.40SW or 9MM? What say you? [Archive]

wahoo95

06-03-13, 09:29

Why are you second guessing your 40cal pistols? I prefer 9mm with quality ammo but would take a 40, 45, or 357sig with quality ammo as well. I seriously doubt anyone on the receiving end will be able to tell the difference when quality modern ammo is used so don't overthink this stuff. Keep in mind the idea that modern defense ammo is designed to perform to the same standard so simply stick to something from Dr. Roberts's recommended list and you'll be ahead of the curve.

Ryno12

06-03-13, 09:29

This thread will for sure turn into a caliber war...
Anyway, I use 40's just because I also have a 10mm & I reload for both.

Sent via Tapatalk

Symmetry

06-03-13, 09:30

It entirely depends on the firearm used. Some makes and models are better in a specific caliber, as the gun was designed from the ground up to use that caliber. When they expand their production line to other calibers, usually it involves just modifying the original platform to accomidate the additional calibers. Sometimes those retrofits do not do the caliber justice. For instance, I've never thought that Glocks in .40S&W were implimented well.

Failure2Stop

06-03-13, 09:46

I have yet to see credible proof of a good 9mm failing where a .40 or .45 would have guaranteed success.

That being said, I would not consider any of them to be truly inferior to each other in the grand scheme of things, as long as quality ammunition is used.

DocGKR

06-03-13, 09:49

I'll happily shoot and carry 9 mm, .357 Sig, .40, or .45 Auto if given free ammo of good quality.

If I have to purchase the ammo, then I go with 9 mm; likewise, I now recommend 9 mm for any LE agency looking to purchase firearms.

If you want to delve deeper, start with carefully assessing your service pistol and handgun caliber needs are, based on potential engagement scenarios. Then look at objective measurements of skill including scores and times using each potential option--which are you more accurate and faster with over a wide variety of standardized tests (500 pt aggregate, FAST, LAPD SWAT qual, 10-8, 99 drill, etc...). Finally, you may also have to factor in other specific ancillary factors not germane to a general discussion.

Guns-up.50

06-03-13, 09:51

Eehhh wht the helll

9mm, use to be available, good ammo evens the playing field, lighter recoil impulse, little higher capacity..

T2C

06-03-13, 09:55

We switched from 9mm to .40 S&W at work, because we felt the .40 S&W performed better than the 9mm did on automobile glass and other intermediate barriers when the testing was done in 1996-1997. Ammunition development has come a long way since then.

I like 9mm. It is less expensive than the .40 S&W and .45 ACP cartridges and it has less felt recoil. I do not think there is any disadvantage to the 9mm for defensive purposes when compared to the .40 S&W.

The reasons I still own a .40 S&W pistol are ammunition availability and the fact that I have several thousand rounds of once fired .40 S&W brass. If I were starting from scratch, I would go with the 9mm.

19852

06-03-13, 10:01

If I am buying my own ammo then it is 9mm all day everyday. If someone else is buying then I shoot what they buy.
Best,
19852

fallenangelhim

06-03-13, 10:04

I have owned 2 .40 pistols and sold them within a month of purchasing them. It may be a mind game but I could not like them.

Tzed250

06-03-13, 10:09

I went with .40 for my Walther PPS and my Steyr M40-A1. No regrets..

.46caliber

06-03-13, 10:11

Yes to both. Good quality ammunition will provide the performance in either caliber.

Physics says energy is determined by mass and velocity. Projectile engineering determines how that energy is used and transferred.

Good quality ammo is the key to finding the balance between physics and engineering.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

RogerinTPA

06-03-13, 10:24

I have and like both, but due to ammo expense and shortages, I train and carry overwhelmingly the 9mm. As others have stated, there are better 9mm selections for 2 legged animals and barriers than their were even 10 years ago. If someone else was funding my ammo, I'd go 40 all day everyday.

warpedcamshaft

06-03-13, 10:31

I keep a common platform in both calibers. I like the option to run standards drills with 40, and availability of 40 ammo in my area helps keep me from burning through my 9mm reserve during shortages. (saving a pile of 9mm for classes)

I don't really lose sleep about terminal ballistics... I pick a load from docgkr's ammo thread in whatever caliber I need, buy a ton of it when it is cheap... And focus on building and maintaining skill.

RBid

06-03-13, 10:51

I have and shoot 9 and .40. I carry 9mm because I have better control of it when shooting with speed, or shooting with one hand.

Trajan

06-03-13, 11:07

9mm = M4carbean hipster round with no KNOCK DOWN or STOPPING power.

40 = Thor's HAMMER!

It would only be hip if it was some obscure caliber.

JW5219

06-03-13, 11:10

9mm here. Never thought much of the 40 S&W. Was issued one, and bought one of my own. They are both gone now !

ryr8828

06-03-13, 11:12

9mm since I got rid of my .40 and want to consider myself smart.

