What's wrong with the 40 S&W??????

[Sheepdog]

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?

[GD2A]

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.

[sdmc530]

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.

[Grouse]

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.

[Caleb]

[Carl in GA]

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.

[BlackKnight]

Originally Posted by Sheepdog

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?

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

[Grouse]

Originally Posted by BlackKnight

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 s, 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. to use each gun specifically, or don't bother carrying it.

[BlackKnight]

Originally Posted by Grouse

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 s, 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. to use each gun specifically, or don't bother carrying it.

Better stated than I. Thanks.

[milkmanjoe]

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.