slow death of the 40?

maifire

maifire

Regular
GunNutz
Rating - 100%
196   0   0
Location
I will stays where I'm at 'til you knows where I'm
Forgive me if it has been on here before but a quick search turned up nothing. Just looking at the header for this section. "...debate between 9 and 45". .40 S&W was a contender too. When it came out...
I am curious about some of the blowout prices I have seen on pistols and pistol-caliber carbines chambered in .40 S&W. As far as I know, North America's militaries never took it in but an overwhelming number of law enforcement agencies did. With the new powders and bullet materials, 9mm sure does most of what the 40 can do-with more rounds, cheaper and less recoil.
Though more successful than the 10mm, is 40 looking like the same fate?
 
Projectile ballistics and performance have come a long way since the 40 first came out. 9mm can do the same now that 40 can, is cheaper, more easily available, is more shootable due to less recoil which usually means better accuracy between shota and generally has a higher capacity in guns that come in 9 or 40. Think of the glock 22 vs the 17. 15 vs 17 rounds. That's 6 extra rounds on a 3 mag setup for those that carry day in and day out in that fashion.

At the end of the day, the only thing 40 has more of than 9 is cost per round.

And I love shooting the 40.
 
I felt like the 40 was the gun you bought when you couldn't find it in 9mm and didn't want to wait 6 months for the next shipment. it certainly doesn't seem to popular. but i'd take one if you were gonna throw them out.
 
I doubt the .40 will die off, it's just not as popular with target shooters because typically if one wants to "go big", he'll get the .45 while on the other hand if they want a light shooting cheaper caliber they'll go with the 9. I know that quite a few people carry the .40 in the US as that's the place the .40 shines most - as a self defense caliber that allows for more capacity than a .45 in a smaller framed gun with more power than a 9. I believe I read somewhere that the .40 is favored by many law enforcement agencies because it provides a more consistent flight path when penetrating angled material (ie. windshields on cars) than the 9 or 45.

As for the 10mm, i feel like it's fate is more akin to that of the .357 sig or .45 GAP, as i have never encountered any ammo for those calibers being sold at any local store.
 
Last edited:
Rumours of it's passing are likely exagerated.

Since I started I've seen roughly two .40's for every twenty 9mm's at the matches I attend. It's never been AS popular and the cheaper 9mm but I have not seen this ratio go down in the 8 years I've been shooting handguns in local matches.
 
the 40 in my hands has a stinging recoil, the 9 and 45 do not have a stinging recoil. other people have noted this as well. this issue, along with durability problems with the early guns has lead to a decrease in popularity. modern bullet design has allowed the 9 to be more effective when compared to the 40 and 45, and the 9 will gain in LE sales because of this. I think the 40 will slowly decline.
 
CanadianMarksman said:
I doubt the .40 will die off, it's just not as popular with target shooters because typically if one wants to "go big", he'll get the .45 while on the other hand if they want a light shooting cheaper caliber they'll go with the 9. I know that quite a few people carry the .40 in the US as that's the place the .40 shines most - as a self defense caliber that allows for more capacity than a .45 in a smaller framed gun with more power than a 9. I believe I read somewhere that the .40 is favored by many law enforcement agencies because it provides a more consistent flight path when penetrating angled material (ie. windshields on cars) than the 9 or 45.

As for the 10mm, i feel like it's fate is more akin to that of the .357 sig or .45 GAP, as i have never encountered any ammo for those calibers being sold at any local store.
Click to expand...

For the reasons I mentioned, many LE agencies are transitioning to 9mm. More rounds, less recoil which generally translates to faster follow up with improved accuracy, cheaper more plentiful supply with modern 9mm matching the performance of 40sw.

40sw out did the 9mm when it was first developed 2 and 1/2 decades ago. Technology has improved in the 9mm world.
 
It's interesting, the 9-40-45 battle. I just saw an older post on a US forum that had a picture of recent FBI testing between those rounds, and including the 10mm. (It was a list of data, not the actual results) Surprisingly, the 9mm penetrated further, and expanded to generally the same diameter in all of the tests.

How do people look at data like that and believe it? It's like saying that a honda civic is basically as fast as a ferrari, is as good off road as a jeep, and can tow like a kenworth.
 
And don't forget the politics behind this. As FBI introduced 40s&w due to the Miami shootout, they are getting back 9mm due to government cost cuts. They have to put out something for the show. US army is doing the opposite at the same time. So pick whoever you want to follow.

9mm also tends to over penetrate in self defense situation, to use premium hp ammo to prevent that, the cost is going up neck to neck with 40 again

Smcx said:
It's interesting, the 9-40-45 battle. I just saw an older post on a US forum that had a picture of recent FBI testing between those rounds, and including the 10mm. (It was a list of data, not the actual results) Surprisingly, the 9mm penetrated further, and expanded to generally the same diameter in all of the tests.

How do people look at data like that and believe it? It's like saying that a honda civic is basically as fast as a ferrari, is as good off road as a jeep, and can tow like a kenworth.
Click to expand...
 
A box of Speer Gold Dot in 9mm is still cheaper than the same brand in 40sw. Carry ammo cost isn't the big cost, the cost of agency practice ammo is due to the higher volumes it is purchased in.

Apples to apples 9mm is always cheaper than 40.
 