Big A

06-03-13, 11:27

9mm = M4carbean hipster round with no KNOCK DOWN or STOPPING power.

40 = Thor's HAMMER!

:lol:

I have both, I'm issued a Glock 22 and I own a Glock 23 along with the Glock 9mm trifecta.

My groups with my Glock 19 are tighter than with my 23, my follow up shots seem faster, and I have 2 more rounds in my 19 so it is what I carry the most in my free time.

However, in my neck of the woods .40S&W ammo is cheaper and more prevalent than 9mm right now...Man this ammo crunch sucks...:mad:

Striker

06-03-13, 11:37

I know this has been discussed before, but I'm starting to second guess my .40SW pistols. Which do you prefer between these two ONLY, and please give some reasons why.

I'm curious as to what's making you question .40S&W?

It depends on the circumstances. In reality, I'm perfectly fine with 9mm, .40, .45, .357 Sig and for that matter, .357 magnum for a defense handgun. 9mm use to be cheap and plentiful, so I use to shoot that more than any other caliber. For me, 9mm has become hard to find and more expensive than .40 or .45 when I do find it, so by default .40 S&W is my flavor of the month. I don't really believe in caliber or platform consolidation, so I never thought about it as having to choose one or the other.

YMMV and whatever works for you, does. If you want to branch out to 9mm, do it. If ammo prices come back to what they were, you'll be happy you did it. If they don't, it's one more caliber you can go to if you need to because of availability of ammo at that moment.

Army Chief

06-03-13, 12:12

I think most of these details have already found their way into the discussion, but the primary advantage of the .40 is greater barrier penetration. This has some obvious utility in a law-enforcement setting; less so in a defensive setting. The best 9mm loads will perform every bit as well for the latter role, while offering a more reasonable ammunition cost and significantly greater capacity. Unless, I were living in a state with a 10-round magazine capacity restriction, these factors alone would probably make the 9m preferable.

Assuming that you already familiar with the shooting characteristics of both, you already know that (depending upon the gun) the .40 is somewhat less enjoyable to shoot, simply because of its sharper recoil pulse. Even if that is not a factor to you as the shooter, it can take a greater toll on your sidearm over time.

I also have some slightly less scientific concerns about longevity, given the fact that most .40s seem to have been originally designed as 9mm pistols, only to be subsequently ported over to .40. This is especially the case when we're talking about pistols of European origin, as .40 is not a particularly relevant cartirdge on the Continent. I'm not suggesting that a .40 pistol is inherently more failure-prone, but you are putting more stress on just about everything inside of the gun.

Although there are no losing propositions here, economics, ergonomics and engineering would seem to favor the 9mm. Granted, I'm still a 1911 guy for the most part, but when I make exceptions, they are usually for a 9mm.

AC

hatidua

06-03-13, 12:20

I wouldn't want to be hit with either of them, thus I don't think it particularly matters. I therefore buy the cheaper option.

gunrunner505

06-03-13, 12:42

Listen to the Chief or Doc. Both work with quality ammo.

I shoot 40 as the recoil in a full size frame gun, to me, isn't bad. I've been on a clock up against guys with 9mm and I'm right there with them. So for me, recoil is not an issue. My groups are about like theirs too.

One reason I went 40 was barrier penetration. Not being a cop the chances of me ever having to fire into a vehicle to either incapacitate it or the driver is remote. But some day I may have to shoot OUT of my vehicle in a defensive scenario.

Also, if you want to run a smaller frame gun along the size of a Glock 19 then 9mm is the only way to fly.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2

Insta-Gator

06-03-13, 12:48

+1 for the .40. Have G23 and G27. Like them both.

Sent via Tapatalk+Autocorrupt

Crow Hunter

06-03-13, 12:49

Which caliber are you more "effective" with?

If you can make the same number of fight stopping hits in the same time frame with a both calibers. Bigger is always better (assuming identical bullet construction).

If, on the other hand, you can make more fight stopping hits quicker with 9mm, go with the 9mm.

I personally am more "effective" with the 9mm than I am the 40 with the advantage of slightly cheaper ammo under "normal" circumstances.

I do keep a G23 though, since sometimes I can find .357 Sig or .40 S&W when I can't find 9mm and it doesn't eat anything sitting in the gun safe.

SWThomas

06-03-13, 13:12

I'm curious as to what's making you question .40S&W?

I guess I just bought into some of the hype about the 40 having too much recoil. I've never fired my pistol models in 9MM and am curious about how much faster I would be able to shoot accurately with the reduced recoil.

I shoot the 40's just fine, but like most folks, I'm always searching for something more.

Rayrevolver

06-03-13, 13:56

9mm. Cheaper for practice ammo. Faster for me to shoot.

But you should get a 10mm.:jester:

Oldie but goodie:
http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg264/crahockey11/CaliberComparison.jpg

beschatten

06-03-13, 13:58

I use to shoot 9mm because it was cheaper and good SD ammo is good SD ammo; regardless of size.

