What's wrong with the 40 S&W??????
 

People are always dissing the 40S&W. I want to know what is wrong with it. It outperforms the 9mm poodle shooter. Why does everyone seem to hate it?

I had one for about a minute back in the day, a Sig, and I just hated firing it. Nines are fine and I love .45's but just never enjoyed firing a .40 ... or .357 Sig for that matter.

Its for people that can't handle the 10mm.....its also known as the 10mm Lite.

Really just joking, nothing "wrong" with the 40 but its just underwhelming compaired to the 45 so I think it gets a bad wrap....

Kind of like guys who like mopeds until their buddy with a harley sees them on it then its not cool anymore......but what do I know.

I am glad a person chooses any firearm to protect themselves of any size or caliber. My wife likes the .380 and she is good with it..I am great with that.
I have a office staff lady who uses a .22....some of the guys give her crap, that is messed up good for her....would never put a person down for a choice in arming themselves.

I carried my HK USP in 40 for nearly 15 years. I have 48k through it or there abouts. I did very well with it last weekend in my plate shoots. I did very well shooting rope at rope nights in seattle. Long story short, it is a damn fine caliber. It is a viable choice between 9 and 45. When it comes down to it, i can shoot it as well as my 38, my 9, my 357, my 45 acp. Some people can't because the don't practice enough, or well enough. They blame the caliber.

When it comes to caliber discussions. I have yet to find anyone who is willing to be shot with a gun of any caliber. 22lr-50bmg. I have asked many times but no takers.

Neener

There's nothing wrong with it. My wife's favorite range gun is a Beretta PX4 in .40. It's a pretty good shooter, if you can get past the DA/SA action and those big, stupid, slide-mounted safeties that look like bat ears. But the .40 part is cool.

I'll use the word (if it is one).... the 40 is "Snappier" in my hands,and that is something that I just don't enjoy. The 9mm "launches" out of the barrel, the 45 "pushes" back against me, but the 40 "snaps"... if that makes any sense.

Its a feeling. That's all. Trutch is, when I've shot the 40sw, I"ve shot it as well as any other handgun.

DaFadda

Because it's 20lbs of crap in a 1lb bag. It's like putting a V8 in a Volkswagen.
So it's becomes unmanageable in my opinion. If I can't have a .45 I'll take a 9 any day.
The 9 got a bad rep because of the military and their use of ball rounds. With today's technology on hollow points the differences are negligible.
I'd rather hit with a nine then miss with a .40.
Now mind you I took Top Gun at the academy with. .40 (P229). So I can shoot anything, but overall I dislike it and sold all my .40's except for the 229.
Just my 2 cents. Take it for what it's worth.
Now mind

I think a lot of the issue stems with putting the 40 in a compact package. It is not a caliber to put in a sub 4" barreled gun. It should honestly be in a full size 4"-5" gun.

One of the big pushes when 40 was first making a name for its self with law enforcement was grip size and gun size for female and male police officers that had smaller hands. The industry responded with smaller guns. Being a higher pressure cartridge than 9 and 45 it gave more felt recoil in the hand. Which lead to a fair number of bad shooters. Yeah you can add in the departments training and Qual standards. To the discussion, the cost of ammo etc. The fact comes down to it, High pressure rounds in small guns suck to shoot. They take time, training and dedication. Things that police departments often have to put in other areas.

Shoot a 40 out of a 1911 gov, or even out a sig 226, HK USP, or CZ 75 and i find it to be an enjoyable caliber to shoot. When you get down to the 1911 officers, emp, khar, mini glocks, 239, etc then it is not so enjoyable and for new shooters it can be down right challenging. Bad shooters can develop habits that become unbelievably hard to get rid of.


Just like i do not recommend a 1911 for a first hand gun purchase, I don't often recommend a 40. Hell I almost always recommend a 22lr, either a MKIII, BM Camper or smith 617. Better training, cheaper ammo, less felt recoil, and certainly more fun to learn on.

I am not going to blame the cartridge, but the actions taken by individual shooters leading up to owning a gun of any caliber. The fact is the 40 is just as accurate, just as effective, and just as capable as either a .38, 9mm, 45acp, 357 round. It comes down to training, effort and time spent with ones firearm. When people swap guns every 3 weeks, because they did not shoot the last one well, then i loose all sympathy. Train to use each gun specifically, or don't bother carrying it.

Better stated than I. Thanks.

To me there is no need for it. It can be hard to find even in good times, in volume. It ain't cheap. It is "snappy" as hell, as already stated. And in all honesty, a 9mm Winchester Ranger T will perform very close to even a .45. Modern ballistics have come a long way. I stick with 9mm or .45, even though I want a 10mm 1911. Wanting one doesn't have to be sensible. We all get that. It's an "odd" caliber with no real calling that what already exists doesn't do.

Well, I think it doesn't get much respect partly because it's pretty much an orphan round. Other than police work everything is pretty covered by the 9mm, 45ACP and the 10mm.

Another problem is it's reputation in a lot of circles. It started out with a 155 at 950fps Which was respectable. Glock chambered their guns for it based on that round. Then they, police and the ammo manufacturers, tried to make it something it wasn't, a 45ACP. Before long that 155 was doing 1250 or so. This caused problems in the Glock chambers, Chrystalization and longitudinal stres-cracks which led to Ka-Booms. The chambers couldn't take the pressure. Plus the casehead is unsupported 360 degrees for about 1/8th inch. Too much pressure.

All in all, an answer to a question that wasn't asked.

I would say 10mm has a much smaller following. It think it would be fair to say 9mm, 45, and .38/.357 fill load out of defensive handgun calibers. rounds like 44mag, 22lr, finish out the defensive/practice rounds.

What is left is the more niche rounds like .380 .40/10mm, 41 mag, 327 mag, 50 AE, 454 casull, 45LC, .460 and 500 are superfluous and really not in the mainstream. Yes they produce guns, and ammo to small degrees. Never will you see it on the scale of even .38/357.

During the ammo crisis after the school shooting. I scored 40sw for 12 bucks per 50 and 10mm for 17.95 per 50. All when 9mm was going for 30 per fifty and 45acp for 35 per 50 all for 115grn rn, and 230grn lrn. another one was 9x18 mak, i picked up 1000 rounds for 179 shipped

In that alone i see some validity to have an odd ball caliber or three. It allows me to shoot, and practice when price spikes would lower my range visits.

I would like to see a break down of ammo manufacture by caliber across the US, the cross reference that with production numbers of guns by caliber. It would be an interesting way to see the metrics on what is and is not mainstream in the US.

Hi I'm Scott and I am a 10mm aholic! I am also an odd ball. My personal opinion is that the 40 S&W with hot rounds is a very useable SD round. I don't carry one, I do shoot them for competition along with 38 Supers. IMHO it is a much better performer than the 9mm. I find the 9mm to "snappy" for what you get. That said i like bigger guns and most of the 9's I shoot or have shot are smaller. Thanks for the feedback. It just seemed that whenever the 40 S&W comes up lot's of people really bash them and I thought maybe I was missing something.

I think Grouse was right on track. Whatever you are going to carry is what you should train with I don't get, the different gun every week thing.

Personally the 40 is my favorite round. I carry a shield in a 40 and a g23 in a 40. I also compete with an m&p in a 40. The m&p does have less felt recoil than the g23 and is actually pleasant to fire. Waiting to pick up my trojan in a 40 and cant wait to get my hands on a new ria in 40. Having recently started to dabble with 38 super and 10mm id have to say the 40 isnt that hard to manage

I have owned 3 of Glock's .40sw, the 22,23 and 27. I have never shot .40 from anything but a Glock. I like the caliber but Glocks sit in my safe. I just cannot get into Glock, so it is not really the .40 as much as the platform.

I think the 9, .40 and .45 are all going to get the job done, if the shooter does their part. For me the .40 and .45 are easer to load into magazines and my aging eyes can see the hole left in the target more easily. Honestly, my opinion of a dream carry 1911 would be an alloy frame 9mm (Commander or Officer) with a double stack 15 round magazine. You'ed get the 1911 platform with the fire power of a wonder-nine. Hi-Powers are cool but I don't care for the safety and DA/SA trigger.

