I know it depends on bullet weight and muzzle velocity.

But in general, can a .40 S&W cartridge push the same weight bullet as fast as a .357 Magnum?

How does it do that

Thank you

__________________
Buy American
Vote Responsibly

From equal barrel lengths, it can come pretty darned close. No barrel-cylinder gap. Bigger bullet for gasses to push against.

I believe that the parent cartridge for the .40 S&W, the 10mm Auto, is more comparable to a .357 Magnum.

A .40 S&W can move a 155 gr bullet at about 1150 fps for about 460 Ft-Lbs of energy.

A .357 Magnum can move a 158 gr bullet at about 1240 fps for 539 ft-lbs of energy.

A 10mm Auto can use a 155 gr. bullet at about 1400 fps for 675 ft-lbs of energy.


The energy of certain loads vary a lot, but average in the order show. ie The .40 tops out at about 556 ft-lbs. The .357 has loads in the 780 ft-lb range . While one loading of the 10 mm can produce 768 ft-lbs energy and.

A little story. The 10mm was proposed for LEO issue, but the recoil was too stout for some people. S&W cut the cartridge back and loaded it with less powder to make the .40 S&W. Proponents of 10mm call the .40 the .40 "Short and Weak.

The 10 mm was created for the Bren Ten auto pistol, but production never got off the ground. Still, there are other makes of 10mm pistols and the cartridge has a loyal following.

I think that comparing autos to revolvers is a little iffy because the revolver is limited by the strength of the frame, cylinder and barrel while an auto pistol is set up with the spring to a limit that would prevent the slide from battering the frame.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Nothing wrong with the 40 and you can easily drop in the 357 Sig barrel. Remember, with the 40, you can go down to 135 grain bullets that will "fly" in a 40 cal.
The 357 magnum shines with a 6" plus barrel, so it's really not comparable to the 4.4" barrel on the 226. Be happy with your 226 in 40 and if you want real performance, investigate some Buffalo Bore ammo or Cor-Bon ammo.

Recently picked up a Sig P229 in .40 S&W. Now I'm starting to think about a .357 Sig barrel, just for extra fun.

I would stay away from 40 cal. I think it is a dying breed, in an auto 9mm

I think post #3 is a good answer:

"A .40 S&W can move a 155 gr bullet at about 1150 fps for about 460 Ft-Lbs of energy.
A .357 Magnum can move a 158 gr bullet at about 1240 fps for 539 ft-lbs of energy.
A 10mm Auto can use a 155 gr. bullet at about 1400 fps for 675 ft-lbs of energy.

But I think it short-changes the .357 a bit.
Real world, the common barrel lengths would be 4" 40, 6" 357 and 5" 10mm - more and more there are 10mm 6" long slides for hunting. But 8" .357's aren't rare either.



Alliant and Hodgdon aren't good for these comparisons because of the goofy barrel lengths they use, if at all. Accurate Arms data is good because they tell you they use a 4" 40S&W, 5" 10mm and 6" .357.
Using their data, you'll see


A 4" .40 S&W can move a 155 gr bullet at about 1125 fps for about 435 Ft-Lbs of energy.
A 6" .357 Magnum can move a 158 gr bullet at about 1360 fps for 648 ft-lbs of energy.
A 5" 10mm Auto can use a 155 gr. bullet at about 1400 fps for 675 ft-lbs of energy.

I think the only place it would matter would be big game hunting ( maybe hogs and whitetail?) and the ME and TKO edge always goes to the 10mm ... but maybe not by enough to convert a revolver hunter to an autoloader hunter.

__________________
Carry.."hope" isn't a strategy

I always preferred a S&W Magnum my self.....

__________________
Only difference Fool/Mule-ears

Now you're thinking!

No, the 357 Magnum has the potential for a much more powerful load. As a reloader I am quite familiar with the potential for both calibers. My hottest 40 caliber load is a 165 grain Speer Gold Dot over x.xx grains of Accurate #5 and it will clock at 1150 fps from a 4 inch barrel with my chronograph. In comparison I have loaded 158 grain Hornady XTP's to 1300 fps from a 4 inch barrel on my model 620 revolver and per the loading manuals I was not at maximum. BTW, found the recoil was a bit more than what I like to shoot with so I only loaded one box, my more typical load clocks at 1150 fps. I also have several boxes of "light" Magnums loaded to 950 fps for use in my wonderful model 19, which features a 2 1/2 inch barrel.

No. Oh..too short an answer. Hell no...

Wow, how much more can you get out of a .357?

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Wow, how much more can you get out of a .357?

