Is there then no truth to reports that the full-house 10mm was found by FBI agents to be too much of a handful? My understanding for years has been that the FBI requested the power reduction of the 10mm to make it more manageable for their personnel.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

Many law enforcement cadets today have trouble qualifying with the horrible recoil of the 9mm.

__________________
U.S. Navy - U.S. Army, ret

One would think you macho guys would shoot something with a little oomph behind it and not these wussy calibers.

Been there, done that 40 S&W dance many times over. CZ's, FN's and S&W's. The same thing with 9mm, 45ACP, 10MM, etc. I always end up going back to revolvers... 38/357Mag and 44Spl/44Mag. My newest addition is a Model 69. And I just traded off my FNX-40 for a 629 Classic. Now those are "real" guns...

I'm not understanding how it's a totally different cartridge's fault some ammo companies download the 10mm? People(FBI) were downloading the 10mm before the .40 was ever sold. It's the reason for the .40 in the first place. Blaming the .40 for weak 10mm loads is like blaming WWII on the Cold War.

Another question is why YOU CHOOSE to buy the downloaded ammo if you don't want it? Simply buy from a company that doesn't download. Several companies make full power 10mm.

I've owned: Kahr K40, 4006, CZ85 in .40 early on in the life of the cartridge. Shot plenty more, including Glocks, Sig 229, Beretta's 96, BHP, and a custom STI 1911 platform.

Look at the .40 brass from your gun, or what you see laying around. You will see firing pin/Striker 'wipe', indicating the case is sliding up the breechace BEFORE the pin/striker has had a chance to retract. This indicates premature unlocking. You may also see cratering of the primer impact. Look at how the cases are bulged out from where there is less support at the 6 o'clock portion of the chamber mouth. These latter to indicate over-pressure in every OTHER auto pistol chambering. WHY do we expect it in the .40????

The ONLY gun that didn't experience signs of either was that pimp STI ! ANd, my friend who owned it was no-doubt conserving powder with his own powder-puff reloads, I'm sure, LOL.

SO, more recoil impulse and muzzle flip than the 9, and harder on guns than either the 9 or the .40.

I tried the .40 and gave it up. I had a Glock 23, and just found the muzzle blast and "snappiness" to be unpleasant. I've got .45s and 9mms and just enjoy them more. I've shot other .40s and I'm still not into them. I went shooting with a friend who had his SIG with him (not sure which model number, but it was one of the compact ones) and I shot it better than he did, but it's just not my thing. Personally, I feel like for defensive purposes, a 9mm with good loads serves the purpose. YMMV.

In reading these types of threads, a case, (no pun intended), can be made for each caliber. What remains constant however, is that shot placement is really the most important thing. Only hits matter. When marksmanship skills garner the same level of discussion that caliber debates do, there will be far less debate about the numbers.

__________________
Stand your ground, 1775

Nicely put!

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

In my opinion, .40 is a great cartridge to load. Lead bullets at 950 fps don't lead badly and shoot well. If 9mm is loaded with lead 115 gr bullets, in my experience, leading is a problem. Nine mm and .40 are both loaded to the same pressure. I don't seem to experience the terrible recoil or muzzle flip some mention. As far as .40 being short and weak, just hold up your left hand and shoot yourself through the palm and with any gun chambered in .40 I can guarantee it will be effective. Dean

I frankly don't enjoy shooting my .40 cal - I have a S&W 4043. That said, it is my nightstand gun, so I do trust it. I DO practice with it, I just don't enjoy it. My other home SD guns are .38 revolvers with wadcutters.

Don't hate the 40SW, just don't see the need for it when a 9MM or 45 ACP will do the job just the same.

Many flock to the 40 because cops carry it which usually turns out to be a mistake.

__________________
Life Is A Gift. Defend it!

That is a real beauty, thanks for sharing.

The recoil of the 10MM was just one part of the problem.

