Is the 40 S&W a must have cartridge?

[mtgianni]

The 9 made it's reputation with the BHP and 13 round magazines. Most full size 40's have 12 rounds. You have to love perspectives.

 

[max]

I personally don't have a need as I have 9's and 45's and load for both. I am too old to learn to load a new caliber and start acquiring, brass, bullets. dies, etc.

There are many bargains in .40 to be found now. For someone who buys factory and does not shoot much, they might be ok. I don't think they would be a good choice for a beginner.

 

[Abbynormal]

I bought a used Sig P229 in 40 17 years ago. At the time, the dealer had 5 used Sig P229's in 40, so he dropped the price to move them. I found the one with the best action and left with it.

After a year of shooting .40, I could take it or leave it. Then I found a factory Sig P229 .357 Sig barrel on another forum for $100.

I got, installed it and bought some ammo and began to shoot it.

Wow! This thing came alive. The .357 is more accurate than the .40 and packs the punch of a 125 grain .357 Magnum! I can fire follow up shots quicker and I've broken 2 AR500 steel plates at the range. I'm accurate out 100 yards with it and rarely change back to .40, except to shoot .40 ammo I find dirt cheap as practice ammo.

The ONLY bad thing about .357 Sig is, it's expensive and getting harder to find. If you reload, you are in a great spot. If not, it can get expensive.

.357 Sig has become my favorite auto loader round

 

[Univibe]

The .40 should never have been born. It's an answer to a problem that didn't exist.

But then, that was also true of the .45 ACP over a hundred years ago.

And the .357 Sig much later.

History repeats itself. In 20 years we'll decide that the 9mm doesn't have enough ________________, and invent some new cartridge to remedy an imaginary deficiency.

 

[Echo40]

Is the .40 S&W a must-have cartridge?

No, but then again, what is save for maybe .22LR and 12 Gauge?

Owning a firearm is about making choices based on your own individual needs. Only a fool subscribes to demonstrably false unilateral beliefs like that there exists some perfect, one-size-fits-all, all-purpose cartridge/firearm.

Personally, I think that .40 S&W is exactly what it was designed to be, a reduced recoil version of the 10mm cartridge which manages to duplicate the ballistic performance of the original 10mm load as designed by Colonel Jeff Cooper. Yeah, that's right, all of you folks who complain about how it's a gimped version of 10mm Auto, it's not, it matches the original load that Jeff Cooper himself designed before Norma decided to load it hotter, purely for the sake of marketing hype. The 10mm load you all love so much and curse the .40 S&W for stealing the thunder of, wasn't made to Jeff Cooper's specifications at all, hence why folks use it namely for defense against large, quadrupedal predatory animals nowadays and why it flopped as a law enforcement cartridge. So the "wimpy" 10mm FBI loads you all hate so much and .40 S&W are actually performing as Jeff Cooper intended when he designed 10mm Auto in the first place.

Anyway, as I was saying... .40 S&W strikes a good balance between the 9mm Luger and .45 ACP, offering more power than standard pressure 9mm Luger loads and higher capacity than .45 ACP. Now here's the part where someone will argue about how 9mm Luger is just as good *hooks arm in upward ark* as .40 S&W and .45 ACP because the FBI said so, and that may very well be true...of the overpressure +P+ loads used by the FBI, but not your average standard pressure 115gr 9mm Luger loads. So yeah, unless you're actually loading up your 9mm pistol with 125gr-147gr +P+ ammo like the FBI, then no, your 9mm isn't anywhere close to equaling the terminal performance of .40 S&W or .45 ACP.

Last but not least, .40cal pistols tend to be extremely cheap right now due to all of the police trade-ins and "me too" civilian trade-ins, ammo has never been cheaper nor more available, and even if you don't like the recoil of .40 S&W, you can easily convert it to 9mm Luger, then have the option to shoot both cartridges at a cost which will most likely be less than the cost of a new 9mm Luger pistol.

Oh, and if you couldn't already tell, .40 S&W has the fringe benefit of annoying fanboys of all the other cartridges, so everytime you bring it up in conversation, you'll get tons of angry responses by fanboys of 9mm, .45, and especially 10mm because the cartridge is just so infuriatingly well-balanced, thus making it all the more difficult to argue how their cartridge of choice is objectively superior.

