View Full Version : 40 Caliber???
I have been a strict 9mm, 45 acp or 357 mag handgun user for as long as I can remember. Thinking about getting a 40, glock 22 or 23 or maybe both. I have read some issues of 40's actually detonating the firearm.
Anyone on here actually every have any personal issues with one, just tired of hearing stories about a guy who knows a guy who's roommate had an issue type stories...Thanks.
NeoNeanderthal
06-23-13, 15:10
Never had one go boom. But they have been harder and more expensive to shoot so I ditched them.
Never had one go boom. But they have been harder and more expensive to shoot so I ditched them.
I agree with this. A lot of law enforcement love them but I've always stuck with 9mm or 45acp. My philosophy is that I either want a bunch of bullets (9mm) or big bullet (45acp). Plus I'm not a huge fan of over pressured rounds like the 40 cal.
I agree with this. A lot of law enforcement love them but I've always stuck with 9mm or 45acp. My philosophy is that I either want a bunch of bullets (9mm) or big bullet (45acp). Plus I'm not a huge fan of over pressured rounds like the 40 cal. The pressure is no higher than a 9mm.
I purchased an XD40 Tactical in 2009 because of a real good price . I have shoot 1000 rounds per year of my reloaded ammo through it "170 GN Missouri bullet SWC bullets, 5.7 GN 231 per year through it +2 boxes of Federal ammo the shop threw in as chum to get the gun sold. No problems so far. If you have the extra $$$ a 40 is not a bad caliber to have. The 45 acp has a "I am making up a number" 9 pound push when fired and the 40 has a 9 pound slap type flip when fired. IMHO the 40 is a 9mm on steroids. The 357 to me is a more brutal caliber to shoot than a 40.
I purchased an XD40 Tactical in 2009 because of a real good price . I have shoot 1000 rounds per year of my reloaded ammo through it "170 GN Missouri bullet SWC bullets, 5.7 GN 231 per year through it +2 boxes of Federal ammo the shop threw in as chum to get the gun sold. No problems so far. If you have the extra $$$ a 40 is not a bad caliber to have. The 45 acp has a "I am making up a number" 9 pound push when fired and the 40 has a 9 pound slap type flip when fired. IMHO the 40 is a 9mm on steroids. The 357 to me is a more brutal caliber to shoot than a 40.
Thanks man, I am wanting a 40 and have shot a few but everyone seems to have an opinion and a story of one detonating or failing but it is always someone who knows someone type of stories. I am probably going to go with a 23 and maybe a 22. I keep hearing they fixed the 40 issue with the gen 4 but people keep telling me to stick with the gen 3 on any glock.
RogerinTPA
06-23-13, 16:13
I had a G23 for quite a while, but didn't enjoy shooting it. I much prefer the round in the M&P platform, which was specifically designed for it, much more comfortable grip and milder/tamer recoil. It is way more enjoyable to shoot over the G23, and it is my favorite round to use because of the M&P. If cost wasn't so prohibitive to train with, I'd be shooting it way more than the 9. If you go 40, try to stick with pistols that were specifically designed for the cartridge, and not a 9 platform that was upsized.
For me, .40 offers no advantages over 9mm.
It's more recoil (and a "flippy" recoil instead of a "pushy" recoil), fewer rounds and more expensive for relatively equal ballistics.
I understand (in a 3rd-hand-internet sort of way) that many LE are going back to 9mm for all those reasons.
If you "just want one to have one" or don't mind the detraction, more power to you. If I hit the Powerball, I could see my 1000th gun being in .40. My choice at that point would be the old S&W 3rd gens. 40XX series. But that's just because I want one of every number.
Whatever you do, *don't* get a G27. Those things kick way too hard to be accurate in a defensive situation. I shot a buddy's. He wasn't accurate with it at all and I had to put the Vulcan-death grip on it *and then* cam my elbows out to get even tighter *and then* almost grip 'down' on it to put a string where I wanted.
YMMV. Good luck regardless!
I personally don't see the appeal of .40 either. I can shoot follow up 9mm shots much faster than .40. I carry either 9mm or .45.
NCPatrolAR
06-23-13, 17:16
I don't mind shooting .40's and have a few around the house. Between it, my 9mm, and 45 pistols I can always find ammo in one of the three calibers
PA PATRIOT
06-23-13, 17:28
Most of the Kaboom stories with the Glock Model 22/23's was do to reloaded brass or brass which was not properly constructed by the manufacturer. I have L/E friends whos departments carry the 22/23's and have fired thousands of rounds without issue.
The trick is to preform proper gun maintenance and replace the recoil spring every 1500 to 2000rds fired and to also to use ammunition from respected ammunition companies.
Devildawg2531
06-23-13, 18:20
I have fired north of 15k rounds from G22, G24 and G27 and have never had a Kaboom. I can count on my fingers the total times that I haven't had them go boom and cycle sucessfully (and most of those were me doing something wrong - like when I used Mobil 1 for lube and took a more is better approach just to see how it worked - caused 3 cycling issues on my G27 in 1 range trip)
I had a G23 for quite a while, but didn't enjoy shooting it. I much prefer the round in the M&P platform, which was specifically designed for it, much more comfortable grip and milder/tamer recoil.
+1. I also had a G23 and quickly realized that it wasn't for me. I can't speak for other 40 glocks but G23 just felt way too snappy for me. I had my friends try it as well and they came to the same conclusion. I replaced the glock with an M&P 40 and it's a much nicer shooter. But if I were you, I would just stick with the caliber types that you already have... If I had the opportunity, i would straight trade my M&P 40 or any other 40 for a 9 or 45 version. Now that i own guns in all 3 popular calibers, the 40 is my least favorite to shoot. It also doesn't seem to offer enough of an advantage over other calibers ,especially with the types of defensive loads available today.
Most of the Kaboom stories with the Glock Model 22/23's was do to reloaded brass or brass which was not properly constructed by the manufacturer. I have L/E friends whos departments carry the 22/23's and have fired thousands of rounds without issue.
The trick is to preform proper gun maintenance and replace the recoil spring every 1500 to 2000rds fired and to also to use ammunition from respected ammunition companies.
That is what I am gathering as well that it appears to be mostly re-loads but have seen a few with factory ammo...Still getting one just debating between the smith & wesson and the Glock...
I have a friend who had a Gen 2 Glock 22 blow up on him, not really the gun's fault, more the ammo, Federal HydroShok, which was determined by Federal to have been a bad batch that caused the gun to go high order. Federal took care of him and sent him a case of ammo and Glock replaced the Glock, he promptly sold both and both a 9mm. That said, I honestly don't see you having an issue with current generation Glocks, though I don't personally like .40 but as has already been said between 9mm, .40, and .45ACP you can pretty much always find ammo to shoot one of them.
I have .32ACP, 9mm, 45ACP, 5.7x28, .38spec, .357Mag & .44Mag and reload all of them....
I have nothing against the .40, but I've not found something any of the above calibers can't do that would cause me to add another auto caliber into the mix.
I love me some .40S&W. With light reloads my PPS and my Steyr M40 are fun to shoot. With SD ammo they are proven threat neutralizes.
Heavy Metal
06-23-13, 20:46
If you go .40 in a G-22, 23 or 35, get a Gen 4. The double-spring recoil assembly is a HUGE improvement vis a vi felt recoil.
goodoleboy
06-23-13, 21:05
I purchased my first Glock in .40. It is a Glock 22 RTF2. My local gunshop was having a hard time selling it because the texture was not what most were used to. I have never had a malfunction with mine and have put a wide variety of ammo through it.
Here's what I can tell you: I have found the .40 to be prohibitively expensive (in my case/public school teacher in the 48th lowest paid state in the nation) to train with, even reloading. As others have said, the recoil is different from a 9mm or a .45, it has a more sharp recoil pulse. The 9mm Glocks and 45 cal Glocks I've owned and shot have much smoother recoil pulses than the .40.
I must say that I can shoot my .40 a little more accurately in slow fire (and only noticable at distance) than my Glock 19, but I feel this is more due to the longer sight radius than anything. In rapid fire, the slower pulse of the 9mm aids in quicker and more consistent follow-up shots.
My advice: I like 9mm and 45 better in the Glock platform.
If you go .40 in a G-22, 23 or 35, get a Gen 4. The double-spring recoil assembly is a HUGE improvement vis a vi felt recoil.
I totally agree with you. I really enjoy my G23 mostly because it's a gen4!
BoringGuy45
06-23-13, 22:06
Of the standard pistol rounds I've shot, the .40 is by far my least favorite. I found that the recoil feels about as heavy as a .45, but quite a bit quicker and snappier. I like the .45 myself (just the way it recoils seems to agree with me) but the 9 is good too. Never got into the 40.
I enjoy shooting 9mm and 45 ACP more. That being said, I still own a few pistols in 40 S&W. I still like shooting them. I also made sure the 40's I own are analogous with the 9's and 45's I own. For example, I own a G22 and a G17. That way, training and experience can cross over between guns
40 also has been easier to find during the recent panic so I can stock up on it and still get some shooting and training in.
I see a lot of G22's and G27's shot every year and have seen no catastrophic failures. I say get a 40 if you can swing it. It is a nice feeling to go into a shop and buy ammo no matter what is on the shelf
Psalms144.1
06-24-13, 09:29
I've been down this road a bunch of times, trying to build a better mousetrap. Let me tell you my personal experience:
1. There is no free lunch. You simply cannot take a 9mm platform like the Glock, drop a new barrel and slide in it, and make it run a harder-recoiling round like the .40 S&W as well as it handles the 9mm. FOR ME, shooting equivalent pistols (G19 versus G23, G26 vs G27), I definitely KNOW the difference between the recoil impulses. While this doesn't affect my shooting significantly in the G23, in the G27, it's a show stopper for me. There are MANY highly respected "been there done that" former action guys who will echo the sentiment that, if you HAVE TO have a Glock in .40, the G22 is the smallest platform to pick.
2. There isn't a big difference at the "business end" of the two calibers. This has been discussed ad nauseam on this and just about every other gun forum in the known universe. The ONLY and SLIGHT advantage that a .40 S&W MIGHT offer over a 9mm is in tactical barrier penetration, so, unless your personal defensive plan revolves around shooting through auto body steel or glass A LOT, you're taking a harder-recoiling round for basically no gain. WRT "known performers," the .40 S&W doesn't "stop" aggressors any better or worse than the 9mm or .45 ACP - and when a lifelong expert like DocGKR advises that the 9mm is a better choice than the .40 S&W EVEN FOR UNIFORMED POLICE WORK, I STFU and listen...
3. More calibers = more problems. Trust me on this. I can't even start to count the number of 9mm cases I've seen "fire formed" to .40 caliber since my agency switched to .40 S&W but still allows 9mm personal weapons. If you already have Glocks in 9mm, the magazines are, for all intents and purposes, impossible to keep separate. In my case, I have both a G19 I carry at work, and G23 that's collecting dust in my safe. I bought Vicker's magazine bases for all my G23 mags, just so I'd have an easily visible way to make sure the magazines I was grabbing were for the right pistol when I load up a herd of mags to head to the range. In the latest incarnation of the Glock, the .40 S&W Gen4 RSAs don't interchange with the 9mm, but, again, except for tiny numbers stamped on them, they're identical in appearance - so if you keep spares around, best to mark them well.
Bottom line, if you want a .40 S&W just because you want one, more power to you. But, I STRONGLY believe that, in the long run, you'd be MUCH better served by taking the money for that new pistol/holsters/mags/sights and putting it into a quality training course. Another gun won't make you a better shooter, or better prepare you for your day on the two-way rifle-range; only QUALITY training will.
Regards,
Kevin
AR Newby AZ
06-24-13, 12:17
40 also has been easier to find during the recent panic so I can stock up on it and still get some shooting and training in.
This is a reason why I chose a .40 over 9mm when looking for a new handgun. .40 was readily available to buy at most places while 9mm were as rare as 223 at the time.
I loved my m&p .40 so much I bought the compact version and currently carry it. It's a good medium between 9 and .45 as far as capacity and ballistics.
WickedWillis
06-24-13, 12:25
If you are looking at getting a .40, I would shy away from Glock honestly. Unless you are planning on getting a Gen 4. I owned a Gen 3 22, and I have fired a Gen 2 22, and they were extremely snappy firing the .40 and I am not recoil sensitive. If you are hell bent on going .40 why not get a weapon designed around the round? HK's, The M&P .40's, Sig's were built around the .40 to handle the higher pressure. I enjoyed the caliber when I begin shooting a HK.
If you are looking at getting a .40, I would shy away from Glock honestly.
I would stay away from Glock completely. Sick of their stupid asses messing up a good thing.
WickedWillis
06-24-13, 12:33
I would stay away from Glock completely. Sick of their stupid asses messing up a good thing.
I can't fully agree with you Sir, I love my 19!
I can't fully agree with you Sir, I love my 19!
I hear you. I love my old G22. But my G17 is one of the Failure to eject right models.
I'm tinkering in the FNX line of pistols right now.
I have had great luck with my glock 22. Bought it in 1994, lost track of how many thousands of rounds I put through it. Still my go to handgun, except at the range where my 1911 excels.
From my mobile phone
I have had great luck with my glock 22. Bought it in 1994, lost track of how many thousands of rounds I put through it. Still my go to handgun, except at the range where my 1911 excels.
From my mobile phone
I really appreciate all the replies received so far. I also can appreciate a gun that has been going strong since 1994...
I am getting one, maybe a 22 & 23 depending on how the first one works out. I too have been buying different base plates as I have several glocks already as mentioned earlier....Good idea...
If you are getting a Glock, I would recommend starting with a G22. I would agree with the earlier posters that the smaller models like the G23 and G27 can be a hand full. I see a definite difference in qualification scores between the G27 and G22.
I've never been a big fan of .40. My issued weapon is a .40 caliber, and it does what it's supposed to do, but I'd rather be carrying it 9mm. All of my personally owned pistols are 9mm.
The use of reliably manufactured .40 Auto cartridges, loaded with virgin cases, has a way of mitigating hazard potential with that caliber in the Glock. Remanufactured ammunition can be utilized, when it is expertly remanufactured with cases of known origin.
The .40 Auto is unforgiving in the Glock, yet millions of rounds go downrange each year without issue. There are trends in those issues that do arise. Heed the above.
snake19792
06-24-13, 21:34
I have had my M&P 40 full size for almost 2 years. It has never failed me. While the 40 S&W muzzle flip may be an issue for some, i have found that if the grip fits your hand well it can be controlled. I have rapid fired the 15 round mags with reasonable accuracy (8 inch groups at 15 yards). Have inspected both the stock barrel and the storm lake barrel, neither have shown any signs of stress or abnormal wear. I recommend .40 to anyone who wants something more than 9mm, and have been known to allow others at range to trey mine in some cases. Best to try renting one before you buy to see if it will work for you as it has for me. This is my opinion and i don't trash anyone else for their choice, DO WHAT FEELS RIGHT FOR YOURSELF.
I have had my M&P 40 full size for almost 2 years. It has never failed me. While the 40 S&W muzzle flip may be an issue for some, i have found that if the grip fits your hand well it can be controlled. I have rapid fired the 15 round mags with reasonable accuracy (8 inch groups at 15 yards). Have inspected both the stock barrel and the storm lake barrel, neither have shown any signs of stress or abnormal wear. I recommend .40 to anyone who wants something more than 9mm, and have been known to allow others at range to trey mine in some cases. Best to try renting one before you buy to see if it will work for you as it has for me. This is my opinion and i don't trash anyone else for their choice, DO WHAT FEELS RIGHT FOR YOURSELF.
Thanks for the reply, I have shot many .40's and like them myself. Just was concerned about them detonating such as the glock kaboom stories but everyone i have read for the most part have been due to some form of bad re-loaded ammunition.
I am getting a 22 first and am eyeballing a 23. I am torn between the gen 3 & 4. I think in the 22 I am getting a gen 3 but if or when I elect on the 23 I am thinking gen 4. torn....
I have an hk p2000 in .40 and its not as snappy as other guns I've shot. I went with .40 because on going with 9mm only gives me 1 additional round.
Just buy yourself a .40 and be done with it. I love my G19 in 9mm and have a lot of rounds through it. But, my next personal pistol will be G23. Anybody can shoot a .40 and become proficient at it.
jpgm.
Just buy yourself a .40 and be done with it. I love my G19 in 9mm and have a lot of rounds through it. But, my next personal pistol will be G23. Anybody can shoot a .40 and become proficient at it.
jpgm.
That's crazy talk. The 40 might have a snappy feel. OMG! A snappy feel makes people cry. :rolleyes:
warpedcamshaft
06-24-13, 23:41
Here is an article I found interesting regarding the 40. S&W in which the author attempted to cause an explosive failure of a Glock 40 S&W handgun with bullet setback.
Andrew Tuohy wrote it.
https://plus.google.com/+luckygunner/posts/CiVxdHvWjYS
My personal experience is that I prefer the Gen 4 Glock in 40 instead of the Gen 3. But, hey... that's just me.
There are quite a few folks waaaaay more knowledgeable than me who don't recommend a Glock in 40 caliber. However, that hasn't stopped me from adding a few 40's to my stack of 9mm Glocks.
In the last decade or so, ammo engineers have produced a superb generation of 9 mm projectiles that offer penetration in the ideal range and that are capable of good performance after common intermediate barriers. As many agencies are discovering, modern robust expanding, barrier blind 9 mm ammunition is performing on par with larger caliber handgun loads, but offers substantial fiscal and training benefits. In test after test, most officers demonstrate a higher qualification score when shooting 9 mm compared to other common service calibers. Smaller statured officers and individuals with smaller hands tend to shoot better with 9 mm. Service pistols tend to be more durable in 9 mm than those in .357 Sig and .40 S&W. In a time of fiscal austerity, 9 mm ammunition is certainly less expensive. For most LE duties and civilian CCW/self-defense requirements, there are a lot of advantages in carrying a 9 mm: easy to shoot--especially one handed, relatively inexpensive to practice with, lots of bullets immediately on tap. (When I injured my strong hand a few years ago and lost its use for several months, I found out how much more effective I was using a G19 weak handed compared to a .45 Auto 1911). In the near future it is likely that many LE agencies will shift back to 9 mm given the benefits noted above; most civilian CCW/self-defense shooters will also be better served with a quality 9 mm pistol.
.40 S&W is a widely used caliber and offers a compromise between 9 mm and .45 Auto. .40 S&W was developed at a time when 9 mm JHP loads demonstrated insufficient penetration and poor intermediate barrier capability. .40 S&W offers nearly the same large magazine capacity as 9 mm coupled with the larger mass of the .45 Auto. Unfortunately, .40 S&W is a relatively high pressure cartridge, has a sharp recoil that can be hard for many shooters to control, and pistols in this caliber have a decreased service life compared to similar 9 mm handguns. In addition, .40 S&W ammunition is more expensive than 9 mm. A very experienced senior SOF NCO who has battled many of our Nation's foes and who has the distinction of having used 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 Auto pistols in combat during various phases of his career wrote the following superb analysis discussing pistol calibers 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 G23 crosses the magic line of running the shit out of your pistol. Allow me to explain... Most of the guys mentioned that they can handle the reduced size of the 19 and the recoil increase over the G17 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 G22 and G35 with acceptable results. However when you go down to G26's and G23's, the juice is not worth the squeeze. The recoil is now noticeably 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.”
The nice aspects of .45 Auto are that it makes large holes, can be very accurate, and offers good penetration of some intermediate barriers. Unfortunately, magazine capacity is less than ideal, .45 Auto is more expensive to practice with, and in general is harder to shoot well compared with 9 mm. .45 Auto makes the most sense in states with idiotic 10 rd or less magazine restrictions, if you get lots of free .45 Auto ammo, or in situations where modern expanding ammunition is restricted due to asinine, illogical regulations.
Rather than using larger caliber duty pistols, most CONUS urban LE agencies and civilian CCW/self-defense users would be better served by going with a quality 9 mm handgun (Glock 17/19, S&W M&P9, or HK P30) along with good ammunition, and then spending the majority of their efforts on effective, high quality, ongoing firearms training—a good minimum would be 100 rounds per week of dedicated, objective, monitored and scored training shots.
The keys are:
-- Cultivate a warrior mindset.
-- Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice -- Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system with adequately trained and equipped armorers to allow ongoing maintenance.
-- Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty load along with a similar practice load in sufficient quantities to allow officers to maintain and improve their skill.
-- Then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance and focus on training and tactics.
Whatever pistol is selected, make sure to fire at least 500 and preferably 1000 failure free shots through each pistol prior to using it for duty. If a pistol cannot fire at least 1000 consecutive shots without a malfunction, something is wrong and it is not suitable for duty use.
I don't mind shooting .40's and have a few around the house. Between it, my 9mm, and 45 pistols I can always find ammo in one of the three calibers
That is the very reason I bought a G22. I also happen to enjoy how punchy the .40 feels compared to my 9mm pistols. It's just fun to shoot. If you shoot your .40 for a while (at speed) and then switch back to a 9mm, it's so much "easier" that it almost feels like cheating.
I also happen to enjoy how punchy the .40 feels compared to my 9mm pistols. It's just fun to shoot.
You aren't from around here. :eek:
We run very sensitive hands and wrists in these parts, Pilgrim.
I’ve carried a Glock 22 & 23 for years. I had no choice in caliber as that was determined by my agency. I have never had a problem. Both guns have been very reliable over many thousands of rounds. I’ve never seen one blow up.
For personal use I’d probably recommend a G17 or G19 in 9mm. They are easy to shoot well, low cost etc.
I have friends that shoot only 9mm and I do admire the simplicity of their setup. One caliber to reload and keep in stock is nice when you run through a lot of practice ammo. If I had to start from scratch and was not into 1911’s - I’d probably stick with 9mm exclusively. It’s very practical.
PatrioticDisorder
06-25-13, 08:51
I may be an oddball here but I find that the 180gr. .40S&W isn't significantly more "snappy" than a 9mm cartridge. I prefer the subsonic loads in 9mm, .40 or .45, but that's just me.
147gr. +p HST 9mm vs. 180gr. HST .40 vs. 230gr. +p .45 the recoil progressively gets a little snappier as you go up in caliber. 180gr. 40 is a good compromise for me, one I feel very comfortable with.
I may be an oddball here but I find that the 180gr. .40S&W isn't significantly more "snappy" than a 9mm cartridge.
You can get banned here for that. :lol:
For me, .40 offers no advantages over 9mm.
It's more recoil (and a "flippy" recoil instead of a "pushy" recoil), fewer rounds and more expensive for relatively equal ballistics.
I understand (in a 3rd-hand-internet sort of way) that many LE are going back to 9mm for all those reasons.
