I am entering the world of 40 S&W owners without expectations. I have a Sig P229R CPO on order in 40. I bought it because of it's ability to switch chamberings. Because of the "power" of the 357Sig, I wanted a metal frame, not a polymer frame. I see it (40S&W) as an intermediate cartridge between the 9 and 45.

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

But what if you can?

That's how most people view it, but it's really sort of an oversimplification considering that in terms of muzzle energy, .40 S&W actually typically matches .45 ACP Standard Pressure loads, and falls just short of .45 ACP +P loads.

.40 S&W is actually best described by its Metric German name, 10mm Kurz. (i.e. 10mm Short)

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

A lot of the online ammo sellers had it, cheap too. I bought a bunch of it, Winchester Ranger JHP bonded.

__________________
LIVE FROM THE DAWGHOUSE

LE having established there is minimal lethality difference between current 9mm and .40 when accurately placed, why not switch to the round with less recoil and additional capacity?

Especially when factoring what is now a far more diverse group in LE, many of them meeting only minimal fitness standards, and the only handgun they ever shoot is a duty weapon when requalifying.

A recently retired LEO friend and avid shooter said in his first decades on the force he routinely shot at the range with fellow officers when off duty, in his last decade far fewer officers used the range on their own time.

Often we see the phrase "police qualification" thrown around, but I have to take that with a ton of salt. Having been a teacher for too long, I have to ask by which standard do they qualify!

Most of the LEOs that I know qualify on the Q target. As a school board President, and the need to rely on our local street cop that needs to attain either 70% or 80% to qualify on the Q target in the event of a school shooting mortifies me. When it comes to range qualification, I have a much higher degree of respect for an officer that qualifies on a B27-style or K-D silhouette as opposed to the Q target.

In my opinion, if an officer can't achieve a 100% score on the Q target, they need to reimburse whichever entity that paid for their training. Like each and every one of us, police officers own every round they fire. I shiver at the thought that a marginal body shot on a Q target allows a police officer to carry a sidearm.

I don't offer this as a condemnation of police officers, but strongly believe that a department shouldn't adopt a potentially less capable arm in order to enhance an officer's ability to qualify.

Here endeth my rant.

__________________
Judge control not gun control!

As to the viability of the .40 S&W I have shot it for years primarily in Glocks. I like the round quite a bit. I also shoot 9 & .45 and I wouldn't have problems carrying any of them & don't plan on getting rid of my .40 platforms at all. I need more 9mm ammo though LOL, gotta wait till after the current situation is somewhat back to normal.

The 9 mm is the most universally used cartridge
in the world for military and police. This was true
going back to nearly WWII and even more so since.

Only in the U.S was the 9 mm a stranger. For autos,
the U.S. was wed to the .45 and a few other
auto calibers such as the .38 Super. But by
the 1980s, with the U.S. military adopting the
9 mm, its total world dominance was assured.

The .40 S&W was but an historical and marketing
blip.

In the world of revolvers, no doubt the .38 and to
some extent the .357 dominate that international
market.

__________________
Ubi Est Mea

I'm just over here waiting for the enormous resurgence of popularity of the .45 GAP guns and ammo.

__________________
Ret'd LEO
SWCA #2275

Ah, a shooter of discerning and individualistic taste.
You are to be admired.

__________________
Ubi Est Mea

I agree. I've read a number of disturbing reports of police officers firing upwards of 30 rounds of ammunition at a target within 7 yards yet only scoring 3-5 hits, and these reports often specify that said officers were carrying 9mm pistols, mind you.

So yeah, apparently even after lowering the bar for officers to qualify by adopting a cartridge which is easier to shoot and saving money on ammo in the process which ought to enable them to train officers better by purchasing more ammunition, apparently certain officers still can't hit for beans.