 

[CajunBass]

I’ve never been tempted to buy one.

 

[pmosley]

I have 40 in my collection because of the S&W models Shorty Forty, 4040PD and 4054...........


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[raljr1]

Desperately wanted a 10mm when they first came out but could not swing the $600 price tag back in the 80s. I had a 4053 and a CS 40...sold them both...just didn't get into them, but then I am more of a revolver guy.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Ziggy2525]

The .40 should never have been born. It's an answer to a problem that didn't exist.

But then, that was also true of the .45 ACP over a hundred years ago.

And the .357 Sig much later.

History repeats itself. In 20 years we'll decide that the 9mm doesn't have enough ________________, and invent some new cartridge to remedy an imaginary deficiency.

I’m holding out for a Barrett 50 BMG pocket gun. The ultimate ccw weapon. Unfortunately, so far, I can only just barely get a couple loose rounds to fit in my pocket. No weapon. Maybe I need bigger pockets.

 

[CH4]

No, the 40 is not a “must have” cartridge, but for me there is no such thing. Cartridges are a personal preference, it’s whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy.

Another vote for the 40 S&W. I like all handgun cartridges above .380, but the .40 holds a special place in my heart.
I was about 1/3 of the way through my LE career when the .40 was THE death ray, every department was hitching their caboose to the .40 train.
I initially bought a Beretta 96 to get me into the .40 game while I was waiting for Sig’s highly anticipated P229, the first handgun designed for the .40 and the last to hit the market. Carried it for the last 20 years of my career. If I started over again, It’d be the one I grab.

I also have a factory .357 Sig barrel for it and I wouldn’t hesitate carrying in that configuration.

 

[cowboy4evr]

Anyone who thinks the 9mm almost equals a 357 magnum needs to watch Paul Harrells video on U-tube on that subject . It proves what I and many others have said all along , " Horse manure " ! I personally have no use for the 9mm . Regards, Paul

 

[29aholic]

I have already weighed in with my opinion, but here's a trivial side note. Had it not been for my P229 and my search for a 357Sig barrel, I might not have graced this forum (some will have mixed feelings I am sure). I was looking for said barrel and the interwebs brought me here. I had to be a member to do anything in the classifieds so I joined. The rest is history.

 

[Echo40]

Another thing that I'd like to add preemptively before someone inevitably enters the thread to spew worthless misinformation...

No, .40 S&W does not "tear guns apart" nor does it wear a firearm out any faster than 9mm Luger +P loads. Perhaps there was some truth to it back in the earliest days of the cartridge when manufactures were basically just reeming out 9mm barrels/chambers to accommodate the larger .40 S&W cartridge, but manufacturers have long since stopped doing that in favor of building firearms specifically for .40 S&W, which may appear to be exactly the same as their 9mm counterparts to the naked eye, but if you actually put some calipers on them you'll find that the slides are slightly thicker around.

Also, ignore folks who prattle on about how .40 S&W is an extremely high pressure cartridge. These people have absolutely no idea what they're talking about because in reality the .40 S&W cartridge operates at identical chamber pressures to standard pressure 9mm Luger ammo, they both operate at 35,000psi, and 9mm +P is actually significantly higher in pressure, landing at 38,500psi. This is because .40 S&W is larger in diameter, ergo the cartridge generates less pressure in spite of being more powerful than 9mm Luger +P ammo.

Furthermore, .40 S&W isn't and most likely never will be dead, no matter how many people may assert it to be so in hopes that if they keep on saying it then eventually it will become true.
Heck, even if it was, we live in a world in which you can still buy ammo for cartridges which have long since faded into obscurity like .25 ACP, .38 S&W, (not to be confused with .38 Special) 7.65x25 Tokarev, 9x18 Ultra/Police, etc. So even if everyone including Smith & Wesson were to cease producing firearms in .40 S&W, then ammo manufactures would continue producing the ammo decades upon decades later. Seriously, if there are still companies making old cartridges like .44-40 and obscure cartridges which never achieved mainstream popularity which very few firearms were ever chambered in like 9x18 Ultra/Police, then I'm pretty sure .40 S&W ammo will still be in production long after we're all dead. Besides, most .40s can be easily converted to 9mm Luger.