I remember when Christine Silverberg was our worst ever Police Chief here in Calgary. Our Force was just transitioning to the .40 Glock. Talking with one of the Instructors. All Police Force members had to qualify with the new pistol in order to carry it. Silverberg just couldn't quite qualify. Too much snap compared to a .38. At the time I was into IPSC using .45. Tried the new .40 Glock with Factory ammo and remember not being impressed with the type of recoil produced. Unpleasent. Between a plastic light pistol and a very snappy round, it just wasn't any fun compared to, say the .45. 1911. Never really changed my opinion since. You can reload and down load it but why when you can shoot 9 or .45 and enjoy it more with more choices available. Also owned 2 1911 10mms at the time and they weren't much fun either on a long range day. OK for the occasional mag full but not shooting 100 round practice drills. Overall IMHO 9 or .45 is the way to go in Auto and 38/357 in revolver for fun and most shots fired.
 
From what I can see, the 9mm is NOT equivalent to the .40 at standard pressures. It is comparable at +P and +P+ depending on bullet weights. However, if you toss in the high-pressure loads to equate to a .40, you also have to assess the recoil at higher pressures.

Personally, I have a Sig P229 in .40, but it also switches barrels easily, so it's also a 9mm & .357 Sig. The Sig is heavy relative to other brands, and the slide is milled stainless, so it's top-heavy. This is to absorb recoil in high-pressure loads. Also, I am a fairly big guy. That said, I don't see any noticeable recoil difference in my gun whether I'm shooting 9mm or .40.

Because of cost, availability and +P options, I tend to side with the 9ers, but I have the .40 barrel on now and will likely keep it there for most shooting. Why? I guess I don't know. I like it.

I advised my son to buy a 9mm. He bought a .45. Go figure.
 
I tend to agree with most of the statements on the 9mm vs .40 S&W debate. Yada, yada, yada.

The .40 is not for everyone. While I will still like & continue to use 9mm, 10mm & .45 ACP I still have a place for the .40, too.

I've shot thousands of rounds thru pistols in .40. Mostly thru Glocks, though.

Personally, I don't see it going away any time soon. :)


1CanadaFlag.gif

----------------
NAA.
 
After many years of following the 9 vs 40 debate it comes down to performance wanted and recoil. I have multiple 9's and one 40, but am looking for more 40s. The 9 has improved over the years to get it closer to the 40, so some like that. Some people are extremely recoil sensitive, so they look for the least recoil possible to make it comfortable for themselves. I find the recoil argument a non factor. Everyone that I have taught to shoot, absolutely love the 40 ! My wife is a 5'2" woos, weaker than hell. I ran her through several 9s, the 40, the 38 special and the full house 357 mag. She loves the 40 and the 38 special and can't believe people don't like the 40. It's all very subjective as everyone has a different level of comfort. I find, that if you approach every caliber will have big recoil you will have a better experience than if you were looking out for big recoil. That way you don't preconceive any false notions regarding any caliber and you can form an unbiased opinion. To add food to this debate, add the 357 Sig into the mix and again opinions will change. Shoot what you enjoy and don't follow the crowd.
 
40 down loaded to 130 ish power factor is very soft shooting using 180 gr bullets. I like to use it in Steel Shoots. Works in IDPA too but I still prefer the 9MM or revolver.

Take Care

Bob
 
CanadianMarksman said:
As for the 10mm, i feel like it's fate is more akin to that of the .357 sig or .45 GAP, as i have never encountered any ammo for those calibers being sold at any local store.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. The 10mm is picking up in popularity in the US as a hunting / backcountry calibre in addition to those who want a powerful CCW. New guns are coming out in 10mm all the time, eg sig, glock, STI, Kimber, Dan wesson, tanfoglio/EAA, several 1911 makers. New ammo is coming out too (eg sig/federal). That is certainly not the case for the 45 gap or 357 sig.
 
I agree with the recoil concerns(and the lack of concerns), but I really feel that recoil isn't considered enough when it comes to follow-up shots. A 40 will shoot a heavier bullet, where the 9+P is still lighter. Physics, to me, should allow the 9 to get away with lighter recoil.
I am definitely a 9mm guy.
 
When I had a .40, I would load longshot under 155gr HPs @ 1350 fps. Data is out there. And that was a 4.5" bbl. Now compare that to 127 gr 9mm bullet @ 1250 FPS +p+ loads.

Almost 15% greater frontal area, 22% more mass, and all the extra energy that mass and extra 100fps brings. Do I think somebody/thing would react much differently when hit in the same place with either? Probably not. But I suspect with equal expanding bullets, the bleed out would be better with the .40. But if reduced to FMJ, I still feel better with the .40.

For targets in Canada, meh. I just never found love for the 9. And if in the market, I have 12500 once fired empty Win range pick ups(cops) for the .40 that would tip me that way.

At 40 years old, I have no desire to start shooting or even obtaining a 9mm. My 1911's were my go to up until now, and I have very little reason to stop liking them. And I do love the .45.

Just to shake things up I just picked up a Ruger SR22. Had to try a modern design. And come on, the little guy is just so damned cute. But when push comes to shove, my full size 22/45 is more accurate, easier to shoot, has a longer sighting radius, and a better trigger. Oh, and it stays cocked the way a firearm should when you put the safety on.

The 9 would be like the SR for me. A range toy. But I don't need another set of dies, time to load etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom