Does the .40 S&W Just Need More Time?

[General Geoff]

the thread is about the 40s&w if +p isn't offered then you can't use it plain and simple.

That's fine and dandy. Even hot loaded standard .40S&W beats most +P rated .45ACP in muzzle energy. You'd really have to narrow the parameters down to specific bullet weights, though. .45ACP standard is 230 grains, everyone knows that. What's the standard for .40S&W? 165gr? 180gr? Otherwise you just keep getting lighter and lighter slugs that go faster and faster, which will yield more and more energy. .45ACP inherently has a disadvantage here because it yields a larger diameter bullet than the .40S&W.

 

[CYANIDEGENOCIDE]

I agree with you 100% the 40 in almost every case has more muzzle energy than a 45. There is more the making an effective cartridge than just muzzle energy. The 40 has proven itself a capable performer but I would never own one. I think the 45 is better suited to fast incapacitation, and I think the 9mm is more economical, easier to plink with, and better for follow up shots. The 40 has no place in my heart or my safe.

 

[General Geoff]

I think the .45 is a great cartridge if you're making a supressed pistol or carbine, but otherwise I prefer higher muzzle velocities (this is why I carry a 10mm ). If I didn't carry 10mm, I'd probably carry a .357 Sig.

 

[buzz_knox]

Actually I have been told by several Special Agents involved in the adoption of the 40 by the FBI that a specific sub-group of special agents couldn't handle the recoil of the 10mm in the chosen handgun, and had problems qualifying, so the PC gurus couldn't let this sub-group look bad, so they had the .40 S&W made.

I think this is a mish mash of several events that are only tangentially related.

The FBI wanted a 10mm that met certain performance guidelines. When loaded to those specs, the 10mm wasn't as hot as the Norma round had been. There was some discussion that the lite 10mm and the full load 10mm would be treated like .38 and .357 Mag: some SAs would get permission to use the hot load, while others would stick with .38. As it turned out, the hot 10mm didn't enter service.

As all this percolated, the 1076s were introduced and were a bit heavy and bulky for some (I've heard the 1076 wasn't liked by some because it ruined the line of their Brooks Brothers suits). The 1076 also had some issues once it got into the field. These were remedied by S&W, but by then the damage was done.

All the while, S&W had been looking at making a round that matched the ballistics of the 10mm load the FBI requested, but more efficiently, so as to fit in smaller weapons. The .40 was born, and rejected by the FBI (which had moved back to 9mm) until the Glock 22/23 was brought into service. The adoption of the Glock was the result of another weird twist, as the FBI had previously rejected the Glock when it first came out.

When the Glock was introduced into FBI service, it was loaded with a mid-range .40 load, apparently out of recoil concerns and in the belief that bullet design advances had rendered the reduced velocity less of an issue. That apparently has gone by the wayside as the new FBI round is apparently loaded to achieve higher velocities.

Some female agents/trainees did have issues with FBI service weapons, but I believe that was at a time when revolvers were issues, as the 1076 hadn't been introduced.

 

[kcshooter]

I think that the days of the .45ACP are dwindling.

Really?? I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.

 

[Z71]

When the .40S&W first came out, ammo was hard to find. Lots of guns around, but ammo was in short supply.

Made it hard for me as a LEO at that time to get in any range time with the caliber I carried. I also had some severe issues with my "new" Sigma .40 S&W.

I soon ditched the Sigma, forgot about the .40, and went with a Browning Hi-Power in 9mm.

Now the .40 ammo is everywhere, guns all over the place, and seems as if the round has made it. Popular enough to be a useful caliber.

I own a .40 now, after swearing off the caliber in the mid 1990's. It's a fine caliber in my opinion. Maybe not perfect for everybody, but it is an easy caliber to shoot, better ballistics than many mainstay handgun calibers, and a wide variety of good guns in the chambering.

I think it's here to stay.

 

[cougar1717]

This has been one of the best Ford/Chevy, Boxers/Briefs, Dale Jr./Jeff Gordon threads that I have read in a long time.

I shoot. It's fun. Life is too short to get caught up in caliber arguments.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Seems to me that discussions of velocities and energies are almost meaningless if sectional density is ignored. 165 grain .40s and .45s are just not the same thing.

Actually, we're comparing 185 grain .45s with 165 grain .40s. And sectional density in pistol bullets -- especially light bullets like these -- is like virginity amongst prostitutes -- there ain't any.

 

[edrice]

This has been one of the best Ford/Chevy, Boxers/Briefs, Dale Jr./Jeff Gordon threads that I have read in a long time.