It's downright baffling just how much information is spread around about the .40 S&W cartridge, but then again, when people are absolutely determined to hate something, they generally don't bother to actually come up with tangible reasons for their hate and thus opt to merely parrot what other ignorant haters have to say about it without bothering to verify the validity of such statements because blind hatred is dumb.

Last but not least, I would like to take this opportunity to state that I am not a .40 S&W fanboy. In fact, I don't even own any firearms chambered in .40 S&W yet. I've been carrying a .380 for years, and only recently decided to start carrying something more, which was going to be a Ruger EC9s because I liked my brother's LC9s, but I ultimately ended up finding a S&W Sigma SW40VE for $199 LNiB at my LGS, so I put it on layaway and plan on using it for Winter carry.
So yeah, by no means is .40 S&W a "must have" cartridge, but then again, neither is 9mm, really. I'm merely pointing out that the vast majority of the negatives associated with the .40 S&W cartridge are gross exaggeration at best, and that at the bottom dollar prices that .40cal pistols are going for these days, you'd have to be a complete fool not to buy one if a good deal crosses your path, because even if you find the felt recoil completely intolerable, you can easily and cheaply convert them to other calibers like 9mm Luger, and once another ammo shortage inevitably hits and you can't find 9mm anywhere, you have another option which may very well still be able to find. It never hurts to have another cartridge on reserve.

 

[The_Truth]

Modern 9mm defensive loads are almost on a par with a 357 Magnum and are above 38 Super. That is why the 357 SIG is fading from the scene slowly.

40 S&W is the same.

The magic word is cost. How many fifty round boxes of 40 can you buy versus fifty rounds of 9mm?

9mm on par with 357mag? Lol...no. unless you're comparing a weak loaded light bullet 357 to the hottest loaded +p+ light bullet 9mm, which is disingenuous at best.

 

[Univibe]

Sure. Both .357 mag and 9mm make the same size hole in a vital organ, and will kill you approximately as dead.

 

[Gunhacker]

Another thing that I'd like to add preemptively before someone inevitably enters the thread to spew worthless misinformation...

No, .40 S&W does not "tear guns apart" nor does it wear a firearm out any faster than 9mm Luger +P loads. Perhaps there was some truth to it back in the earliest days of the cartridge when manufactures were basically just reeming out 9mm barrels/chambers to accommodate the larger .40 S&W cartridge, but manufacturers have long since stopped doing that in favor of building firearms specifically for .40 S&W, which may appear to be exactly the same as their 9mm counterparts to the naked eye, but if you actually put some calipers on them you'll find that the slides are slightly thicker around.

Also, ignore folks who prattle on about how .40 S&W is an extremely high pressure cartridge. These people have absolutely no idea what they're talking about because in reality the .40 S&W cartridge operates at identical chamber pressures to standard pressure 9mm Luger ammo, they both operate at 35,000psi, and 9mm +P is actually significantly higher in pressure, landing at 38,500psi. This is because .40 S&W is larger in diameter, ergo the cartridge generates less pressure in spite of being more powerful than 9mm Luger +P ammo.

Furthermore, .40 S&W isn't and most likely never will be dead, no matter how many people may assert it to be so in hopes that if they keep on saying it then eventually it will become true.
Heck, even if it was, we live in a world in which you can still buy ammo for cartridges which have long since faded into obscurity like .25 ACP, .38 S&W, (not to be confused with .38 Special) 7.65x25 Tokarev, 9x18 Ultra/Police, etc. So even if everyone including Smith & Wesson were to cease producing firearms in .40 S&W, then ammo manufactures would continue producing the ammo decades upon decades later. Seriously, if there are still companies making old cartridges like .44-40 and obscure cartridges which never achieved mainstream popularity which very few firearms were ever chambered in like 9x18 Ultra/Police, then I'm pretty sure .40 S&W ammo will still be in production long after we're all dead. Besides, most .40s can be easily converted to 9mm Luger.

It's downright baffling just how much information is spread around about the .40 S&W cartridge, but then again, when people are absolutely determined to hate something, they generally don't bother to actually come up with tangible reasons for their hate and thus opt to merely parrot what other ignorant haters have to say about it without bothering to verify the validity of such statements because blind hatred is dumb.

