9mm or .40S&W for IDPA/USPSA Production?

[MrBorland]

I've been shooting wheelguns in competition, and it's soon time to play with pistols a bit, just for a little mental break. When I do, It'll be for SSP/ESP in IDPA and production in USPSA, and will likely pick up an M&P Pro. The question is 9mm or .40? I reload, so factory ammo isn't part of the equation.

9mm "pros" include much abundant brass, and it's cheaper to reload. And even though I'd be reloading, in a pinch, factory 9mm feels quite a bit softer than factory .40. Are 9mm pistols generally any more or less reliable than .40? I've not heard of any differences, but if there are, that'd certainly play into the decision.

Plenty of top shooters shoot 9mm, but even so, I've leaning toward .40 for the bigger holes (more likely to touch the perf on shots that're otherwise oh-so close to an "A" or -0), and loaded for competition, it'd be pretty soft shooting. Eventually I could pick up a double stack 1911 in .40 and shoot USPSA Limited as well (though that'd be loaded to make major pf). Range pickup brass isn't as abundant as 9mm, but I still see plenty of it.

Any thoughts from those who've played with both? Does it even matter?

 

[9mmepiphany]

I've had this discussion with friends who've made the same discision.

I don't reload, so 9mm was the obvious choice for me...I just finished the last of my PMP stash that I got for $79/1K rds

I've been told that guys are loading 165gr hollow based bullets that are softer recoiling than any 9mm load that will make the power floor. I believe him as his G23 was softer recoiling than my G19 loaded with 115gr Blaser (measured 113.8) which just clocked 1165,1119,1134 (1098 required) at our state match.

The M&P will be inherently more reliable in .40, because their extractor is optimized for it's case/rim size. Apex Tactical Specialties offers their Failure Resistant Extractor, which is optimized for the 9mm

 

[Uncle Richard]

IMHO 9mm is a better choice due to cheaper reloading costs, and less recoil than a 40sw. Also, 9mm is more widely used in IDPA.

Personally, I use a 40sw XD because that's what I carry concealed. Some of my friends have tighter groups and sight recovery time is a little better with 9mm.

Using 40sw forces me to be better. It's working, just takes more practice and be more focused. Also, I load my 40sw ammo just above the miniumum power factor required.

 

[twofifty]

If you shoot 40 in Production div., you will mostly be shooting against Nines. You will not be awarded Major scores even if you are shooting Major PF.

The guys with the 9MMs who have tuned their load & springs to their gun will find their gun returns to Point of Aim more quickly than your 40sw. That means tighter shot intervals for guys shooting Minor PF.

Between competitors who are equally skilled at planning and moving through a stage, those extra fractions of a second can add up.

As to the scoring advantage, the bigger bullet can also play against you if it crosses the line into a no-shoot target.

Lots to consider.

 

[westhope]

A few of the very good shooters, IDPA / IPSC Production, in my area handload the 40 SW to just above minor power factor. (Same as a factory 9 mm load.) They claim that they can recover faster with the minor power factor 40 SW than with a 9 mm.

They tune their 40 SW gun to run at that power factor. They don't shoot major power factor in that gun.

Most shooters (including me), shoot the M&P in 9 mm.

Most like the longer 5 inch barrel in the M&P for competition.

The 9 mm will be cheaper to reload.

 

[Blue Thunder]

As others have said, shoot 9MM or downloaded 40S&W. I only shoot Major in 40S&W in B Class Limited so I can have 19+1 in the G35 and keep the load at 170PF, which shoots really soft. I also use 200GR FP bullets for the 40S&W, which makes things softer with less boom which you will have a larger powder charge with a lighter bullet to make the same PF. I have a ton of 9MM and 40S&W brass so if I shoot IDPA I can shoot either.

 

[waktasz]

I only shoot 40 in IDPA, Production or Limited. I tailor my loads accordingly. .40 minor is not a disadvantage at all, other than cost.

I made M in both sports with a .40 Glock.

 

[ny32182]

My thoughts:

Brass availability: At IDPA, obviously 9 is much more common. At Uspsa it probably depends on your local divisional demographics, but around here we have a lot of .40 major shooters in Limited, and finding 9mm brass is a lot harder since it is mixed in with so much .40. I go to a local IDPA, shoot 80 rounds. Go to a local Uspsa, shoot 120-150 rounds. I always come home with more brass from the IDPA matches since it is easier to locate on the ground.

Cost: 9mm is a little cheaper, but really, not THAT much. Within 2-3c a round. Even at 20k a year it isn't that big of a difference in the grand scheme of things.

147 9mm vs 180gr 40 minor recoil: I can barely tell a difference. I suppose the .40 is a little bit slower push. But it is nowhere near as prounounced as the difference, between, say, 115/124 and 147 9mm. At least that is my perception.

Bullet hole size: Sometimes the .40 will get you a few extra points, and sometimes it will get you an extra no-shoot. I call it a wash.

Ultimately I've stuck with 9mm due to cost since that turns out to be the top of the list of things that would impact me between the two. If I was shooting Limited major on a regular basis I would probably standardize on .40 for everything just to simplify logistics (avoid switching the press around frequently). All you should have to do for a Prod load vs a Limited load is change the powder and/or charge level.

On the M&P: I just crossed 30k on mine and feel like I have a pretty good idea of what keeps them running, if you ever want some opinions. Personally I've never had a problem with the extractor, and am on my original factory one. There are also plenty of internet reports that the .40 Pro is more accurate than the 9 Pro. I've never measured between the two, and of course every gun is different. I can't show you an accuracy difference offhand between my M&P and my old 34. I know my M&P with the stock barrel with 30k through it (and stock sights) can shoot no D's offhand at 50 yards on a Uspsa classic ("turtle") target.

 

[jim243]

Between competitors who are equally skilled at planning and moving through a stage, those extra fractions of a second can add up.

In IDPA you are better off shooting a 9 mm because of faster recovery times. If shooting USPSA then Major vs Minor comes into play and a 40 would be better for score.

Depends on what you are doing.
Jim

 

[ny32182]

Production is all minor scoring regardless, so you might as well shoot minor ammo. That means the OP is debating between 9mm, and .40 minor.

 

[9mmepiphany]

In IDPA you are better off shooting a 9 mm because of faster recovery times

That means the OP is debating between 9mm, and .40 minor.

This is the key point.

When .40 is loaded to minor, shot to shot recovery is the same, if not better, than the 9mm

 

[Sauer Grapes]

I don't think it matters much since you reload. If the new gun will be your only .40, why bother. If your already loading for .40, I would say .40 is fine. Then there's always the 9mm conversion barrel option. Of course 9mm M&P mags are more rare than a 3 dollar bill right now. That is something to consider in the immediate future.

I pretty much do what waktasz is doing. Taylor the .40 to what I'm shooting. Now if I could figure out how to get to M class....lol. {not happening}

 

[MrBorland]

Thanks for the input folks. Some good food for thought. Just a follow-up on a few points:

Yes, I'd be shooting 9mm or .40 to minor PF. Going with .40, I'd have the gear to load to major, but if I were to do that, it'd only to compete in USPSA Limited, where major PF is an option.

Bullet hole size: Yes, sometimes it works the wrong way. It did for me once when I decided to use semi-wadcutters at the LAMR - the nice clean border made it clearer I touched the NT's perf. At any rate, it seems to me more common that the round doesn't quite touch the higher-scoring ring. Considering the relative penalties involved, though, I'll concede it might be a wash.

Mag availability: A local bud of mine just brought this to my attention - that 9mm mags are tough to find nowadays. Who'dathunk?

Reloading cost: I'm thinking I'd go with a relatively heavy 9mm bullet (147gr) or a relatively light .40 (165gr), so the cost difference is about a penny a round. 'Course, that's theoretical - once I start testing loads, I might prefer something else. I currently use Clay's for me revolver loads, so to keep things simple, it's a bonus if the load in question can be loaded with a similar charge of Clay's. To that end, it seems .40 is a bit more amenable.

Anyhow, it seems clear there's not a big and clear benefit to one over the other, but the small things may add up. I'm still mulling it over, as one inner voice tells me ".40", and another tells me to "keep it simple, don't over think it, and just go with the 9".