40 barrels

Argonnakid

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
460
Reaction score
126
Location
Virginia Beach,VA
I don't have anything chambered in 40S&W and never have. What I would like to find out is if the barrels of the M&P 40's are fully supported as far as the cases are concerned. If I am to keep with my routine, I would be reloading for anything I bought. I know that for example Glocks chambered in 40 are not fully supported and reloading those cases and trying to use them again can lead to big problems. I'm on the fence about buying a 40 for this reason. Can someone give me shove one way or the other?
 
Register to hide this ad
I know that for example Glocks chambered in 40 are not fully supported...
I don't believe this is true. It may have been true at one time, but not now. At least not on Gen 3 and newer. My G27 and G22 both had fully supported chambers.

Likewise, my M&P 45 has a fully supported chamber.
 
40 Barrels Supported

The answer is S&W Shield 40 and 9mm are fully supported. As a reloader, it is also very important to me. When I see the "balooned" fired cases at the range, it is usually from Glock pistols. Hope this helps you out.
 
I don't believe this is true. It may have been true at one time, but not now. At least not on Gen 3 and newer. My G27 and G22 both had fully supported chambers.

Likewise, my M&P 45 has a fully supported chamber.

I'd like to see pictures of your fully supported glock chambers, to my knowledge no glock has supported chambers, not even gen4.
 
I'd like to see pictures of your fully supported glock chambers,...
And I would love to show you those pictures. I'm positive that I took pictures. Those pictures showed both Glock and 1911 chambers with rounds in them and the support provided was the same.

Alas, I cannot find the pics now, and I have sold both my Glocks. I claim no expertise here. All I can say is what the chambers were like in the Glocks I owned.

What did they look like in your Glock?
 
Here's a pic comparing Glock barrels that I found on another forum. Apparently, the new ones have a "more" supported chamber, but not quite fully supported.

light013.jpg
 
I shoot and reload .40 S&W. All my brass is picked up at the range and I de-bulge all of it with the Lee bulge buster kit. Not all of it needs debulging, but some does and it is hard see the bulges with my eye so all of them get the treatment. It adds an extra step in the reloading process, but I feel it's worth the effort.
 
Actually, no pistol chamber is "fully" supported. They all leave a tiny bit of the case open. My Glocks looked exactly like my M&P 45 does now. Mine was like the far right barrel in Jyezahn's pic.
 
Actually, no pistol chamber is "fully" supported. They all leave a tiny bit of the case open. My Glocks looked exactly like my M&P 45 does now. Mine was like the far right barrel in Jyezahn's pic.

Now that I look closer at my 40c barrel, you are correct, not 100% supported, but pretty darn close. Here are some pics with an unfired round from two angles, a fired round, an empty barrel, and the profile of the fired round respectively. You can see in the next to the last picture, the groove that is cut out to decrease the angle of feed from the ramp.

20130207_121516_zpsaee88494.jpg


20130207_121344_zps43cd4bfc.jpg


20130207_121321_zpsb1201130.jpg


20130207_121902_zpse1112b8f.jpg

The top of the casing correlates to the point of the teardrop in the breach face with the firing pin. If there were any bulge, it would be there.
20130207_123307_zps1737e4ff.jpg
 
Last edited:
As has been said, Glock barrels do seem to be made a bit differently in the newer guns. But you asked about the M&P. I don't notice any excessive bulging from my M&P40. There are de-bulging dies that help straighten out picked-up cases from the range that need it and they are not too expensive - cheaper than buying new brass. :)

If you are critical about accuracy you might consider that M&P's are not at the top of the heap in that department. I do not recall ever seeing one that was an outstanding shooter. In the "box-stock, best accuracy" contest I think the P229s are going to win every time. I do not have any experience with the newer versions but the older P229s I have been around have been "good" shooters, with a few "exceptional" ones thrown in.
 
Range Ricochet

While shooting at a metal target from about 30 ft. at the range yesterday a round from my Shield .40 ricocheted to the right temple of my buddy who was standing to my right rear and drew a considerable amount of blood. A couple of weeks ago while using the same targets I noticed some frag's hitting my lower pant legs but didn't realize such large frags could come back so high. We were both wearing proper eyewear, however, i think we'll be steering clear of the metal targets in the future!! Any similar experiences?
 
rono,
You should probably start another thread. You'll get better answers.

Even so, if bullet fragments are hitting you from 30' away, the steel is not set up right.
 
I own a M&P Shield in 40 and I would not consider the chamber to be 'fully supported'. In some pistols, the feed ramp sits entirely proud of the chamber. In the 40 shield, the feed ramp extends far enough into the chamber that it approaches the location where the wall of the cartridge begins to get thinner. This seems to be a common practice. I have not experienced any bulging in spent cases and I have looked for it carefully.

I understand that Buffalo Bore, Underwood, and Georgia arms all market 40S&W ammunition in '+P' despite there being no SAMMI spec in this caliber. It is my understanding that the peak pressure of these cartridges is between 35,000psi and 38,500psi. (This mimics the specification for 9mm+P due to shared instrumentation.) As a result of what I choose to call a "mostly supported" chamber in the shield 40, I have chosen to avoid this ammunition.

I sectioned a spent cartridge with a dremel and took some pictures of the barrel to help illustrate. I hope this is helpful.
mtp1f4.jpg
 
Good illustration!

emory's post is a service to all who might pay attention.

The cautionary comments about trying to achieve excessive chamber pressure via +P or overloading via hand loading should help increase shooter safety insofar as people realize they don't have to achieve more "manly" chamber pressures and muzzle velocity (and why bother out of such short barrels?).

Also worthy of note are the following considerations:

1) "De-bulging" fired cases in order to use them over and over and possibly over, increases the likelihood of case failures due to the metal becoming work hardened--i.e., made more brittle and prone to rupture due to being flexed repeatedly. Case ruptures might seem rare or unlikely to the casual shooter who does not shoot thousands of rounds of reloads and has not had it happen to him, but whatever the statistical likelihood of such a failure, it only needs to happen to any one person one time, and it is unpredictable when it might happen to you if you reload the same cases repeatedly (or pick up other people's case at the range--not knowing the history of their use). When I was reloading modest pressure .45ACP and .300WinMag ammo, my rule was to only re-use cases one time, to include full-length re-sizing and trimming the cases to spec as well.

Of course, somebody might chime in here as say that it is OK to re-use brass over and over if it is annealed after X number of firings, but once you introduce enough additional steps to re-using these cases, you cannot really control the quality of the metallurgy and the reliability of the cases to the level where they should have left the factory.

2) Any case metal other than brass might be even more likely to fail under such treatment. Aluminum in particular will work harden more quickly or easily than brass, so perhaps it does not make sense to try and reload these at all???

An aside--aluminum can also corrode and therefore become weakened. This can happen under poor storage conditions, such as any time there is opportunity for exposure to salts of various types or possible galvanic reaction when in contact with other metals. I am not an expert on this, but recall that the aluminum-cased GAU-8 ammo for the A-10 had corrosion problems under conditions where it was stored/deployed, which led the AF to move toward steel cases (perhaps in the search for a cheaper material than brass). Of course, for the GAU-8 ammo they also applied protective coatings to the cases to improve corrosion resistance--which I don't know anyone does for pistol ammo.

Finally--to improve extraction of spent pistol cases, I am thinking that it might help to use a silicon cloth on brass and especially aluminum cases to improve lubricity and reduce any tendency to stick in the chamber. Does anyone have any experience or insight about this?
 
Back
Top