When the 10MM was issued to some FBI agents, I had the opportunity to talk to an agent while I was working. He HATED his 10MM S&W pistol because it was so heavy. Like him, almost all the agents he worked with that was issued the 10MM kept their guns in their desk, briefcase or stashed them under the seat of their cars! Carrying a brick on your hip while wearing dress slacks held up by a flimsy dress belt isn't very comfortable.

Have no idea how many rounds of 9mm, .45ACP and .40 S&W I've fired. Plinking level range loads are unremarkable regardless of caliber. As well everyone has at some point had a less than satisfactory experience with some particular load in some particular caliber. To suppose that such experience defines a particular caliber is about as rational as taking the single highest velocity a load demonstrates over a questionable chronograph and declaring that velocity to be the standard routine norm of that load.

About the only thing wrong with the .40 S&W is that it offends the cognizant who have much invested in their support of the 9mm or .45 ACP or the 10mm or of late the .357 sig. The 10mm was about like the .41 Magnum, dead on arrival for police work, poorly thought out in the reality of actual day to day use. The .357 sig. is what it is, a cartridge that came late to the dance floor already crowded with well established very effective rounds.

Had it come to the market before the .40 S&W, had it been made available as something other than limited bullet weights, were it useful by recreational shooters w/ cast lead bullets., etc., and were it not so much more expensive to general shooters, it might now be the round everyone loves to hate. But, it didn't.

The .40 S&W did come to the market first, at a time when there was a perceived need for something offering better ballistics than what was commonly thought the norm for 9mm ammo, something offering much better capacity than possible with the .45 ACP.

__________________
<><

The .357 Sig was designed to mirror popular 125 grain .357 mag defense loads of the time in a 9mm frame. If you want to shoot heavier bullets you'd simply buy a .40/10mm/500S&W. Plenty of people shoot cast bullets as well. Not that it's ideal for folks who want to shoot a high volume of ammo. Those people would simply get an easier round to reload. .357 Sig isn't an all around round and was never intended as such. It's certainly more expensive for factory ammo but if costs are a factor you'll be shooting 9mm exclusively.

And I can tell you that the .357S round has more hate than the .40. The most vile product ever set forth upon the public if you ask people. I like mine though. Since I understand it's purpose and limitations.

I got into 40S&W in the early nineties... I was shooting IPSC, and had recently moved to 9mm.... I hated shooting the minor caliber, but 45 was almost twice the cost... I had a buddy that wanted to sell me a 40 Glock, and the local gunshop/reloading store showed me that I could make major power with 40 cheaper than 9mm factory..... I still have the G22, more sentimental value than anything....

I found for MY ergonomics that I had more flip/blast in 40 and eventually went back to 45. I was a careful reloader, and luckily never had any "scary" rounds in the time I shot 40. Since then, I have stumbled into a Kel Tec sub2K in "Glock 40", and I can tell you that a 40 S&W makes a FANTASTIC light carbine round...... so my two 40's sit around in the safe most days, and while I don't "hate" 40, it would take a smoking deal to get me into another.....

On a side note, I do have a buddy who is a 10mm addict, and I hope to visit him one day and shoot some of the buffalo bore insane loads he talks about.... he says that 10mm is much different than 40... I can only imagine stronger, however.

For ten years as a street cop I carried a department issued HK USP .40 cal. While carrying the issued HK I cast, loaded, and shot thousands and thousands of rounds of ammo for it. It was an extremely effective and reliable platform. On two occasions I saw firsthand how effective the round can be on the human body. With a good hollow point load the .40 caliber is a superbly effective and deadly cartridge. I also witnessed it shot repeatedly through a car windshield and deflect straight down into the dash never making it to the man it was intended for. Side windows were no problem though.

I personally view the .40 caliber as a solution to a problem that never existed. As soon as the department switched to Sig P220 .45s I stopped loading .40 caliber and sold off my personal .40 cal handgun. The .40 caliber is a good killing round, but I prefer other calibers instead. If my department went back to the .40 caliber tomorrow I wouldn't be crying over it. Until then my .40 cal dies and molds will remain 10mm dies and molds.

Yep. Gotta agree. 40 is a fine round but if I want to shoot a .401 bullet, the 10mm is just dandy with me.

__________________
Slim, U.S. Army, Ret.

The sheriff's office where I served 30 years went from S&W 4506 .45acp, to a Glock .40s&w. I know why they did it, they hired a lot of females who could not handle a .45. Why Glock has taken the lion's share of LEO pistol business away from S&W concerns me greatly. I have never shot a Glock, have no desire to. I will say I do not like all double action pistols. All of mine in .45acp & .380 are DA first shot, SA thereafter.

With respect, observations made regarding the .357 sig. were to illustrate the reason why the .40 S&W is by some lauded while by others denigrated, often driven by unfounded emotionally based supposition rather than actual broad experience.

__________________
<><

That would be odd since the 45acp in a steel frame has a lot less recoil then the Glock in 40s&w

I just miss the days when .40SW brass used to grow out from the ground. I started collecting it up and before I knew it I had a couple of buckets of the stuff. A couple of bullet molds later and I became a .40SW owner. I still run all my brass through a Redding G-Rx die and my gun has a fully supported chamber. I found early on that the lighter bullets in the .40SW were the stuff that people complain about being snappy and high recoil. As soon as I switched to heavy bullets then the issues went away. Now I cast the Lee 175gr SWCTL and coat them in powder coating and load them mild with Titegroup to wild with Longshot. I could care less for caliber war talk as most of it boils down to sounding like children argue. Gun capacity wars are second only to the caliber wars. Someone will always take up the torch of one side or the other. I'm happy with what I have. I even do 10mm in a Delta Elite. Heck, I've even shot some Corbon loads through it and didn't think it was so bad. If that's the recoil that had everyone whining back then I'm not sure what to say about them. It wouldn't be polite.

I think its just media / marketing swaying the herd. They are now saying a 9mm is "just as good" as a .40 these days. With "new bullet technology" LOL LOL (Same tech as could be used with any round)
One of its main strong points is capacity & energy. I shoot about all the major calibers. Nothing wrong with 15 in a Glock 22 or 12 in a 229.
Have had mine since they came out.
These are strange days with everything being pitted against each other. LOL LOL And I mean everything... On the plus side, when 9 and 45 were hard to get, .40 was not a problem. )
Fads are pushed in and out. Seems right now we are being told the 40 is dead. I am not buying it...... In small guns its more an issue. Example, my Shield is 9mm. But I mainly wanted the xtra round over 9 V.S .40 6+1 V.S. 7+1.

On another note, D/A S/A semi autos are also out of favor right now. Please don't tell my 225, 226 & 229. Thanks

Amen, brother. I don't know why the current fad is if it isn't striker it isn't safe/good/accurate/whatever. That snapping green twig feel drives me nuts. There is NOTHING crisp to be found in a striker fired gun. You can tweak and spend on them to get them lighter and shorter but they just aren't a true single action trigger in feel compared to the standard.

That being said I still like my M&P's and my SR9 but they will NEVER replace anything. Just another option in the catalog.

As long as the gun was MADE for .40 instead of a conversion, and it's a model that won't beat up my brass I have nothing against .40s.

If I had to only have one pistola, it would be a .40 S&W, probably a Springfield XD Tactical. YMMV

__________________
I believe in the wadcutter.

This. I have never hated the .40 S&W, Just never had a need for it. I think it had a definite purpose when introduced as it was better than the 9mm loads of the day, and allowed a more powerful round in the common 9mm framed guns. At the time I was a 1911 devotee, so was never interested in the .40

Now, hollow point bullet and cartridge design has put the 9mm in the same performance as the .40 and .45 with less recoil and more rounds in the gun. I have several 9mm's and 3 .45's so I don't really need a .40.