Frankly, I don't buy that the switch to 9mm Luger had anything to do with optimizing the shooting performance of officers, it's merely an excuse to justify switching to lower cost ammunition, which in reality was most likely a decision made primarily through the consultation of accountants.
The FBI can claim all they want that the differences in ballistics performance between 9mm Luger, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP are marginal at best, but regardless of whether or not said statement is 100% accurate, I don't believe that they conducted thorough, costly experimentation in order to reach that conclusion because obviously .40 S&W was working just fine for them, so why would they have any reason to perform said testing for any other reason than to cut costs in the long-term?

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

If you ask my two pennies... 9mm is cool n' all cheap to shoot well it was before "covid19" lol It goes bang, bullet technology sure has improved over the years yes, but if you ask me... I prefer .40kurz over 9mm. I shoot it better than 9mm. I shoot it probably best out of all my flavors of projectiles, but that's just me...

I went to a local show about um.. 3 or so weeks ago and everyone there was buying up 9's and .45s they glossed right over the .40s, so I stocked up lol.

Maybe an odd ball caliber, but when it hit the fan around my parts there was plenty of .40S&W to be had...

__________________
This is the way....

I'll grant you the .40, but I'm not. so sure on the .41. The miniscule difference between .41", and .429"...and a few grains weight...is not on the same level, IMO. That .41 sure shoots flatter, farther, IIRC. Truth be told though, I just don't have any measurable significant experience with the .41, having only briefly owned/shot a 627. More experience with the .44, including a couple flirtations with leverguns.


I was 'IN-ON' .40 from the jump in '95. Bought the first 4006 I could grab.
Extra weight in the slide, for sure, over the 5906. Still, original 180gr loads at about 950fps were snappy. Further still, even in the Smith, primer-wipe AND casehead bulging was evident in recovered brass.

I don't recall ever owning a Glock .40, but certainly have shot them. There's a reason Herr Gaston added the 3rd cross-pin to the frames, and that was the battering from .40. You can't merely just 'UP-spring' the 9mm design. If you ever get to handled a BHP in .40, you would easily see how they added needed weight into the slide. Also, that model pistol, and a friend's 1911 pattern w/integral feed ramp remain the ONLY .40 cal pistols I've shot which didn't exhibit primer-wipe nor casehead bulging.

On any other forum you would most likely have already been bombarded by replies informing you that it is scientifically impossible to shoot .40 S&W better than 9mm Luger because according to non-disclosed testing conducted by someone, somewhere, at someplace in time everyone shoots 9mm better because it addition to being able to defy the laws of physics (or at least marginally so) it has somehow managed to achieve perfect balance, regardless of who shoots it or what they fire it from, ergo it will always have faster follow up shots, less felt recoil, higher ammo capacity, and equal -- excuse me -- "marginally" equal performance compared to a .40 S&W or .45 ACP. It's just science...Or magic...Or maybe a touch of divine intervention...Or all of the above.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

It's the 9mm that I wish would decline. The .40 S&W is esteemed here.

I don't really mind 9mm Luger so much as I dislike its Fanboys who absolutely will not stop trying to push it as the ultimate do-all cartridge, complete with ridiculous claims that anything more powerful is either too little a difference to matter or otherwise excessive.

Honestly, when I was first looking into getting a handgun for Self-Defense, they made research nearly impossible and ended up misleading me so terribly with their rhetoric that what should have been simple, fast, and ultimately ended in a prompt satisfactory conclusion ended up a roundabout baffling ordeal.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

The answer is simple. Take the same gun in both 9mm and 40 S&W and shoot them side by side. 9 out of 10 people will shoot the 9mm more accuratly in rapid fire and also enjoy the lessened recoil.
Personally, I never had need for the 40 but admittedly ended up with a few 5" range guns (1911 and M&P Pro) chambered in 40 S&W in the collection. ( Read: Deals too good to pass up) I reload for them so they shoot softer like a 185gr 45acp but at reduced cost. I also keep a 357 sig barrel for each so the interchangeability is kinda cool.

p.s. When I started working in a gun shop some 4 years ago, 40's were the big sellers in carry guns. By the time I quit last year, we couldn't give a 40 away to most customers. We even stopped taking them back in trade they sold so poorly.

__________________
Dave

I believe that the large amount of rounds fired has more to do with the changeover from 6 shot revolvers to 15+ round semi auto pistols. One of the arguments against the switch was that officers would be more inclined to spray and pray during gunfights. From watching the numerous body cam footage now available, I believe that to be true in many cases. In some of the high round count videos that I've seen, one well aimed round from a Colt SAA would have done the job.

It would have been interesting to compare DA revolver involved gunfight videos if the technology existed back then.

I had a 40 S&W at the academy, a Sig p229 that we swapped out the 357 Sig barrel for 40 at the beginning of the class....big mistake.

I found the 10's and never looked back, never had another 40.




I later re-discovered the 41 Magnum and that's all she wrote

Attached Images

10mmposter.jpg (51.7 KB, 241 views)

__________________
On the Oak Savannah

As as I was saying previously, such blanket statements ignore variables such as the build of the shooter as well as the firearm.

Sure, for the lowest common denominator of civilian shooters who tend to gravitate towards smaller, lighter, easier to conceal pistols/bullets and doesn't spend very much time at the range, the statement is fairly accurate.
However, for Law Enforcement officers who you'd hope are in better overall physical condition, carry full-size pistols which are typically heavy duty service-grade firearms, and spend more time shooting than your average Joe Shmoe who buys a firearm then proceeds to throw it directly into his holster or nightstand drawer before even taking it out to the range, not so much.

Out of a full-size pistol, the difference in felt recoil better 9mm and .40 S&W defensive loads can be downright negligible, especially in heavier all-metal service pistols like the Beretta 92/96 or SIG P226.

So even if modern police departments are packed full of lady cops and smaller framed gentlemen, I doubt that the difference between the 155-180gr .40 S&W loads they were carrying and the 124-147gr 9mm Luger +P+ loads they're currently carrying have an appreciable difference in felt recoil.

Perhaps, but regardless of the reason, adequate training should prevent them from haphazardly slinging lead, both to mitigate the risk of collateral damage as well as to conserve ammo so that officers don't have to pause to reload in gunfights as often.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

No videos, but I recall reading an article based on NYPD's SOP-9 report, which is their annual report on firearms discharges. From what I remember, when they used DA revolvers, officers would typically fire 4-5 shots per incident. When they switched to semi-autos, it went up to 10+ shots per incident. It was suggested that whatever the capacity of the gun, officers would fire nearly every round the gun held. It should also be noted that at the time I read the article, I believe that after the academy, NYPD officers only did 2 days of firearms in-service training once/year, 1 day of training and 1 day for qualifying. I don't know if that's still the case.

I think many people pay too much attention to what is written in the gun press and what is said on the Internet.

And like to go with trends and have lots of people agree with them.

This instead of common sense.

How can a heavier, larger diameter bullet launched with greater energy not be at least a little better than it's smaller less powerful cousin?

^^^^That's just crazy talk!

Common sense tells me to rely on facts, not what people believe. The fact is that in actual shootings, any difference in effectiveness between the handgun service calibers is neglible.

So pick a good HP in a caliber you like, and go from there. Doesn't really matter if it's 9mm, .40, .45, etc.

A little, or a lot, or no better; no one has found a way to scientifically measure it. All we have are anecdotes, questionable formulas and some inconclusive tests. I think what matters most is that we have faith in our chosen caliber.

Not that it matters in the discussion but I find the 40 S&W physically easier to reload than 9mm. For me the slightly larger cases and projectiles are easier to handle. So as all of my handgun shooting lately has been at targets and usually with reloaded ammo that in itself is enough reason to pick the 40 load. Maybe I now have multiple M&Ps for the same reason I have multiple K frames, they may be different calibers and barrel lengths but they feel and handle very similar. So if I find myself actually having to call on that handgun in a low light situation and adrenaline pumping, hopefully muscle memory will help.

