.40 not so popular?
- Thread starter Nightcrawler
- Start date
- Status
FWIW, I sold my pair of G19's for a G23, figured why not have a more powerful caliber in the same size gun? I had shot it alongside a buddies G23 and found the difference in recoil not enough to discourage me from moving "up". Besides, the family members had difficulty in racking the slide on the auto "house-gun", so it became a revolver.
Well, I'll throw in my .02. I got a .40 for my CCW because it's got a little more uumph than the 9mm and it's cheaper to practice with than the .45. I haven't shot all that many handguns but the recoil isn't all that bad in my Sig P239. It was also very managable in my friends Beretta 96. For what it's worth, I thought the recoil was much worse in the 9mm Walther P99 I shot.
Autolycus
Member
I wanted to get an HK P2000. The difference in capacity between .40 S&W and 9mm was one round. I figured I would take 12 + 1 of .40 S&W versus the 13 + 1 of 9mm. I liked the ballistics of the .40 better and figured I was not losing much in the way of capacity.
If HK imported the 15 round magazines as a standard thing for the HK P2000 in 9mm then I might have gone with that.
I like the .40 and plan to purchase a few more.
If HK imported the 15 round magazines as a standard thing for the HK P2000 in 9mm then I might have gone with that.
I like the .40 and plan to purchase a few more.
fattsgalore
Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2007
- Messages
- 364
Well for one most of the options in 40cal are normally polymer, some people just don't like the thought of plastic guns or these new fangled triggers. Also yes 40 is a bit snappy when compared to 9mm or even 45. I've enjoyed 45's and 9mm more but I haven't given up on the 40. Theres some guns that just shoot it better then others. I hate to use the word better so I'll say more consistent. Glocks and XD's(XD obviuosly the better grip) shoot to similar for me, I need to shoot a 40 Sig or Hk or something before I jump to any conclusions.
I hear that alot, the confounding .40 brass. I've pretty well trained my eyes to distinguish the difference when they're on the ground, from a distance. Also collect my brass not all at one time at the end, but periodically throughout a session makes it easier. But yeah, just picking out .45acp among .22, 9mm, and .45 is much easier than when .40/10 is in the mix. TONS of .40 left out at our range though anyways, so I have to be careful. Seems to be a popular choice.
But yeah, these are the reasons I gravitate toward 9mm and .45acp exclusively in centerfire autos. Nothing wrong w/.40sw at all- and it doesn't seem to me any more fierce of recoil to me, but if I was to downgrade from .45acp to .40sw for the capacity, size, and velocity advantages; I'd just assume go all the way to 9mm and further maximize these advantages. I just see a bigger gap (in terms of penetration and expansion only fwiw) from 40 to 45 than I do from 40 to 9, imo only and ymmv. Then again for others, the fact that it's right in the middle (velocity/bullet weight/capacity) is a positive.
lol at whoever said .40sw depends on what crowd you hang with. Don't let your kids fall into the wrong crowd!
I don't know why it isn't popular with some.
Personally - it is my caliber of choice. All of my guns (excluding rifles of course) are chambered in .40.
I own:
2 Glock 22's
1 Glock 23
1 Glock 27
I will be buying
1 more Glock 27
1 1911 of some sort chambered in .40SW.
Probably a Kahr MK40
Ammo I own:
2,150 rounds of Speer Gold Dot HP 165 grain .40SW
and the rest is .22lr
I own a couple other guns, but they're just .22lr's. I am in need of getting a good hunting rifle.... or I suppose if the going gets tough (ie: terrorists decide to come over here and cause the "blood to run through the streets" as they claim - it could be a sniper rifle.)
Personally - it is my caliber of choice. All of my guns (excluding rifles of course) are chambered in .40.
I own:
2 Glock 22's
1 Glock 23
1 Glock 27
I will be buying
1 more Glock 27
1 1911 of some sort chambered in .40SW.
Probably a Kahr MK40
Ammo I own:
2,150 rounds of Speer Gold Dot HP 165 grain .40SW
and the rest is .22lr
I own a couple other guns, but they're just .22lr's. I am in need of getting a good hunting rifle.... or I suppose if the going gets tough (ie: terrorists decide to come over here and cause the "blood to run through the streets" as they claim - it could be a sniper rifle.)
rbernie
Contributing Member
I like 40S&W. A lot. I think that it does exactly what it's intended to do; provide greater wounding potential than 9mm but still work within a double-stack format suitable for all hand sizes while providing sufficient power for self-defense without being overwhelming in any regard..
