Has the the quality of today's 9mm bullets made the .40 cal obsolete?

[montgomery381]

Hornady Critical Defense ammo is some of the best and most readily available self defense ammo out there. The 9mm out of a 4" barrel has 332 ft. lbs. of energy at the muzzle while the .40 has 506 ft. lbs. of energy out of a 3" barrel (per Hornady's website). The .40 is still more powerful and therefore still has its place. And it has advantages and disadvantages just like anything.

 

[Robert101]

The 40 is my choice for self defense. I prefer the bullet weight, increased metplant area, and energy advantages of this caliber over the 9MM. The only reason I don't go further and carry the 45 automatic is because I believe the 40 is better at penetrating barriers.

 

[missionmild]

Could it be the less the difference, the more strenuous the argument? Well, that's what forums are for.

 

[mokin]

Welcome missionmild.

This thread has been an interesting read. Short answer on my thoughts is no. There are some things a larger bullet will always be able to better than a small one. To expand on my thoughts though, I think metalugical/technological advancements have gone a long way to leveling the field so to speak. I have always been indifferent about the .40 S&W. I have shot S&Ws, HKs and XDs chambered in .40 and was ok with them. They were more snappy than my 9s but, not too different from my "compact" Glock 29 (unholy bastard caliber 10mm Auto) loaded with 175 grain Winchester Silvertips.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

.40 and .45 bullets simply perform better against automotive windshield glass than 9mm bullets of the same sectional density because the heavier bullets possess greater momentum.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Obsolete, no. Gives the shooter more choices, though. A 9mm can be turbo-charged but it's still a 9mm. Reminds me of the term Volumetric Efficiency. A bigger hole is a bigger hole. However, in reality the difference between 9mm and 40 S&W in real world situations is pretty minute. With that said, I'd rather have the extra couple of rounds in the same size frame.

 

[Elm Creek Smith]

Well, I got good news today, my agency has reconsidered. They are taking back the Glock 22 and letting me carry the S&W 686!

.357 Magnum RULES!

Carry on.

ECS

 

[jmstevens2]

I remember being told that the 9mm is here and the .45 ACP is obsolete. back in the 80's in the Army. Funny a lot of SOCOM went back to the .45 ACP. I think you should get a .40 if you want, if not get something else. It's not MY gun. we could argue that the .50 AE or mag is better, so let's switch. It is moot what the numbers say, most will choose on simple preference. All will work, used correctly, some faster, some not.

 

[jackpinesavages]

No, the prices of the materials used to make bullets has made most of all obsolete except the 9mm and the .22. The reloaders are just about the only common men left who can afford to shoot 10mm/40/45 on a regular basis.

While I'm glad I started reloading, I'm even more grateful I found that smokin deal on a S&W 22A and grabbed it!

As bullet quality and tech. has surged so has barrel/steel construction. Our agency issues the G19. People are generally more accurate with the 9s in multi round shoots, and the ammo. is cheaper. Win win scenario.

 

[Super Sneaky Steve]

I have no need for a .40 automatic.

.357 Magnum RULES!

Truer words never spoken!

 

[sm]

Just me, but I always thought and still do, the .40 was a answer to a non-existent problem.

The late Stephen Camp and I agreed on the idea, JMB had it correct. One does a BHP or 1911.

Then I got, and still get ticked at the fact the BHP was made in .40.
<expletives>

For some time now, my dealie when 9mm vs .40 vs 45 ACP comes up is to suggest a person get a .357.
(Mr. Camp laughed, but agreed with me ) Especially in regard to the part, folks will thank me after about the second range session, and they realize they ain't bending over to pick up the brass.

If'n you gonna do something else in a semi, do a 9X23. I have a thing for Commander sized ones myself.

I didn't get this old by being totally stupid. *snicker*

Steve

 

[Lucky Derby]

Elm Creek Smith-Glad you are getting to carry the gun you are most comfortable with.
I carry a Colt Trooper .357 myself.

The debate rages on. In S-As I shoot 9mm and .45. Yes I have shot the .40, even owned a sig P229 in .40. Just didn't get it. Lower capacity than a 9mm, smaller bullet than a .45, more recoil than either.

