40 cal vs 9mm: Best for Self Defense?

I will also add, some people think handguns suck and as a result of that, they lump their effectiveness together so that one doesn't really shine over the other. I do agree that they'll all work if you put the bullet in the right spot and they can all fail just as easily. It's further compounded because most premium JHP bullets, no matter 9mm, .40 or .45 are all designed to perform about the same, they're meant to pass certain tests, that's it, so it's not a good example of each cartridges potential. The .40 and .45 have more room for growth than the 9mm does, sure they can all benefit from bullet design but the .40 and .45 have room to grow, the 9mm doesn't.

Huntolive said:

Thanks,
So since I now have a sub compact in 9mm and a compact in 40 cal, looks like I picked right.
Good to know 40cals are goin cheap used ti new homes.

So top 3 Rounds (ammo) under 75cents a Round in boxes of 50 for CC???
for both 9mm and 40 cal???

Click to expand...

Pretty much all manufacturers use FBI protocol as a benchmark for testing. My suggestion would be to go to WWW.sgammo.com and get whatever big name LE ammo is priced right

I have both, I shoot both and I love both. One of my 9s is 17 round, my 40 is 15 rounds... big deal.

It's interesting how much things have changed in 15 years or so. Back then, the 9mm was commonly derided on gun boards for being inadequate (or only marginally acceptable, at best) as a defense round. It was that attitude (and some real-life events) that gave rise to the .40 S&W while keeping the .45 ACP as popular as ever. Now, whether it's because of advanced bullet designs or just the march of time, 9mm is widely accepted as a viable defense round and is often regarded as the near-equal to the .40 and .45. Yes, you still get the "1911 or nothing" crowd and the folks who insist that their pistol caliber must start with a "4," but that's mostly just a blustering minority. Personally, I've always viewed all three cartridges on a sliding scale, but without that much real difference between any of them. Moving from .355 to .455 caliber, the smallest offers less recoil and more rounds, while the largest gives the most energy and stopping power with fewer rounds. The .40 just splits the difference between them. Just go with whichever you like best and can afford to shoot.

Huntolive said:

So top 3 Rounds (ammo) under 75cents a Round in boxes of 50 for CC???
for both 9mm and 40 cal???

Click to expand...

If you have to shoot someone once, twice, or more times to save your life, does the cost of the ammo matter?

"Shooting that meth head that tried to rape my kid only cost me $2.25!"

Check out SG ammo. They have good self defense ammo selections at reasonable prices, and they keep a good flow of stock coming in. If they are out today, sign up for an email notification. It's your life on the line. Make an informed decision and don't skimp.

The average citizen not in involved law enforcement, military and related occupations, you are more likely to be involved in a traffic accident than a shooting incident. Thus the difference in the colossal caliber debate between as examples 45ACP - 40S&W - 9X19mm and etcetera-etcetera much talked and written about make your choice and the force be with you.

Bigger, deeper holes bleed more and bleed faster than smaller, shallow holes no matter WHERE YOU POKE THEM. There is no place in a human body where you can poke a hole and then make it bigger and deeper and it will bleed LESS. At least until it quits completely.

Huntolive said:

Hello and I know some of you well groan when you see this thread title as I imagine it's old hat and a long existing debate for many of you. However I just got my first 9 mm; I've been shooting 40 cal 4 about a decade as well as revolvers in 357.

While I do not mind The Recoil at all from 40 cal and I'm used to shooting heavy revolvers like 454 Casull occasionally for hunting, so many folks out there have nine mm that I figured I'd get one at least for concealed carry. It just seems like 9 mm ammo would be around more both in stores and in the field with the possible exception of Rushes on ammo.

So here's the inevitable question
Which is better and why 9 mm or 40 cal?

Click to expand...

I personally LIKE .40 S&W more than the 9 mm. more mass at the same velocity and can have the same bullet selection. Momentum is where it's at baby! I started with .45 acp then 10 mm, then .357 sig then .40 S&W and now more and more of my pistols are being converted to 9mm.