Can't ask for much more than that, IMO.
Can't ask for much more than that, IMO.
Marshall
Member
Good caliber!
MD_Willington
Member
I have a 5906, but now that I think of it, I should have also picked up a 4006.
It does recoil snappily, has no affect on my shooting, last .40 I shot was a G22...
I think if I do eventually get a Stoeger Cougar, I will get one in .40 S&W
It does recoil snappily, has no affect on my shooting, last .40 I shot was a G22...
I think if I do eventually get a Stoeger Cougar, I will get one in .40 S&W
Come now, that's not even being honest. Just say "I only like .45ACP" and be done with it. I suppose the "40 haters" also dislike .357 sig for the same reasons ("it's not .45" or "it's new and has no mystique"), despite its ballistic similarity to .357 mag.
How about:
More bullets than .45
Less kick than 10mm
Larger than 9mm
Personally, I like 40S&W for a number of reasons:
1) It's not as expensive as .45ACP
2) the 3 above stated reasons
3) a compromise between the 'snap' of 9mm and the 'push' of .45, allowing for a less jarring experience while shooting than 9mm, and a faster recoil recovery than .45
4) There aren't a whole lot of carryable guns available in .45 that aren't 1911s or entirely too fat. Thus guns like the CZ75 or BHP in .40 come into favor.
Really, if you're used to .45 or 9mm, you'll end up limp-wristing .40. A .40 USP was my first handgun, and I've learned how to shoot it properly and make quick recovery shots. I like the 'twisty snap', and like many of you feel about the slower push of .45, you learn to let your body work "with" the recoil and not against it, working out a subconscious response to the recoil.
Not as many bullets as a 9mm
Not as fast as a 10mm
Not as fat and heavy as a .45
I agree.
I've shot the .40 and I'm not a fan. I like NATO calibers. 9mm, .38, .357, .45.
I don't really like the 10mm either.
Personal preferance. nothing wrong if YOU like the .40, I just don't.
I'm going out to buy a Glock 26 now.
Not as fast as a 10mm
Not as fat and heavy as a .45
I agree.
I've shot the .40 and I'm not a fan. I like NATO calibers. 9mm, .38, .357, .45.
I don't really like the 10mm either.
Personal preferance. nothing wrong if YOU like the .40, I just don't.
I'm going out to buy a Glock 26 now.
.40 cheaper than .45?
A couple of you have stated that the .40 is cheaper than the .45.
According to The Armed Citizen Solution Handbook, Ammo Comparison Chart, the Avg Cost/Round of a .40 is $0.36 and the .45 is $0.24.
Download at: http://www.usconcealedcarry.com/public/460.cfm
Richard
A couple of you have stated that the .40 is cheaper than the .45.
According to The Armed Citizen Solution Handbook, Ammo Comparison Chart, the Avg Cost/Round of a .40 is $0.36 and the .45 is $0.24.
Download at: http://www.usconcealedcarry.com/public/460.cfm
Richard
chaim
Member
In auto calibers the .40 is my favorite all purpose caliber, but I think the "big three" .45, .40 and 9mm, are all "good enough" and each shines in its own particular application.
For some time I didn't like it. I felt that 9mm was good enough and if you needed more you should just get a .45. I had a CZ 40B which I never warmed up to because I wasn't into the caliber.
Then, a few years ago I wanted a smaller pistol. I decided on the Taurus Milennium Pro which I could have had in any of the three calibers. I wanted a little more power in a carry gun (I can't carry in MD but I sometimes carry out of state) than 9mm would give and I wanted more flexibility in ammo choice (in 9mm some loadings are just fine, and others aren't good performers while in .40 and .45 most are at least decent). I was a little concerned about .45ACP in a short barrel- in a short barrel they just don't get enough velocity and that seriously effects performance. The .40 seemed a good compromise out of a short barrel.