With recent times, I've noticed that the majority of firearm owners have adopted 9mm and/or tend to horde it. Thus, it's no longer that available and since December--it's not any cheaper than 40 or 45.

I've been finding good deals online for 45ACP for 35-50cents a round where 9mm is still 50-75cents a round for target ammo.

So I adopted 45acp and all is well again.

Alex F

06-03-13, 14:02

I personally shoot better with a 9mm with faster and more accurate follow up shots.

I can control a .40 but with a good 147gr load I don't feel undergunned with a 9mm.

JMHO
YMMV

opngrnd

06-03-13, 14:02

9mm period when not restricted to FMJ.

Heavy Metal

06-03-13, 14:05

.40 for the woods where I might have to use it on a Black Bear.

9mm when carrying primarily for two-legged varmits.

srcochran49

06-03-13, 14:15

I don't believe the 40 offers any real world advantages over the 9 with good ammo. Controllability and recovery is better/faster with the 9. If circumstances dictate need for something larger than a 9, I am going to a 45, as I find it no more difficult to shoot than a 40.

SteveL

06-03-13, 14:29

I went to all 9mm back before everything went crazy simply because ammo was cheaper.

markm

06-03-13, 14:35

I went to all 9mm back before everything went crazy simply because ammo was cheaper.

And now? :D

HES

06-03-13, 14:43

I'll happily shoot and carry 9 mm, .357 Sig, .40, or .45 Auto if given free ammo of good quality.

If I have to purchase the ammo, then I go with 9 mm
Pretty much my stance. If it's free it's for me. I used to be all about the .40. Then I read (especially what DockGRK has taken the time to post in the past) and read and read. I determined, as others have said, the 9mm will get the job done quite nicely, thank you very much, for less cost than .40. Having said that some pistols will shoot 40 better than their 9mm counter parts. Go with what works for you.

9mm = M4carbean hipster round with no KNOCK DOWN or STOPPING power.

40 = Thor's HAMMER!
TV guest star on a lame incredible hulk nightmare special from the early 00's or Joss Wheedon Avengers type? :jester:

foxtrotx1

06-03-13, 14:44

And now? :D

.45 is cheaper.. :(

SteveL

06-03-13, 15:04

And now? :D

And now you'd think you were shooting ammo made of solid gold based on the prices you pay for it. I guess that would put an end to the whole steel vs. brass thing though. ;)

ChrisCross

06-03-13, 15:46

I have both 9mm and .45 (no .40). I've shot 40 and to me it has a sharp recoil vs 9mm (light) and .45 (more like a slow-mo boom).

I think all of the above 9mm, .40 & .45 (using good ammo) will do it's part if I do mine.

I will say these days I shoot alot more .45 since it's cheaper than 9mm... who'd would have thought. :rolleyes:

TheJRK

06-03-13, 16:28

.40 because I can find it easier than 9mm.

Blackbird90

06-03-13, 16:47

I have and carry both and have no problem shooting either. 9mm is a little hard to find in my area though...

NeoNeanderthal

06-03-13, 17:40

9mm
Why? Every reason.

There is only 2 reasons to carry a .40, the first is if you want better intermediate barrier penetration (vs 9mm). The second is if you are issued a .40 and want commonality/get free ammo.

A cop friend of mine told me once not to shit on .40s because they are the best round for police departments. When I asked him why, he told me that they satisfy the .45 guys and the 9mm guys. Thought that was an interesting perspective.

sandman99and9

06-03-13, 20:13

A .45 will kill your soul ;)

S.M.

Ryno12

06-03-13, 21:26

16916

Sent via Tapatalk

ETA: Sorry, didn't see the other one...

Salamander

06-03-13, 21:29

9mm. For me, it's easier to shoot accurately from a cold start; my recovery time between shots is slightly quicker; and I tend to practice more often with it.

While I own other calibers and use them for certain specialized purposes, 9mm is my EDC choice.

Striker

06-03-13, 22:08

TV guest star on a lame incredible hulk nightmare special from the early 00's or Joss Wheedon Avengers type? :jester:
Joss Whedon's Avengers type of course.

I guess I just bought into some of the hype about the 40 having too much recoil. I've never fired my pistol models in 9MM and am curious about how much faster I would be able to shoot accurately with the reduced recoil.

I shoot the 40's just fine, but like most folks, I'm always searching for something more.

Oh I see. There's a lot of back and forth about that. Truthfully I've read the statistics and read/listened to both sides and my opinion is if you shoot both to comparable level, choose the one you like best. And honestly if you shoot enough, you can become very proficient with .40.

