9mm is cheaper & performs well, 45 is more proven, why all the agencies going 40S&W??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:
That said, the .40 isn't very much fun to shoot.
Well, that's one vote. As for me, I just love to shoot the 40 in my Sig P239 SAS.
Click to expand...

I find the fotay to be painful. After a 100 or so rounds my elbow just can't take anymore. I have no such problems with either the 9mm or the Hammer of God .45.

Weird I know. I was looking for a heavy forty for a while but I've decided I'd rather have a light 9 for ccw.
 
The .40 is as easy as a 9mm to shoot.

Even my mother (who is 68 and not very big) can shoot 50 rounds of .40 without even getting tired.
And she's fairly accurate...considering her vision.
 
I can tell you why the VERY FIRST PISTOL I BOUGHT WAS A 40... it was back in 2001, and I went to the gun shop...didn't know anything at all about what I was looking at. I asked about glocks. the gun shop owner asked "you ever shot a glock" "nope. never shot anything."

He then went and did a very nice thing....he started giving me information. My eyes started to glaze over and I kept looking at the glocks. He took a glock out, handed it to me, then asked what I thought... I told him I liked it. He said "good, give it back." I was 21 then.... he put the glock back in the case and pulled out a sheet of paper, then asked "Is this for defense or sport?" I told him mostly for fun. He started writing. The first thing he wrote on the paper was 3 calibers. 9mm big, around for 50 yrs, 40s&w little bigger around for 10 yrs, 45acp biggest, combat round for a century.

Then he sent me on my way with some brilliant advice. "Research these three and come back, I'll sell you a pistol." I went home and did some research then came back a few days later, where I found out I was a little too young to buy a pistol. Got a 40s&w Taurus (beretta 92 clone) and I was a happy camper. Research showed that 40cal wasn't all that more expensive than 9mm and had a little more velocity, and many LEO's shot 40cal....that was enough evidence for me to pick that caliber.

If Glock would have marketed better, then the 45GAP would be a very common round.
 
+1 mavracer

Quote:--since 1986 and there are many 9mm loadings today that might have worked to stop platte.

I totally agree! In 21 years bullet technology has gotten much better. I really like my two 9mm- if you ever get a chance try the Smith- MP I have two MP's a 9mm and .40 The MP has turned out to be an awesome gun. I want the MP .45 when they change the mag capacity to 14. If you want to spend less money go with the Taurus 24/7- 9mm this gun has been totally reliable and has a lot of nice features.

The Best to you and Yours!

Frank
 
This is all well and good, but here locally the cops carry .40 glock 22s and those who wish to carry 10mm 20s. It is always fun to watch the local LEOs come out to our gun club to play. The guys shooting the 40s are ecstatic if they keep all rounds on target at twenty five yards. After they all qualify, the guys with the 10mm glock 20s go over to the rifle range and engage targets at a hundred yards and yes, scoring as though they were shot at twenty five yards, they qualify again. I carry 10mm because I don't have to compromise and anyone who thinks the downloaded low powered fotay is comparable to the ten is welcome to come on out and play at our range anytime. I've even got some 40 S&W 180 gr rounds I'll donate as I use them in an aftermarket barrel in my ten for cheap practice to the tune of three or four hundred rounds a week, but when I go back out the club gate, the ten barrel is in place and the original Norma loading of 200gr jhp at over 1200fps is the load I pack.:)
 
The case for the 40...

I've even got some 40 S&W 180 gr rounds I'll donate as I use them in an aftermarket barrel in my ten for cheap practice to the tune of three or four hundred rounds a week,
Click to expand...

This is exactly why most folks get the 40. You can get it pretty cheap compared to the 45, and while more than the 9, it has more power. It is 20-30% cheaper than the 45 for practice ammo or otherwise.

It DOES have more power and weight than the 9mm. It is most likely the equal to or better than the 45 in terms of gunfighting - at least in data of 'one shot stops' it is, and better than the 9. It is reasonably priced, and easy to buy. Now, it is a self licking ice cream cone because as it has been adopted by the LEOs, it is easier to get.