Shooting the .40 out of the PT140 M. Pro was very comfortable (to me, a friend feels it is too uncomfortable, but he isn't really a shooter). I really liked the gun and caliber combination. I started researching the caliber more to see what ammo I wanted to use and the more I read the more it seemed to stack up well against .45ACP in any length barrel. It can be chambered in 9mm sized guns so it is good for CCW duty. In a service sized pistol it holds more rounds than .45ACP with more power (and ammo flexibility) than 9mm. It is cheaper to shoot in practice than .45ACP, and all three are similar in price in good premium defensive ammo.
I ended up liking it enough to buy a SIG 229 in .40S&W and when I get a 239 (and several other guns available in more than one caliber) it will be in .40S&W.
I think the 9mm shines in the smaller autos like the Kahr PM9. It is available in .40S&W but I think that small a gun would be too much in .40. Due to the lowest prices for practice ammo I also think it is ideal for a shooter with only one gun- it is capable for defense, and relatively cheap to shoot.
I think .45 is the best auto caliber for home defense. It is powerful (as far as handguns go), recoil is fairly low, overpenatration issues are lower than 9mm or .40S&W and it is quieter than either. It is also the most proper caliber for a 1911 which is one of my favorite platforms.
I think due to size of the platforms, capacity, and power the .40 is a best all around caliber. Almost the .357mag of auto calibers.
For some time I didn't like it. I felt that 9mm was good enough and if you needed more you should just get a .45. I had a CZ 40B which I never warmed up to because I wasn't into the caliber.
Then, a few years ago I wanted a smaller pistol. I decided on the Taurus Milennium Pro which I could have had in any of the three calibers. I wanted a little more power in a carry gun (I can't carry in MD but I sometimes carry out of state) than 9mm would give and I wanted more flexibility in ammo choice (in 9mm some loadings are just fine, and others aren't good performers while in .40 and .45 most are at least decent). I was a little concerned about .45ACP in a short barrel- in a short barrel they just don't get enough velocity and that seriously effects performance. The .40 seemed a good compromise out of a short barrel.
Shooting the .40 out of the PT140 M. Pro was very comfortable (to me, a friend feels it is too uncomfortable, but he isn't really a shooter). I really liked the gun and caliber combination. I started researching the caliber more to see what ammo I wanted to use and the more I read the more it seemed to stack up well against .45ACP in any length barrel. It can be chambered in 9mm sized guns so it is good for CCW duty. In a service sized pistol it holds more rounds than .45ACP with more power (and ammo flexibility) than 9mm. It is cheaper to shoot in practice than .45ACP, and all three are similar in price in good premium defensive ammo.
I ended up liking it enough to buy a SIG 229 in .40S&W and when I get a 239 (and several other guns available in more than one caliber) it will be in .40S&W.
I think the 9mm shines in the smaller autos like the Kahr PM9. It is available in .40S&W but I think that small a gun would be too much in .40. Due to the lowest prices for practice ammo I also think it is ideal for a shooter with only one gun- it is capable for defense, and relatively cheap to shoot.
I think .45 is the best auto caliber for home defense. It is powerful (as far as handguns go), recoil is fairly low, overpenatration issues are lower than 9mm or .40S&W and it is quieter than either. It is also the most proper caliber for a 1911 which is one of my favorite platforms.
I think due to size of the platforms, capacity, and power the .40 is a best all around caliber. Almost the .357mag of auto calibers.
Greg8098
Member
Look at my signature and just take a look at all the .40's that I own . I used to have a Glock 22 and absolutely hated it. The .40 in my opinion is overhyped. One thing I can say is that when somebody "necked" the .40 case down to except a 9mm bullet, true magic was born on that day { 357 SIG }, the true .357 magnum of the autoloader calibers.
. I used to have a Glock 22 and absolutely hated it. The .40 in my opinion is overhyped. One thing I can say is that when somebody "necked" the .40 case down to except a 9mm bullet, true magic was born on that day { 357 SIG }, the true .357 magnum of the autoloader calibers.Marshall
Member
Dangit, we got us Mustangs and we got us Station Wagons, we don't need no Mid Sized cars, they just a compromise and an answer to a question that ain't been asked.