I live in CO and routinely go into the mountains where there are both mountain lions and black bear. The 610 appeals to me as a revolver that can fire both 10mm for black bear defense and .40 for a lot of range shooting. I have picked up almost 2000 pieces of .40 brass casings and I have .40/10mm dies so I could reload easily, but 4" 610's are extremely expensive when you can find them so the 686 or 3" 65 does duty.

To my understanding the FBI came up with their own parameters and Norma uploaded it (in regards to the 10mm).

I prefer the bigger caliber in the given pistol.

The wife has a BHP 40 and I have a compact framed CZ 40.

The BHP is a dream to shoot and the alloy framed CZ is a bit more energetic feeling. They are well suited to their purposes and great pistol/caliber combinations.

Being used to shooting .40, .45, and an Airweight .38, 9mm feels a bit anemic.

I'm not hunting with my pistol so .40 works for me.

Love the .40!!!..................and 9mm....and .44Spcl....44 mag.....380.... 22. Just never got too caught up in the hype over which caliber is best. IMO they all have their own place. I shoot em, if I like them, I keep them.

I think the push for a more effective cartridge over the 9mm had its beginnings with the infamous FBI Miami shootout of 1986. This led the FBI to the 10mm Lite while the .40 S&W was secretively on the drawing boards. Eventually, they saw the light and went to the .40.

However, this is not an easy caliber for female LEOs and smaller statured individuals to master. Of late, I hear that the FBI is returning to the 9mm as the .40's advantage of the 9mm, if any, is too slight to warrant the increased training difficulties with the .40.

As for people hating the .40: debating this caliber over that is the sustenance of gun forums. My carry guns are 9mm and .45 ACP, not withstanding whether or not others love or hate them. Like it or not, what the FBI does or does not do has a great influence on what other law enforcement agencies do. We may be witnessing a gradual return to the 9mm or perhaps some new way of loading the .40 to overcome some of its faults.

"We may be witnessing a gradual return to the 9mm or perhaps some new way of loading the .40 to overcome some of its faults."

I guess that's the part I missed.

What exactly are its faults?

While I only have (2) in 40 out of 20, I have never had a failure to feed, fire etc. Have owned 'em for 20 yrs. But Do not shoot them daily.

Thanks! Learn something new every day! Very curious.

Wow, there's a loaded question.
I've never been a big fan of the .40 but, that's mainly due to the sharp recoil. I've owned and/or shot multiple sizes from little light weight compact guns such as the Kel Tec P40, up to a big ole heavy boat anchor Hi-Point and a few in between. In my opinion, they all sucked. Personally, if I feel the need for something bigger than a 9mm, it's gotta be a .45...........and most likely, I'd get a 1911.

I honestly think your right. Its the recoil some folks don't care for. I shoot more 44 mag than anything, so its never really been an issue for me.

Actually, as mentioned in this thread several times, the "fault" of the .40 is its snappy recoil, resulting in a somewhat slower recovery than a 9mm or .45 ACP but the .40 cal handgun does indeed hold more ammo than the same size .45 ACP.

For younger people of reasonable strength, the .40 S&W should not be any problem. As an adopted agency cartridge where once size must fit all, problems arise.

To be sure, the .40 is an excellent cartridge over all and I certainly hope to never find myself at the wrong end of one.

Perhaps somebody will design a .40 tungsten bullet, of 230 grains, slow it down a bit, unsnap the recoil and now you have .45 ACP ballistics with the gun capacity of a .40, along with better penetration over the .45. Just thinking aloud.

Nothing wrong with the .40 S&W, it's just not .380 ACP, 9mm, or .45 ACP. I've got one, a Glock 23, and I've owned others that I've moved on, mainly due to the felt recoil. A Glock 23 is probably the lightest handgun that should fire the .40 S&W. The differences in ballistics discussed earlier in the thread are negligible at best, and the 9 mm and the .45 ACP are just better to fire, IMHO.

