View Full Version : Top 5 40s&w guns/platforms ever.
Here is my list:
1) m&p40- Everyone loves it here so I'll take their word for it since this is a pretty knowledgeable group. i Had an m&pC and was not impressed but I imagine the full size is another animal
2) Sig P229- formally owned 3. In my experience it was built around the 40 and had the weight to handle it. Too bad sig has supposed issues my best shooting buddy just got a P229 Elite and I have to say it has been awesome for the first 600-800 rnds. Many would agree the 228 in 9mm was even better.
3) HK USP- the first 40s&w gun right?
4) HK P30/P2000- own both and P2000sk is also nice.
5) Glock 22/23- formally owned: 2nd gen G22, 3rd gem G23. The 23 was a beast (like the 19) 13 for carry 15 and some extra grip for HD.
I also have owned a beretta 96, and a Waltier PPS in 40 and thought it was a nice little powerhouse......i looked in to the walther P99 but decided to pass and always wanted to try the BHP in either 9 or 40.
Am I missing any?
Glock 22 was the first .40SW handgun on the shelves. It beat the S&W 4006 to market (by about a week IIRC).
Glock 22 was the first .40SW handgun on the shelves. It beat the S&W 4006 to market (by about a week IIRC).
Your memory serves you right. Glock was the first to market with the .40 Smith and Wesson. Im sure there were some execs at S&W who felt like this :shout: when it happened.
if i had to go 40 cal it would either be a USP/p30/p2000 or a smith m&p 40...
those are some of the few pistols truly designed for the cartridge... Seems a lot of 40's are just bored out 9mm's... perhaps that's why 40 gets a rep as a "snappy" unpleasant to shoot round...
i can't comment on the sig, but given recent sig quality.. i'd have to pass.
titsonritz
09-20-11, 01:51
Your memory serves you right. Glock was the first to market with the .40 Smith and Wesson. Im sure there were some execs at S&W who felt like this :shout: when it happened.
And I remember the 2nd Gen 22s failed the CHP trails and they adopted the S&W. Glock shortly afterwards came out their redesigned third pin model.
if i had to go 40 cal it would either be a USP/p30/p2000 or a smith m&p 40...
those are some of the few pistols truly designed for the cartridge... Seems a lot of 40's are just bored out 9mm's... perhaps that's why 40 gets a rep as a "snappy" unpleasant to shoot round...
I agree.
Here is my list:
1) m&p40- Everyone loves it here so I'll take their word for it since this is a pretty knowledgeable group. i Had an m&pC and was not impressed but I imagine the full size is another animal
2) Sig P229- formally owned 3. In my experience it was built around the 40 and had the weight to handle it. Too bad sig has supposed issues my best shooting buddy just got a P229 Elite and I have to say it has been awesome for the first 600-800 rnds. Many would agree the 228 in 9mm was even better.
3) HK USP- the first 40s&w gun right?
4) HK P30/P2000- own both and P2000sk is also nice.
5) Glock 22/23- formally owned: 2nd gen G22, 3rd gem G23. The 23 was a beast (like the 19) 13 for carry 15 and some extra grip for HD.
I also have owned a beretta 96, and a Waltier PPS in 40 and thought it was a nice little powerhouse......i looked in to the walther P99 but decided to pass and always wanted to try the BHP in either 9 or 40.
Am I missing any?
I would say the Gen4 G22/G23 is a better .40 platform than the previous Gen's. On the Gen4 G23 (now has just over 1k rounds on it), recoil has some snap taken out of it, and the new texture/slightly smaller frame really works for me. Being a former owner of a Gen3 G22 and having opportunities to shoot a Gen2 and Gen3 G23 frequently, I do think the Gen4 Glock .40's rachet up Glock .40 performance a bit. I prefer the handling of the Gen4 G23 to the M&P40 that I also own.
Having owned the Sig 229 DAK, M&P 40, both gen 3 and 4 of the G22 & 23 i can summarize this way: 229 is or seems heaviest and because of that handles the 40 S&W best in terms of recoil but difficult trigger compared to the others. The M&P; best ergos and handles recoil very well but trigger is odd in its original configuration. Glock; handles recoil well (in the Gen4 iteration) and best trigger of the group.
1. M&P40
2. MP5/40
3. S&W 4006
4. Browning Hi-Power
5. Everything else...
I know everyone loves the m&p but the only way I will ever own one is if it's free. My brother and our academy classmate had nothing but problems with them. My brother sents his back to s&w, he shot it and had 1 malfunction out of 100 rounds since getting back. Both have since switched to glocks with zero malfunctions. As a duty or edc I will never trust a m&p. I carry a XD on and off duty but may switch to a gen 4 glock 22.
I know everyone loves the m&p but the only way I will ever own one is if it's free. My brother and our academy classmate had nothing but problems with them. My brother sents his back to s&w, he shot it and had 1 malfunction out of 100 rounds since getting back. Both have since switched to glocks with zero malfunctions. As a duty or edc I will never trust a m&p. I carry a XD on and off duty but may switch to a gen 4 glock 22.