If you're a handgun shooter, the recoil of a 40 shouldn't be an issue, unless you're a "recoil sensitive" (politically correct) person. I can't imagine someone selling a 40 S&W handgun because it's recoil is just to much for them to handle. Maybe they're shooting hot loads in sub-compact guns, I dunno? I've shot about all calibers in handguns and the 40 S&W is very fine cartridge that has a lot of positive attributes.
If you're a handgun shooter, the recoil of a 40 shouldn't be an issue, unless you're a "recoil sensitive" (politically correct) person. I can't imagine someone selling a 40 S&W handgun because it's recoil is just to much for them to handle. Maybe they're shooting hot loads in sub-compact guns, I dunno? I've shot about all calibers in handguns and the 40 S&W is very fine cartridge that has a lot of positive attributes.
[email protected]
member
Great Question!
I don`t understand either. I actually have a thread on this topic or at least similiar to it. The fact is that the .40 is a better choice. It`s got everything. As far as the recoil goes, I have a 9mm, a .45 and a .40 and the differences are slight but not enough to complain about. The way that I look at it is , "why would anyone not like the .40?" I mean come on, this caliber is nearly perfect in all aspects. I guess you`ll always have the 9mm lovers and the .45`s or nothing guys but as far as I`m concerned, the .40 is the perfect carry weapon. Like I`ve stated, I have one of each and after my personal testing, the forty is the weapon that`s in my holster and strapped to my side.
Check out my thread and give me your thoughts if you`d like to.
I don`t understand either. I actually have a thread on this topic or at least similiar to it. The fact is that the .40 is a better choice. It`s got everything. As far as the recoil goes, I have a 9mm, a .45 and a .40 and the differences are slight but not enough to complain about. The way that I look at it is , "why would anyone not like the .40?" I mean come on, this caliber is nearly perfect in all aspects. I guess you`ll always have the 9mm lovers and the .45`s or nothing guys but as far as I`m concerned, the .40 is the perfect carry weapon. Like I`ve stated, I have one of each and after my personal testing, the forty is the weapon that`s in my holster and strapped to my side.
Check out my thread and give me your thoughts if you`d like to.
quickcanary
Member
Caimlas said:
When did shooting a 9mm become a "jarring experience?"
That's the first time I've ever heard anyone describe it that way, and it certainly hasn't been my experience with the exception of very small 9mm guns like the Kel-Tec and a 9mm derringer that a friend owned. If you can shoot a .40, you certainly shouldn't be bothered with a 9mm. The .40 is a more violent round, period.I have also seen a lot of guys say that they feel the .45 allows for faster recovery between shots than the .40, but hey...whatever works for you! I'm glad you like the caliber; if more people owned the 10mm, prices for the round would go down and I could justify the purchase of a G20.
Archer1945
Member
I happen to have both .40 S&W and .45acp and like both of them. My .45s are a P220 and an XD45 Compact 5". The .40, which is strapped on right now, is a P226. For those who think a .40 is a bit weaker than a .45, would you like to volunteer to stand in front of me and tell me which hits harder? If you are still able to talk that is.
Btw, as far as grip sizes go both the P220 and P226 have wider and longer grips than my XD45. Go figure.
Btw, as far as grip sizes go both the P220 and P226 have wider and longer grips than my XD45. Go figure.
76shuvlinoff
Member
well it's popular with me
Liked the glock 23, hated the glock 27, loved the sigpro 2340, liked the xd40 service and the xd45 but decided the XD40 subcompact was a keeper, added the pearce pinky mag extension and it's a different gun, "snap" is nothing to me now.. (btw just got and installed the 9mm conversion for the sc, today) really enjoyable shooting 9s out of it but it's back to .40 for everyday.
...and next to the bed is a 1911 in nothing less than .45.
Guess they're all popular with me.....
Liked the glock 23, hated the glock 27, loved the sigpro 2340, liked the xd40 service and the xd45 but decided the XD40 subcompact was a keeper, added the pearce pinky mag extension and it's a different gun, "snap" is nothing to me now.. (btw just got and installed the 9mm conversion for the sc, today) really enjoyable shooting 9s out of it but it's back to .40 for everyday.
...and next to the bed is a 1911 in nothing less than .45.
Guess they're all popular with me.....
- Status
