Kodiak Cowboy
Custom
In the name of clarity, I was speaking in metaphors and was not referring to the size of my alleged safe or safes.
Roger that!
Does 40S&W Really Suck?
- Thread starter Annihilator
- Start date
Roger that!deadduck357
Custom
The 40 is a good round. Caliber fits right in the middle of 9x19 and .45. More power than 9mm, more capacity than 45.
ca survivor
Operator
most of my hand guns are in .40 or .45 ACP, just recently I started to get 9mm guns, actually that is all they have around my area at the gun shops I go to.
I only have one .40 S&W. It's an XDS I bought just because I was curious about the round. I know the 'big explosion' in firearms for sale for this round was because of the FBI and other law enforcement switching to it.
That being said, that article is mostly crap. It's a guy who hates the round proving to himself that he was right for hating it.
Oh, and that he's a glock fanboi (disclaimer: I don't like glocks).
Yes, the 9mm has less recoil. Surprise. Especially when your 9mm has a way heavier magazine because it's larger capacity than the 40S&W is. Pistol weight has always played a factor in recoil. That's why old 1911's and 92FS were popular: Heavy guns, less recoil.
Go shoot 44spl out of a revolver (bulldog pup) if you want to experience lots of recoil.
People should use whatever they're comfortable with. I've got a couple of 38spls that I still use and enjoy. They'll do the job just as well for me as any of the other carry pieces I have. Yes, there are times when bigger, heavier. bullets are called for. But that tends to be for hunting and not EDC.
So does the .40 S&W suck? Not any more, or any less, than anything else out there. The craftsman doesn't blame his tools.
That being said, that article is mostly crap. It's a guy who hates the round proving to himself that he was right for hating it.
Oh, and that he's a glock fanboi (disclaimer: I don't like glocks).
Yes, the 9mm has less recoil. Surprise. Especially when your 9mm has a way heavier magazine because it's larger capacity than the 40S&W is. Pistol weight has always played a factor in recoil. That's why old 1911's and 92FS were popular: Heavy guns, less recoil.
Go shoot 44spl out of a revolver (bulldog pup) if you want to experience lots of recoil.
People should use whatever they're comfortable with. I've got a couple of 38spls that I still use and enjoy. They'll do the job just as well for me as any of the other carry pieces I have. Yes, there are times when bigger, heavier. bullets are called for. But that tends to be for hunting and not EDC.
So does the .40 S&W suck? Not any more, or any less, than anything else out there. The craftsman doesn't blame his tools.
HansGruber
Ronin
On the heavier magazine:
The .40 S&W uses heavier bullets—usually 20-40% heavier—than the 9mm, which pretty much evens out the mag weight issue—or might even be heavier.
For example—a Glock 17 with 124gr bullets is going to weigh (bullets alone, of course) 2108gr; a Glock 22 with 15 165gr bullets weighs 2475gr. That’s a fair comparison, both being common mid-weight bullets.
Blackmesa96
Master Class
Is the another caliber that experiences the amount of disdain the .40SW does? I never have been able to understand that; it usually seems like the critics are rooting for their prediction (to steal a sports term).
Granted, it may not be everyone's cup of tea, but can't that be said of anything? Is it capable of stopping a threat? Does it go bang when you pull the trigger? Everything can't be defined entirely by numbers, whatever you may choose to prioritize.
I know it's likely a shallow and somewhat goofy concept, but I figure that if we ask everyone who wouldn't be afraid to be shot by (insert your choice of caliber here) to form a line, it would likely be very short. Especially if we are talking about the distance we would expect to encounter in a self defense scenario.
My XDm in .40SW is probably my favorite pistol. Better than the others simply because it makes me look like I can really shoot. To this day I still think someone else made that small group at 25' that day. Probably should have framed that target...
Granted, it may not be everyone's cup of tea, but can't that be said of anything? Is it capable of stopping a threat? Does it go bang when you pull the trigger? Everything can't be defined entirely by numbers, whatever you may choose to prioritize.