If you must have real power in a semi-auto, get a Coonan.
As far as .357 Sig-they just reinvented .38 Super.
10mm is great, as long as you handload. Modern factory loads are just a sorry shadow of what they should be.

 

[m2steven]

I'm fortunate enough to be able to shoot a lot of steel and lots of breakable targets, I shoot out in the middle of nowhere. There is quite a difference between a standard 9mm and a standard 40 cal round in terms of impact violence and simple ability to break stuff. If you shoot a variety of targets you should have no problem telling which bullet breaks stuff better.

If you move to a good +P 9mm round, you start getting 40 caliber performance. The difference is obvious but against a human target I would think marginal. A 9mm slug from a +P round seems to be more accurate than a standard 40 cal round when shooting a target behind automobile windshield glass. Both rounds break the glass well, but the 9mm seems to keep it's vector better than the 40.

If you go to a 357 Sig round you have a whole different animal and I consider it a bit better than 40 cal. Real world performance is hard to come by because hundreds of thousands of people get shot by rifles, relatively few by pistols.

Having said that, I actually really like the 40 caliber round. It's generally cheaper than the 45 and it's nearly the same size (check them out together - they are both really large pistol bullets). The 40 is almost as good as the 45 when shooting bowling pins (stopping power???) and you get several more per magazine over the 45.

If you have chosen a 9mm as your carry/personal defense pistol, just practice as much as possible should the need arise. If you choose a good +P round for carry, you'll be well served. I generally always carry a 9mm or a hot-loaded 380 or 38 snubby. I trust 9mm. Easier followup shots, more rounds, cheaper practice. I really enjoy shooting so I have trouble "dissing" any particular round.

 

[ReloaderEd]

I don't own a 40 or a 9mm but have fired quite a few and reloaded for both.
I still can't get the article years ago out of my mind about the "meham in miami" concerning the two agents who hit a drug addict at least several times in the chest with a 9mm and he still killed them both with a 223 rifle. The pro 9 guy said the felon was dead but just didn't know it. They tried the 148 gr. bullet in the nine and it was like shooting a 38 s&w. That sort of convinced me I did not want a 9mm. The 40 shoots heavier bullets and I think it is a better caliber if you just gotta defend yourself and shoot somebody. The 45 I believe is the best of the bunch. Easy to buy and obtain, has good heavy bullets of good design . As a police officer though, I would have a 12GA handy, very handy. I tried a Glock 45GAP recently and it was an impressive round, shorter than the ACP used small pistol primers and held up well with the ACP. Rounds are expensive however.
Also, the firearms Manufactures are in the business of selling guns and making money. I am convinced they will down play any caliber to sell more guns expecially to Police Departments. I carry the equivalient of a Colt Comander 45ACP with 3 1/2 inch barrel. It is totally dependable, will carry 8 rounds if need be and I have confidence in it. Be safe

 

[1SOW]

The popularity of the 9mm rd will continue to drive efforts of the cartridge companies to capitalize on it. Even if it's only +P+ hype.

 

[jackpinesavages]

Mayhem in Miami shoot involved the bank robber taking a 9mm through his armpit, and the lead stopped just an inch short of his heart, leaving the bad guy to continue fighting. Practice head shots on human silhouettes.

 

[MikeNice]

Reloader look up officer Soulis. He shot a perp 17 times center mass with a .40. The guy kept right on fighting.

 

[Pilot]

I never bought into .40 anyway, so for me it doesn't matter. The Hicap mag capacity ban helped the .40 because people wanted to maximize the 10 round limit in a 9MM framed pistol. That was never an issue for me as I had, or bought plenty of hicap (standard capacity to me) 9MM mags.

I believe .40 was a lot of marketing hype for gun makers to sell new guns to people in another caliber. Nothing wrong with the .40, but its not enough of a difference for me.

 

[Kiln]

I'm in with the guys that prefer the .40 but I'll immediately admit bias as I've owned three .40 S&W pistols and while I have fired several 9 mils I've never owned one. I will say that if I get another centerfire pistol anytime soon I might grab an XD9 to train with since the ammo cost is so much lower. 250 rounds of 9mm is about $50. The same amount of .40 runs closer to $70. I'd be willing to wager that this is probably the largest factor in your department's decision to change calibers.