Yeah, this has been a good one.

But I still haven't found out who won the good-shot/bad-shot battles...

Ed

 

[Mike Franklin]

When the FBI did field tests with an issue 10 mm there were agents, some male most female, who couldn't hold the thick gripped guns the 10 mm came in. I was working in Houston at the time and they brought this up to me, among others. The FBI wanted every agent to be carrying the same gun. S&W figured out that they could make a short 10 mm with the same specs as the 10 mm but didn't want to call it 'short'. Thus the .40 S&W.
I think most complaints about the .40 actually are about the guns. Smaller and lighter than a .45 ACP. Most old shooters didn't like'm.
Because Glock made very good sales deals to LEO agencies the gun took off. History will either bury or sustain the .40. In my book it's not much different than other calibers but who cares?

 

[elChupacabra!]

Yeah I agree with the sentiments above - this thread has been quite an interesting read about the comparative ballistics of .40S&W and .45ACP

Of course nothing that hasn't been discussed before, ad nauseum, so I wonder if it won't get locked.... (perhaps my stab at an IBTL? I love IBTLing )

Anyway, to address the issue, I have a SIGPRO SP2022 in 9mm, an HKP2000 in .40S&W, and a 1911 in .45ACP. I love all three, I think they all have specific strengths that make each ideal for the intended use.

The 9mm SIG stays in the car. With one extra mag, that means I've got 30 rounds of ammunition in case something happens when I'm on the other end of town and may have some difficulty getting home to arm up. The SA/DA trigger is both immediately accessible for carjacking defense etc. while also providing a nice, light SA pull if there's time. The gun is large enough to make shooting it very comfortable indeed.

The .40S&W HK is my carry gun when I'm not at work / can carry. It's small enough to conceal, potent as a defensive caliber, and has a decent capacity - 12 rounds before reloading. I like that. If I had to draw my gun and defend my life in very close interpersonal combat, I like the controllability of this gun (with a VERY ergonomic grip for my hands and low bore axis) versus the potent round, maybe even more than the SIG in 9mm. The LEM trigger may not be ideal for accuracy work but it's great as a CCW.

The .45ACP 1911 is my nightstand gun. It's heavy, big, long sight radius, and has a limited magazine capacity of awesome, powerful rounds. The SAO trigger is the best of any handgun I have, making rapid, accurate shooting the very best. For answering a crashing down front door - or fighting my way to the shotgun or rifle - I think it's tops.

So I like the .40S&W. It provides variety. It fits a very nice niche in my spectrum of defensive weapons. Plus, if the world ends, I've got a handgun in one of the most popular US calibers, which some may feel is important. Heck, I've got a gun in the 3 most popular US autoloader calibers, even better!

The .45ACP will always be loved because of the 1911. The 9mm will always be loved (by some at least) because of price and capacity. For those interested in diversity or compromise, the .40S&W fills a definite niche.

Also, regarding costs, I find that, if you reload, they really don't cost that much different at all - just a few cents difference for bullets, and the powder and primers are virtually the same, if you've already got the brass

 

[vanilla_gorilla]

Comparing a +P rated .45ACP to .40S&W is unfair, you should be comparing it to 10mm Auto. That being the case, find me any .45ACP +P load that will yield 750+ ft-lbs of muzzle energy.

I disagree. The argument was thrown up that a high-pressure round (the .40) is superior to the much lower pressure round. By bringing a slightly higher pressure round into the fray (the +P at 23K PSI), one has more than equalized the "advantange" of the .40.

Changing the rules in the middle of the game doesn't work.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I disagree. The argument was thrown up that a high-pressure round (the .40) is superior to the much lower pressure round. By bringing a slightly higher pressure round into the fray (the +P at 23K PSI), one has more than equalized the "advantange" of the .40.

Changing the rules in the middle of the game doesn't work.

But if we can rechamber the .40 S&W to 10mm, then I can switch out the recoil spring on my M1911 and shoot .45 Super loads -- a 185 grain bullet at 1300 fps will duplicate 10mm loads in terms of energy.

 

[elChupacabra!]

Yeah, I think this one may have devolved to the point that I am now going to firmly state my opinion:

IBTL

There. I said it!

 

[OregonJohnny]

Ok, if this thread keeps heading toward a caliber war, or discussion of ballistic data, I'm sure it will get locked. I'll simplify/alter my original question so we can get back on track.

