.40 S&W, whatcha got, what do you want

Status
Not open for further replies.
NWPilgrim said:
What? The Gen 3 is still be made and of all the generations it is probably the most trouble free. The Gen4 had a long period of brass to face and erratic ejection issues. The Gen4 main purpose as far as I can tell are the multiple grip panels for adjusting the grip size. The recoil spring was changed to a nested dual spring, but the old Gen1-Gen3 recoil spring/rod was pretty famous for lasting a good while, and the pistol still able to function after the rod broke and flew out the front (after several thousands of rounds). The Gen4 is an improvement in many wyas but reliability is not one I am aware it can claim. My 2 Gen3 and one Gen 2 trade-ins have tens of thousands of rounds through them (from me at least, plus whatever the police dept shot) and I have had zero failures or issues with them. I replace the recoil spring every 4,000 rounds as part of maintenance but they all have original extractors, ejectors, strikers and springs.
Click to expand...

There are some known issues with the gen3 .40 and weapon mounted lights. Supposedly there is no such issue with the gen4. I actually prefer the gen3, and have a model 23, but I don’t put lights on my guns.
 
I have an M&P40 FS that I'm not too overly impressed with. And I don't feel the love, nor hate, for the 40S&W. Got a Hi-Point carbine to go with it.
With what I have in the M&P, Apex Trigger kit and I bought it when the 40 was the thing to have, I'd lose my asset off if I sold it now. With a 9mm barrel on the way, I'll keep it until the FBI decides the 40 is back in. :D
 
NWPilgrim said:
What? The Gen 3 is still be made and of all the generations it is probably the most trouble free. The Gen4 had a long period of brass to face and erratic ejection issues. The Gen4 main purpose as far as I can tell are the multiple grip panels for adjusting the grip size. The recoil spring was changed to a nested dual spring, but the old Gen1-Gen3 recoil spring/rod was pretty famous for lasting a good while, and the pistol still able to function after the rod broke and flew out the front (after several thousands of rounds). The Gen4 is an improvement in many wyas but reliability is not one I am aware it can claim. My 2 Gen3 and one Gen 2 trade-ins have tens of thousands of rounds through them (from me at least, plus whatever the police dept shot) and I have had zero failures or issues with them. I replace the recoil spring every 4,000 rounds as part of maintenance but they all have original extractors, ejectors, strikers and springs.
Click to expand...
Remember, the subject of this thread is .40 S&W guns. The early Gen 9mm Glock's were just fine, the .40S&W's not so much, especially with lights mounted on the guns. The early 9mm Gen 4's had problems as they shipped with .40S&W recoil spring assemblies which caused ejection issues. Glock fixed that quickly. The brass to the face was an issue with both the Gen 3 and Gen 4 guns of the same era.

There would probably not be a Gen 4 Glock if not for the problems with the .40 S&W guns. The grip back straps and the mag release were just throw-ins since they had to change the frame to fix problems with the .40 S&W guns.

Hilton Yam did an article on the subject a while back on Modern Service Weapons, it's no longer available, but it is quoted in this article.

https://www.military.com/kitup/2013/02/hilton-yam-10-8-performance-glock.html

...the M&P was designed for the .40, with steel chassis for increased rigidity and none of the durability or function issues of the Glock 22.
Click to expand...
He did a follow up article when the Gen 4 guns were released. He then believed the Glock in .40 S&W was now the equal of the M&P and the choice was more personal preference.
 
Last edited:
Proud Southern Son said:
There are some known issues with the gen3 .40 and weapon mounted lights. Supposedly there is no such issue with the gen4. I actually prefer the gen3, and have a model 23, but I don’t put lights on my guns.
Click to expand...

I've had a Glock light and a TLR-1 mounted to my G23s gen3 for several years and shoot them as such regularly. Never had an issue. It seems almost laughable saying the gen4 was supposed to be more reliable than gen3 given all the ejection issues some of the gen4s had. As far as I know the main reason for the gen4 was to introduce the removable grip panels. Most people consider the other changes as faux pax, not an improvement. I have never heard of the reliability issues of the G22 that Hilton Yam mentions, though I respect his knowledge. Hundreds of thousands of .40 glocks have been in use for years and I just find that hard to believe as a general indictment of the platform (gen1-gen3). Maybe I have been super lucky to have a gen2 and gen3 .40 Glocks with zero issues, and none of my friends with them have either. I think some of these "issues" are blown out of proportion considering the number in service (as percentage of those in use).