You have just let an experiment with an N of 1 cause you to loose faith in a platform that has demonstrated a track record of reliability when tested in large numbers.
Although I can't comment too much about the .40 due to my limited experience, I wish to chime in none the less.
I had a Sig P229 for a while but didn't like it much. I felt it was to heavy for what it was. I have a USP Compact and it's ok. Much better than the P229. But I really love my P2000. Some day I'd like to try an M&P but for now it looks like I should throw a 4006 into the collection!
And yes, I wish I could have an MP5/40.
You have just let an experiment with an N of 1 cause you to loose faith in a platform that has demonstrated a track record of reliability when tested in large numbers.
It has not demonstrated a track record of reliability in front of my eyes. I've seen the weapons fail over and over right next to me at the range, not some screen name posting on the internet. Even if it was an N of 1, it's my life that is on the line. Being a LEO my chances of being in a shooting is ten fold greater than that of average Joe ccw'er. I refuse to put my life in the hands of something that I have seen fail numerous times, but that's me.
Sorry for the thread jack.
Exiledviking
09-21-11, 00:05
But I really love my P2000.
I have to agree, the .40S&W HK P2000 is one of my favorite pistols and it is superb .40 pistol.
The M&P40 is my top choice for a .40 pistol.
Would love to get my hands on the new CHP S&W 4006 with the integral rail.
if i had to go 40 cal it would either be a USP/p30/p2000 or a smith m&p 40...
those are some of the few pistols truly designed for the cartridge... Seems a lot of 40's are just bored out 9mm's... perhaps that's why 40 gets a rep as a "snappy" unpleasant to shoot round...
i can't comment on the sig, but given recent sig quality.. i'd have to pass.
This is the reason I chose the M&P in 40. And when I decide on a Glock, it will be a 9mm. This logic holds true for a lot of other things: the AR was designed to be DI, the 1911 in .45, etc.
I carry the HK USPc in .40 and the HK P2000SK as a BUG or PC weapon. Love them both. Would like the P30 in .40S&W instead of the USPc for the updated ergos but I have a limited list to work from.
Although reliable and durable for its day, except for nostalgia or if issued by your agency, there is no longer any reason to use a 4006 as it is a difficult to service, unergonomic, low mag capacity, heavy pistol that has been far surpassed by the M&P40.
Although reliable and durable for its day, except for nostalgia or if issued by your agency, there is no longer any reason to use a 4006 as it is a difficult to service, unergonomic, low mag capacity, heavy pistol that has been far surpassed by the M&P40.
The 4006 was the first gun I was ever issued. I hated it when I carried it but I wish I would have bought it when I had the chance. I always shot great with it but there are much better options now.
I carry a P2000 at work, a P2000sk off duty, and have a G22 gen2 next to the bed.
Beretta 96.
Because i have thousands of rounds down range on it and the muscle memory to go with it
Anything else would be secondary.
For newcomer I'd go with Smith & Wesson #1. The gen 4 glock issues have me leary.
I know everyone loves the m&p but the only way I will ever own one is if it's free. My brother and our academy classmate had nothing but problems with them. My brother sents his back to s&w, he shot it and had 1 malfunction out of 100 rounds since getting back. Both have since switched to glocks with zero malfunctions. As a duty or edc I will never trust a m&p. I carry a XD on and off duty but may switch to a gen 4 glock 22.
Really, I feel the same way about XD's and carry M&P's.
Magic_Salad0892
09-21-11, 15:01
1: HK USP40C
2: Glock 23 Gen4
3: S&W M&P40
4: HK P2000
5: HK MP5 Subgun chambered in .40.
Really, I feel the same way about XD's and carry M&P's.
Same here. I owned an XD for about 2 months. Its was nothing but a unreliable paper weight.
I'm glad TXBob liked his 96. Ours were crap, the agency had to order up a replacement before the 96D contract was even five 5 years old. I've never seen so many cracked frames in my life.
MagicSalad. We had the UMP-40's. I'd have preferred a telescopic stock with adjustable LOP to the side folder.
I'm glad TXBob liked his 96. Ours were crap, the agency had to order up a replacement before the 96D contract was even five 5 years old. I've never seen so many cracked frames in my life.
The 40 S&W was always too much caliber for that Beretta platform. Frames, locking blocks...
I had an XD 40 that I developed a hatred for. I felt it was a failure from design.
It certainly wouldn't top my choices now, but i am loathe to switch with from a proven working weapon.
Also I cheated and switched to 9 mm.
To me the Sig 229 always lacked the balance and feel of previous models lile the 220, 225, and 226. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the 229 just a beefed up 228 with a much heavier SS slide. The Arkansas State Police adopted it and it was their shortest serving sidearm ever. They had lots of problems with extractors and ended up replacing after 3-4 years if I recall with Glock 21's and 23's.
My experience with a couple of XD's was not stellar. I would have to rate the Glocks 22,23, or 35 at the top followed by the H&K's, and BHP .40. The H&K UMP's never impressed me and an agency that bought several for SWAT ended up all going down. The MP-40 was much better but I always thought they hit a home run with the MP-5 for what it was originally designed for and the .40 model was never as controllable, not even close.
Maybe we should be making a list of the 5 worst .40's. The original Sigma takes the cake on this list.
if i had to go 40 cal it would either be a USP/p30/p2000 or a smith m&p 40...
those are some of the few pistols truly designed for the cartridge... Seems a lot of 40's are just bored out 9mm's... perhaps that's why 40 gets a rep as a "snappy" unpleasant to shoot round...
i can't comment on the sig, but given recent sig quality.. i'd have to pass.
The H&K USP was designed around the .40S&W and I seem to recall reading the P229 was as well. I would prefer an older SIG P229 over a Glock in .40S&W.
I've only owned three .40S&W guns, thus far. A SIG P229, a Kahr K40 and an H&K USPc (with .357Sig barrel.) I was less than impressed with the P229 at the time, pretty much the same with the H&K mainly because I shot .357Sig with it and the Kahr dented every empty it spat out, plus...the sonova-bitch BIT ME! It was my own damn fault though. I had just cleaned it and had the action open, carrying it in my support hand with the ejection port by the web of my thumb then SNAP! I still have the scar too. :big_boss:
Fuzzy-Reticle
09-21-11, 20:34
Of the ones I own:
1. Glock 22
2. Hk USP
3. SIG239
3. SIG229
4. M&P40
5. XD40
Magic_Salad0892
09-28-11, 12:59
I'm glad TXBob liked his 96. Ours were crap, the agency had to order up a replacement before the 96D contract was even five 5 years old. I've never seen so many cracked frames in my life.
MagicSalad. We had the UMP-40's. I'd have preferred a telescopic stock with adjustable LOP to the side folder.
UMP-40 is definitely a downgrade.
HK went full retard. However, there are some cool things about it. I've only shot the 9x19mm one though.
I only shot a Glock 22 and S&W 4006 in .40 They are also the only two .40 guns I ever saw outside of a gunshop, and even there they are a rarity. The caliber is just not popular at all in my area, or Europe in general I suppose.
Both shot fine, though I generally just donīt like the classic S&W semi-autos. Didnīt notice that much of a difference between the 9mm and the .40, but as I said I have very limited experience with the caliber.
Only shot a UMP in 9mm, but they are not even close to the MP5 IMO.
My favorite .40 is the M&P40c.
I can shoot it sooo much better than my old G27.
crusader4x
09-29-11, 14:21
I'm NOT LEO nor do I carry, but I've had nothing but love from my .40 1st Gen Walther P99. I have read anecdotal stories of cracked P99 frames but have never seen one nor known anybody within 2 degrees of me that have either.
That being said, a year and a half ago I switched to shooting my M&P9 and my P99 doesn't see nearly as much range time anymore.
PdxMotoxer
10-01-11, 06:09
I just don't get how a "top 5 40S&W platform EVER" list needs to be made or how some can rank weapons they have never even held much less shot.
you rank it because you read good things?
I've shot a few Taurus 40's and own a M&P40c but only thing i'd say is
i TRUST my M&P 40c with my life.
But sorry but no way can i tell anyone if it's better than a colt 1911 40S&W.
This kinda reminds me of watching those "Nut-n-Fancy" youtube reviews on guns they have never even shot. :rolleyes:
Have a H&K P30 (LEM) in .40 and love it.
The P30 platform handles this caliber.
When size not a factor (e.g. concealed carry), this is my first choice.
Had a H&K USP in .40, and it was very good, but the ergos of the P30 simply trump the USP.
hotrodder636
10-01-11, 08:02
I just don't get how a "top 5 40S&W platform EVER" list needs to be made or how some can rank weapons they have never even held much less shot.
you rank it because you read good things?
I've shot a few Taurus 40's and own a M&P40c but only thing i'd say is
i TRUST my M&P 40c with my life.
But sorry but no way can i tell anyone if it's better than a colt 1911 40S&W.
This kinda reminds me of watching those "Nut-n-Fancy" youtube reviews on guns they have never even shot. :rolleyes:
I would have to agree with this....though I have personally shot various pistols in .40S&W, I am most familiar with my H&K USPC. That being said, I am sure there are those out there who have shot many of these pistols with enough rounds down range to have a viable opinion.
For my money I think a usp 40 is about as good as you can get.
I will add that I have a glock 23 and a p30 though the p30 is a 9mm...It would also be good in a 40 as well I believe.
1 M&P40
2 G22
3 USP40
4 96
5 XD40
These are ones I have experience with, have owned them all but the USP. No experience with the Sig .40s, only with their 9mm models.
I've had several guns in .40-A Glock G23 and G27, a SIG-Sauer Sigpro 2340 and 3 P229, a Ruger P944, and 3 Browning/FN Hi-Powers.
The only one that I've kept is my current FN Hi-Power Mk III.
Best, Jon
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.