All I know is when I was able to snag 4k of brass for $40 last year, and finally bought my 1st 40 in Oct a CHP 4006 I'm set in the reloading department. I had at least 2k casings on hand before my purchases. Just got to buy a mould and powdercoating powder to make me some dirt cheap reloads.

Couldn't of said it better! You hit the nail on the head with this comment.

I have nothing to say about declining 40S&W sales and usage.
Since I never jumped on that bandwagon in the first place.

Blasphemy!!! Haha. Just kidden, my point exactly!

__________________
This is the way....

Another example as to what Dirty Harry Callahan has laied out and 1 example to discredit the "average off the street person who's never shot a gun before"...

Upon meeting my now wife, I'm very pro 2a, so one of our first dates was to the range.. the guns brought.. a Glock 43, 27 a model 19 and a Taurus. 38 snub... a new target for each course of fire with corresponding weapon...

Mind you she has NEVER fired a gun before meeting me...

At the time we ran what I could remember from Florida LEO qualification, the Taurus she flopped on big time, the 43 did ok alot of crotch hits (ykes) ,the 19 was all over the place, but the 27 she scored perfect with....

She has shot that gun consistently better than any 3rd generation S&W, revolver or any other glock I stick in her hands... in .40 KURZ!!

__________________
This is the way....

Not long ago, I went into Turner's just to see what was on sale. They tend to have really good one day sales on one or two models of guns.

Anyway, they had a great sale (I don't remember the price), on a GP-100 Ruger in 10mm. It used moon clips, and would also shoot 40 S&W.

Now that looked like a really nice revolver. And, the particular display gun had a great trigger.

I'd love to have one of those, but I didn't buy it. I have too many guns already, and not enough money...

40 S&W would likely be a great revolver cartridge, just like 45 ACP is.

I never had a 40 S&W gun until recently, but now have two that I bought since 40 went out of style.

A Glock 27 (which I like) and a Kahr PM40. The Kahr was purchased new for $425. Good time to pick up a 40 cal or two if you can spare the funds.

Half-a-wave of nostalgia reading all this - if you'll recall this sorta stuff used to sell gun mags..... Author vs. author, and caliber vs. caliber, and revolver vs. auto....LE viewpoints vs. outdoorsmen viewpoints, etc, etc.

I have far too many 9mm's. Enjoy most of'em and carry everything from my only 'tiny 9', a Kahr PM9 when the weather dictates shorts and t-shirts, to HKP7, BHP, Colt Combat Commander, M&P compact, G19, and embarrassed to list any more....

Next up the line in autos - well, all my .40's are 10mm's.
A M1076 and Colt DE in SS.
Strangely enough, the 1076 will function and run with .40's, but only learned that from brief experimentation. I have plenty of old 10mm duty ammo that was the 'Lite' 180 gr. JHP at 950 fps - so guess that counts as my 'sorta .40'.

I missed out on the huge outbreak of rave over the .45 GAP, but have enough N frame .45 ACP revolvers that if I ever encountered a bunch of that ammo, guess I could shoot it up.

In .45 ACP self-loaders, oh, various M1911's in 3", 4.25", 5", a M&P mid-size, the old duty M4566.

Just don't see a .40 in my future making any real meaningful contribution.

__________________
Ret'd LEO
SWCA #2275

Ain’t dead and never will be. The FBI will get into a shootout with a renegade band cookie-selling Girl Scouts where they get their asses handed to em. Within a month they’ll be back to the 40 and state and local agencies will soon follow.