Do you personally have any experience with gen3 Glock .40 issues or just referencing others?
 
Last edited:
tipoc said:
The HP with a .357 Sig barrel is interesting. What weight spring do you use and how is it doing?
Click to expand...
It's new, so i haven't fired it yet. I have more guns than range time (small kids). Stock 40 spring as far as I know. I may also get a 9mm barrel in the future as well.
 
Pilgrim
My Glock 35 G3 had problems when a TLR-1 tactical light was mounted. One data point, I guess. The G22 I don't use with a light because of these concerns. No issues with it on the G17 which is my bedroom pistol or the G34.

I think the Insight Technology M3 was okay, but it's no longer available...?

M
 
Last edited:
I EDC one of two identical Sig-refurbed p229s which have triggers broken in just perfectly. I have an S&W 4006 and an S&W 4006-CHP which are stashed around the house and several p226s and M&P-pros which normally rock 9mm but have .40 S&W conversions. All of the SIgs were originally .357 Sig and I have .40 bbls and 9mm caliber change kits for them. The long slide M&P pros originally came in .40 but I converted them to 9mm and added carter comps. Also, two Glock 27's which were replaced by the 229s years ago.

DSCF0057_zps289cda31.jpg
 
Glock 27 gen3, 23 gen4, 22 gen3(my retired duty weapon) and (2) 22s gen 4, one is my current duty weapon so it really belongs to the city. My most recent is the sheriff department's trade in sig p226 DAK. I did have failure to feeds with the G22 gen3 with a TLR mounted. the magazines would not feed fast enough and the bullet's nose would get caught on the feed ramp. New 11 coil mag springs all but fixed the issue.
 
“My” gen 4 Glock 22 with Streamlight. In the last decade, I’ve also carried gen 2 and 3 Glock 22’s at work. With the texture and improved recoil spring, the gen 4 is my favorite.

Also have a gen 3 Glock 27, but it doesn’t get any carry time since I got a Shield 9mm a couple years ago.
 

Attachments

  • FAC5D364-1CEF-48A4-93B3-CBA5A4E8C4E0.jpeg
    FAC5D364-1CEF-48A4-93B3-CBA5A4E8C4E0.jpeg
    134.9 KB · Views: 6
I really like the .40 S&W round, if it's in the right pistol. In lighter guns, including Glocks, the recoil is more than I care to have in a pistol. I prefer 9mm for these applications. But for heavier full-size duty guns, the .40 really shines. I personally have a pair of Sig P226 pistols chambered in .40, and they're some of the best shooters I have.

Someone previously asked what's the point of the .40 if you can have a .45. Capacity and ammo cost come to mind. Also, I prefer the feel of the .40 over the .45. I've long heard people talk about the difference between the "snappy" .40 and the "push" of a .45. I think it's bunk being spread by those with a nostalgic affection for the .45. Since I like my .40 P226 pistols so much, I bought a P220 in .45. Except for grip width and the chambering, these pistols are nearly identical. Honestly, compared to the .40 P226, I absolutely hated the way the .45 P220 shot.
 
Highly unscientific, but shooting steel the .45ACP is noticeably louder clang and more force swinging the steel than 9mm. Same with shooting milk jugs of water. The 9mm puts a hole in it, the .45 busts it up. Admittedly, that is from a 1911 versus a S&W Shield (plated 230 gr versus plated 124 gr). What really surprised me is that my 165 gr .40S&W loads were noticeably more vigorous hitting steel than the .45! I totally did not expect that, but it was an impressive difference. Made me question how powerful the .45ACP really is. The 165 gr plated FN is going almost 1100fps versus the 230 gr plate RN going close to 850fps. This was just fully plated bullets on steel not bonded HP in gel test media. But I was impressed.

I know the current rage is to compare the very best bullets in each and of course they are designed to perform to the same expansion and penetration standard so there is little difference in terminal performance, by design. And I do carry Gold Dots or Win PDX ammo in all the calibers. BUT, I also consider that I may not always have quality HP ammo available. I would really like to see gel tests done with FMJ versions of 9mm, .40 and .45ACP using the common bullet types available. I think the flat nose/truncated cone of the .40 would give it an advantage over the pointy 9mm and the round nose .45. Anyway, I enjoy shooting the .40 most of all but try to get in enough practice with 9mm and .45, too.
 
