Ok, I'm considering an M&P 40. I've never owned a .40 and I'm curious about it's accuracy. Is it better, worse, or about the same as a 9mm?

I'm very interested in your experience with both cartridges.

I don't think you can say one bullet would be more or less accurate than the other. Almost all guns in these calibers are "combat accurate" to say 5"@25yds or better. You do see more target grade 9s' then you do 40s' like the PPC9 and 952s'. The main thing about 40 is you're getting 45 power in a 9mm size gun, so the recoil is greater.

I don't own an M&P 40 but i terms of cartridge accuracy out to 25 yards I cannot tell the difference between 9mm and 40 S&W. I shoot a S&W M&P9 PO18-8, S&W99, S&W952, Dan Wesson Pointman (9mm & 40 S&W), PO16-40, CZ-40B, and STI Trojan in 40 S&W.

I have the FS 40 & 45 M&P. I just recently put the 45 on a pistol rest 3/4 of an inch group at 25 ft. The 40 is similar at about 1 and a half inch group at 50 ft. My nephew has the 9mm compact, same accuracy. When speaking accuracy off a solid rest, I can't tell a dimes worth of difference between them, off a rest remember. I think it should be noted these guns are service pistols, not designed to shoot one inch groups at 25 yards. If you ever have to use it in self defense at 25 yards I hope you can say he fired first.

there seems to be an urban legend that the .40S&W is an inaccurate round, but they all shoot the same to me. I think the shooter makes more difference than the gun or caliber.

Currently, I own a M&P 40. I've previously owned a 4003, Sig P226, Beretta 92F, Colt Series 80 Gov't and a Glock 17. The Sig (9mm) was by far the most accurate out of the box. The Beretta I had was a dog, accuracy wise. The M&P 40 is definitely more towards the top of the list. The more I shoot it, the better it gets (actually I get). I used to sell guns, and it seems as with anything mass produced, you can get a good one or bad one in any caliber. If you are recoil sensitive (flash and muzzle jump), you may shoot a 9 better than a 40. But the 40s I've owned and others that I have had the chance to shoot, seem to have about the same practical accuracy as the 9s. I went back to a 40 because IMO it has better on target performance, but you must hit the target first. Practice, practice, practice.

With my Glock 23(.40), I can get a 4 inch group at 100 ft.

Is .40 inaccurate? Not in my opinion. Does it have a sharper recoil than 9mm? Yes.

I personally prefer .40 to 9mm.

I've shot both but own 9s

I don't think that the .40 is inaccurate, just more useless than anything else.

__________________
Don't look, reload and shoot!

The inaccuracy in early .40 guns wasn't urban legend. It was later discovered that the issue had to do with the dwell time (time the barrel/slide stay locked) and the unusually steep pressure curve of the .40. Changes were made and accuracy improved.

I'm issued a .40, I own a 9mm. I'll take the 9mm any time. The .40 is much ado about nothing significant.

My Glock 23 in .40 with federal HST 180 JHP's is much more accurate at 25 yards that my G17 with W-W 147JHP's. On the other hand my Beretta 92FS is more accurate that any of my Glocks with any ammo........ I dont know...... No semi auto I own will match one my tunned 1911's with Hardball or Match ammo.

I have a F.S. MP 40 and a MP 9 Pro. I bought the 40 a while back and have shot it several years. Nice pistol, very accurate.
Then I bought my MP 9 Pro which quickly became my favorite range pistol. It makes me look good.......well, like a good shot. I also have a MP 9c which is suprisingly accurate.
The only thing that may make a 40 less accurate is the sorta snappy recoil. It's very manageable but after a long range session it kinda wears you down where the 9mm is less tiring. At least that is the way it is with me, but I'm not as young and energetic as I used to be.
The only other pistol I own that is comparable to the Pro is my 9mm CZ 75B. That is my second favorite range pistol.

__________________
NRA & TSRA
Texas CHL Holder