I know it's likely a shallow and somewhat goofy concept, but I figure that if we ask everyone who wouldn't be afraid to be shot by (insert your choice of caliber here) to form a line, it would likely be very short. Especially if we are talking about the distance we would expect to encounter in a self defense scenario.
My XDm in .40SW is probably my favorite pistol. Better than the others simply because it makes me look like I can really shoot. To this day I still think someone else made that small group at 25' that day. Probably should have framed that target...
Kodiak Cowboy
Custom
9mm? Faster target reacquisition with dang near the same power as the.40 S&W. 10mm Auto or 45 Auto? More knock down power and better accuracy than the .40 S&W. .40 S&W
It's a newer and unesassary cartridge! "Bring Enough Gun." Just my opinion. Shoot fun, shoot safe, and shoot straight!
HansGruber
Ronin
I don’t get wrapped up in energy figures.9mm? Faster target reacquisition with dang near the same power as the.40 S&W. 10mm Auto or 45 Auto? More knock down power and better accuracy than the .40 S&W. .40 S&W
Foot pounds don’t wound; permanent cavity—expansion and penetration—does.
And the fact is, all things being equal, a .40 will make a bigger hole than a 9mm, which means more chance of hitting something important.
Kodiak Cowboy
Custom
Energy and Velocity is what creates expansion and penatration! As well as devastating hydraulic energy. Can't have one without the other to get maximum terminal performance out of any particular projectile.
HansGruber
Ronin
Handguns in defensive calibers—which 9mm and .40 are—don’t create enough of a temporary cavity do reliably to damage. “Hydrostatic Shock” is a myth.
And a bullet with lower energy can do more damage quite easily; the two do not equate.
Kodiak Cowboy
Custom
Yes I agree maximum velocity is not always the best for maximum penatration. If that's how it came across. I said it wrong. All projectiles have a recipe they like best to perform to thier maximum. Chamber pressures powder typs ext. That's probably why Federals HYDS is only 1000 fps in 10mm auto. That particular bullet performs best at creats maximum terminal performance at that muzzle velocity, And the two do equate from my experience of the hundreds of animals I've harvested. All just my opinion bud. Shoot fun, shoot safe and shoot straight.
Last edited:
HayesGreener
Ronin
The .40 was a compromise in the search for something with more wallop that the 9mm, but less recoil than the 10mm. It all stemmed from the FBI shootout in Miami in 1986. Jerry Dove's shot to the primary aggressor (Platt) with his 9mm pistol fell a couple of cm short of killing the guy instantly, and Platt went on the kill two agents after being shot. Agent Dove's shot was lethal by the way but not instantly. The FBI wanted to blame the death of its agents on the ammo so they didn't have to admit it was a failure of leadership and planning. The FBI was well enough armed but didn't have it together enough to bring it to bear . I was a SWAT commander in Florida at the time and we studied the incident ad nauseum. The first question I had at the time was, why the heck didn't they have the HRT out on the operation?
First the FBI charged off and chose the 10mm, then toned down to .40 S&W because it was so difficult to train recruits with a 10mm. Combat experts of the day equated the 10mm to a .41 magnum in manstopping ability. Most LE agencies jumped on the .40 bandwagon based on what the FBI test and development people recommended. Teaching new recruits to fire the .40 accurately was a challenge as well, as it was a bit snappy. Then a few years back the FBI recommended the 9mm again claiming the ammo was much better now and 9mm is better to teach new recruits with. I personally think it was economics more than anything that drove the recommendation back to 9mm, although I agree that the modern 9mm is a potent round. The .40 is a lethal round. In the 20 plus years that it was the standard LE round many men went to see them ME with .40 cal. holes in them.
The .40 cal. round has an interesting history and is still a potent defensive round. There is much irony in the story based on the knee jerk response to the Miami shootout. The firearm industry and ammo industry were the winners. But the greatest irony is that the two bad guys were ultimately killed by one severely wounded agent, a former Marine, with a Model 686 .357 revolver.