If you "just want one to have one" or don't mind the detraction, more power to you. If I hit the Powerball, I could see my 1000th gun being in .40. My choice at that point would be the old S&W 3rd gens. 40XX series. But that's just because I want one of every number.
Whatever you do, *don't* get a G27. Those things kick way too hard to be accurate in a defensive situation. I shot a buddy's. He wasn't accurate with it at all and I had to put the Vulcan-death grip on it *and then* cam my elbows out to get even tighter *and then* almost grip 'down' on it to put a string where I wanted.
YMMV. Good luck regardless!
I dont know what you were shooting in the Glock 27 but I love mine, it is a joy to shoot with full power 180 grain defensive ammo. I shoot my Glock 27 as accurately as my full size Glock 35 with no issues.
skijunkie55
06-25-13, 08:59
I've run close to 1,000 rounds through my Gen4 G23 with no issues. Every type of ammo I've used it just eats up. (165 / 180gr Herters, PMC, CCI, Federal, Winchester, etc.)
Granted this was my first handgun so I wouldn't know the difference with the "snappy feel" compared to the M&P 40.
I do prefer shooting my Springfield 1911 tho... Something about that .45 just feels.... 'Merican
PatrioticDisorder
06-25-13, 09:01
You can get banned here for that. :lol:
http://www.ironmind.com/ironmind/opencms/Main/captainsofcrush.html :lol:
In all seriousness I think there is a lot of seasoned old school shooters who are simply more comfortable with 9mm, nothing wrong with that I don't think the .40 is substantially superior to 9mm or .45, at the end of the day a handgun in any caliber cannot compare to a rifle or shotgun. It does crack me up how many .40S&W haters there are, I'm still having a hard time understanding that one.
No one hates .40. Put thousands of officers on timers and score their results--the vast majority shoot faster and more accurately with 9 mm. Maintain a fleet of thousands of pistols; the 9 mm versions last longer and have less parts breakage. Thus, for most shooters, 9 mm makes more sense from a practical, functional, and fiscal standpoint.
Maintain a fleet of thousands of pistols; the 9 mm versions last longer and have less parts breakage.
That's true. I run em both. I cloned my 40 in a 9mm version for practice and cheaper ammo. They cycle close enough for me that the cheaper ammo for 9mm makes sense.
PatrioticDisorder
06-25-13, 09:38
No one hates .40. Put thousands of officers on timers and score their results--the vast majority shoot faster and more accurately with 9 mm. Maintain a fleet of thousands of pistols; the 9 mm versions last longer and have less parts breakage. Thus, for most shooters, 9 mm makes more sense from a practical, functional, and fiscal standpoint.
IDK about that Doc, I think some do hate the .40 reading some of the posts, some of the hate very irrational (my comment was definitely not aimed at you).
For me, the cost isn't an issue, ammo availability is a bit better than 9mm, parts breakage would be a worry if one was to not properly maintain and replace parts/springs. The timer issue I'd have to shoot an idential M&P 9mm side by side with a .40, but I don't think id be substantially faster with the 9mm, but of course I could be wrong.
Thanks for the reply, I have shot many .40's and like them myself. Just was concerned about them detonating such as the glock kaboom stories but everyone i have read for the most part have been due to some form of bad re-loaded ammunition.
I am getting a 22 first and am eyeballing a 23. I am torn between the gen 3 & 4. I think in the 22 I am getting a gen 3 but if or when I elect on the 23 I am thinking gen 4. torn....
I'm on my 3rd G23. Had a few gen2's back in the 90's. Have a recent
gen3 now for CCW.
I take both my G19 and G23 to the range and shoot back to back.
While rapid fire may yield smaller groups with the 9mm, they all
stay on the BG target at 7 yards or less.
I notice a lot of .40 bashing, but in 25 years of shooting every caliber
there is I don't have a problem with it.
No one hates .40. Put thousands of officers on timers and score their results--the vast majority shoot faster and more accurately with 9 mm. Maintain a fleet of thousands of pistols; the 9 mm versions last longer and have less parts breakage. Thus, for most shooters, 9 mm makes more sense from a practical, functional, and fiscal standpoint.
The Truth Cometh.
No one hates .40. Put thousands of officers on timers and score their results--the vast majority shoot faster and more accurately with 9 mm. Maintain a fleet of thousands of pistols; the 9 mm versions last longer and have less parts breakage. Thus, for most shooters, 9 mm makes more sense from a practical, functional, and fiscal standpoint.
Although I don't disagree with your conclusion, I fail to see how the large law enforcement agency / military only example applies to 'most shooters'. The economy of scale doesn't usually apply to individuals, which sounds like the op of this thread is.
From my mobile phone
I thought the OP's question was regarding people's personal experiences with .40 cal Glock kabooms. Not what their opinion is on 40 vs 9mm. :confused:
Sent via Tapatalk
I thought the OP's question was regarding people's personal experiences with .40 cal Glock kabooms. Not what their opinion is on 40 vs 9mm. :confused:
It was. But the modern bullet designs in 9mm can't be ignored! :lol:
I think the 9mm vs .40 vs 45 on the individual level is first, dependent on well you shoot each caliber and providing you shoot each with comparable results; then a matter of personal choice. More bullets versus bigger bullets, there's no right answer to the equation. It just depends on how the individual balances it. If you're outfitting a unit/agency, it becomes a matter of offering choices or going with what will work for everyone from your best shooter all the way down to the worst shooter and economics. It doesn't matter what round you're shooting if you can't hit anything with it. I like the offering choices solution, like LAPD, does, but I know a lot won't do that for a myriad of reasons.
Regarding the OPs question about .40 Glocks; I know people who run them on a regular basis and I've never seen that problem. As someone stated before, I think it's an ammo issue more than a gun issue. Having said that I'll also say that while I really like Glocks, the 22/23 are IMO somewhat unpleasant to shoot. I personally would rather shoot an HK/USP, M&P or Sig P226 in .40. I will say that I've never shot the Gen 4 22/23, so my observations are based on Gen 3 guns. Also, if you own a fleet of 9mm Glocks, it's sure nice that the 40s fit in the same holsters. Again, it's a matter of balance.
brickboy240
06-25-13, 11:45
I know one thing about the 40SW round.
During both the 2008 and recent ammo panics...I could not find 9mm or 45 anywhere for a long time.
I could always find 40SW....sometimes lots of it and I had choices.
For that reason alone...everyone ought to buy one of those cheap police trade G22s and some cheap mags and squirrel it away.
-brickboy240
I have fired tens of thousands of rounds through Glock .40 caliber pistols without any kabooms. A lot of the rounds were reloads. If you pay attention to how you reload ammunition, shooting a .40 caliber is just as safe as shooting other calibers.
After I retired and turned in my .40 caliber service pistol I had planned on getting away from .40 caliber and shooting 9mm and .45 ACP. Factory 9mm ammunition was cheaper than .40 S&W and I still have a few 1911 pistols I like to shoot. In November of 2012 ammunition started getting scarce and I still had reloading components including two 5 gallon buckets full of .40 caliber brass, so I decided to hang onto my Glock 22.
Buy a .40 caliber. In this day and age, .40 caliber ammunition may be available when 9mm and .45 ACP are scarce.
PatrioticDisorder
06-25-13, 12:27
I know one thing about the 40SW round.
During both the 2008 and recent ammo panics...I could not find 9mm or 45 anywhere for a long time.
I could always find 40SW....sometimes lots of it and I had choices.
For that reason alone...everyone ought to buy one of those cheap police trade G22s and some cheap mags and squirrel it away.
-brickboy240
This is actually THE reason I switched to .40, bickering over the small differences in capacity/size/performance is kinda silly, availability of ammo trumps everything else, especially in volatile times like we live in today.
No one hates .40. Put thousands of officers on timers and score their results--the vast majority shoot faster and more accurately with 9 mm. Maintain a fleet of thousands of pistols; the 9 mm versions last longer and have less parts breakage. Thus, for most shooters, 9 mm makes more sense from a practical, functional, and fiscal standpoint.
Yep. I just got that T shirt. I got a Gen 4 G22 600 rounds ago because .40 ammo is far more plentiful around there than 9mm. From sampling Gen 4 .40's I thought the recoil management was negligible. Well, when I got past sampling and got to running a few varieties of measured drills and used it in a USPSA match instead of my trusty 9's I learned differently. Whether I shoot it well or not; I don't shoot it nearly as accurately as fast as I can a 9mm. I plan to keep it for the ammo shortage plan B but I have no illusions.
Funny is some short drills up close like the FAST - yeah, hardly any difference (sub 6). But more complex tasks, longer strings of fire and SHO/WHO for strings much less the stuff the match threw at me and I was clearly at a disadvantage vs me shooting a 9mm.
But if somebody likes shooting them hey why not. Definitely a plan B for me.
Edit to add: Since starting to train with a Captains of Crush grip trainer - the "Trainer" model in my case; I've learned my grip is not as strong as I would have estimated it to be. I recognize this limitation is a significant factor in my recoil management of the .40 at speed.
PatrioticDisorder
06-25-13, 13:53
Edit to add: Since starting to train with a Captains of Crush grip trainer - the "Trainer" model in my case; I've learned my grip is not as strong as I would have estimated it to be. I recognize this limitation is a significant factor in my recoil management of the .40 at speed.
Keep at it! They're humbling at first, but you'll definitely strengthen your grip up! I started using them when I realized I needed wraps to go heavy deadlifting.
I know one thing about the 40SW round.
During both the 2008 and recent ammo panics...I could not find 9mm or 45 anywhere for a long time.
I could always find 40SW....sometimes lots of it and I had choices.
For that reason alone...everyone ought to buy one of those cheap police trade G22s and some cheap mags and squirrel it away.
-brickboy240
Agreed, and that is why I just picked up a G22, shot it, like it a lot...Installing night sights and possibly a captured 15 pound recoil spring. I am now wanting a 23 but will wait a while.
I don't want to get to far off topic though...My main concern was actually hearing from someone that has in fact had a failure, would love pictures and some first hand testimony...I know there are a lot of glock haters and is the first thing most people go to. I have seen kaboom stuff from all different vendors though, my question is not just about a glock that failed but any .40 that has failed. I would welcome the first hand response...
I personally like glock for the reliability, price and availability. I have never had one fail in anyway shape or form. I also love the M&P and HK P30, I had a hard choice with the 22 but feel it was right. If you have had one fail, post the pictures, tell me how and what you were shooting...Thanks for all of the responses.
I don't want to get to far off topic though...My main concern was actually hearing from someone that has in fact had a failure, would love pictures and some first hand testimony...I know there are a lot of glock haters and is the first thing most people go to. I have seen kaboom stuff from all different vendors though, my question is not just about a glock that failed but any .40 that has failed. I would welcome the first hand response...
I have personally experienced a number of case failures of various types in Glocks 22 and 23. Most recently, a series of them that occurred at a predictable rate with specific causality. I have also inspected a number of Glocks 22 and 23 that experienced catastrophic destruction.
In the mid to late 1990s, changes in the specs of brass and nickel cases with certain vendors contributed to catastrophic destruction of guns with less supported chambers, even with virgin cases. Failures from this era are frequently referenced in failure discussions, and over-extrapolated within the period and beyond.
Critical analysis of the guns, ammo, and trends are much more useful than internet lore. That analysis is what I base the advice I previously posted in this thread: use high quality ammo, manufactured to spec, from an accountable source. And sometimes even when all is GTG, stuff happens with man-made gear.
When lesser informed folks talk about kB!s, it's easy for them to focus on the guns. Get into the weeds.
No one hates .40. Put thousands of officers on timers and score their results--the vast majority shoot faster and more accurately with 9 mm. Maintain a fleet of thousands of pistols; the 9 mm versions last longer and have less parts breakage. Thus, for most shooters, 9 mm makes more sense from a practical, functional, and fiscal standpoint.
This.
I have never been a fan of .40's. The majority of pistol malfunctions, stoppages and parts breakage, that I have witnessed, have been with .40's. That includes Glocks, M&P's, and SIGs.
Alaskapopo
06-26-13, 00:15
I have been a strict 9mm, 45 acp or 357 mag handgun user for as long as I can remember. Thinking about getting a 40, glock 22 or 23 or maybe both. I have read some issues of 40's actually detonating the firearm.
Anyone on here actually every have any personal issues with one, just tired of hearing stories about a guy who knows a guy who's roommate had an issue type stories...Thanks.
.40's do KB but its more of an ammo issue generally. This is a high pressure cartridge and some of the guns don't have much case support. Things are generally fine until you get a batch of ammo that is over pressure (happened with Federal a while back and Speer) and things go boom. Generally its just a case failure and you will have to replace the magazine and find the extractor. Sometimes the frame gets cracked. A 9mm has a larger safety factor due to better case support and more steel around the chamber area due to a smaller hole. Also if you re chamber the same round multiple times seating the bullet deeper in the case each time you are tempting fate for a KB. Not a huge .40 fan but its not as bad as it used to be.
Pat
I have personally experienced a number of case failures of various types in Glocks 22 and 23. Most recently, a series of them that occurred at a predictable rate with specific causality. I have also inspected a number of Glocks 22 and 23 that experienced catastrophic destruction.
In the mid to late 1990s, changes in the specs of brass and nickel cases with certain vendors contributed to catastrophic destruction of guns with less supported chambers, even with virgin cases. Failures from this era are frequently referenced in failure discussions, and over-extrapolated within the period and beyond.
Critical analysis of the guns, ammo, and trends are much more useful than internet lore. That analysis is what I base the advice I previously posted in this thread: use high quality ammo, manufactured to spec, from an accountable source. And sometimes even when all is GTG, stuff happens with man-made gear.
When lesser informed folks talk about kB!s, it's easy for them to focus on the guns. Get into the weeds.
Do you have any photographs, what type of ammo, reload or factory, what was the failure and was the firearm still functioning after or repairable??? Thanks.
.40's do KB but its more of an ammo issue generally. This is a high pressure cartridge and some of the guns don't have much case support. Things are generally fine until you get a batch of ammo that is over pressure (happened with Federal a while back and Speer) and things go boom. Generally its just a case failure and you will have to replace the magazine and find the extractor. Sometimes the frame gets cracked. A 9mm has a larger safety factor due to better case support and more steel around the chamber area due to a smaller hole. Also if you re chamber the same round multiple times seating the bullet deeper in the case each time you are tempting fate for a KB. Not a huge .40 fan but its not as bad as it used to be.
Pat
Every glock in production does NOT have an supported chamber, doesn't matter what model or caliber NONE of them have a supported chamber. And 40 is not that much more pressure than a 9mm especially in a +P load.
I heard from a pretty knowledgeable source a few years back that... when the Kabizzles were more frequent... Glock went to having the guns sent to a 3rd party for analysis... and that it was pretty much always the case that the findings were that the pistols had been exposed to pressure levels beyond SAAMMI spec for the given round. :confused:
PA PATRIOT
06-26-13, 11:47
Its really simple,
If you feel comfortable using a .40 caliber Glock pistol just keep up with the simple measure of replacing the recoil spring every 1500rds and using quality factory ammunition.
For re-loaders I would suggest they do not try to stretch the usable life of a .40 caliber case and always use a & Full Length Sizer Die.
While some will disagree I will not reload a .40 case more then three times when fired in a Glock as I feel the continual Case Bulge and resizing weakens the brass upping the chance of a case rupture.
PatrioticDisorder
06-26-13, 11:50
.40's do KB but its more of an ammo issue generally. This is a high pressure cartridge and some of the guns don't have much case support. Things are generally fine until you get a batch of ammo that is over pressure (happened with Federal a while back and Speer) and things go boom. Generally its just a case failure and you will have to replace the magazine and find the extractor. Sometimes the frame gets cracked. A 9mm has a larger safety factor due to better case support and more steel around the chamber area due to a smaller hole. Also if you re chamber the same round multiple times seating the bullet deeper in the case each time you are tempting fate for a KB. Not a huge .40 fan but its not as bad as it used to be.
Pat
6-7 years ago Kb's seemed to happen every so often with pics, usually they were .40s, back then I stayed away from .40s myself, much has changed since then, Glocks have more chamber support, M&P's have good chamber support and I think ammo manufacturers have gotten better with QC.
How often do you hear about kabooms with pics in real life or on a gun forum? I've never seen one in real life and reports of kabooms have faded away almost entirely. Now the only issues I hear about with Glocks or M&Ps seems to be mostly 9mm issues (erratic ejections/BTF with glocks & accuracy issues with M&Ps and even the M&P issue has reportedly been recently addressed, Apex addressed the Glock issue).
Keep at it! They're humbling at first, but you'll definitely strengthen your grip up! I started using them when I realized I needed wraps to go heavy deadlifting.
I will! I'm ready to order a #1 me thinks. I thought I had a good grip from going pretty heavy on chins with quite a bit of weight added but I now conclude that locking my grip on a bar statically is not the same as crushing something. I've read Bob Vogel works out with the #3 IIRC.
A few years ago a popular series of photos on gun forums showed the incremental increase in chamber support Glock added to .40 barrels over some years.
I heard from a pretty knowledgeable source a few years back that... when the Kabizzles were more frequent... Glock went to having the guns sent to a 3rd party for analysis... and that it was pretty much always the case that the findings were that the pistols had been exposed to pressure levels beyond SAAMMI spec for the given round. :confused:
I agree and that is what I am seeing, someone overloaded a round when reloading it and blew the gun up. I just bought a G22 and love it.
I am still waiting for some first hand pictures or real information other than I knew a guy type stories. I am very interested in hearing about how and what happened with some of these .40 issues. I guess it is the engineer in me but I welcome someone to show me where this has happened. I can't find any real first hand info....
crazymoose
06-26-13, 16:43
Every glock in production does NOT have an supported chamber, doesn't matter what model or caliber NONE of them have a supported chamber. And 40 is not that much more pressure than a 9mm especially in a +P load.
Almost every autoloading pistol chamber is unsupported to some degree, it's just a question of how much. I believe follower and mag spring tweaks have allowed newer .40 cal Glocks to have more chamber support.
Alaskapopo
06-26-13, 20:32
Every glock in production does NOT have an supported chamber, doesn't matter what model or caliber NONE of them have a supported chamber. And 40 is not that much more pressure than a 9mm especially in a +P load.
Your missing some key points. First glock 9mm chambers have whole lot more case support in the 6 oclock are of the chamber than the .40 models do. 2nd while the .40 is not that much more pressure than a hot 9mm there is a lot less steel in the chamber area to contain those pressures. I have experienced .40 KB's I have also seen them happen they are not internet myth and its not limited to Glocks. Had it happen with a Sig 229 myself the first .40 I owned.
Pat
Alaskapopo
06-26-13, 20:34
I agree and that is what I am seeing, someone overloaded a round when reloading it and blew the gun up. I just bought a G22 and love it.
I am still waiting for some first hand pictures or real information other than I knew a guy type stories. I am very interested in hearing about how and what happened with some of these .40 issues. I guess it is the engineer in me but I welcome someone to show me where this has happened. I can't find any real first hand info....
I have seen it first hand and there is also plenty of photos out there if you search. I remember going to a Glock armorers class back in 2003 and asking the instructor in front of the class about the KB issue and denied it was a problem and then 4 other students in the class joined me in sharing their experiences. That shut him down pretty quick on that topic.
Pat
Your missing some key points. First glock 9mm chambers have whole lot more case support in the 6 oclock are of the chamber than the .40 models do. 2nd while the .40 is not that much more pressure than a hot 9mm there is a lot less steel in the chamber area to contain those pressures. I have experienced .40 KB's I have also seen them happen they are not internet myth and its not limited to Glocks. Had it happen with a Sig 229 myself the first .40 I owned.
Pat
I disagree, the 9mm does not have any more chamber support than the .40, the casing still has the tail exposed which is where this is happening from what I read. I also disagree with your a whole less steel in the chamber as a 9mm is .355 in comparison to that of the .40. Fairly minimal when considering this from an engineering standpoint and taking into account the round pressures.
If you have experienced this please post your photos, I can't imagine having this happen to me without taking and posting a ton of photos showing what happened....I am not being argumentative but I am curious to see it....
I have seen it first hand and there is also plenty of photos out there if you search. I remember going to a Glock armorers class back in 2003 and asking the instructor in front of the class about the KB issue and denied it was a problem and then 4 other students in the class joined me in sharing their experiences. That shut him down pretty quick on that topic.
Pat
where are your photos??? what did you do with the gun, how much damage occured, just a extractor and magazine damage or frame detonation????
Alaskapopo
06-26-13, 21:24
where are your photos??? what did you do with the gun, how much damage occured, just a extractor and magazine damage or frame detonation????
Did not take photos back then. Magazine was shot. Extractor was blown off the gun. no significant damage past general. Had a friends Glock once that got a small crack after a KB but in the others the fames survived without damage. As for what we did with the gun. Replaced the parts that needed it and keep using it. Not a big deal.
Pat
Did not take photos back then. Magazine was shot. Extractor was blown off the gun. no significant damage past general. Had a friends Glock once that got a small crack after a KB but in the others the fames survived without damage. As for what we did with the gun. Replaced the parts that needed it and keep using it. Not a big deal.
Pat
Type of ammo? Factory or reload, if reload how many times have you reloaded it???
This is actually THE reason I switched to .40, bickering over the small differences in capacity/size/performance is kinda silly, availability of ammo trumps everything else, especially in volatile times like we live in today.
I have 38 ,9mm and 45 acp but I bought a 40 just to have a 40. 9MM is blah to shoot the 45acp is more fun to shoot and the 40 is bla with a snap . But I just like to shoot so put a revolver or a pistol in my hand with a bunch of ammo and I will shoot it.
I have 38 ,9mm and 45 acp but I bought a 40 just to have a 40. 9MM is blah to shoot the 45acp is more fun to shoot and the 40 is bla with a snap . But I just like to shoot so put a revolver or a pistol in my hand with a bunch of ammo and I will shoot it.
Nice! Agreed!
Alaskapopo
06-26-13, 22:28
Type of ammo? Factory or reload, if reload how many times have you reloaded it???
Some factory (Federal 180 grain Hydra Shocks, and Speer 180 grain Gold dots) Some reloads. When it comes to reloading the .40. I do the following. If I am reloading for my EDGE or other similar guns with more case support that can be loaded long I don't worry at all. If am reloading for a Glock or other service auto at standard overall lengths I use slow burning powder to keep pressures down and I keep the pressures down in the 25K range and then I don't worry. I am not going to sort brass for a pistol and keep track of how many times it has been fired. I shoot way too much for that and I also pick up range brass.
Pat
:secret: It's looks like everybody loves .40 Some fans deny it and others enjoy it!
I have 38 ,9mm and 45 acp but I bought a 40 just to have a 40. 9MM is blah to shoot the 45acp is more fun to shoot and the 40 is bla with a snap . But I just like to shoot so put a revolver or a pistol in my hand with a bunch of ammo and I will shoot it.
You're "SIMP"ing.
I carried a Sig 229 .40 for years and never had a problem with it at all, even during 1 hand shooting drills. My dept just switched to the Sig 220 in .45, so it's a transition getting used to more frequent mag changes.
I can't believe all the negative comments about the .40 recoil...I can't imagine what some people would think of a full power 10mm load! (I actually carry a personal Glock 20 at work w/ three 15 round +2 mags loaded with 180gr DT).
I almost bought a 9mm Sig 226 "Tactical Operations" with the 20 round mags before they enacted the new ban in CT, as 9mm is the only caliber I'm missing (I have a 5.7mm, .357sig, .40, 10mm, and a .45). I thought the 9mm would be great for target practice, 3 gun matches, as well as it being an easy caliber to acquire in the event of "World War Z".
I do agree with shot placement being more important than caliber though. A 9mm to the head is a lot more lethal than a .40 that doesn't even hit. There's pros and cons to every caliber, and that's why it's nice to have several, so why not buy a .40! If you're going to get a Glock in .40, and size isn't an issue, get the Gen4 Glock 35.
Alaskapopo
06-27-13, 15:20
I carried a Sig 229 .40 for years and never had a problem with it at all, even during 1 hand shooting drills. My dept just switched to the Sig 220 in .45, so it's a transition getting used to more frequent mag changes.
I can't believe all the negative comments about the .40 recoil...I can't imagine what some people would think of a full power 10mm load! (I actually carry a personal Glock 20 at work w/ three 15 round +2 mags loaded with 180gr DT).
I almost bought a 9mm Sig 226 "Tactical Operations" with the 20 round mags before they enacted the new ban in CT, as 9mm is the only caliber I'm missing (I have a 5.7mm, .357sig, .40, 10mm, and a .45). I thought the 9mm would be great for target practice, 3 gun matches, as well as it being an easy caliber to acquire in the event of "World War Z".
I do agree with shot placement being more important than caliber though. A 9mm to the head is a lot more lethal than a .40 that doesn't even hit. There's pros and cons to every caliber, and that's why it's nice to have several, so why not buy a .40! If you're going to get a Glock in .40, and size isn't an issue, get the Gen4 Glock 35.
You make it sound like people are complaining about painful recoil. We are not. The thing is recoil slows down the speed at which you can shoot and this is exponentially true as distances increase. Stopping power is also about more lead in the threat in any given amount of time. I would rather be able to shoot someone 5 times in com with a 9mm in the amount of time it takes to shoot them 4 times in com with the .40. I shoot a 10mm and a custom 5 gun in 454 as well. Its not about not being man enough to handle recoil. Its about making smarter decisions.
Pat
With SD ammo they are proven threat neutralizes.
A rock can also neutralize a threat. I do not believe .40 offers anything over the 9mm, especially given the ammo available. Please see DocGKR.
Whatever you do, *don't* get a G27. Those things kick way too hard to be accurate in a defensive situation. I shot a buddy's. He wasn't accurate with it at all and I had to put the Vulcan-death grip on it *and then* cam my elbows out to get even tighter *and then* almost grip 'down' on it to put a string where I wanted.
YMMV.
Well I guess my Mileage does vary. The only 40s&w i have left is my g27, which i shoot well and do not think is a hard recoil to handle. I take it out past defensive handgun range and can hit head size targets at 50yds on static paper.
Its my go to fishing carry piece.
RagweedZulu
06-28-13, 00:00
I can't believe all the negative comments about the .40 recoil...I can't imagine what some people would think of a full power 10mm load! (I actually carry a personal Glock 20 at work w/ three 15 round +2 mags loaded with 180gr DT).
Amazing isn't it. OP, the Glock kaboom fiasco was years ago and new Glocks have no more problems than any other brand of pistol.
I own and carry anG27, 23 and 22 and love them all. I'm fast and accurate with them and for me they just shoot better than my G19. Plus I feel like I'm getting some knock down power in there, not just an anemic little "pop". My well used Glock .40s show very little wear, have never kaboomed and are still running original parts and springs.
As someone who shoots thousands of .40 rounds on and off duty every year, I'd take them any day over a 9, but I realize recoil bothers some of you, so you guys will have to stick with what works for you.
Also, be careful fawning over some "Internet experts" on gun forums like this. I've heard a couple guys on this thread alone speak of another member as if he's John Moses Browning himself. You guys don't know me or any other poster here well enough to say "he said this and he's an expert so i'm doing what he says!" Trust me... REAL gun runners are probably not hanging out in Internet chat rooms. Some of us have run guns harder, longer and in more places than others, but if you write a lot of wordy dissertations on M4C.net you're now a gun guru. Problem is, nobody has met you, seen your work or validated that you even do the awesome things you claim. Beware folks, there are lots of posers here on the interwebs.
Salamander
06-28-13, 01:01
In this day and age, .40 caliber ammunition may be available when 9mm and .45 ACP are scarce.
That's why I keep one .40 around. But it's a backup. I prefer to shoot 9mm or 45.
StingerDan
06-28-13, 05:28
To OP. I have owned and carried a Glock 22C for 8 or 9 years and shoot regularly. I have never had an issue. If I had to to it over again it would be a hard choice between .40 and 10mm. But I Do love my .40.
Amazing isn't it. OP, the Glock kaboom fiasco was years ago and new Glocks have no more problems than any other brand of pistol.
I own and carry anG27, 23 and 22 and love them all. I'm fast and accurate with them and for me they just shoot better than my G19. Plus I feel like I'm getting some knock down power in there, not just an anemic little "pop". My well used Glock .40s show very little wear, have never kaboomed and are still running original parts and springs.
As someone who shoots thousands of .40 rounds on and off duty every year, I'd take them any day over a 9, but I realize recoil bothers some of you, so you guys will have to stick with what works for you.
Also, be careful fawning over some "Internet experts" on gun forums like this. I've heard a couple guys on this thread alone speak of another member as if he's John Moses Browning himself. You guys don't know me or any other poster here well enough to say "he said this and he's an expert so i'm doing what he says!" Trust me... REAL gun runners are probably not hanging out in Internet chat rooms. Some of us have run guns harder, longer and in more places than others, but if you write a lot of wordy dissertations on M4C.net you're now a gun guru. Problem is, nobody has met you, seen your work or validated that you even do the awesome things you claim. Beware folks, there are lots of posers here on the interwebs.
If you are referring to docgkr, you may want to do a little research on Dr. Gary Roberts. That's the only person I've seen referenced here. Facts are facts, he's not an Internet expert. He is the top authority on the country right now (as I understand it) on terminal ballistics. Unless shooting though barriers - which gives only a slight advantage to 40, 9mm is a better choice for most shooters. He carries a 9mm because of the obvious advantages... I have a 40, but I'm getting a conversion bbl once I get the cash.
If you are not referring to him, nevermind.
Edit; also, there are a ton of "real" gun runners here, whatever that means. We have the whole gamut here.
Also, be careful fawning over some "Internet experts" on gun forums like this. I've heard a couple guys on this thread alone speak of another member as if he's John Moses Browning himself. You guys don't know me or any other poster here well enough to say "he said this and he's an expert so i'm doing what he says!" Trust me... REAL gun runners are probably not hanging out in Internet chat rooms. Problem is, nobody has met you, seen your work or validated that you even do the awesome things you claim. Beware folks, there are lots of posers here on the interwebs.
Plenty of M4C Subject Matter Experts are the real deal. I wouldn't call Kyle DeFoor a poser. Nor would I call LAV a poser. Or Combat Diver. Or F2S. Or Jason Falla. Or.. There are plenty of been there, done that's that "hang out" at M4C from time to time. Also, I have met multiple members at multiple top tier classes. Doc GKR is the real deal. If you love the .40, rock on. Many of us deliberately choose the 9mm over other platforms based on those that know and say as well as solid, fact based research.
gtmtnbiker98
06-28-13, 10:04
Amazing isn't it. OP, the Glock kaboom fiasco was years ago and new Glocks have no more problems than any other brand of pistol.
I own and carry anG27, 23 and 22 and love them all. I'm fast and accurate with them and for me they just shoot better than my G19. Plus I feel like I'm getting some knock down power in there, not just an anemic little "pop". My well used Glock .40s show very little wear, have never kaboomed and are still running original parts and springs.
As someone who shoots thousands of .40 rounds on and off duty every year, I'd take them any day over a 9, but I realize recoil bothers some of you, so you guys will have to stick with what works for you.
Also, be careful fawning over some "Internet experts" on gun forums like this. I've heard a couple guys on this thread alone speak of another member as if he's John Moses Browning himself. You guys don't know me or any other poster here well enough to say "he said this and he's an expert so i'm doing what he says!" Trust me... REAL gun runners are probably not hanging out in Internet chat rooms. Some of us have run guns harder, longer and in more places than others, but if you write a lot of wordy dissertations on M4C.net you're now a gun guru. Problem is, nobody has met you, seen your work or validated that you even do the awesome things you claim. Beware folks, there are lots of posers here on the interwebs.You lost me at "knock down power."
brickboy240
06-28-13, 10:14
If you think the 40SW out of a full sized pistol like the Glock 22, HK USP40 or SIG P226 is "too snappy" well...maybe you need to hit the gym! LOL
-brickboy240
You lost me at "knock down power."
Yeah, me too.
The thing is recoil slows down the speed at which you can shoot and this is exponentially true as distances increase.
Yep. A lot of folks found this out the hard way with the .357 Sig, too.
I attended Rogers Shooting School several years ago. It was interesting to watch all (and I mean all) of the PD and SO types who were issued .40-cal sidearms switch out to loaner guns in 9mm on training day two. I asked about this and was told that it happens all the time. I finished the course shooting a G35 but, that was the watershed moment for me to make the switch back to 9mm.
Let's return this thread to the topic of the .40 Auto/.40 SW.
If any members have concerns about the credentials, authority, or the level of influence of contributors herein, please bring the matter to a staff member or moderator via PM. It will be dutifully considered.
Heavy Metal
06-28-13, 11:45
You lost me at "knock down power."
He lost me at shoots the crap out of his Glock .40's but is still on the original springs.
If you want a .40 CALIBER Glock to last a long time, you need to be agressive on recoil spring replacement, especially the pre Gen4's which use the same spring as the 9mm models.
Trust me... REAL gun runners are probably not hanging out in Internet chat rooms.
True, 10 years ago. These days you never know who is around these marvels of technological wizardy.
crazymoose
06-28-13, 12:48
If you think the 40SW out of a full sized pistol like the Glock 22, HK USP40 or SIG P226 is "too snappy" well...maybe you need to hit the gym! LOL
-brickboy240
Plenty of us here pretty much live in the weight room. It's not a question of unpleasantness, it's a question of being measurably faster and more accurate at speed with a 9mm. Take the platform you usually shoot in .40, get one chambered in 9mm, shoot some timed drills. Almost a 100% chance you're faster with the 9. If you anticipate needing the capabilities of more powerful rounds (e.g. you're a cop who might need to shoot through auto glass or body paneling), then that's where the cost/benefit analysis of the various rounds should come into play. It's just a question of realistically assessing what you need out of your gun and round.
Alaskapopo
06-29-13, 02:42
If you think the 40SW out of a full sized pistol like the Glock 22, HK USP40 or SIG P226 is "too snappy" well...maybe you need to hit the gym! LOL
-brickboy240
Its not too snappy to just sit and plink with but its slows you down no matter how buff you are. I would prefer to have a 9mm that I can shoot faster and have more rounds than have the .40 with a slower rate of fire and a only a slightly margin of better terminal performance.
Pat
LoneStarM1A
06-29-13, 03:07
I'm issued a pistol and ammo in .40 so the decision was made for me. I wasn't really "into" guns until I was issued one so all my personal semi-auto pistols are in .40 as well. I'm happy with the cartridge, as is the agency that issues it apparently. I doubt it's going away anytime soon. A lot of these "billion round" ammo purchases you hear about by the .gov probably include a lot of .40 S&W. I feel no need to acquire a 9mm or .45 ACP pistol.
Functional reliability has been exceptional in the platforms I've used the cartridge with, namely the M&P, USP, and P30. Thankfully I've never had the misfortune of needing to fire it outside of training so I can't speak to its terminal performance, but based on all the testing I've seen I have confidence that it will perform well. The 180gr HST bullet driven at about 1000 fps seems to be a winner.
I don't notice a huge difference in recoil between .40 S&W and 9mm +p going from say an M&P 40 to a glock 19. It all feels about the same. In fact one of the softest shooting centerfire pistols I've ever fired was an STI Edge in .40. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I've fired .22LR pistols with more felt recoil.
If I need something hotter, I'll go with one of my revolvers in .357 magnum. If I need something cooler, again to a revolver with .38 special.
I do think there are a lot of people out there that hate the .40 S&W. A lot of them are 10mm proponents who resent the .40 as a "short and weak" watered down version of the 10mm. The rest are .45 ACP enthusiasts who probably feel threatened by the .40's advantages over that cartridge.
Alaskapopo
06-29-13, 04:19
I'm issued a pistol and ammo in .40 so the decision was made for me. I wasn't really "into" guns until I was issued one so all my personal semi-auto pistols are in .40 as well. I'm happy with the cartridge, as is the agency that issues it apparently. I doubt it's going away anytime soon. A lot of these "billion round" ammo purchases you hear about by the .gov probably include a lot of .40 S&W. I feel no need to acquire a 9mm or .45 ACP pistol.
Functional reliability has been exceptional in the platforms I've used the cartridge with, namely the M&P, USP, and P30. Thankfully I've never had the misfortune of needing to fire it outside of training so I can't speak to its terminal performance, but based on all the testing I've seen I have confidence that it will perform well. The 180gr HST bullet driven at about 1000 fps seems to be a winner.
I don't notice a huge difference in recoil between .40 S&W and 9mm +p going from say an M&P 40 to a glock 19. It all feels about the same. In fact one of the softest shooting centerfire pistols I've ever fired was an STI Edge in .40. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I've fired .22LR pistols with more felt recoil.
If I need something hotter, I'll go with one of my revolvers in .357 magnum. If I need something cooler, again to a revolver with .38 special.
I do think there are a lot of people out there that hate the .40 S&W. A lot of them are 10mm proponents who resent the .40 as a "short and weak" watered down version of the 10mm. The rest are .45 ACP enthusiasts who probably feel threatened by the .40's advantages over that cartridge.
The Edge in 40 is very soft but you know what is softer still an Edge in 9mm. I own both and compete with both.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Semi%20auto%20pistols/EDGE.jpg (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Semi%20auto%20pistols/EDGE.jpg.html)
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Semi%20auto%20pistols/SuperTunedEdgein9mm_edited-1_zpsce182b90.jpg (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Semi%20auto%20pistols/SuperTunedEdgein9mm_edited-1_zpsce182b90.jpg.html)
I only shoot HK's in 40s&w. I only stock 40 ammo and only train with 40.
1) HK's have no problem with a reliable 40s&w gun. None. There is no proven reliability or longevity differance between it and a 9mm. I understand LE agencies have different needs then my own, but I am focused on my needs not there's.
2) I know we all love modern 9mm Service ammo, but I personally love the 180gr 40s&w bullet. It's a smoking hot round. The 180gr HST is available to me commercially stocked deep in my safe and ready for any situation. At the end of the day 40 is less load dependent.
3) 9mm has slightly less recoil. Recoil management is subjective and a training issue. My goal is to get so good shooting 40 that I can burn down anyone on a shot timer while they are usin 9mm (not saying I am there yet;)
4) I know docGKR feels 9mm is past the minimum treshhold of performance standards and thus the return for moving to 40 is not necessarilly out weighed by it offsetting cost in most situations. I feel that while I may have a small measurable peromance benifits in pure shot on target and on clock using 9mm, that is going to be offse by a small measurable performance differance in terminal ballistics. There is no free lunch.
5) shooting in the real world is a dynamic thing. I know on a one way range we all hit heart and head shots on paper. What if the guy is wearing a thick winter jacket and I hit his shoulder with the first shot. What if he is behind a corner and I go through a piece of drywall first etc...
6) at the end of the day. If A new shooter asks me what to get, I say 9mm 100% of the time because I see the benifits of it for a basic civilian shooter. That being said, I love me some 40! Perfect mix between 9mm and 45!
To OP. I have owned and carried a Glock 22C for 8 or 9 years and shoot regularly. I have never had an issue. If I had to to it over again it would be a hard choice between .40 and 10mm. But I Do love my .40.
Thanks man, I do like the 22 I bought...
Amazing isn't it. OP, the Glock kaboom fiasco was years ago and new Glocks have no more problems than any other brand of pistol.
I own and carry anG27, 23 and 22 and love them all. I'm fast and accurate with them and for me they just shoot better than my G19. Plus I feel like I'm getting some knock down power in there, not just an anemic little "pop". My well used Glock .40s show very little wear, have never kaboomed and are still running original parts and springs.
As someone who shoots thousands of .40 rounds on and off duty every year, I'd take them any day over a 9, but I realize recoil bothers some of you, so you guys will have to stick with what works for you.
Also, be careful fawning over some "Internet experts" on gun forums like this. I've heard a couple guys on this thread alone speak of another member as if he's John Moses Browning himself. You guys don't know me or any other poster here well enough to say "he said this and he's an expert so i'm doing what he says!" Trust me... REAL gun runners are probably not hanging out in Internet chat rooms. Some of us have run guns harder, longer and in more places than others, but if you write a lot of wordy dissertations on M4C.net you're now a gun guru. Problem is, nobody has met you, seen your work or validated that you even do the awesome things you claim. Beware folks, there are lots of posers here on the interwebs.
Well spoken.
Let's return this thread to the topic of the .40 Auto/.40 SW.
If any members have concerns about the credentials, authority, or the level of influence of contributors herein, please bring the matter to a staff member or moderator via PM. It will be dutifully considered.
Thanks man, seems like we were getting off topic...
I only shoot HK's in 40s&w. I only stock 40 ammo and only train with 40.
1) HK's have no problem with a reliable 40s&w gun. None. There is no proven reliability or longevity differance between it and a 9mm. I understand LE agencies have different needs then my own, but I am focused on my needs not there's.
2) I know we all love modern 9mm Service ammo, but I personally love the 180gr 40s&w bullet. It's a smoking hot round. The 180gr HST is available to me commercially stocked deep in my safe and ready for any situation. At the end of the day 40 is less load dependent.
3) 9mm has slightly less recoil. Recoil management is subjective and a training issue. My goal is to get so good shooting 40 that I can burn down anyone on a shot timer while they are usin 9mm (not saying I am there yet;)
4) I know docGKR feels 9mm is past the minimum treshhold of performance standards and thus the return for moving to 40 is not necessarilly out weighed by it offsetting cost in most situations. I feel that while I may have a small measurable peromance benifits in pure shot on target and on clock using 9mm, that is going to be offse by a small measurable performance differance in terminal ballistics. There is no free lunch.
5) shooting in the real world is a dynamic thing. I know on a one way range we all hit heart and head shots on paper. What if the guy is wearing a thick winter jacket and I hit his shoulder with the first shot. What if he is behind a corner and I go through a piece of drywall first etc...
6) at the end of the day. If A new shooter asks me what to get, I say 9mm 100% of the time because I see the benifits of it for a basic civilian shooter. That being said, I love me some 40! Perfect mix between 9mm and 45!
I to like shooting the .40 and am going to pick up a G23 now, I am sort of regretting not getting the gen4 on the 22 but I still like it quite a bit. I think my list of the next two are a G23 gen 4 and a G21sf...
I still have not had anyone post any real evidence of any failures, I am starting to think it is more of a myth anymore....LOL
You make it sound like people are complaining about painful recoil. We are not. The thing is recoil slows down the speed at which you can shoot and this is exponentially true as distances increase. Stopping power is also about more lead in the threat in any given amount of time. I would rather be able to shoot someone 5 times in com with a 9mm in the amount of time it takes to shoot them 4 times in com with the .40. I shoot a 10mm and a custom 5 gun in 454 as well. Its not about not being man enough to handle recoil. Its about making smarter decisions.
Pat
I understand about follow up shots, and that totally makes sense for 3-gun competitions, but most officer involved shootings are 2-3 rounds within 10 meters. After reading this thread, I feel like we have come full circle since the FBI shootout in Miami. It was interesting reading about the development of the 10mm, how some agents loved it, and how they developed the 10mm "light" round because some agents didn't like the recoil. S&W then just shortened the cartridge, and we had the .40. In the end, there is no right or wrong answer, it just depends on what your comfortable with. That's why there are so many calibers to chose from...
Alaskapopo
06-29-13, 13:35
I understand about follow up shots, and that totally makes sense for 3-gun competitions, but most officer involved shootings are 2-3 rounds within 10 meters. After reading this thread, I feel like we have come full circle since the FBI shootout in Miami. It was interesting reading about the development of the 10mm, how some agents loved it, and how they developed the 10mm "light" round because some agents didn't like the recoil. S&W then just shortened the cartridge, and we had the .40. In the end, there is no right or wrong answer, it just depends on what your comfortable with. That's why there are so many calibers to chose from...
There is no such thing as an average gun fight. Some happen close some happen as far out as 70 yards with pistols. What does matter is shot placement. Take two shootings as an example that happened up here. One with Anchorage PD and the other with the Alaska State Troopers both involving large south pacific islanders attacking police officers. In the AST shooting the suspect was shot 4 times with a .40 sw and the suspect was wrestled into handcuffs and recovered enough from his wounds to steal a car when he was released form jail a few weeks later on bail and get into another pursuit. Now take the APD shooting where the suspect was swinging a club at the officers head and 3 well placed shots from his Glock 17 dropped in for good. What matters is not what round you chose rather its 9mm or .40sw but rather how well you place your shots with it.
Pat
There is no such thing as an average gun fight. Some happen close some happen as far out as 70 yards with pistols. What does matter is shot placement. Take two shootings as an example that happened up here. One with Anchorage PD and the other with the Alaska State Troopers both involving large south pacific islanders attacking police officers. In the AST shooting the suspect was shot 4 times with a .40 sw and the suspect was wrestled into handcuffs and recovered enough from his wounds to steal a car when he was released form jail a few weeks later on bail and get into another pursuit. Now take the APD shooting where the suspect was swinging a club at the officers head and 3 well placed shots from his Glock 17 dropped in for good. What matters is not what round you chose rather its 9mm or .40sw but rather how well you place your shots with it.
Pat
Not trying to start an argument but to me that just means the person could be a lousier shot or one of the environments may have been slightly less stressful. My groups are just as tight with the 9mm as they are with the .40, .45 and .357 mag. Do I shoot the 9mm faster or re-acquire the target much faster than with the .40, I am not good enough of a shot to really tell a noticable difference.
Lets not get off track, I want to see some failure photos!!!! where are they at, if I had a handgun kaboom on me I would have a hundred photos of the aftermath...Where are they at, who has them????
i have a g27 (used police trade-in) and a g35 "longslide."
the g27 is my preferred carry pistol and both guns have run many classes & range sessions. i actually usually shoot the mini and find it just fine for shoot-ability.
i have never had an issue with either of them (or my g26 or g21).
i remember the genesis event for the .40s&w - the FBI shootout in miami. now the main problem there was that the g-men brought pistols to a rifle fight, as well as the early silvertip bullets.
much different situation with today's ammunition, but the .40 is a great compromise between 9mm and 45acp. it's dominance in LE is powerful testament.
and, even at height of the post-newtown madness i could actually lay hands on .40 - and for reasonable prices at that.
another advantage of the 40 glocks - you can convert them to 9mm with a new barrel and mags. or 357sig and 40 mags(!).
so you have it your way, and do it without concern.
I don't think there's any real kaboom problem with glocks and 40. Wear problems, or at least shortened maintenance Intervals sure, but if your on a fishing expedition, you might get skunked.
Edit: okay aparently I'm wrong. Everything I had read here before suggested it was bad ammo/reloads. That said, it seems they are fixed or at least improved... Thanks for the clarification alaskapopo.
Alaskapopo
06-29-13, 14:49
Not trying to start an argument but to me that just means the person could be a lousier shot or one of the environments may have been slightly less stressful. My groups are just as tight with the 9mm as they are with the .40, .45 and .357 mag. Do I shoot the 9mm faster or re-acquire the target much faster than with the .40, I am not good enough of a shot to really tell a noticable difference.
Lets not get off track, I want to see some failure photos!!!! where are they at, if I had a handgun kaboom on me I would have a hundred photos of the aftermath...Where are they at, who has them????
That is the point. Shot placement is what matters not caliber selection. You will need a timer to tell the difference in your shooting performance you can't go by feel. As distance increases the advantage of less recoil becomes more and more noticiable in your follow up shots.
Pat
Alaskapopo
06-29-13, 14:51
I don't think there's any real kaboom problem with glocks and 40. Wear problems, or at least shortened maintenance Intervals sure, but if your on a fishing expedition, you might get skunked.
Yes there was real problems that have gotten better over time since Glock has improved the case support on the .40 barrels and ammunition makers have made some changes as well.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic3.gif (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic3.gif.html)
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic2.gif (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic2.gif.html)
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic1.gif (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic1.gif.html)
PA PATRIOT
06-29-13, 15:32
Deleted by PA Patriot
There is no such thing as an average gun fight. Some happen close some happen as far out as 70 yards with pistols. What does matter is shot placement. Take two shootings as an example that happened up here. One with Anchorage PD and the other with the Alaska State Troopers both involving large south pacific islanders attacking police officers. In the AST shooting the suspect was shot 4 times with a .40 sw and the suspect was wrestled into handcuffs and recovered enough from his wounds to steal a car when he was released form jail a few weeks later on bail and get into another pursuit. Now take the APD shooting where the suspect was swinging a club at the officers head and 3 well placed shots from his Glock 17 dropped in for good. What matters is not what round you chose rather its 9mm or .40sw but rather how well you place your shots with it.
Pat
Honestly I can't stand stories like this. So this one time in band camp.....guy took three 48 calibers right between the eyes and he still managed to do a backflip off the roof and run for 3 miles before pitching a no hitter in game 7 of the World Series. And then, this other time, dude died spot on a from a .22 to the left pinky....go figure!
(And I am not trying call out Alaskapopo at all, I understand and agree with his point about shot placement and no two gun fights being the same. Please don't take this as me trying to call you out at all)
But what this really means to me is all force on force situations are at best described as dynamic, unpreictable and unqiue. It's a mataphysical battle of order trying to overcome entropy.
There is no magic bullet. All you can do is:
1. Cultivate a warrior mindset (citation DocGKR)
2. Make decisions about hardware and ammo selection you feel comfortable with and understand
3. Train as best as possible
Everything else is just BS that fills the empty space of the interweb.
Alaskapopo
06-29-13, 19:18
Honestly I can't stand stories like this. So this one time in band camp.....guy took three 48 calibers right between the eyes and he still managed to do a backflip off the roof and run for 3 miles before pitching a no hitter in game 7 of the World Series. And then, this other time, dude died spot on a from a .22 to the left pinky....go figure!
(And I am not trying call out Alaskapopo at all, I understand and agree with his point about shot placement and no two gun fights being the same. Please don't take this as me trying to call you out at all)
But what this really means to me is all force on force situations are at best described as dynamic, unpreictable and unqiue. It's a mataphysical battle of order trying to overcome entropy.
There is no magic bullet. All you can do is:
1. Cultivate a warrior mindset (citation DocGKR)
2. Make decisions about hardware and ammo selection you feel comfortable with and understand
3. Train as best as possible
Everything else is just BS that fills the empty space of the interweb.
Did not take offense at all. The stories were used to illustrate that shot placement is what matters. The 9mm officer made good hits to the upper chest and the AST Troopers hits were not as good.
Pat
I have been a strict 9mm, 45 acp or 357 mag handgun user for as long as I can remember. Thinking about getting a 40, glock 22 or 23 or maybe both. I have read some issues of 40's actually detonating the firearm.
Anyone on here actually every have any personal issues with one, just tired of hearing stories about a guy who knows a guy who's roommate had an issue type stories...Thanks.
No issues. Buy a .40 S&W if you want to expand your gun collection.
Yes there was real problems that have gotten better over time since Glock has improved the case support on the .40 barrels and ammunition makers have made some changes as well.
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic3.gif (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic3.gif.html)
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic2.gif (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic2.gif.html)
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic1.gif (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic1.gif.html)
Finally, is this your pictures or something you downloaded on the web??? Either way finally pictures....
When I first got into Glocks, 9mm was getting hard to find after the first election, so I bought a G23. I'd fired one belonging to a friend on the range, and it started my slide from 1911s into Glock Fanboi Hell. I have always been able to find .40 S&W during the post election/post latest shooting ammo scares. Yeah, it's a little snappier, but it just requires more practice. I've now owned four Glock .40s (G22s and G23s) and one 9mm (G34), and only bought 9mm conversion barrels in order to shoot more often when The Panic isn't on. For me, .40 is a good compromise between 9mm capacity and .45 size holes. I carry 147gr HSTs in my converted 9mm G22, and 180gr HSTs in all the rest. I'd imagine both will incapacitate adequately and quickly if I do my part, without much difference between them. I just like the bigger hole and barrier performance of .40 in a worst case scenario. And the recoil is just something to learn to manage. My wife wants a G19 ... I like the G22 ... the next guy likes .500 S&W wheel guns. YMMV.
Alaskapopo
06-30-13, 05:58
When I first got into Glocks, 9mm was getting hard to find after the first election, so I bought a G23. I'd fired one belonging to a friend on the range, and it started my slide from 1911s into Glock Fanboi Hell. I have always been able to find .40 S&W during the post election/post latest shooting ammo scares. Yeah, it's a little snappier, but it just requires more practice. I've now owned four Glock .40s (G22s and G23s) and one 9mm (G34), and only bought 9mm conversion barrels in order to shoot more often when The Panic isn't on. For me, .40 is a good compromise between 9mm capacity and .45 size holes. I carry 147gr HSTs in my converted 9mm G22, and 180gr HSTs in all the rest. I'd imagine both will incapacitate adequately and quickly if I do my part, without much difference between them. I just like the bigger hole and barrier performance of .40 in a worst case scenario. And the recoil is just something to learn to manage. My wife wants a G19 ... I like the G22 ... the next guy likes .500 S&W wheel guns. YMMV.
They both require practice the fact is you will shoot slower with a .40 regardless of your skill level.
Pat
If you ever try shooting an IDPA match with a Glock 22 as opposed to a G17 one will fully comprehend why the 40 S&W isn't optimal. One handed and weak hand drills become close to impossible. Manipulating a flash light becomes doubly difficult.
Devildawg2531
06-30-13, 07:58
If you ever try shooting an IDPA match with a Glock 22 as opposed to a G17 one will fully comprehend why the 40 S&W isn't optimal. One handed and weak hand drills become close to impossible. Manipulating a flash light becomes doubly difficult.
Some of these 40 recoiling comments sounds like your shooting a 44 mag snub nose. Yes I've shot IDPA with gen3 Glock 22 and gen4 Glock 22 and gen 4 Glock 34. I honestly can't tell a difference in my times. Seriously to say that 1 handed and weak hand drills are impossible with a 40 is just goofy.
Some of these 40 recoiling comments sounds like your shooting a 44 mag snub nose. Yes I've shot IDPA with gen3 Glock 22 and gen4 Glock 22 and gen 4 Glock 34. I honestly can't tell a difference in my times. Seriously to say that 1 handed and weak hand drills are impossible with a 40 is just goofy.
Agreed, hit the gym then man...I can shoot one handed week handed whatever...Am I slower with the .40 than the 9mm, maybe but we are talking about split seconds...
We are getting off topic again, I want first hand failure photos, I want first hand stories....The only photos posted so far are from party other than the person posting them...If I ever and I mean ever have a kaboom I pledge this promise, I will post a hundred photos and first hand reasoning to what happened from what I can comprehend.
If you have these first hand photos and such please post them, what ammo, reloaded or factory, grain hell if you can post the weather conditions if it is an outside range. I am not saying it can't happen, I am sure that it has but I think that it is very rare and is from three and four time reloaded ammo....
I've had my P229 since 1997...and it's been by EDC since then. I have about 16K rounds through it....factory/factory reloads, defensive rounds. Taken to several courses and a trigger so smooth, it's like butter.
I like the .40 in the 229, as I can quickly bring it up to my target and make follow up shots easily.
Some of these 40 recoiling comments sounds like your shooting a 44 mag snub nose. Yes I've shot IDPA with gen3 Glock 22 and gen4 Glock 22 and gen 4 Glock 34. I honestly can't tell a difference in my times.
This could mean different things. You could be super awesome so 40 doesn't bother you, or you could be horrible so it makes no difference what you shoot.
What I am interested in is how you placed against same level shooters who shot 9. Percent hits, times, stuff like that.
Another personal observation is that I yet to see any competition shooter who ran with factory 40 ammo. What I've seen is a freaking art and science of loading 40 so it barely makes major.
I'd love to love 40 as it is ballistically superior to 9. I rent 40 once a year, buy two boxes of ammo, and half hour later, having looked at the timer and target, happily go back to my tiny 9 mm buhlits.
Failure2Stop
06-30-13, 11:59
Some of these 40 recoiling comments sounds like your shooting a 44 mag snub nose. Yes I've shot IDPA with gen3 Glock 22 and gen4 Glock 22 and gen 4 Glock 34. I honestly can't tell a difference in my times. Seriously to say that 1 handed and weak hand drills are impossible with a 40 is just goofy.
Do side by side bill drills with a G17, G19, G22, and a G23 and it becomes apparent which ones are "easier" to shoot.