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

If not for the 40, I would not have my 4013 or 411 or 4006 or 4054 or............................


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Don't see why. Springfield built the sub compact XD-s around the 45 auto.
If the 10mm held its turf, I'm pretty sure we'd see it in this platform.

__________________
it just needs more voltage

It's the same size as a Glock 27?
Edit: I see it's a single stack. The point still stands. The .40 will always be able to fit in a smaller platform.

I like the 40 S&W caliber very much and carried it on duty for many years. With proper grip and actual proper training and putting rounds down range you adapt to the recoil and it becomes a non issue. Early on a gun writer wrote "the 40 S&W is an inherently inaccurate caliber" and that is another one of the great gun writer myths that shooters hold as gospel to this day. The 40 can be as accurate as any other caliber. What gave rise to claims of inaccuracy is shooters anticipating the 40's recoil. I have a SIG 229R in 40 that is the most accurate pistol I own. That pistol is one ragged hole accurate if you do your part and it handles the 40 very well.

The 40 is often called a compromise caliber. It is a good, unique caliber in its own right. Plenty of power, weight, and sectional density with various loadings to suit anyone's applications.

40 has become America's law enforcement caliber of choice. The ammo makers have made it by the ton. During each ammo crunch 40 can always be found. With the recent trend of LE going back to 9mm even more 40 will be available at good prices. I just bought another pistol in 40 this weekend because of that. Bill

Really can't argue with that.

I haven't shot .40 S&W for fifteen years and my hands have deteriorated markedly in that time due to arthritis; but in a second generation G22 I didn't find it at all unpleasant then.

I took the Glock and a woman friend to the range when I had just bought the pistol. She had never fired a gun before. She out-shot me and enjoyed shooting the .40. Makes me wonder if anticipation of nasty recoil figures into this for some shooters.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

Ive done my own evaluations and ill take the .40 every time. The recoil isn't that big of a deal over the 9mm a frame that fits my hand better than the .45 usually your only talking a couple rounds different in capacity over the 9. Also if you check energy figures in a lot of cases the 40 will have as much if not more energy than the .45 I say if a person doesn't like the 40 then dont buy one. I see it as the best of both worlds.

When I was younger, I was Mr. 1911 in .45ACP. Any other caliber in a semiauto was simply a waste of time and powder as far as I was concerned. I had always been taught to use the largest caliber handgun I could competently handle for self defense, and the .45ACP filled the bill admirably. Then a wrist injury to my dominant hand left me with a wrist that would unlock unpredictably to recoil. I would be lucky to get 3 rounds per magazine to fire out of my 1911 without a lot of FTF, FTE drills. I reluctantly swapped my 1911 for a S&W 4006 in .40 S&W, and later added a S&W Model 625 so I could continue shooting .45ACP.

I really like the .40 S&W round. It is the largest caliber round I can reliably shoot from a semiauto handgun without stoppages and other assorted issues. I found the polymer framed handguns, and the heavier grained bullets (especially the 180 gr. offerings) are very user friendly. I have a M&P 40C in .40 S&W along with a 9mm replacement barrel that I am very fond of. In fact, a full sized M&P 40 is presently on my wish list.

Recently, I got a killer deal on some .40 S&W brass and (unloaded) projectiles (155 gr.) from a guy that was getting out of the .40 S&W caliber. He stated his teenaged girls could comfortably fire the 9mm, but the recoil and blast from the .40 was too much for them. I asked him if he had considered either using the heavier grained bullets for the .40, and/or buying and using a 9mm replacement barrel for his .40 handgun and he got the "aw shucks" look on his face. I offered to let him back out of the sale if he had misgivings, but he wanted to go ahead and complete the sale, so I did. By the way, I got over 500 rounds of cleaned, once-fired .40 S&W brass, a box of WW 155gr. target ammo, and a sealed box (250 bullets) of Nosler 150 gr. projectiles for $50.00.

Regards,

Dave