Nothing wrong with 9, .40 or .45. I don't want to be on the receiving end of any of them. Just my $0.02.

When I first started with my agency they did not issue you a weapon and could carry anything you purchased. That was ok at first until I started getting involved in the qualifications for our office. People were buying and trying to qualify with guns they had no business owning let alone qualifying with.
Then, at one point our agency started issuing weapons, but they weren't consistent. Some got G23's, 27's, 19's or 26's.
So finally it was decided that they were going to purchase and issue one weapon.
I was on the deciding panel. I argued for G19 and we got it. The caliber for me was one of the deciding factors, on top of cost, support, so forth and so on.
Since we're not a uniformed patrol agency where we work 24 hours a day I felt that the caliber and handgun would suffice.
Of course I got the grumblings from a few as you can never satisfy everyone, but tough cojones.
Once they were purchased and issued I immediately saw and improvement in qualifying scores.

Hi Scott, welcome to the group......I have been a member for about a year now. funny

Smart decision. We had were allowed to carry any gun we purchased also. This was my first pistol, After long search I ended up with the HK USP. Most picked the 17 or 19 glock. I chose the hk because i could pick it up and shoot it more accurately than the Glock. I picked 40 because i could shot it more accurately than the 9 and 45 with it. Looking back, there was a lot of extra training i had to do to be as competent with my gun as the other officers were with their glocks. Ultimately i was better.

I watched as several agencies allow officers to pick over various glock sizes, Beretta sizes, Sig sizes, then offering different caliber choices. I saw many officers become overwhelmed. At least in my experience not many were shooters, or really interested in the firearms aspect. Allowing for all those choices did nothing to aid training, standardize training or help officers. I would say it made it worse for officers.

I am a big fan of duty guns all being the same and having interchangeable grips. Allows for common training, and caliber, yet allows for individual fit.

I like the .40, can shiot it well. But, the 9 I can shoot better and quicker with better accuracy. Shot bith this past weekend in a Glock and an HK. It would not bother me to pick up either and be confident with my choice. Which do I prefer? The 9, only because there are more rounds in the mag than the .40.

I carry a Px4 in .40. I also have a M&P9 that I shoot as well. When my wife and I are at the range, she usually shoots the 9 and I shoot the .40, but I do find I'm more accurate with the 9, but that may be because the M&P has a few extra inches, so my sight picture seems to work better.

When I shoot without sights, my accuracy is about the same.

Since a gunfight will, unless freakish, last less than a dozen rounds, round count isn't my biggest concern. I have carried Glock 17's back to the Gen 1's, which I still have. though I always preferred a 1911, because I can follow up much more accurately with the heavier gun. I am a bit purist, and and 1911 in .40 cal wouldn't feel right, and feel is real big to me.
So, then, why not .45 GAP?.....cause it is another orphan that was produced without merit. Just is not a need for anything between .45 and 9mm.
Keep it simple, stock your ammo in quantity, practice often, and remember, if ya hit 'em in the gut their natural reaction is to drop what is in their hands.

How about giving us a little Bio in the New Member Introduction Forum so's we can welcome you aboard?

Practice is key.

Absolutely agreed.....in rifles I shoot .308...period....my kids have a bunch of .22 rifles, I do not shoot them.
In pistols I practice with the G17 as it allows me to pull off 20 plus rounds(extended mags) to try to stay on target. I create fatigue with high cap mags. And some of you that have met me have seen or shot one of my G17's that have the grip reduced to a 1911 shape. Two of them are going to Lane Owens in Texas next month for re-shaping. I try to keep my grip the same.
My SD pistol choice has gone back to a 1911 in .45 full time.
I stock .45, 9mm, 22, .308 and 12 gauge.
I am fairly stupid, so I need the KISS principle. (Keep It Simple, Stupid)

Don't tell, Doug is one too. He is still in denial.:D

We will get him out of the closet yet!

[QUOTE=Snipersnest;73846]How about giving us a little Bio in the New Member Introduction Forum so's we can welcome you aboard?[
will do

You'll have to pry his boyfriend off first :D