I prefer the .40 because it makes a bigger hole and doesn't sacrifice too much capacity in comparison to the 9mm...normally in two guns of the same make one chambered for 9 and the other for .40, there are only two more rounds of 9mm to a magazine.

Edit: I'd also like to say that I'd feel okay with a .32 acp or 9x18 pistol for defense anyways. With modern ammo they all perform pretty well. Some just do a little better than others.

 

[beatledog7]

Choice is good. That's one reason why the .40 S&W has been successful.

I mentioned earlier that if one argues because we have .9mm and .45 we don't need .40, that same person might argue that because we have blondes and brunettes we don't need redheads. I'll stick by that; I like redheads just fine.

If the .40 is a caliber that filled a non-existent need, how come so many hobbyists, LE agencies, competitive shooters, CCW-ers, and HD advocates have adopted it?

If tomorrow I invent the .42 "Beatle" semiautomatic that arguably does nothing any better than any existing caliber, and over the next few years I sell a few million .42 guns and countless rounds of .42 ammo and reloading gear and components, then my new caliber unquestionably filled a need.

 

[rcjohnson]

The 40 S&W was brought out because all the arguments between the 9mm Luger and 45 ACP had been settled and we needed something new to argue about at our LGS

If I were a police officer and from a pure "power" perspective, I'd probably PROBABLY pick the 40 over the 9 just because I think (don't know) the 40 would be better for car doors, glass, etc. On the other hand as a civi I might not want so much penetration?

From a control standpoint, a 40 is a bit more snappy, but nothing I can't handle with 200 pounds of... uh, muscle . But, what the 40 adds in power takes away from some control especially for smaller framed folks or those who don't have as much range time as they'd like. Which includes me. Trade offs.

I'll say this, when I shoot 9mm +P that tries to approach the 40, it is pretty darn snappy too, and I lose some control. So what does that really gain me?

What do I actually have / carry? 9mm or 45. I just don't want to mess with an additional caliber, and I reload so don't want more components rolling around my workbench.

Am I quite satisfied at the end of the day with my comfort level not having a 40 S&W? Absolutely, and I wouldn't blink any harder in a "gunfight" if I were up against someone with a 40. Oh, and no, I have never had to be in a gunfight and I am CERTAIN I would blink a hell of a lot no matter what I was being shot at with.

 

[o Unforgiven o]

No, for the simple reason that whatever advancements have been made in bullet design that allowed the 9mm to become better are also present in .40 cal.

True, the bullet quality for all bullets has gotten better, however, is there a point where the 9mm and .40 cal are now so close in performance that the added rounds for the 9mm is worth it?

So whatever performance increase with modern bullets 9mm has achieved, it will be paralleled by .40 so the performance gap will still be there.

The above is also from my first post.

 

[Casefull]

40 is better and 10mm is even better. 9mm is better than 380...but if I have a very good bullet in the 380 and pack in the powder, why, it is the equivilant of a weak 9mm load. Same argument, same load of ----. The more I shoot 40 the more I like it. Less recoil than my 45 and 10mm, shoots flatter than the 45, and with handloads it is close to 10mm in velocity and free brass is laying around everywhere.

 

[KenW.]

I have XDs in 45compact, 40XDm3.8 compact, and 9mm subcompact. I stay qualified on each, but carry the 9 most as a detective. On my road patrol shift I'll carry the 45.

The 9 allows for quicker follow-ups. If I can place three-four controlled hits into a target in the same time I can get two from a 45, I feel I'm ahead of the problem

That being said, I hope to pick up a XD40 subcompact in a trade tomorrow. One caliber is as good as the other providing you place the holes where they need to be.

As far as a badguy absorbing 17 COM hits, ain't the miracle of modern illicit pharmacuticals really something? After the first couple try the head shot.

 

[LightningMan]

I juat had by chance today, get to shoot two exact same pistols only difference was caliber. I went to the range today with my M&P .40c and by chance the only other fellow there had one in a 9mm. We each talked about how much we liked our own guns, but we tried each others pistol out, to see/feel the difference. After shooting his, I felt there was little difference in recoil (only slightly more for the .40) and I shot them both equally as well. FYI. LM