Likewise, look at USPSA production results; how many top 10% finishers are shooting .40?
Buy what you want and shoot what you want, but even for highly proficient users, 9 offers a shootability advantage.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
Devildawg2531
06-30-13, 12:11
This could mean different things. You could be super awesome so 40 doesn't bother you, or you could be horrible so it makes no difference what you shoot.
What I am interested in is how you placed against same level shooters who shot 9. Percent hits, times, stuff like that.
Another personal observation is that I yet to see any competition shooter who ran with factory 40 ammo. What I've seen is a freaking art and science of loading 40 so it barely makes major.
I'd love to love 40 as it is ballistically superior to 9. I rent 40 once a year, buy two boxes of ammo, and half hour later, having looked at the timer and target, happily go back to my tiny 9 mm buhlits.
I tend to be in the top 1/3 or 1/4 of local matches so no incredible ability. I have owned 40 for over 20 years and it was the 1st pistol I purchased so perhaps I am just used to it. It may take you more than 2 boxes a year to be proficient with the 40. I would say that in most matches it seems about 80% are shooting 9 and maybe 10% 40 and 10% 45. I shoot factory ammo usualy 180 gr in 40 and 147 in 9. I find the 9 perfectly adequate with good feed and have no issues carrying it - just find the recoil difference neglible. I do like 9 for competition fun as the ammo was about 25% cheaper when it was available.
It may take you more than 2 boxes a year to be proficient with the 40.
I shoot factory ammo usualy 180 gr in 40 and 147 in 9.
It isn't about getting proficient with two boxes, it is about looking at it and figuring how much work needs to be put in. This goes beyond just simple split times. How much physical effort needs to be put it, how soon shooter fatigue creeps in after moderately long sessions and then you're not really improving etc. Out of 3 common service calibers, 40 is the king - in my observations - in inducing flinch/anticipation when shooting factory ammo; I don't want to spend more time than I need to rectifying that. Then, there is an issue of longevity: when you want to put upwards of 10K rounds downrange annually, you wanna consider your joint health. Plenty of 45 shooters wrecked their elbows shooting large volumes, and I find 45 softer shooting comparing to 40.
I personally think that most 9mm shooters would benefit from running heavier calibers from time to time to check and challenge their control skills, but I won't run 40 or 45 as a primary training and carry stuff. Just my thing, and my aspirations and skill goals. I'd shoot a couple of thousand of 45 annually, and that's it.
That said, if 40 is your thing, rock on. You certainly get my respect for running factory stuff and not downloading it.
Agreed, hit the gym then man...I can shoot one handed week handed whatever...Am I slower with the .40 than the 9mm, maybe but we are talking about split seconds...
Split seconds matter. Being a quarter to half second ahead or behind an aggressor can be life or death. In matters less grave, that same time can separate five placings in a field of competitors.
If you have these first hand photos and such please post them, what ammo, reloaded or factory, grain hell if you can post the weather conditions if it is an outside range. I am not saying it can't happen, I am sure that it has but I think that it is very rare and is from three and four time reloaded ammo....
Most folks who experience those in any quantity or distinction tend to do so as part of pursuits that are regulated by the rules and quirks of an employer, sponsor, or host. Pics and data may be restricted, proprietary, or covered by an NDA. I think you've gotten the answer you're going to get, and you're free to accept or disregard it.
My suggestion: Go shooting. Do it enough, and see what happens.
Split seconds matter. Being a quarter to half second ahead or behind an aggressor can be life or death. In matters less grave, that same time can separate five placings in a field of competitors.
Most folks who experience those in any quantity or distinction tend to do so as part of pursuits that are regulated by the rules and quirks of an employer, sponsor, or host. Pics and data may be restricted, proprietary, or covered by an NDA. I think you've gotten the answer you're going to get, and you're free to accept or disregard it.
My suggestion: Go shooting. Do it enough, and see what happens.
I think you are thinking a little to much into the recoil or speed of shooting in this. I think that there are a lot of other variables that count in a life or death situation. In that situation caliber will NOT matter to me, my mindset and physical abilities will far outweigh a split second between a 9mm or a .40 shooting ability. I appreciate the feedback though.
I still would like to see some actual first hand failures though...Anyone????
There are a lot of agencies that have noted earlier and more frequent parts failures with .40 pistols compared to comparable 9 mm, or example G23 vs. G19. This is a fact.
Psalms144.1
06-30-13, 17:30
jarhelo - it's clear that you're mind is made up - good on you. Best of luck in all your endeavors.
I've seen exactly two .40 S&W case failures since I started working with the caliber. Both were from the same batch of "gun show reloads" using 135 gr JHP projectiles - and yes, a couple of decades ago I was stupid enough to think that gunshow reloads were a "good deal..."
The first failure was in a BHP .40; it blew the bottom out of the magazine - destroying it in the process - no other damage. My buddy who had the failure did not recover any part of the failed casing.
The second was in my personal G23. No frame damage, slide or barrel damage, but the magazine release was destroyed as was the magazine. I did recover the failed casing, and it showed the classic "unsupported chamber" failure pattern. These failures took place back in the '95-96 timeframe, but I'd be lying if I told you I have any record of the serial number range of the Glock involved, which has long since left my collection. I'd wager the pistol was 2-3 years old at the time of the case failure.
Do I have photos? Of course not. The digital camera was, if available at all, a piece of "high tech" that I'd never even seen in person at the time...
Regards,
Kevin
Alaskapopo
06-30-13, 17:31
I think you are thinking a little to much into the recoil or speed of shooting in this. I think that there are a lot of other variables that count in a life or death situation. In that situation caliber will NOT matter to me, my mindset and physical abilities will far outweigh a split second between a 9mm or a .40 shooting ability. I appreciate the feedback though.
I still would like to see some actual first hand failures though...Anyone????
Gun fights are measured in seconds. Hitting the threat a split second fast could mean the difference between life and death. Not knocking your choice but don't discount the real advantages of a lower recoiling 9mm. Again your choice is not wrong but you have to weigh the options evenly. With a .40 caliber you get slightly better terminal performance and better penetration through some barriers. You also get more recoil which slows the rate of fire and makes shooting while injuried with one arm more difficult. The .40's also have shorter service lifes and generally less reliablity than their 9mm counter parts although the new Gen 4's reversed this trend for a time. The most important thing is that you feel confident in your choice and have the skill and mindset to use it effectively.
Pat
I'm much faster at placing follow up shots on target with my 9 than with a 40. Discernibly, a great deal more accurate as well. For me, when viewing this from a CCW holder's perspective, the faster, more accurately placed follow up shots trump larger caliber selection (I will not fool myself into hoping for a one-shot stop). And when taking into account today's advanced bullet construction I see the large caliber advantage margins disappear.
Devildawg2531
06-30-13, 18:03
Not interested in a 9 vs 40 argument (I like and own both). I carry the 40 because I can handle the recoil well and shoot it well. But for those who are anti 40 due to the thunderous recoil, it's hard on elbow's (haven't seen this documented), wears out guns (replace the recoil spring every 5k rounds) and may go KABOOM (with crappy gun show reload's).
The resident terminal ballistic DocGKR say's regarding the 40:
"Nonetheless, if I was in a department that issued .40 or was doing a lot of LE work around vehicles, I'd be strongly tempted to carry a M&P40. Lots of 180 gr JHP's that do well against intermediate barriers is a good thing."
I live in an area that has a good # of automobile's and I'm assuming that in a shootout someone may attempt to take cover behind a barrier. Serious question I CCW always and thankfuly have never needed to discharge it at a human but not knowing when I may need the weapon does improved barrier performance of the 40 not resonate at all?
Honestly DD, barrier penetration isn't very high on my priorities list.
Alaskapopo
06-30-13, 18:13
Not interested in a 9 vs 40 argument (I like and own both). I carry the 40 because I can handle the recoil well and shoot it well. But for those who are anti 40 due to the thunderous recoil, it's hard on elbow's (haven't seen this documented), wears out guns (replace the recoil spring every 5k rounds) and may go KABOOM (with crappy gun show reload's).
The resident terminal ballistic DocGKR say's regarding the 40:
"Nonetheless, if I was in a department that issued .40 or was doing a lot of LE work around vehicles, I'd be strongly tempted to carry a M&P40. Lots of 180 gr JHP's that do well against intermediate barriers is a good thing."
I live in an area that has a good # of automobile's and I'm assuming that in a shootout someone may attempt to take cover behind a barrier. Serious question I CCW always and thankfuly have never needed to discharge it at a human but not knowing when I may need the weapon does improved barrier performance of the 40 not resonate at all?
Does this look like a crappy gun show reload to you?
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g299/355sigfan/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic2.gif (http://s59.photobucket.com/user/355sigfan/media/Gun%20blow%20ups/deanpic2.gif.html)
Also as to barrier penetration the difference is slight its not like the 9mm is going to bounce off what you hide behind and the 40 will blow it up. People have a tendancy of overstating the advantages of their choices and understating the disadvantages as you have done on both hands in your post.
Pat
I can't believe this thread is still going on. For as much as practice is preached here(as it should), snappy recoil along with pistol damage are poor excuses to avoid a .40 s&w. I think of all the people who go through our academy every year, who never shot a pistol before and it's not an issue for them to shoot fast and accurate without their pistol going down. End thread go shoot.
jpgm
Alaskapopo
06-30-13, 18:51
I can't believe this thread is still going on. For as much as practice is preached here(as it should), snappy recoil along with pistol damage are poor excuses to avoid a .40 s&w. I think of all the people who go through our academy every year, who never shot a pistol before and it's not an issue for them to shoot fast and accurate without their pistol going down. End thread go shoot.
jpgm
I don't have the stats in front of me but many departments have noticed an increased hit ratio when going back to 9mm from the .40. Also police standards for passing qualifications are typically very low and its not a measure you should try and use for setting an argument like this. I shoot thousands of rounds per year with a variety of calibers and I chose the 9mm for serious use. There is a mistaken assumption by big bore fans that if you prefer the 9mm it is because your lack strength or the ability to shoot well and that clearly is not the case.
Pat
This thread brings flash backs to never ending BBQ discussions between my father and his friends about the 30.06 vs. .270.
Caliber wars are hilarious. Like what you like and use it well.
No need to redefine or inject an unmade argument on my behalf.
jpgm
This thread brings flash backs to never ending BBQ discussions between my father and his friends about the 30.06 vs. .270.
Caliber wars are hilarious. Like what you like and use it well.
Yeah, no kidding. Thing is, the OPs question has NOTHING to do with 9mm. He's asking about people who have had 1st hand experience with Glock .40 KBs, yet some people can't figure that out. :rolleyes:
Sent via Tapatalk
Alaskapopo
06-30-13, 19:42
Yeah, no kidding. Thing is, the OPs question has NOTHING to do with 9mm. He's asking about people who have had 1st hand experience with Glock .40 KBs, yet some people can't figure that out. :rolleyes:
Sent via Tapatalk
Some of us have given him those experiences and yet he seems to want to discount them.
Pat
Some of us have given him those experiences and yet he seems to want to discount them.
Pat
And I saw that too, Pat, but it seems whenever someone asks about any caliber other than a 9mm, everyone's gotta jump in & tell their story about how great the 9 is. We've all heard it. God forbid someone's interested in talking or learning about other calibers.
Sent via Tapatalk
I think this thread has run it's course. With the additional threads already available, the topic is adequately covered for now.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.