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Wasn't the 125gr. .357Sig..... a bottlenecked .40 case ..... designed to replicate the 125gr .357magnum round fired from a 4" barrel.

The 40 S&W is not the semi-auto counterpart of the 357 Magnum. The 357 Sig can match the ballistics of the 357 Magnum, but is limited to bullet weights of no more than 150 grains. The 10mm Auto easily matches and can slightly exceed the 357 Magnum with bullet weights of 135 to 200 grains.

It’s a different topic, but I agree 100%. I can’t explain why, but I find P226 .40-caliber guns difficult to shoot well. I never took the time to test mine for accuracy from the bench and I probably should have. Maybe it had a bad barrel, or maybe it was ammunition sensitive and wasn’t being given what it liked, but I could easily outshoot it with my P229. I shot a few others and had similar impressions. On the other hand, I consider the 226 in 9mm a sweetheart. I really like the newer E2-style grip, but haven’t been able to justify buying one of those guns, just yet.

Back to the original topic, in guns with 4-inch barrels, I don’t see a lot of difference between the two rounds, at short range. Admittedly, the .357 will be quicker, but not a lot - probably about 10%, and longer ranges should favor the .357. To me, the .40 is closer to the .357 than the 10mm will ever be to the .41 Magnum. (There’s a really tired discussion, IMO. )

I suppose the .357 Magnum has a slight edge over the 40S&W but since you are comparing a Revolver cartridge to a Semi Auto cartridge and there are many variables such as barrel length, B/C Gap, bullet weight, powders used, etc. it's sort of a moot point.

If you are set on an Auto Loader, the 10mm would answer your "power situation" however that caliber seems to be on its way out of popularity and might soon be difficult to feed. From what I've been seeing lately, the new & improved 9mm offerings are also taking their toll on the 40 S&W - as many police and law enforcement agency's have switched back to the 9. I suspect the 40 S&W while still fairly popular will start loosing more ground to the 9mm as well.

I truly believe the 10mm and the 40 S&W are the reasons that the ammo and gun Company's got off their Butts and revved up the old 9mm into a new viable caliber for the future. It is also the reason I believe the 10mm and .40 S&W will fade away and sort of become what the .38 Super and the .357 Sig have.

I prefer revolvers, but on occasion like when I am on my motorcycle carry a Glock 22. One thing to keep in mind when balancing the power of any round is capacity. Is the energy of 6 357 going to be as effective as 15 40 into a grisly bear. Even the 9 mm probably beats the 357 in power in a similar sized handgun. IIRC a 12 gauge buck shot round is around 9 pellets at probably slightly faster than the 40, but lighter. Considering the round count I trust the 40 just as much the 357.

If I am comparing revolver to revolver 44 mag beats the 357 which is usually what I carry in the woods. Also compare the 40 to 357 in a snub, I believe the 40 will be very close with considerable less recoil, and muzzle flash.

Funny, thats exactly what everyone was saying about the 9mm 20 years ago, yet it's still here. And back with a vengeance. All this talk about how new bullet design and technology have made the 9mm equal to or superior to the .40 is probably true... until you apply the same tech to the .40. Now we're right back where we were with the 40 out in front of the 9 again.
This whole thing about law enforcement agencies switching back to 9mm because it's better is horse ****. The whole reason for the switch was, and is, all about economics. 9mm is cheaper to produce than .40, and when departments started adding up how much could be saved shooting 9mm in practice vs. 40 over 10 years, it was a real eye opener. The whole "well, new tech. and bullet design blah blah makes the 9 a better cartridge" was created to sell the idea. How else are you going to tell officers who are out there putting their lives on the line that " Hey, we're taking your .40s that have worked so well for the last 20 or so years and we're gonna give you this smaller cartridge to defend yourself with. But hey!.. You'll be saving us 15cents!" (Based on an average 5 rounds fired per shooting incident) I know alot of officers who were not pleased with the decision. I just pray to God that they are right when they say the new 9s are as good or better than the old .40.
As for me, I will continue to use my .40s (including a brand new Glock 22 that I picked up cheap from a local police dept.) For defense and competition (by the way, 9s are STILL classified as MINOR in USPSA) so the less 40 you all shoot up leaves more for me.

But no, it's no .357 (another dying breed replaced by the 9mm.)

(stepping down from soapbox...)

Same with the guns....... bean counter go for the low bid...... not knocking Glocks; they work. Are they the best? I don't know! But for years they were the cheapest gun offered in response to Dept RFPs that........... "worked"!


IMO in handguns shot placement is King .... stopping power is secondary from a "single" handgun round; hence the "double tap" or "2 to the chest 1 to the head"....... a 9,40 or 45 ain't no .308 or even 5.56!!!!!