Sure, 10mm is great if you reload, and can spend quite a bit on ammo.
 
I wonder how many posters in this thread have:

1. shot all 3 calibers

2. Shot all 3 calibers from multiple frames, and understand how subjective things like "accuracy" and recoil are when measured by the hand and not with instruments

3. understand that there are liars, damn liars and statisticians

Further posters should state that they meet these 3 requirements before posting.

:)

(oh and the ultimate stopper is 22lr - please add that to the coversation as well)
 
2. Shot all 3 calibers from multiple frames, and understand how subjective things like "accuracy" and recoil are when measured by the hand and not with instruments

The hand would measure the same recoil impulse as the instrument. How that recoil is perceived is a different area of discussion. The recoil impulse would not change between the two all things being equal [ load data from the same guns ].

No matter how you slice it, the 40 in the same platform as the 9 would produce MORE recoil impulse to the hand.

Brownie
 
Having been in law enforcement since the revolver was the norm, and following the "stopping power" and "firepower" debates all this time, I think the .40 has become so dominant due to the fact it's a compromise cartridge, which dimensionally fits the same size envelope as 9mm pistol frames. Police handgun cartridges are political issues, whether it is local government politics or police union politics, and compromise is a big thing in politics. FWIW, I have fired all three cartridges extensively, used all three of them on duty, but have not fired all three of them in the same exact type of weapon, such as, for example, in the 1911, which has been chambered in all three. Each cartridge seems to have its own, well, let's say "personality." I find the .40 to indeed be "snappier" than the other two, IMHO. The .45 ACP may have more total recoil, but the pistol accelerates rearward more gradually, or so it seems to me. Working night shift patrol, I qual at night most of the time, and I miss the dull orange flicker of flame from the .45 that is so kind to my night vision, as the .40 has been my duty load since 2002. I have not read nearly all the posts here, so if I just plowed the same ground as someone else, it was not intentional.
 
It DOES have more power and weight than the 9mm. It is most likely the equal to or better than the 45 in terms of gunfighting - at least in data of 'one shot stops' it is, and better than the 9. It is reasonably priced, and easy to buy. Now, it is a self licking ice cream cone because as it has been adopted by the LEOs, it is easier to get.
Click to expand...

Very interesting that so many folks THINK the 40 has more "POWER" than the 9mm.

For some folks education.

Standard loads.

9mm= 124gr @ 1250fps
40S&W = 180gr @950fps
45acp = 230 @ 850fps

The 9 and 45 are both NATO standards. The 40 is the standard load & velocity as originally published by Remington, Winchester, Federal etal.

Now for you folks that know the math, do the energy numbers.

So much for the myth of the lack of "POWER" in the 9mm. In fact the energy of the 9mm is GREATER than either 45 or 40.

One can mix and match and change those numbers. But lets talk apples and apples, vs apples and oranges. Standard loads.

Otherwise we go back to todays selected bullets, and no caliber has any advantage then any other.

Give it up. If you like the 40 you like it. Don't try to rationalize it. There is no other valid argument except "I believe". Now we are into religion.

I like 45 or 9, doesn't really matter to me. If you "believe" your 40 is better, fine. Just don't blow smoke up my skirt. In the end, there really isn't any difference.

If you still think caliber is important, I you don't understand the question.

Go figure.

Fred
 
Chieftain...

You picked a set of numbers that do service your 'argument'. But, all defense loadings in the 9mm have to go into the +P realm to get close to the 40. Also, the record gunfight numbers for the 40 are better - and maybe not enough to matter. OK - but it is a novel argument to declare the 9mm MORE powerful.
 
Chieftan,

I get what you're saying, but there's a bit more to it. While I'm not condemning any of the cartridges mentioned, I will say that some do things that others don't. For instance, when shooting at some steel targets (the kind that you're trying to knock down), I and several others had issues trying to knock them down with 9mm. Even the 147 grainers were hit and miss. Every .40 and .45 load we used knocked the plates down. 10mm didn't just knock them down, it got a few of them stuck in the dirt.

Secondly, go to the box o' truth.com and see what each does against windshields and what not. The differences are merely a fact, with substantial data to back it up, not a condemnation of a particular caliber. I still like 9mm for serious work. But there ARE differences in what each caliber can or will do. And then, of course, there are different loadings of each. For a person to deny that there are quanitfiable differences is simply incorrect.
 
Why? Pretty simple. You can have 15+1 rounds in an average sized gun, unlike 45 ACP. And you have NICE stopping power with premium .40, even better stopping power than with most 45 ACP even if many have a hard time accepting that.
I like all calibers, 45 ACP is a classic, but 40 S&W is a better compromise with just as much power and a lot more ammo. It is NOT easier to shoot than 45 ACP, anyone that thinks so needs more time with both calibers. Heck, I prefer 357 SIG. :p

FerFAL
 
To be honest, FerFal, I feel that there are more high quality, consistent performing loads in available in .40 than there are in 9mm or .45. But that's just my opinion...not a fact by any means.
 
FerFal,
I second the 357 Sig. I shoot it out of my Glock 22, I have a 6.5 " barrel and a 4" barrel for it. Made by Lone Wolf...

http://208.67.249.201/showthread.php?threadid=716844

I have a 6.5" barrel for my .40 cal and a Glock std barrel that fit the Mdl 22.

I have a Mdl 17L with a 6" barrel and I also have a std slide and barrel that goes on it.

I like to shoot um all, but I now have the 357 Sig with me like American Express.

Good round, I shoot it and have all the makings for reloading up 1500 rounds when I get the time.:cool:

HQ:D
 
It’s still relatively new and as always it takes time to get accepted. Expensive, high pressures, and you need a good platform to shoot it, but on the other hand the bottle neck round feeds more reliably than any other straight wall round ( never had a single FTF, any other 357 SIG shooter had feeding problems out there? ) it’s very accurate, and sending that 125 JHP pill at +1500 FPS (4.5 “ barrel) , you just know the love gets received at the other end. :D
I agree with Brownie, specially on what he said on that PDF article. These days, a 5 or 6 shot wheel gun is more of a BUG and not a main gun. When bad guys start showing up with high capacity autos and attacking in packs, you need all the help you can get, including a lot of ammo in your magazine. 4 or 5 rounds per gunfight was the norm back in the day when high capacity autos weren’t as popular.

FerFAL
 
You picked a set of numbers that do service your 'argument'. But, all defense loadings in the 9mm have to go into the +P realm to get close to the 40. Also, the record gunfight numbers for the 40 are better - and maybe not enough to matter. OK - but it is a novel argument to declare the 9mm MORE powerful.
Click to expand...

Nope. Those are not arbitrary numbers. They are THE STANDARDS for each of the rounds under discussion. Of course there are many other combo's you can mix and match with. That is why I use standards. What do you use?

What record of 40 gunfight numbers are better. Frankly the 40 hasn’t been around that long. I don’t think it is any worse than the daddy of them all the 9mm or the slightly younger 45acp.

Once again, If you can do the math, you know I am stating facts as to the energy figures. Facts, not religious beliefs with arbitrary numbers.

I get what you're saying, but there's a bit more to it. While I'm not condemning any of the cartridges mentioned, I will say that some do things that others don't. For instance, when shooting at some steel targets (the kind that you're trying to knock down), I and several others had issues trying to knock them down with 9mm. Even the 147 grainers were hit and miss. Every .40 and .45 load we used knocked the plates down. 10mm didn't just knock them down, it got a few of them stuck in the dirt.

Secondly, go to the box o' truth.com and see what each does against windshields and what not. The differences are merely a fact, with substantial data to back it up, not a condemnation of a particular caliber. I still like 9mm for serious work. But there ARE differences in what each caliber can or will do. And then, of course, there are different loadings of each. For a person to deny that there are quanitfiable differences is simply incorrect.
Click to expand...

If the purpose of your cartridge is to move steel or solids, heavier rounds will work better. Now reconcile that for 80 years the knock on the 9mm has been over penetration. In fact you will find that in bullet bouncers (bullet proof vests) the 9mm is the toughest for the vest to defeat. In fact during the roaring 30’s the most gun knowledgeable folks carried a cartridge that penetrated the bullet bouncers of the era better than any other. A 9mm that goes by the name of 38super.

My point is if moving steel or for that matter bowling pins is your mission, go with the 45 I do. The 40 will do better than the 9mm too.

AS to the windshield test. I cannot speak for the 45, historically a weak penetrator, but the 9mm with solid copper bullets can get the job done. I frankly don‘t know if that is true of the 45 too. That is one area I believe the 40S&W is superior. For me though, I cannot envision a Home or self defense scenario where I could or would legally shoot through the front windshield of a car.

If your mission is to penetrate the human body, the 9mm does a better job. And has longer than any other fighting handgun cartridge. In fact no greater luminaries than the Late LtCol Cooper and Chuck Taylor admitted the 45 did have problems with penetration.

I have witnessed this problem myself on the battlefield. Now the Jello murderers tell us “penetration” is the key. Well the 9 has that in spades, at least as compared to the 40 and 45 in the human body.

But then your mission is knocking down steel and such. For my CCW weapons, stopping humans is the mission.

Go figure.

Why? Pretty simple. You can have 15+1 rounds in an average sized gun, unlike 45 ACP. And you have NICE stopping power with premium .40, even better stopping power than with most 45 ACP even if many have a hard time accepting that.
Click to expand...

Nope, the 40 has no more or any less stopping power than the 9mm or the 45acp.

I like all calibers, 45 ACP is a classic, but 40 S&W is a better compromise with just as much power and a lot more ammo. It is NOT easier to shoot than 45 ACP, anyone that thinks so needs more time with both calibers. Heck, I prefer 357 SIG
Click to expand...

I disagree as to the 40 being a better compromise. It is no better or worse than the 45acp.

I only have hand guns in: 22, 32, 380, 38spl, 357mag, 38super, 40S&W, 45acp, 45 Colt, 9mm, 357SIG, 44spl, and 44Mag.

So I am sure you have much more time than I do shooting the various calibers.

Ability to shoot any caliber well or poorly comes from the shooter, not the weapon or caliber. Granted there was a reason Cooper had to create a minor category. He knew the 9mm would be the top gun otherwise. And in the end a 9mm did become the top caliber in the open class, 38super pushed to shoot major.

AS to ease of shooting. One of my close shooting buddies thinks the 9mm recoil is to ‘snappy’ compared to his collection of 40S&W Glock’s. He bought a 9mm, to save the price of store bought ammo. He got rid of it. His words “to ‘snappy’ for me.” He is a range Master at one range, and shoots competition several times a week. IDPA, USPSA and Pins.

If I was to starting shooting today vs. the 50 years I have been shooting, I would be using 357SIG. I have several weapons in 357SIG. It just isn't worth the logistics to me, at this time, to change over.

Besides, there is no gain in the stopping power.

Go figure.

Fred
 
See, you all took a look at the wrong 9mm, take a peek at the .38 Super. Now there's a 9mm! A 124 Gn projectile at 1,594?! Hello!

I love caliber wars. :neener:
 
So Chieftan, you are not talking about the 9mm Luger specifically but 9mm rounds in general?

I took this thread to be about the 9mm Luger vs. X and X not .355ish bullets as a family vs. X and X.
 
Doc beat me to it.

1594 FPS? I just googled and the top I could find (in less than two minutes of searching I admit) was 1440 (124gr RNFMJ, 7.2 gr, IMR SR 7625, 1440 fps,).

Still would leave a mark though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
How much more powerful is the .40 over the 9mm?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
11K
Bilt4Comfort
B
S
  • Locked
9mm vs .40 vs .45 Recoil
2
Replies
34
Views
13K
1boredguy
1
W
  • Locked
Why is .40S&W so popular?
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
.357 magnum
3
K
  • Locked
Anyone else not not like the 40S&W?
2 3
Replies
60
Views
2K
StrikeEagle
S
G
  • Locked
Why a Glock 22 over a Glock 17?
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
Stephen A. Camp
S
Back
Top