I have friends that I train with that are SWAT/ex SWAT/ex mil guys who won't carry 9mm pistols unless they have no other choice. Their experiences have been that .40 and .45 have better stopping power. Are they wrong? They certainly are not for them because they shoot .40 and .45 just fine. Personally, as I said before, I'm fine with any of the major defense calibers, but just because the statistics show that one is not significantly better than the other doesn't mean that the marginal difference won't be the deciding factor in an encounter because you never know. It's a balancing act and bigger bullets equals less per mag. Different people balance the equation differently.

ra2bach

06-04-13, 08:49

This thread will for sure turn into a caliber war...
Anyway, I use 40's just because I also have a 10mm & I reload for both.

Sent via Tapatalk

that right there might be the only legitimate excuse for .40...

thegreenman76

06-04-13, 09:31

My first GLOCK was a 22. So maybe I am partial. I have owned 9mm .40 and .45. I traded my .45 due to expense of ammo. I went back to .40 GLOCK model 22. I carry it in o.e.m., but I go to range with a 9mm conversion barrel. For me it’s best of both worlds. Cheap 9mm to practice and heavier projectile for carry. I also can’t really tell the difference between shooting the two calibers as far as recoil goes.

Magic_Salad0892

06-04-13, 09:35

.40 ACP has better intermediate barrier penetration, things like autoglass, car doors, and such will be defeated easier.

9x19mm provides extremely sufficient terminal performance, in most commercially available defense loads, and does okay against intermediate barriers. It costs less, and puts less wear on most pistols, which can equate to longer service life. Longer service life means less parts replacement, which equates to a cheaper weapon system, which means you have more money to allocate to other areas.

Usually the service life issue doesn't mean much to me, because I maintain my guns parts replacement intervals, and won't see a problem with it, but I'm not going to deny that there is an inherent advantage.

9x19 costs less to shoots, and delivers less recoil/muzzle jump per shot, which means more shots on target. 9x19mm weighs less, so you can carry more bullets with less weight, and single stack 9x19mm pistols are suuuuper thin. (IE: Walther PPS, Kahr offerings)

9x19mm pistols give more magazine capacity, for less weight.

Carry four fully loaded 15 round Glock magazines in .40 S&W, and carry four fully loaded 17 round Glock magazines in 9x19mm and tell me which was lighter.

9x19mm is easier to use in a suppressor capable pistol, due to better subsonic loadings, and better suppressor options.

Though AAC, and Osprey both make great options in .40.

9x19mm is a standard NATO round, so it will ALWAYS be available somewhere.

These are the reasons I was driven to carry 9x19mm, and invest in it.

Quoting myself again. This one is from the "9mm or .45 for carry?" thread. But it applies here too.

Parts in blue are corrected for .40.

thegreenman76

06-04-13, 09:35

Sorry I don’t. I used to be a carpenter and work with my hands for a living while I carried heavy sh*t at work. Hahah!!:D

Ranger86

06-04-13, 09:45

that right there might be the only legitimate excuse for .40...

Really, legitimate excuse? your statement sounds pretty narrow minded considering the constant evolution of firearms and ammunition.

From my mobile phone

yellowfin

06-05-13, 00:31

I personally started with .40 and have had something or another in it for the last 6 years or so. At the time I had thought 9mm to be too small having come from a family that primarily owned .45's. I figured at the time since so many LE had switched to the .40 from 9mm and 9 had been bashed by so many as being puny, if I had to put a hole in something it might as well be bigger. Oh, and I got a great price on the 1st carry gun I got and it happened to be in .40--the pawn shop was willing to trade me even on a .22 I hated so it just worked. Then the next one I wanted to use the same ammo I already had.

Most recently I picked up a 9mm for the wife because of lower recoil in a smaller framed gun for her. It's certainly far from inadequate and it's handy enough she won't have any excuse not to have it with her. Teeny tiny but not too blasty is just the ticket for my valuable loved one.

I must say I like being able to pick up both calibers of brass at the range, thus being able to load off of almost everything we find using the same small primers and pistol powder--it sucks to go to a store looking for one caliber and if it's not there then the trip's a bust. This very thought tempts me even further to get a .45 so that any time a store has anything then whatever I find can be used.

darr3239

06-05-13, 01:41

Practice 9mm.

Carry .40.

Desmond82

06-05-13, 03:14

Practice 9mm.

Carry .40.

What 9mm and .40 do you shoot ?

And I wouldn't think that combo work out well. I've heard of people doing the opposite to work on recoil control but never the other way around.

Alaskapopo

06-05-13, 03:17

I know this has been discussed before, but I'm starting to second guess my .40SW pistols. Which do you prefer between these two ONLY, and please give some reasons why.

I prefer the 9mm because it offers less recoil for faster follow up shots, greater ammunition capacity and in most makes greater reliability and longevity over the life of the weapon.
Pat

Iraqgunz

06-05-13, 03:43

Worry less about this vs. that caliber and actually go out and shoot. I'd be willing to bet more shoot situations would be ended if people didn't do the Hollywood Give Up and actually hit their targets where they need to be hit.