Heck; with my new Mec-gar flush fit mags ..... my Beretta 92 Centurion is up to 18+1 vs 12+1 for a .40 caliber S&W 96.

No law say's you can't have one in 40 and one in 9mm , perfect excuse to buy another in my book !
Gary

I've been shooting and carrying a 40sw since 1990 For the last 10 or 11 years a 155gr gold dot boutique load at 1318 fps but home rolled 150gr sierra at 1285fps before that from a tp40 kahr or sig p320c . 135gr GD will exceed 1420fps in both . Now compact the to a 2 thru 3 " barreled 357 and the 40sw out performs a 357mag and I hunted with 357mag since 1976 but with 8" barrel and hotter than normal factory ammo too . 170gr sp at 1410fps .

I carry my 40sw even when hunting and have killed a couple deer over time with my 40sw when they show up under my tree stand and the hot 155gr bonded gold dot loads work well but there straight down shots 20 to 22 feet and both were pass thru shoots of 17" plus with heart lung on one deer and no bone hit while the other was a glancing spine shot and found bone in the heart and major lung damage . First deer ran 20 yards second deer dropped in its tracks .

But is the hot 40sw any better than some of the better bullet designs like a fat slow 180gr HST and the ranger loads ? Those bullet expands very well too .

But none of the typical defense cartridges are all that so place you bullets well and keep shooting as needed !

Thanks, Dvus for speaking truth to the sheep!!!

I regret that I can only like this post ONCE!!!!

John

In a word.......No.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

Simply put, but certainly the correct answer.

No need for name calling by................ a devotee of the "Short and Weak"; especially one who carries a custom 3913/469.

Besides; who you calling "sheep"...... some of us never drank the cool-aid and stuck with the 9mm and .45s and .357 magnums while the "sheep" followed along behind the FBI like good little lambs !!!!!!

As I stated in my post #21 above there is no magic bullet from any handgun.... carry what you like; it doesn't effect me one way or the other.

If "modern" 9mm ammo is in fact as good as 1990's era .40...... great my 9mm now preforms the same as the .40 ammo whose performance you found satisfactory for 20 years ...... bottom line I still got more of the newer,better, harder hitting 9mm rounds in my gun than if it were a .40.

No. There are guys getting 1800fps or more with 125gr bullets and 1600fps+ with 158gr from Coonan autos with 5" barrels (and a significant portion of that 5" is chamber). While both are carefully crafted for the Coonan, neither are over pressure.

125gr @ 1800fps and 158gr @ 1600fps are both right at 900 ft-lbs, totally impossible for a .40S&W.

__________________
Psalm 27:2

If the shoe fits, wear it.

Seriously, I've never based cartridge selection solely on popularity.
I certainly prefer ammo that is readily available and capable of doing the job at hand: (9mm; 40s&w; 45acp; .223; .308; .30-'06; 12 gauge; even .22lr and .22mag.)

And I am certainly able to deduce that larger bullets pushed by more powder will likely cause more damage.

The "sheep" are those individuals (not agencies) that have decided 9mm is preferable to 40s&w because it is no longer "in style".

History repeats itself.
I'm old enough to remember the 1960s when the .357 magnum supplanted the .38 special in the holsters of the nation's LEOs.

Then the social unrest came, Cops were called pigs and murderers, and the .357 was seen as an overpowered, brutal, sadistic choice of cartridge.
Big city politicians urged the departments to return to the .38 special as a more "politically correct" loading.

Thanks to heavily armed cocaine dealers (There's an unexpected phrase), the public began clamoring for the police to be better armed.
Hence higher capacities and more powerful ammo.

The political winds have once again shifted, and I am ashamed to observe that many big city political leaders would prefer to having an officer killed in the line-of-duty than have an officer kill a career criminal who always happens to be a "gentle giant" pictured wearing his 5th grade cap and gown, and "turning his life around".

No, BAM-BAM.
The sheep are those who are selling their .40s&w handguns or eschewing the cartridge because they "think" it has fallen from popularity and they can't stand to be "out of style".

These are the "sheep".

Not surprisingly, most of these folks are the same people who have little to no idea how their equipment operates.

Sorry.
I'm one of those rapidly disappearing people who values facts over feelings.

John

Top 10mm loads are close to top .357 revolver loads. The .357s go a little faster; the .10mm are a bit heavier. The .40 cannot equal top 10mm loads.

For a "real world"comparison::[ leather skin, pork pectorals, pork ribs, oranges, pork ribs and leather skin]; look to the Paul Harrel you tube video on .357 mag and .40 S&W.

Indeed. Interestingly, the 9x25 Dillon produces similar ballistics from a 5" 1911 as the Coonan .357 with max loads. Both do that nice "ring of fire".

__________________
Psalm 27:2

I look at the .40 S&W a little differently.

Historically, the .38-40 got the job done just fine in a rifle or carbine with a .401 diameter 180 gr cast bullet at about 1,150 fps in a rifle, and less optimally at about 800 fps in a revolver.

The .40 S&W was developed when the 10mm proved to be a bit too much for many FBI agents to handle, which led to a reduced FBI load, which lead to the shorter but nearly equivalent .40 Short and Wimpy.

And the .40 S&W has pistol numbers that are pretty close to the old .38-40 carbine velocities.

"More" isn't necessarily "better", just as "great" is the mortal enemy of "good enough".

----

Similarly, it you do a dive into the big data around self defense and officer involved shoots, you'll find that once you get to the .357 Magnum, you don't see much improvement as you move to larger bores like the .40 S&W, the .45 ACP, the 10mm, or even the .41 and .44 Magnums. They all get the job done just fine within a range that's lost in the statistical noise.

----

In terms of 9mm Luger versus .40 S&W, the .40 had more going for it back when 9mm hollow point performance was much worse than it is today.

Now, what little you gain in terminal performance over a good 9mm Luger hollow point is more than offset by the reduced magazine capacity you get with those fat .40 S&W cases.

The same argument applies to the .357 Sig, which is a great cartridge, giving .357 Mag performance, but with .357 Mag recoil, and those larger diameter cases that reduce magazine capacity.

I played around with the .400 Cor Bon back when it was a thing and came to the same general conclusion. You got a nice, fast .40 caliber bullet, but you still had .45 ACP magazine capacity.

I hear that discussion a lot about improved 9mm ammo.

I have 147 gr Ranger T in 9mm, but I also have 180 gr Ranger T in 40.

Hell I even have Ranger T for my little LCP for when I carry it... got a few boxes in 45 APC too, but just for the cool factor. It's a bit on the large size for everyday carry.

The 9x23 Winchester provides close to .357 Magnum ballistics. I load a 124 grain FMJ bullet to over 1450 ft/sec in a M1911.

The 40 is here to stay for a while . I good while back I was at a show and picked up two older 50 rd boxes of COR Bond for 10 each they are 40 cal 135 gr . I do not shoot 135 gr much but I will try them out some time . I bet they are hot .

I'm a contrarian. Like to buy when everyone else is selling.

Just bought my first 40 -- a Glock 27.

10 rounds in a gun that can fit in a big pocket.

Works for me.

BTW, I carry a 357 mag snub revolver most days.

IMO 357 mag and 40 s&w are the two best defensive rounds going, and I doubt there is any significant difference in efectiveness.

I'd be most difficult to quantify power as use in this comparison. Were I inclined, I can load .40 S&W with 200 grain bullets to darn close to 1100 FPS, which is darn close to 10MM territory.

Personally, I think the .357 Mag is our most versatile cartridge.

I'd rather have a P229 .40 S&W than a .357 Mag.

The only .357 Mag ammo I use in my gun is 180 grain. This is an excellent bullet-for-cartridge were one to be forced to convince a large black bear to dine elsewhere.

I bought a .357 Mag for fishing in black bear country. I've carried it once. With a 4" barrel, it's big, bulky, heavy, & uncomfortable. If I'm fishing where mean critters live, I'm probably carrying a .40 S&W or a 1911-A1.

You mean diminishing returns? It sounds like your Coonan is the poster gun for diminishing returns.

Just exactly how fast does a handgun bullet have to travel to reach maximum efficacy?

I think the full power .40 S&W get's pretty darned close to factory .357 magnum.

The 155 gr. .40 s&w does 1,200 ft/s. From a 4 inch revolver, the 158 gr. magnum does 1,220 ft/s.

The magnum can be hot rodded with boutique stuff and hand loads.

For factory stuff; it's a wash.

Buffalo Bore has a hot rod 10mm that'll equal or exceed anything in .357 mag.

Except for Buffalo Bore's 357 ammo.

Yes, BB and Underwood do have heavily loaded 10mm ammo. But this thread is about the 40 S&W, not 10mm. Most people will agree that the 10mm is at least a little bit more powerful than a 357. But BB makes extremely heavy loads for the 357 too. It is unfair to cherry pick the hottest 10mm or 40 loads available and compare them to conservatively loaded 357 ammo.

Look at 180 grain bullet loads BB makes in all three calibers:

Heavy .40 Smith & Wesson +P Pistol & Handgun Ammunition
40 S&W +P = 1119 fps = 484 ft-lbs (5 inch barrel)

Heavy 10mm Pistol & Handgun Ammunition
10mm = 1351 fps = 728 ft-lbs (5 inch barrel)

HEAVY 357 MAG OUTDOORSMAN Pistol & Handgun Ammunition
357 = 1400 fps = 783 fps (5 inch barrel)

The 40 load above is labeled "+P" in a caliber where that can mean anything since there is no +P spec for that caliber.

When comparing calibers you shouldn't look at ammo from companies that explore the limits of how hot ammo can be loaded before guns become unreliable or break. If you want a semi-auto as powerful as the 357 magnum buy a 10mm, don't try to hot load a 40. Out of carry size guns the 40 S&W with light bullets is in the same ballpark as the 357 but comes up a little short.

I shoot a Sig P250 in 40 S&W and 357 Sig, I have also owned a 686 in 357 mag. I feel pretty confident in all of them. All of them shoot to point of aim at 25 yards. Not sure what some folks are trying to shoot that they think a 40 won't knock down at 1300 fps. By the way, I also own several 9s but I carry the larger bores, that's just me.

It was designed to make you think it was, but it still falls a little bit short.

According to the reloading manuals, no. At the same bullet weight, the .40 is also slower than the .45 auto.

__________________
Common sense isn't so common.

I don't currently have a .40 or a 10mm, but I've owned a number of .40 Glocks and S&W M&Ps in the past, as well as a 1066. I really like the 10mm round in a semi-auto. As a retired LEO, I pretty much carry .38/.357 J-frames, .45 1911s or sub-compact and compact 9mm semi-autos on a daily basis. I don't feel under-gunned with any of them, but then, I believe in shot placement as being the deciding factor over ballistics.

As a firearms instructor for about 28 of my 37 years, I've trained officers in .38/.357, 9mm and .45 ACP. I never worked for an agency that issued the .40 S&W, but have worked beside a number who do/have. I have been asked by range staff from some of these agencies what duty round we carried in the 9mm, because of our incapacitation rate in officer involved shootings. Folks were impressed with the effectiveness of the Speer Gold Dot 124 +P round we issued, and when compared against .40 and .45 rounds in center mass hits, the damage and penetrations was equal to superior in most situations. This was so much so that I often got the question about ammo by those who intended to report back to their administrations.

Don't get me wrong; I prefer .45 ACP to most anything for daily carry, although 9mm and .38/.357 don't make be feel inadequate. In the mountains or desert, I'm usually carrying .357 mag. Around town, capacity concerns will sometimes lead me to carry the small 9mm guns. But to address the original question, I'm certain .40 S&W will perform with the appropriate level of lethality with proper shot placement; but ballistically, I don't think it's quite to the level of .357 mag. And, to respond to other comments regarding 9mm, most calibers have enjoyed higher performance levels with improved bullet and propellant technology, but this technology has raised 9mm to a level that makes it significantly more effective than it was back in the early days when law enforcement agencies first began to issue it. Hell, as a young cop in the 70's we would never consider a 9mm over .357 mag. or .45 ACP. Things are a little different today.

__________________
Dave Frost

Not trying to hijack, drift or throw a wrench in the works but while checking ballistic tables for similarities between .44 Special and .45ACP, I noticed similarities between heavier .40S&W (180 & 200 gr. range) and similar .44 Special loads. Not surprising but just never thought about it.

Not sure what you mean...how is a 125 grain pistol bullet at 1800 feet per second and within pressure guidelines "diminished"?

Diminishing returns would be a noticeable increase in noise, flash, and recoil for just a meager gain in velocity. Like a .357 J frame snub over a .38 Special +P.

__________________
Psalm 27:2

For all those folks that want use and shoot what the Military and LEO use in weapons and ammo, you have to realize they really don't have a choice in what they use. That is done by some bureaucrat sitting in an office somewhere. It may not exactly be the best gun or ammo available but it is probably the least expensive to the bureaucrat.

Im a big 357 Mag fan .... and the 357mag 125gr JHP is known as a manstopper ...
But having said that my EDC is a Glock 27 loaded with 180gr HST ... for SD carry this combo is hard to beat ...

The 357 Sig with Underwood 125gr Gold dots are equal to the 357mag 125gr

The 10mm when loaded to its full potential , like Underwood ammo offerings .. Is between the 357mag and 41mag ..

That's not been my experience. In all of the departments that I interact with (which is quite a few) the training officers and supervisor staff have quite a bit of input in model of firearm, caliber, and ammo issued. Sure, cost is an issue but it's only part of the equation.

__________________
- Change it back -