Do you think the .40 S&W will continue to grow in popularity to the point that it becomes the next .45 ACP or 9mm? In other words, will it get adopted by the military or make one of those other 2 rounds obsolete? I agree with one poster who said that the .40 poses a bigger threat to the 9mm than to the .45, but I think the 9mm will be around for a long time to come. Hopefully, so will the .40 S&W.

 

[harbinger_j]

For those of us who didn't already have a 9mm or .45, or a strong emotional attachment to one, the .40 is a great caliber.
As the popularity of the .40 grows there will be less and less haters just give it some more time.

 

[JesseL]

I think 9mm, .45 ACP, and .40 S&W are all going to be around longer than most of us.

It's a big market and all these rounds are very viable and bring different advantages to the table.

I doubt the military will ever adopt the .40, but I do think the standard FMJ .40 S&W loads would perform better than the FMJ 9mm and .45 used by the military, simply because the of that nice big meplat.

 

[Cliff47]

Shoot the caliber that you do the best with in the way of shot groupings. Placement is, and always has been king.

You cannot get totally away from recoil (except .22, which has none, or minimal). However, you can manage the recoil. There are devices on the market to perform this function, and make the act of shooting your preferred platform more enjoyable.

 

[mpmarty]

It sure would suck if all we had to choose from was .22 long rifle, .45 ACP, .30-06, and 12 Guage.

Well, that's one opinion anyway. I feel quite comfortable with those and ONLY those calibers / gauges. 40 Short and Weak is just an excuse to "custom market" to a non existent need like the 45gap. The 45acp will launch a 185 gr slug at over a thousand fps within its much lower SAAMI pressure limit. The 40 S&W launches a lighter bullet, slower and at considerably higher chamber pressures. What we need is a 10mm super not a 40 shortandweak.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Well, we'd still need a .22 centerfire for varmits (mine is .22 Hornet) and I'd miss my .357 and .45 Colt.

 

[azredhawk44]

I don't think the .40 will be truly loved by anyone until we get some kids who grow up shooting grand-dad's old police issue Glock 22 or similar stories.

There isn't really a "classic" .40 handgun like there is for the 9mm and .45acp.

1911, BHP, Luger, Colt 1917, Glock 17, Beretta 92. These are classics and mainstays. (Ugh, I just put a Glock on a list of classics. )

Is there a classic handgun in .40 that isn't just a classic 9 with a different barrel?

 

[zxcvbob]

Is there a classic handgun in .40 that isn't just a classic 9 with a different barrel?

Bren-Ten?

 

[JesseL]

It sure would suck if all we had to choose from was .22 long rifle, .45 ACP, .30-06, and 12 Guage.

Well, that's one opinion anyway. I feel quite comfortable with those and ONLY those calibers / gauges. 40 Short and Weak is just an excuse to "custom market" to a non existent need like the 45gap. The 45acp will launch a 185 gr slug at over a thousand fps within its much lower SAAMI pressure limit. The 40 S&W launches a lighter bullet, slower and at considerably higher chamber pressures. What we need is a 10mm super not a 40 shortandweak.

And yet the .40 S&W has been a resounding success in the market.

You can shoehorn all your shooting needs into 4 chamberings that's great, but that isn't a convincing argument that those chamberings should be all anybody gets to choose or that anybody who chooses anything else is wrong.

The .45 ACP obviously has the potential to be ballistically superior to the .40 S&W, but if that was all that mattered wouldn't we all be packing S&W .500 Magnums?

 

[tipoc]

I agree with one poster who said that the .40 poses a bigger threat to the 9mm than to the .45, but I think the 9mm will be around for a long time to come. Hopefully, so will the .40 S&W

I agree!

tipoc

 

[easyg]

Well, that's one opinion anyway. I feel quite comfortable with those and ONLY those calibers / gauges. 40 Short and Weak is just an excuse to "custom market" to a non existent need like the 45gap. The 45acp will launch a 185 gr slug at over a thousand fps within its much lower SAAMI pressure limit. The 40 S&W launches a lighter bullet, slower and at considerably higher chamber pressures. What we need is a 10mm super not a 40 shortandweak.

It's not just about bullet performance, there are other factors to consider....
Like magazine capacity and grip diameter.
I love the .45ACP caliber, but I want a pistol with a higher magazine capacity and with a smaller grip.
I've yet to see that in a .45ACP.
You can either have a high mag capacity, and a fat grip.
Or a comfortable grip, but a low magazine capacity.

But with the .40 I can have .45ACP equivalent performance AND have a higher magazine capacity AND have it all in a pistol that I can get my hand around.

What's not to like about that?