SWThomas

06-05-13, 08:02

Thanks for all the replies fellas! I really appreciate all the input on this topic. :cool:

filthy phil

06-05-13, 08:20

9's walking away with it:D
I might get a 40 convo for my g20 just to have a cheaper way to shoot it but I like the 9 best

darr3239

06-05-13, 11:23

What 9mm and .40 do you shoot ?

And I wouldn't think that combo work out well. I've heard of people doing the opposite to work on recoil control but never the other way around.

They are a Glock 19 and a Glock 23.

Under real life stress situations no one will ever notice the difference in recoil.

Alaskapopo

06-05-13, 14:56

They are a Glock 19 and a Glock 23.

Under real life stress situations no one will ever notice the difference in recoil.
Have to disagree with you there. People don't rise to the occasion they default to their level of training. Cops in the 70's and 80's used to carry 357 magnums and practice with 38 special and they found that hit ratios in gun fights were horrible. Things did improve once they started practicing with their carry ammo. You get used to a certain recoil impulse and your better off not having things change when things go bad. Not saying that practicing with the 9mm is useless as it does build trigger control and other fundamentals but like when I practice with .22's I know that it will not relate to recoil control training. If you carrrying the .40 you should practice with it as well.
Pat

gamewarden

06-05-13, 16:53

Bullet design it what matters when talking about the "Big 3".

I will take a 9mm where in general i can have more rounds on board, easier to control, less muzzle rise keeping me on target more effectively for faster follow up.

That being said I carry a Glock 22 on duty because that is what I'm issued. It does make shooting my Glock 17 feel that much better!

Johann Boden is a good teacher!

Talon167

06-05-13, 20:23

darr3239

06-05-13, 21:01

Have to disagree with you there. People don't rise to the occasion they default to their level of training. Cops in the 70's and 80's used to carry 357 magnums and practice with 38 special and they found that hit ratios in gun fights were horrible. Things did improve once they started practicing with their carry ammo. You get used to a certain recoil impulse and your better off not having things change when things go bad. Not saying that practicing with the 9mm is useless as it does build trigger control and other fundamentals but like when I practice with .22's I know that it will not relate to recoil control training. If you carrrying the .40 you should practice with it as well.
Pat

I agree with the idea that people resort to their level of training. However, the difference in recoil response between the 9 and 40 is nowhere near the difference between the practice 38s and full power 357s. Especially if your shooting technique is proper.

In the day, guys that wanted the 357 had to buy their own with our department, and most were the better shooters. We did practice with the 38 on the department dime, along with shooting a practice qualification with our duty ammo, in order to swap it out, prior to qualification with the 357 full power duty ammo. Those who couldn't qualify with them, under the same timed course, weren't allowed to carry them.

I used the 357 for a couple of years before the department went to 9mms. Then, when the change was made to 40s, the vast majority of shooters shot just as well, but there were a few marginal shooters who had some issues, primarily technique based. I think our department was/is better than most in the amount of firearms training the officers receive.

Does your dept. have you qualify with duty ammo? I presume it does. Our qualifications were done annually with duty ammo. It was also mandatory to have range time, three other times during the year, with frangible ammo in the indoor ranges. The frangible "practice" ammo also isn't as stout as the duty ammo, but that's what you get indoors.

Police gunfights are funny things. Once the first shot is fired, the norm is for just about everything to go to shit, making cut and dried assessments hard to come by.

Socom Elite

06-05-13, 21:02

40 for me. Range ammo is the same grain as SD ammo (180) and it seems to be the easiest pistol caliber to find when panic mode kicks in. Personally, I don't have any issues with muzzle flip or getting/staying on target.

I don't have an issue with controlling the recoil in my G23 either.

Ill add that most people that compare the recoil of a 9mm vs a 40s&w are comparing range ammo. But I know a lot of people that carry a 9mm +p load.

There's not much difference in recoil between a 40 and a 9+p.

I say as long as its 9,40 or 45 your ok. I just prefer 40 over the 9. It just stacks the odd a little bit more.

goodoleboy

06-05-13, 21:50

Allow me to preface my response: when it comes to defensive handgun shooting, I prefer more practice to larger caliber, thus, I chose 9mm.

My preferred handgun of choice for personal defense is a Glock 19 (although I do own a Glock 22 RTF2).

I can practice more for the same money with a 9mm, I can carry a more concealable pistol with a higher mag capacity with a 9mm, and with modern ammo, the 9mm is a caliber I damn sure wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of.

big_joe555

06-05-13, 23:58

Based on all the reports I have read, ballistic labs I've attended, and videos I've watched of Officer involved shootings, I come to find these things to be true:

All pistol cartridges are equally poor manstoppers.

A bullet fired from a pistol at less than about 2000 fps, leaves only a permanent wound cavity the same diameter of the bullet. (in the case of JHP that would mean the diameter if the expanded bullet).

A pistol bullet must generally strike a major blood vessel on the top of the heart, the brain stem, or sever the spinal cord to produce immediate or quick incapacitation of an attacker.

The diameter of the bullet is less important than the ability of the cartridge to penetrate deep enough in tissue to disrupt major organs.

That being said...

In most modern HP ammunition, the 9mm & .40 expand to about the same diameter, and penetrate barriers & simulated tissue to about the same depth(9mm bullets were 124 or 147 grains & .40 bullets were 165's and 180's). The .45 expands to larger diameter, and penetrates on average about an inch deeper in tests.

I choose 9mm, because it holds more rounds and does just as good a job with quality ammo.

In conclusion... both are equally worthless. Grab a rifle or a shotgun.

VIP3R 237

06-06-13, 00:37

In conclusion... both are equally worthless. Grab a rifle or a shotgun.

Pistols poke holes, Rifles destroy Shit.

markm

06-06-13, 07:58

:rolleyes: This thread is officially worthy of the ARFcom Archives!

gruntjim

06-06-13, 10:50

9MM is simplly a much easier caliber to control, when the firer can't be using two hands, squared up, and knows how many rounds they'll have to face.

It's always been more about fighting, and less about terminal ballistics (though with modern ammo, the difference is small).

VIP3R 237

06-06-13, 11:15

I voted for the 40 because that is what i have the most of, and whenever there is a crunch it seems to be be more prevalent than the 9mm.

As I am a rock climber and a gunsmith i have pretty strong hands so the recoil has never been much of an issue to me.

:rolleyes: This thread is officially worthy of the ARFcom Archives!

We did it just for you.

T2C

06-06-13, 12:41

I like 9mm because it's cheaper and I can get in more trigger time for the same money.

Holes are holes. If you do your job, the 9mm will do it's job.

Dos Cylindros

06-06-13, 13:30

As has been said multiple times in this thread there is virtually little to no difference in performance between the big 3 (9mm, .40 S&W or .45 ACP). If I were buying my own ammo I would own and shoot 9mm. I am issued a .40 S&W for work and get my ammo mostly for free. For compatability sake I only own .40 S&W handguns with the exception of my J frame.

I do feel that the 9mm is far superior to the .40 ad .45 when it comes to very small frame guns like the S&W Shield, baby Glocks and the like. I shoot my .40 Shield just fine, but there is a distinct differnence (for me) in rappid shooting and comfort when shooting a Sheild or G26 in 9mm.

Your .40's are fine. 9mm is not superior to .40 and .40 is not superior to 9mm.

Army Chief

06-06-13, 13:40

:rolleyes: This thread is officially worthy of the ARFcom Archives!

I am awaiting your explanation. You can't just make an assertion like that without providing some substantive insights into why you believe that to be the case; otherwise, you're no better than just another garden-variety troll. Come on man, we can do better than this.

AC

rgswaim

06-06-13, 13:51

9MM. Ask a Navy SEAL. It's all about shot placement. An enemy with two in the chest and one in the head doesn't if it was 9MM, 40 S&W or 45 ACP.

markm

06-06-13, 14:02

I am awaiting your explanation. You can't just make an assertion like that without providing some substantive insights into why you believe that to be the case; otherwise, you're no better than just another garden-variety troll. Come on man, we can do better than this.

AC

You still following me? I'm not sure what your obsession is with me the last few weeks... but whatever.

You seriously are going to defend a caliber debate? We can do better than this by not entertaining silly caliber debates. These type of threads are normally locked in 5 posts or less. This subject has been covered hundreds of times since before the dawn of the internet... let alone the gun forum.

Army Chief

06-06-13, 14:31

Not following you, and I still happen to consider you one of the good guys around here, so there is nothing to fear on that account. Yes, I do agree that there is an inherent eye-roll component to the typical caliber comparison thread, though this one was asked in good faith, and it seemed to at least stand a chance until people started adding pure silliness to the thread, thus breeding more of the same.

I don't lay all of this on your doorstep, but in the interest of clearing the air, when you add a half-dozen absolutely senseless posts to a thread like this that invite others to respond in-kind, you can't very well go back and complain that about the quality of the thread. Much of your recent posting activity has been limited to marking snarky comments which in no way advance the discussion, or which are simply intended to be funny. I'm fine with that, right up until it becomes all that you seem to be capable of contributing.

Again, I'm making this a public comment because I think a larger point probably needs to be made, but all I'm really asking is that you think about what you are posting. If there is a joke in there, alongside a legitimate observation or helpful point, then no one is going to find that out of line. If, on the other hand, every post is effectively a one-liner that doesn't really lead to anything except for inviting more one-liners, that takes something away from the quality of the thread, makes it harder for folks to find their answers, and just generally ramps up the white noise factor that so often results in complaints.

We needn't exchange words on this again, and I'm in no way trying to rain on your parade or make this in any way personal. Just please try to participate in the discussions you choose to enter, rather than simply using them as a platform to get a quick (and often unrelated) laugh, because the latter tendency just happens to be what makes threads "worthy of the ARFcom archives."