__________________
213th FBINA

I keep hearing that bullet technology has improved and made the 9mm better since the 40 S&W came out and replaced it. What technology has changed? From my memory, the same bullets available for the 9mm in 1990 or so is still being used today are they not? Sure there some of these new fandangled fragmenting bullets and super penetrators, but the standard XTP, Gold DOt, Hydra shock etc, weren't they available back then? And are they really that much better now if not?

Rosewood

As I recall, that wasn't an order. It was a request for bids. They were seeking a manufacturer who would agree to make that amount of ammo available, and at what price.

Perhaps they got the bids and didn't like the price. Could that have anything to do with the shift toward 9mm? Could it really be that simple?

I thought it was a 10mm Kurz?

Actually the SHASHTF and my first choice is two ply.

__________________
Forum consigliere

Any agreements, or disagreements that

Read my post #14 YOU HAVE TO HIT THE BEAR. In Law enforcement add "with as little cost to the taxpayer as humanly possible". Bears-bad guys same principles apply

__________________
Forum consigliere

I don't recall Gold Dot and XTP showing up until later in the 90s but I think HydraShocks were available back then. What changed was in the 80s and early 90s there was a heavy emphasis on expansion and even fragmentation over penetration.

Silvertips had a great reputation because they expanded more reliably than older HP designs. That expansion came at the cost of less penetration which lead to the failure in the Florida shootout that prompted the FBI to look for something better. At the time the best way to ensure deep penetrations was with a heavy, slower moving bullet. At the time I remember a lot of my fellow gun enthusiasts and magazine writers going on about the larger diameter but the FBI being mostly concerned about penetration.

Modern bullets like Gold Dots often have the jacket bonded to the core which helps with penetration. But the biggest change was not radical new technology but different design goals. Bullets don't over expand and fail to penetrate as much as they used to. Most likely this is the result of harder lead alloys which is not high tech but effective.

I thought the guys in the Florida Shootout had body armor on? Would a better bullet had solved that issue?

Rosewood

If you mean the 4/11/86 shootout in Miami - neither of the bad guys wore body armor.

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

The guys in the Florida shootout were trained to double-tap to center mass. Hopefully, we've learned that center mass isn't always the best choice.

My experience is that my M&P 40c has held up very well as a .357 SIG. It has over 2,500 .357 SIG rounds though it without any issues, after firing over 13,000 rounds of .40 S&W. You can read a more detailed report on my 40c here:
Long-Term Report on M&P 40c, Shield 9, & Shield 45

As to the Texas Rangers, I would be surprised if a Texas Ranger limp wristed anything. Rangers are a small, elite group within the Texas Department of Public Safety, responsible for carrying out criminal investigations that other agencies can't solve. Now, it's possible that the DPS's other major law enforcement group, the Texas Highway Patrol, had M&P issues, because they are a much larger organization.

__________________
What, me worry?

That must have been the shootout in Hollywood?? I am thinking about?

Oh yeah - those boys had all kinds of body armor on.

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

I duty carried a Sig P229 .40 cal. from 1995 to 2015, and never had an issue until the extractor broke after somewhere over 20K rounds of 180 gr. HP had passed through the bore. I was a firearms instructor and Sig armorer, and I never felt the .40 P229 had excesive recoil in comparison to 9mm, nor did the.40 cal. create undo damage to Sig frames or other components.

Funny how the .40 became the latest/greatest after the 9mm was judged ineffective. Now, the tables are turned. Like the weather, more changes will occur, and the .40 cal. isn't dead yet.

If they were wearing body armor a 40 would not have solved the issue either.

Nope, only a rifle would have turned the tides.

I would buy a 40 before a 9mm

Attached Images

BD43E594-E4F8-47C6-9FEE-94772B223BB0.jpg (88.0 KB, 113 views)

Harder for some to shoot well and it not the newest flavor on the list . I don't own one anymore but it's because I did not like the pistol I bought not the cartridge . Would not hesitate to buy one if I found one with a trigger pull I could stomach .

__________________
Grumpy Old Man With a Gun