious if qualification scores have improved by moving from the .40 to the 9mm in those agencies that made the change; mine is still using the .40 but has moved to Gen 4 Glocks from Gen 3 and the recoil reduction from the newer guide rod system is supposed to make the gun easier to control and perhaps extend the life of the frame.