It's a signal-to-noise thing ... nothing more.

[passes peace pipe]

AC

markm

06-06-13, 14:36

It's a signal-to-noise thing ... nothing more.

[passes peace pipe]

AC

Cool. :)

I'm only paranoid because the mods are out to get me! :p

GO team 40 S&W!

Army Chief

06-06-13, 14:41

I'm only paranoid because the mods are out to get me! :p

Well, at least I know that you inhaled. ;)

We're all good.

Thanks,
AC

SWThomas

06-07-13, 20:26

:rolleyes: This thread is officially worthy of the ARFcom Archives!

268 votes and 4 pages long.... Yeah, there's a lack of activity here. :rolleyes:

AKDoug

06-08-13, 00:07

Cool. :)

I'm only paranoid because the mods are out to get me! :p

GO team 40 S&W! You didn't even vote yet.

Anyhow, I'm run over with .40S&W ammo and brass, so that's what I shoot. Thanks to the State Troopers practicing on our range and not cleaning up their brass, I've got a big bucket of free .40 brass.

I'm currently working with a couple 9mm Glocks and I'm really no faster with them than my .40 .

Alaskapopo

06-08-13, 00:20

You didn't even vote yet.

Anyhow, I'm run over with .40S&W ammo and brass, so that's what I shoot. Thanks to the State Troopers practicing on our range and not cleaning up their brass, I've got a big bucket of free .40 brass.

I'm currently working with a couple 9mm Glocks and I'm really no faster with them than my .40 .

You should come to some of the matches in Palmer, Anchorage area and test that theory. You will have fun. In reality its simple physics no matter how skilled you are you will shoot a gun with less recoil faster at least on your follow up shots.
Pat

Omega Man

06-08-13, 07:06

QuickStrike

06-08-13, 14:56

Alaskapopo

06-08-13, 15:02

The +p+ ammo that I carry in my 9mm's are already pretty close to the .40's recoil characteristics.

There isn't an earth shattering difference between my gen 3 g17 and gen 4 g22 due to the dual recoil spring assembly.

So I have and carry both, and also .45 when I carry a 1911 or HK45c.

I have to disagree with you there. Frankly the Gen 4 recoil spring assembly does nothing that I can feel to reduce recoil or muzzle flip in the slightest. I took out a Gen 3 Glock 22 and a Gen 4 Glock 22 to compare them when the Gen 4's first came out. I was shooting the same ammo in both and no perceptible difference could be felt by me or the friend I was shooting with. Now then I went back to shooting my Glock 17 gen 3 and it has quite a bit less muzzle flip and recoil. As for recoil forces a Glock 17 with a +P 147 grain bullet at 1050 fps has a power factor of 154 while a 180 grain 40 sw at 1000 fps has a power factor of 180. Power factor is a momentium based measurement which directly relates to recoil. The 40 simply has more recoil no way around it. This problem is made worse by the fact its generally in lighter 9mm sized guns. I like shooting the 40 in my STI Edge as its la 45 sized pistol. But in 9mm sized pistols not so much fun.
Pat

QuickStrike

06-08-13, 15:23

I have to disagree with you there. Frankly the Gen 4 recoil spring assembly does nothing that I can feel to reduce recoil or muzzle flip in the slightest. I took out a Gen 3 Glock 22 and a Gen 4 Glock 22 to compare them when the Gen 4's first came out. I was shooting the same ammo in both and no perceptible difference could be felt by me or the friend I was shooting with. Now then I went back to shooting my Glock 17 gen 3 and it has quite a bit less muzzle flip and recoil. As for recoil forces a Glock 17 with a +P 147 grain bullet at 1050 fps has a power factor of 154 while a 180 grain 40 sw at 1000 fps has a power factor of 180. Power factor is a momentium based measurement which directly relates to recoil. The 40 simply has more recoil no way around it. This problem is made worse by the fact its generally in lighter 9mm sized guns. I like shooting the 40 in my STI Edge as its la 45 sized pistol. But in 9mm sized pistols not so much fun.
Pat

Gen4 g22 was a lot more pleasant than my g26 with +p+ ammo. Probably close to my g19 with the hot 9mm's, but sight tracking feels better.

Probably the most enjoyable of all my pistols to shoot TBH. Something about the recoil, very flat. I don't recall shooting my g17 as well at speed compared to it.

Will bring the g17 along too next time, if I can find reasonable ammo...

I wouldn't buy a small framed gun in .40 though, for sure.

Alaskapopo

06-08-13, 15:26

Gen4 g22 was a lot more pleasant than my g26 with +p+ ammo. Probably close to my g19 with the hot 9mm's, but sight tracking feels better.

Probably the most enjoyable of all my pistols to shoot TBH. Something about the recoil, very flat. I don't recall shooting my g17 as well at speed compared to it.

Will bring the g17 along too next time, if I can find reasonable ammo...

I wouldn't buy a small framed gun in .40 though, for sure.

In fairness the Glock 26 is the smallest Glock 9mm you can get while the Glock 22 is a full size gun. You need to be measuring these on the timer and not by perceptions. On courses of fire when I have felt slow I have had the best times because I was being smooth. Conversely when your trying to go fast you end up being less smooth and have slower times.
Pat

Alaskapopo

06-08-13, 15:48

Forgot to mention I have nothing against someone carrying a .40 or .45 or any service caliber just be aware there is no free lunch. With more power comes recoil. Make your choice based on sound facts and not emotion or myth.
Pat

Morpheous

06-08-13, 17:03

Bullet technology has come a long way. It's a toss up. Having said that, I roll with a 9mm as follow-up shots are mo'betta in a few aspects.

DocGKR

06-08-13, 17:06

Folks, unless you are issued it, there is almost no reason to be shooting a 9 mm +P+...

T2C

06-08-13, 17:12

Folks, unless you are issued it, there is almost no reason to be shooting a 9 mm +P+...

After extensive experience with 9mm +P+, I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

AKDoug

06-09-13, 02:22

You should come to some of the matches in Palmer, Anchorage area and test that theory. You will have fun. In reality its simple physics no matter how skilled you are you will shoot a gun with less recoil faster at least on your follow up shots.
Pat

I'd love to, but I've sold my soul to my business and managing the RSO operations of our local range. I shoot steel up here twice a month, but it's pretty darn informal.

I use a timer in training. My times with my Glock 17 vs. my XDm .40 are slightly faster with the XDm. I suffer horrible accuracy problems with the G17 and that might be part of the issue due to me working too hard to shoot it.

ST911

06-09-13, 09:25

C.Edwards

06-09-13, 10:39

I carry a .40 but if Doc says 9 is fine it is.

FAB45

06-09-13, 10:41

All the departments in my neck of the woods are issued .40, not sure why. I prefer 9mm, just handles smoother for me.

gunnut284

06-09-13, 11:55

I carry a .40, on and off duty, primarily because its issued to me. In a full size gun (my issue is a Glock 35) the .40 is fine, though I don't think there is a significant advantage over 9mm.

When my agency switched from 9mm (and limited .357 Sig) I was a proponent of the 9mm but there were too many of influential members who believed the 9mm was weak and the .40 was a hammer. No amount of documentation through testing and expert opinion was going to change what they "knew".

I am perfectly comfortable carrying a 9mm on or off duty and have done so for many years. I only began carrying a .40 off duty because I got a great deal on a HK P2000 which happened to be in .40. I definitely prefer 9mm in smaller guns (anything smaller than a Glock 23).

Overall, if given the choice I will choose the 9mm over the .40 in most cases.

Sensei

06-09-13, 12:16

I read the opinions, saw the stats, compared shooter performance, considered the qualitative stuff, and crunched the program costs. Late last year I switched to 9mm as my standard pistol caliber, and am working with a number of other folks that have either begun the same transition or are seriously considering it.

These are the early days of a major trend that will increase in momentum. 40 isn't going anywhere, but it will decline. Bullet technology in 9mm and justification for it's selection has never been better.

I tend to agree. Most of my early handgun purchases were between 1995-2002 when we were limited to 10-round magazines. Thus, I gravitated toward 40SW and 45ACP under the logic that the slight edge in stopping power won when magazine capacity was held constant at 10 rounds. This was also a period when most commercially available JHP ammunition was not as equal across the calibers.

Fast forward 15 years and high capacity magazines and better bullets make the 9mm a very attractive option. Therefore, I find myself going back and purchasing 9mm visions of my Glocks and HKs. As for ammunition, I favor the heaviest standard pressure option in each caliber. That means 147g for 9mm, 180g for 40SW, and 230g for 45ACP. My carry ammo is exclusively Speer Gold Dot or Federal HST. I see no significant difference in the 147g vs lighter +P loads when dealing with 9mm, and the 147g is noticeably lighter in the recoil department which equals a win for me.

houdini23

06-11-13, 08:27

my daily carry for the past 5 years was chambered in 40sw (XD subcompact). just in the past few months did i change to a 9mm. i feel equally comfortable with either round (both are speer gold dots).

the only reason i went from 40 to 9 is because my new carry weapon (Caracal C) was more available in 9mm and it was all i could find at the time.

after several months and several thousand rounds down range with the 9, i now find the less snappy load (compared to the 40) to be better for follow-up shots and thus confidence inspiring.

.XL

06-11-13, 12:23

As has been said multiple times in this thread there is virtually little to no difference in performance between the big 3 (9mm, .40 S&W or .45 ACP).
Your .40's are fine. 9mm is not superior to .40 and .40 is not superior to 9mm.

I agree. I own a Classic .40 and M2/9MM very same PPQ platform/frame/style both pistols and I really enjoy even those little performance differences if so, between siblings.

PLCedeno

06-12-13, 05:43