I still use the .40 S&W for home defense in pistols that are stashed around the house. My ammo count is about 30% .40 S&W and 60 % 9mm.

So if I like the .40 more why the switch to the 9?

well, all of the 'goodies' come out first or even exclusively in 9mm. My three favorites right now are the Rx red dot sights, the Sig phosphate coating in their Mk25 and m11A1 pistols and their p365. Could they offer similar in .40 ? sure they could but they're putting their money where the market is and I can't blame them.

Now, these goodies are primarily used outside the home: The red dots for competition and carry. The phosphate coatings for carry and field use and the p365 (if I can get one) for carry as well. Hence the .40's (mostly 3rd gen S&Ws have been relegated to guarding drawers and other cubbyholes.

Flip a coin and call it a day

j

Choose what you want, but I have gone from .45 to .40 to 9mm and now I'm all .40. The .40 is a powerful handgun caliber that doesn't need to be +p to be as effective as it is. I had a Gen 3 G23 which I found to be...........snappy, I now have all Gen 4 G23's and the difference is noticeable, I shoot the Gen 4's better.
Set a 9mm cartridge next to a .40 and you will see the size difference, bigger bullets tend to work better imo.

In the past I’d say bigger calibers in the winter, such as a 40 S&W or 45 ACP. But I don’t believe you’re undergunned if you have a 9 mm, 40 S&W or 45 ACP. 9 mm lends itself to capacity and smaller size. 9 mm is also cheaper by a long shot. It has a decent variety of grain weights from the Common 115g to the subsonic 158gr/147gr rounds.

The 40 S&W in 180gr, I did not realize was actually, still subsonic, though. I’m guessing more LEO used the faster 165 gr bullets. I like the 40 S&W, especially in 180 gr, because it can still be Suppressed. I don’t find it to be a feisty round, either.

The 45 ACP can be Suppressed, even with +P ammunition, though. Mind you, I’ve only shot 230 and 210 gr bullets. Never tried the smaller grain weights.

I reload all sorts of calibers: 45 ACP, 357 Magnum , 9mm, 44 Magnum , 454 Casull , 460 S&W and 500 Magnum . For subsonic 9mm, I prefer 158 gr out of a Carbine so I buy factory. For competing with 9 mm , I like 147 gr. I prefer factory, also.

As for a semiautomatic, many 40 S&W have conversions to 357 Sig and 9 mm .

If you can afford to shoot high volumes of 40 S&W or 45 ACP, then that is awesome.

I think it is like asking what is the better fruit an apple or orange it comes down to your taste, one is a 9mm and one is a
10mm not a huge difference

I am not a “caliber guy” so to speak. I really believe they all have pros and cons vs each other but those largely fall into the statistical noise especially as far as common self defense goes.

That being said if 9mm was wholly inadequate I doubt it would be going on 120 some years of world wide service.

Point is shoot what you enjoy and gives you confidence. At the end of the day in the super unlikely event you get into a serious social interaction it will not be a movie shootout but a a fast, quick and dirty encounter where the reality is you want all parties to break contact and most folks will.

Any martial caliber that YOU CAN SHOOT will likely be as good as the next and any bad luck will get you dead no matter how good you are. Violence is a crap shoot in the best of circumstances as even a blind squirrel finds a nut good guy and bad. Be competent, be mentally prepared for a fight, not a gunfight, a fight period and pray you never have to be there. Software is FAR more important than hardware, always has been, always will. The Miami shootout was a failure or tactics, combined with bad luck, combined with the stastically rare encounter with a couple of badass folks who were in the FIGHT. It wasn’t a 9mm / .38 failure. Your choice of caliber is so far down the important list as to be statistically insignificant.

The biggest caliber advantages come in the FMJ varieties. I would much prefer .40 or .45 in ball/flat nosed ammo. In modern defensive ammo ..... ehh whatever I can get.

One thing I like about .40 is generally the practice ammo is the same weight and overall power/recoil feel as the common SD ammo.

All that being said I still chuckle at 9mm is just like .45........set to stun.

