M&P .40 fs

[Freddie]

I have a full size M&P .40 and I was thinking about selling it to get a glock 23. My? Is what do you guys think it worth. It has around 75 shells through it and 50 was a CCdw class and then it went back in the box and in the safe. Thanks

[mizer67]

New M&P .40 FS are around $460 shipped right now.

I'd say $350 - $399 is a fair price range for the base gun and two mags.

[DocGKR]

I think that would be a stupid move--the M&P40 works better than the G23. If you want a G23 size pistol, you would be better off going with the G19. Have you read the information on handgun calibers here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19887?

If you don't need to routinely shoot through intermediate barriers like automobile windshields, if you don't get free .40 S&W practice ammo, and if you don't get to practice 250+ rounds per week, you will most likely be best served with a good 9 mm.

In a timely coincidence, a very experienced senior SOF NCO who has slayed many of our Nation's foes and who has the distinction of having used 9mm, .40, and .45 ACP pistols in combat during various phases of his career wrote the following superb analysis discussing this very topic recently:


"Not getting into the weapons transition issues from frame design to frame design (it's the reason I love to hate the Glock), the fact of the matter is that the recoil on the 23 crosses the magic line of running the shit out of your pistol.

Allow me to explain...

Most of the guys on the G19 thread mentioned that they can handle the reduced size of the 19 and the recoil increase over the 17 is acceptable. Most of us have also determined that this does NOT cross over to the .40 cartridge. Guys with a firm handle on recoil manipulation can use the 22 and 35 with acceptable results. However when you go down to 26's and 23's, the juice is not worth the squeeze. The recoil is now noticably effecting times and it's measurable. If you can't effectively control recoil and are wasting time allowing your pistol to settle between shots then this is all a wash and means nothing to you, but if you can apply the fundamentals effectively you will quickly see that you can't run a sub compact 9 or a compact .40 worth a shit. So a decision to accept a larger pistol in order to have an acceptable recoil impulse based upon caliber must be made. The smallest 9mm Glock recoil that I will accept is the G19 and I will not go below the G22 when bumping up to .40."

[Freddie]

I already have a 19 and a 27. I just kinda like the glocks better I used to be a m&p fan I have a .40 fs a .40c and the shield in the 9. I can't say that I don't like them just the full size seems to big for my hand unlike the mid size

[Business_Casual]

Step 1: Stop buying pistols

Step 2: Seek a Guru and train with him (Vickers, Hackathorn, Super D)

Step 3: Master the pistol you intend to use/carry

Step 4: Practice, Improve and maintain your skill set

[Freddie]

Thanks for the info. I not new to guns I've been around them for a long time. I just didn't know what to ask for the m&p

[warpedcamshaft]

If you don't need to routinely shoot through intermediate barriers like automobile windshields, if you don't get free .40 S&W practice ammo, and if you don't get to practice 250+ rounds per week, you will most likely be best served with a good 9 mm.


Doc, could you please elaborate on the 250+ rounds a week phrase? I am not sure I understand what exactly you are driving at. I have seen you post this phrase a couple of times now and I value your input, but am just curious for a little more information.

Are you suggesting that to keep your shooting skills at an acceptable level with the 40 S&W, you need to fire 250+ rounds per week? Or that it would require that quantity of ammunition to allow most shooters to remain savvy with any caliber and because the 9mm is cheaper it should be chosen? What level of proficiency and for what purpose/job?

This seems like a fairly broad and unclear statement and I want to make sure I understand. I am not trying to be fractious, but am just curious...