First the FBI charged off and chose the 10mm, then toned down to .40 S&W because it was so difficult to train recruits with a 10mm. Combat experts of the day equated the 10mm to a .41 magnum in manstopping ability. Most LE agencies jumped on the .40 bandwagon based on what the FBI test and development people recommended. Teaching new recruits to fire the .40 accurately was a challenge as well, as it was a bit snappy. Then a few years back the FBI recommended the 9mm again claiming the ammo was much better now and 9mm is better to teach new recruits with. I personally think it was economics more than anything that drove the recommendation back to 9mm, although I agree that the modern 9mm is a potent round. The .40 is a lethal round. In the 20 plus years that it was the standard LE round many men went to see them ME with .40 cal. holes in them.
The .40 cal. round has an interesting history and is still a potent defensive round. There is much irony in the story based on the knee jerk response to the Miami shootout. The firearm industry and ammo industry were the winners. But the greatest irony is that the two bad guys were ultimately killed by one severely wounded agent, a former Marine, with a Model 686 .357 revolver.
Kodiak Cowboy
Custom
Definitely a leathal round! It's just not my choice that's all.
conax
Master Class
I have always been a revolver guy, especially magnums. Recoil is something that I tolerate in a powerful gun, more power equals more recoil. No free lunches I'm aware of.
I had no experience with the .40 til I took one in trade on a motorcycle I was selling. I read some articles, reviews, and people's comments and almost all of them were saying it was too snappish to easily shoot well.
I bought some 180 grain hardball and off to the range I went. I could see why some complained, it recoiled a bit harder than the 9s I had shot before. Still, it was not a problem, no pain, just a minor adjustment in grip and I was shooting it as well as anything. The pistol is a lightweight S&W, 24 ounces empty.
The ballistics are impressive to me. About the same velocity as a 9mm with a heavier bullet, so I thought, cool!
I like the round just fine. Every time you turn around another article comes out denigrating the .40.
I suspect they are written by 9mm fans. Like I've said here before, why do they try to influence other shooters to adopt their favorite? What a waste of ink and time writing just to be a cheerleader for what is already best selling pistol cartridge out there.
Shoot what you want. Nobody cares.
I could buy .40 cheaper than 9mms last year. Again, cool!
I had no experience with the .40 til I took one in trade on a motorcycle I was selling. I read some articles, reviews, and people's comments and almost all of them were saying it was too snappish to easily shoot well.
I bought some 180 grain hardball and off to the range I went. I could see why some complained, it recoiled a bit harder than the 9s I had shot before. Still, it was not a problem, no pain, just a minor adjustment in grip and I was shooting it as well as anything. The pistol is a lightweight S&W, 24 ounces empty.
The ballistics are impressive to me. About the same velocity as a 9mm with a heavier bullet, so I thought, cool!
I like the round just fine. Every time you turn around another article comes out denigrating the .40.
I suspect they are written by 9mm fans. Like I've said here before, why do they try to influence other shooters to adopt their favorite? What a waste of ink and time writing just to be a cheerleader for what is already best selling pistol cartridge out there.
Shoot what you want. Nobody cares.
I could buy .40 cheaper than 9mms last year. Again, cool!
Kodiak Cowboy
Custom
Ok Plain and Simple! Dose the .40 S&W Suck? It's all a matter of opinion! We're all Starting to beat a dead horse on this subject. Yes I agree shoot what you want , what you like and what's comfortable for you!
javbike
Hellcat
You know the 40 rd I like it lot it’s actually pretty balanced rd for me at least but I would definitely get a bigger gun then the mp shield to take up some of the recoil maybe like a 1911 . But I am getting used to the mp shield weight in a 40 your grip has to be a little tighter then normal. I am keeping mine
Bassbob
Emissary
I never even fired a .40 before I got the Shield so I have nothing to compare it to. Mine is the Performance Center, so it's ported, but honestly after I shot it I assumed everyone who was complaining about the recoil was smoking crack.
javbike
Hellcat
Yea I think the performance center is a bigger gun than the mp shield snd it’s ported like you said too makes a difference I think my mp is really small but fun to shoot
Last edited: