What is wrong with the 40 S&W?

The 40 S&W was a compromise cartridge designed for a specific era in ammunition technology. It tried to combine the terminal ballistics of the 10mm FBI load in a 9x19 size pistol. It worked pretty darned well, but that time has come and gone. With modern bullets, you can get the 9x19mm to expand to diameters very close to those of the 40 S&W.

You also have a lot more females entering the LEO field and recoil can be an issue, not only for females, but also a good number of males.
With these two things in mind, the FBI switched back to the 9x19mm as its issue sidearm. When the FBI did that, many other federal agencies as well as police and sheriff's departments started dumping their 40 S&W pistols and bought 9x19 pistols.

Like many here I cut my handguning teeth on on a 1911 .45 courtesy of Uncle Sam. It is and always will be my favorite defensive semi-auto handgun.
However, back when the .40 was first introduced, I fell for all the hype. .45 power, 9mm capacity! So I bought a S&W 4006. Never could shoot it well. The recoil wasn't the issue. Although it is rather sharp. Over the next two years I tried just about every factory load, every bullet and every powder available to no avail. I simply could not shoot the gun as well as I should.
I finally gave up on it and tried to sell it. It was then that I discovered that nobody wanted it! About a year later I finally traded it off to a LGS. I lost my rear end on the deal. But I was finally rid of the thing.
Over the years I've sat behind a table at gun shows and had people ask if I was interested in buying their .40. I politely declined and many have remarked how they had heard that a lot today.
I've never had any desire to own another one.

The original question was "What is wrong with the .40 S&W".....many varied responses as always in a caliber discussion.

My answer is simply "Nothing is wrong with it!!"

Randy

Why is it that certain folks seem to believe that advances in bullet technology are unilateral?

Honestly, while it's true that bullet technology has advanced and 9mm Hollow Point bullets now expand more reliably/penetrate deeper than they did previously, those same advances have been applied to other cartridges as well.

So unless you're trying to make the argument that the only thing .40 S&W ever had going for it was that .40cal JHPs expanded to larger diameters/penetrated deeper than 9mm Luger or .45 ACP, and that any increase in expansion/penetration .40cal JHPs have gained from the same advances which improved 9mm are negligible or excessive, then I really don't understand how such an advancement has simultaneously rendered .40cal obsolete.

Dirty Harry Callahan said:

Hopefully one of these days when I have the money one of the supposedly many dirt cheap .40cal pistols will show up at my LGS because so far it really hasn't happened.

I guess it's just a regional thing, but where I live .40s still go for the same amount as a 9mm and nobody has been selling .40s for a song anywhere either, which is a real shame to as I'm looking for a cheap new Winter carry gun. I'd love a .40, but unless I should happen upon a cheap used .40 then I'll be getting a Ruger EC9.

Click to expand...

Used Gun Collection | Sportsman's Outdoor Superstore: Police Trade-Ins and Used Guns for Sale Online | Page 2

Nothing at all wrong with a .40. It's just not the flavor of the month so there are deals to be had.

In small guns often carried concealed by civilians, greater recoil impulse is generally avoided. .40 S&W has a sharp recoil impulse.

In full sized handguns with a two-handed grip, a competent shooter will not see much difference in recoil between the .40 and other cartridges. However, shoot one handed and there will be a difference in felt recoil and recovery time.

Ammo cost is a factor for many shooters.

Magazine capacity is a valid concern in a carried weapon.

The difference in terminal performance is negligible not because of the reasons listed in bullet design and loading advancement. All defensive cartridges are now designed to meet the FBI standards of penetration and expansion. Any of them COULD perform differently, but they then become a liability rather than an asset.

So, is there anything wrong with .40 S&W? Not really.

Is there any advantage to .40 S&W? Not really.

Are there valid reasons not to use .40 S&W compared to other cartridges? Yes.

Marketing plays a real role in popularity. The original marketing pushed the advantages, at that time, of the .40 (10mm short) over other cartridges. Today, marketing (and law enforcement results) favors the 9mm. There is a great deal of real, hard evidence that 9mm has equal terminal performance (FBI tests as well as medical professional observations). Equal performance, less recoil, greater capacity, lower cost favor the 9mm over other standard defensive cartridges.

Choosing the .40 is neither a mistake nor unwise. It’s just a choice. Validate your choice for your reasons. Then place your shots well. I bet you will win.

Sorry, just not interested in a duty sidearm that requires specific ammo to be "...just as good as..." other caliber/bullet combos. The 40 is effective with common, commercially available ammo. If you are required to carry a 9, by all means find the best ammo available that functions in your weapon and do your best. If you do not have to carry a 9, there are better choices available with widely available ammo - the 40 is one of those.

I'll admit the Glock 22 KaBoom stories had me unsettled and when I had a case blow out in my Beretta 96 it killed my confidence.

Nothing wrong with the 40sw. Noobs are flocking to the 9mm because somehow they feel they must follow the FBI.

I personally don't care what the FBI does. The 40sw pistols are cheap right now - and I like that.

Nothing is wrong with 40S&W I just let that bandwagon cruise on by me and stuck with 36 caliber. (357 and 355 round up to the nearest hundredth)
I do not have to stock cleaning supplies for another caliber.
Save for my 696 and 17 the handguns I own are 38 and 9mm

@CB3
I'm going to have to disagree with you here a little bit. While it is indeed possible for 9mm Luger to duplicate the performance of the .40 S&W FBI Load, your standard factory loaded 115gr 9mm self-defense loads will not. You'd need a heavier, 124-147gr 9mm +P load to match the .40 S&W FBI Load. Furthermore, it's worth mentioning that the .40 S&W FBI Loads aren't loaded as hot as many modern .40 S&W premium self-defense loads are.

As I previously stated, the advances in ballistics technology aren't unilateral and have been applied to all existing cartridges. Granted that 9mm Luger has arguably benefited more than .40 S&W since .40 S&W simply had less room for experimentation/improvement, but the FBI's vague assertions that advances in ballistics technology had somehow inexplicably levelled the playing field based on nondisclosed testing parameters/load data were little more than a flimsy attempt at justifying the adoption of a somewhat weaker yet still perfectly adequate service cartridge to the ignorant masses.

9mm Luger is a time-proven cartridge which is adequate (dare I even say "perfectly" adequate?) for arming equal opportunity Law Enforcement/Military personnel, and it most certainly has it's advantages, but the blanket statements made by the FBI are just that. Vague, lacking in vital scientific information, and ultimately misleading.

For example, it is absolutely possible to load up a .380 ACP cartridge hot enough to equal 9mm Luger target loads as well as some moderate self-defense loads, except pretty much nobody bothers to load .380 ACP that hot because the only .380 ACP pistols that can withstand such overpressure loads are large, heavy, and very robust pistols that are virtually identical in size/weight to 9mm Pistols anyway, so there's no valid reason to do so, it just exceeds the intended role/use of the .380 ACP cartridge.
The FBI's statements in regards to the supposed equality of 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP are essentially like using the above example as anecdotal evidence that .380 ACP is equal to 9mm Luger by omitting vital information like that you can really only get .380 ACP to match moderate 9mm self-defense loads at best, and using tricky wording to make it sound like such overpressure loads are the new standard when it comes to modern .380 ACP loads.

TL;DR: Look up some load data for NATO spec 9mm Luger loads, then compare that to standard pressure factory loaded 9mm self-defense loads, then look up load data for FBI spec .40 S&W loads and compare that to modern factory loaded .40 S&W self-defense loads. 9mm Luger =/= .40 S&W.

Since my beloved FBI has come up several times I thought I should weigh in again.

I was an Agent and Firearms Instructor for 25 years. I was issued a 9mm (Sig 226), carried a .45 (Sig 220), and qualified a gazillion guys and gals on whatever was approved at the time. As an instructor I saw all the shooting reports (about 12 - 20 per year) and saw all the internal memos flying to and fro from the field to FBIHQ and back. I was one of ten field agents/instructors recalled to the mothership to shoot all the candidates for the contract that led to the adoption of the .40 which was recently replaced. (My pick was the USP Compact .40).

The Bu doesn’t issue ammo to outside agencies. If the Keokuk Iowa PD wants to follow our lead, that is on them. We looked at OUR shootings and tested for that.

The move from the .40 to the 9mm had NOTHING to do with ammo improvements. 9mm got better, and .40 got better.

It had NOTHING to do with wimpy girls and boys not being able to handle the wrist-breaking recoil of the mighty .40 S&W. New Agents shoot about 10,000 rounds of duty ammo at the Academy. If they can’t qualify, they don’t graduate. There wasn’t a problem with recycling Agents due to recoil issues with the .40 caliber.

In 2001 19 cretins with boxcutters changed the world, and the FBI with it. Our budget for computers and analysts to squint at them skyrocketed, while the ammo budget stayed the same. It was the same when I retired in 2016.

9mm is cheaper than .40 S&W. 13,000 Agents shooting 1,000 rounds per year is 13 MILLION rounds just to stay qualified. Add in Quantico, SWAT, and HRT and you are well over 20 million rounds a year. Even a few bucks a case adds up quick.

I like the .40 cal. I like the 9mm. Mostly I carry a .32 Colt because I don’t think caliber matters at all.

biku324 said:

Sorry, just not interested in a duty sidearm that requires specific ammo to be "...just as good as..." other caliber/bullet combos. The 40 is effective with common, commercially available ammo. If you are required to carry a 9, by all means find the best ammo available that functions in your weapon and do your best. If you do not have to carry a 9, there are better choices available with widely available ammo - the 40 is one of those.

Click to expand...

I think you may be confused. No duty sidearm needs specific, unique funky-bullet ammo to meet FBI specs. Each major defensive cartridge has a dozen or more almost equally performing loadings, because they are all designed to meet the same specs. They are all commercially available. No one of them is guaranteed to be any better than any other. They all perform similarly. “Just as good as” doesn’t mean one is better. It means they are all essentially equal.

I like .40, but I like a lot of calibers and feel most are more than adequate for my needs and safety. As for price, I have recently purchased .40 for less than 9mm and have seen it at rock bottom prices from several sources, so the price argument is waning. The biggest thing I see (or rather "hear") is the .40 is done talk from the internet commandos who know all and do none. So my '40s will be happy staying right where thy are. As for recoil, in fairly recent drills I fired over 500 rounds in 24 hours and never even noticed it.

In the right gun 40 recoil (the biggest complaint) isn't much worse than a 9mm unless one is shooting hundreds of rounds a session . For a box of ammo or so it's just fine. I have a 40 as a bedside gun, and I've been quite happy with it.

If you can shoot it well in a particular gun, why not?

Ha! Yeah right. I love the comments about cleaning supplies. A .40 brush costs what? $1.49? Good idea, use the money saved on not buying a .40 brush to buy more 9mm ammo.

Yeah...and the folks that say .40 S&W recoil isn't a problem...yet they inexplicably shoot it poorly...and blame the cartridge

You're not going to convince me that a Sig, CZ, H&K, etc isn't going to shoot well because of the cartridge. Nonsense.

Bobafett said:

I'll admit the Glock 22 KaBoom stories had me unsettled and when I had a case blow out in my Beretta 96 it killed my confidence.

Click to expand...

OT, but this reminded me: I had a squib firing the Beretta 96 that belonged to the guy the next bench over. I was happy that I noticed it and did not take the guy's advice to "Just pull the trigger again."


Yowza! Here's my post from back in 2010 when it happened

Friend and I were at the range today, and we met a nice fellow named Wain. We chatted for a while, and I let him try out some of my guns and he let me try out some of his.

Wain loaded up the mag for his Beretta 96G (.40), and handed it to me along with the gun. I popped in the first round and dropped the hammer.

Nothing - and no hole in the target.

Wain says, "Just pull the trigger again." Instead, I cocked it and pulled the trigger. Nothing. I DA'd it a couple of times. Nothing. I drop the mag and pop the chamber round (a Federal ball round).

Hunh. No bullet. Dirty empty case.

Wain takes it from my hands, reinserts the mag, and drops the slide, chambering another round. Puts it back in my hands.

I said, "Do me a favor and humor me. I'm going to pull the top end." I do, and he pops the barrel out.

You should have seen Wain's face when we realized that the bullet was just a little ways down the bore.

I've never had that happen before - and I've been shooting a reasonable amount for 25 years. Friend had a rod for just such events, though, and we hammered it right out. Wain was pretty glad that I'd said we ought to pull the top end.

The gun shot like a dream after that, BTW. I'd never fired a 96 before, but it's a really good matching of cartridge to the gun size.

Click to expand...

CB3 said:

I think you may be confused. No duty sidearm needs specific, unique funky-bullet ammo to meet FBI specs. Each major defensive cartridge has a dozen or more almost equally performing loadings, because they are all designed to meet the same specs. They are all commercially available. No one of them is guaranteed to be any better than any other. They all perform similarly. “Just as good as” doesn’t mean one is better. It means they are all essentially equal.

Click to expand...

No confusion; I've lived through one 'HydraShock and +P+ ammo make a 9 into a 45' era - it wasn't true then, as we paid to learn at the time, and we'll see this time. When there is a decade or more of satisfactory police shootings on a par with 40 or 357 using the 9 I might be swayed. Or not.