Last but not least, I would like to take this opportunity to state that I am not a .40 S&W fanboy. In fact, I don't even own any firearms chambered in .40 S&W yet. I've been carrying a .380 for years, and only recently decided to start carrying something more, which was going to be a Ruger EC9s because I liked my brother's LC9s, but I ultimately ended up finding a S&W Sigma SW40VE for $199 LNiB at my LGS, so I put it on layaway and plan on using it for Winter carry.
So yeah, by no means is .40 S&W a "must have" cartridge, but then again, neither is 9mm, really. I'm merely pointing out that the vast majority of the negatives associated with the .40 S&W cartridge are gross exaggeration at best, and that at the bottom dollar prices that .40cal pistols are going for these days, you'd have to be a complete fool not to buy one if a good deal crosses your path, because even if you find the felt recoil completely intolerable, you can easily and cheaply convert them to other calibers like 9mm Luger, and once another ammo shortage inevitably hits and you can't find 9mm anywhere, you have another option which may very well still be able to find. It never hurts to have another cartridge on reserve.

Well said.

And the point about the next ammo shortage is spot on.

During the last one when .22LR and 9mm ammo was as hard to find as hens teeth and cost as much as the hope diamond... there was plenty of .40 S&W sitting there unwanted, at bargain prices due to the current disdain for it.

Man, I stocked up like nobody's tomorrow... and was enjoying myself at the range while many others moaned about not being able to find ammo.

 

[Kurusu]

Please believe me, I am NOT trying to resurrect a "which is better" thread, I am trying to spark an informed conversation in trying to decide whether a handgun capable of firing the 40 S&W should be in my future.

I realize that the 40S&W development was somewhat a parody of Goldilocks and the Three Bears: the 9mm was not enough, the 45 was too much, and the 40 was just right! I have the opportunity to get a Sig 229 at a decent price, and it is a metal frame, not polymer. Other than price and the fact that it is a Sig, it can easily be converted to 357 Sig.

Realistically, I don't need a 40, since I have both 9s and 45s which I can handle competently. If I need to make a 40 something hole, I have a 41 Magnum. If a need a flat shooting hotrod, I have 357 Magnums. All of my firearm purchases are mission driven, but I already have handguns in calibers capable of over-shadowing a 40 S&W or a 357 Sig.

While I would like a metal frame Sig, I don't need a 40 S&W or a 357 Sig. Could anyone help me shed some light on why I should purchase a 40 S&W?

Thanks in advance for your opinions!

If you have to ask... I think you already know the answer.

And... The 9 mm is adequate (if you hit where you should).

And... the .45 is not too much.

 

[Echo40]

Sure. Both .357 mag and 9mm make the same size hole in a vital organ, and will kill you approximately as dead.

So will .38 Special or .380 ACP, and with substantially less recoil, meaning faster follow up shots.

Come to think of it, The 9mm Luger should never have been born. It's an answer to a problem that didn't exist.

 

[Kurusu]

So will .38 Special or .380 ACP, and with substantially less recoil, meaning faster follow up shots.

Come to think of it, The 9mm Luger should never have been born. It's an answer to a problem that didn't exist.

The 9mm was designed in 1902 to improve the performance of a .30 caliber, in an semi auto pistol that was developed at the same time the .38 SPL was .

The .380 ACP only came up 5 years after the 9mm Parabellum.


You are talking apples and oranges here.

 

[Buford57]

Last year I found a SIG P250 (full size) in .40 at a silly-low price. I bought dies and brass and bullets and loaded ammo. I had fun. I considered a compact slide and frame. I nearly ordered a .357 SIG barrel. But I never for a moment considered carrying the thing when I had a smaller lighter 9mm and a similarly sized .45. Then I spotted a vintage big-bore N Frame and reminded myself that I had committed to a one-in-one out policy. I made $25 on the sale of the SIG and my brother inherited a large box of reloading supplies for his M&P .40.

If it had been a 229 or a 220 it likely would have stayed and I either would have foregone the N-Frame (unlikely) or told myself "just this once". A 220 has been calling to me for the past 2 months.