Seriously there's no reason to pay that much for SD ammo go to www.sgammo.com they have Winchester over run FBI 40 180gr bonded and LE boxes of Federal HST and Winchester Ranger 9mm all for well under 50 cents a round. I prefer 147 in short barrels it loses less velocity. I use 124 +p in 4" or longer although I still don't think it'll matter much.

minutemen1776 said:

It's interesting how much things have changed in 15 years or so. Back then, the 9mm was commonly derided on gun boards for being inadequate (or only marginally acceptable, at best) as a defense round. It was that attitude (and some real-life events) that gave rise to the .40 S&W while keeping the .45 ACP as popular as ever. Now, whether it's because of advanced bullet designs or just the march of time, 9mm is widely accepted as a viable defense round and is often regarded as the near-equal to the .40 and .45. Yes, you still get the "1911 or nothing" crowd and the folks who insist that their pistol caliber must start with a "4," but that's mostly just a blustering minority. Personally, I've always viewed all three cartridges on a sliding scale, but without that much real difference between any of them. Moving from .355 to .455 caliber, the smallest offers less recoil and more rounds, while the largest gives the most energy and stopping power with fewer rounds. The .40 just splits the difference between them. Just go with whichever you like best and can afford to shoot.

Click to expand...

The standard pressure/service Bbl.147 gr. 9mm/180 gr. .40/230 gr. .45 ACP loads are all subsonic, and share approximately the same Sectional Density (0.167/0.161/0.162).

Both the 180 gr. .40/230 gr. .45 ACP have 400 Lb-ft of muzzle energy, the 147 gr. 9mm does not.

"One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?..."






GR

Yes but which one kills them deader?

Sebastian said:

Yes but which one kills them deader?

Click to expand...

After a decade or two of field results, we will have a better idea.
(and then probably switch back to the .40/.45 ACP, like we did the last time)






GR

Sebastian said:

Yes but which one kills them deader?

Click to expand...

Definitely. .40. Lol

My EDC is a Glock 27 ..stoked with
180gr HST

Sebastian said:

Yes but which one kills them deader?

Click to expand...

That's a twofold dumb statement,first making them dead isn't the goal it's to get them to stop trying to make you dead. Second doing so faster is pretty much universally accepted as a good idea so levels of how fast they expire are very important.
It's why we don't just carry 22s coated with a toxin, that would have a much higher mortality rate but having the BG die a week after me and my family isn't a good goal.

mavracer said:

That's a twofold dumb statement,first making them dead isn't the goal it's to get them to stop trying to make you dead. Second doing so faster is pretty much universally accepted as a good idea so levels of how fast they expire are very important.
It's why we don't just carry 22s coated with a toxin, that would have a much higher mortality rate but having the BG die a week after me and my family isn't a good goal.

Click to expand...

Wait you mean this whole time I could have been using 22's coated in toxins?

Garandimal said:

After a decade or two of field results, we will have a better idea.
(and then probably switch back to the .40/.45 ACP, like we did the last time)






GR

Click to expand...

Isnt the decade or two of field results the very data used by the FBI to switch to the 9mm?

Huntolive said:

Thanks,

so IF I were to go up to $1 plus per round, what ammo would Truly be Worth paying that premium for?
In both 9mm and 40 cal. SD?

It seems though that perfectly effective ammo can be had for under 60 cents a round. What rounds Under 70 cents per round are still a safe bet?

Is it advisable to shoot 147 grn bullets out of a subcompact like a Sig. p365?
Or would 124 grn be better?

Is +P Necessary for 9mm SD?

I always shoot 180 grns in 40 cal.

Click to expand...

I have a 9mm subcompact and only shoot 115gr ammo because it’s cheapest. If I felt the need for heavier bullet I would just go up to .40.

CC I’ve been using UMC 115gr JHP (100 rounds for $30. at Walmart) And Fiocchi 115gr jhp (50 for $22.).

I like to shoot my carry ammo some when practicing and can only do that with the cheaper JHP ammmo.