NWPilgrim said:
I've had a Glock light and a TLR-1 mounted to my G23s gen3 for several years and shoot them as such regularly. Never had an issue. It seems almost laughable saying the gen4 was supposed to be more reliable than gen3 given all the ejection issues some of the gen4s had. As far as I know the main reason for the gen4 was to introduce the removable grip panels. Most people consider the other changes as faux pax, not an improvement. I have never heard of the reliability issues of the G22 that Hilton Yam mentions, though I respect his knowledge. Hundreds of thousands of .40 glocks have been in use for years and I just find that hard to believe as a general indictment of the platform (gen1-gen3). Maybe I have been super lucky to have a gen2 and gen3 .40 Glocks with zero issues, and none of my friends with them have either. I think some of these "issues" are blown out of proportion considering the number in service (as percentage of those in use).

Do you personally have any experience with gen3 Glock .40 issues or just referencing others?
Click to expand...

Sorry, been off the forum for a few days. I work for a department that was gen3 .40 for fifteen years. Started seeing some malfunctions with weapon mounted lights on the range at Training and quals years ago. I warned some officers with other agencies who ended up coming back to thank me. It really is a well-known issue. I’m not badmouthing the gun, after all I own and prefer gen3 guns. Mine have never had a wml malfunction because I don’t hang stuff off my guns. Do a google search for “Streamlight Glock malfunctions” and you’ll quickly find a statement Streamlight even issued on the matter.
 
Although I rarely carry them, I have a couple.....from the top and c/wise:
Star 31-P
Shield 40
Glock 27
Keltec P40
Beretta 96

Not shown is an APEX Survival Rifle with barrels for .40 and 10mm.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1399.JPG
    IMG_1399.JPG
    139.6 KB · Views: 10
Proud Southern Son said:
Sorry, been off the forum for a few days. I work for a department that was gen3 .40 for fifteen years. Started seeing some malfunctions with weapon mounted lights on the range at Training and quals years ago. I warned some officers with other agencies who ended up coming back to thank me. It really is a well-known issue. I’m not badmouthing the gun, after all I own and prefer gen3 guns. Mine have never had a wml malfunction because I don’t hang stuff off my guns. Do a google search for “Streamlight Glock malfunctions” and you’ll quickly find a statement Streamlight even issued on the matter.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up. For others who may be interested, here is the notice on Streamlight's site:
https://www.streamlight.com/docs/default-source/product-specific-issues/glockissues.pdf?sfvrsn=2

They state it seems to be individual weapons are affected, and most are reliable (G22, G23, no gen specified), and that it appears to be a magazine issue, i.e. rounds are not fed rapidly enough or correctly. And that the reliability issue occurs with other brand lights including Glock's own lightweight one.

So I will continue to use the TLR-1 as I have since I have zero feed issues with it, and I always practice with the light attached anyway to ensure I test the actual configuration. If I notice any change and the issue occurs I'll have to remove the light and find a different home defense gun. Streamlight says that if the problem occurs, it seems to get worse and is hard to solve. Several years ago I updated the followers in all my Glock mags, and replaced the springs with Wolff. So perhaps that has avoided the problem. Or, I had one of the many that never experience the problem to begin with.
 
I had a CZ 75B Tutone in .40 that never would shoot properly for me. I had an early Gen4 Glock 22 that ejected brass directly back at my face even though I had the ejector replaced with the improved version that supposedly fixed that problem. I had an HK USP 40 that I should have kept, and I’d like to get another one. I still have the SIG P226 in .40 that is a great shooter, and I think I’d go for a Beretta 96FS if I come across a decent used one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Trey Veston
  • Locked
Guns in 9mm not available in .40 S&W that you would buy if they were?
2 3
Replies
62
Views
3K
jjones45
jjones45
A
  • Locked
.40 S&W based on an M9
Replies
5
Views
325
Aaryq
A
Tag
  • Locked
.40 S&W and the HK USP.
Replies
12
Views
818
Bobarino
B
B
  • Locked
which .40 S&W?
Replies
18
Views
665
Legasat
L
S
  • Locked
P226 .40 S&W, what year?
Replies
0
Views
219
Scorpiusdeus
S
Back
Top