40 or 45 cal

I am looking for something I can use for home defense, CCW (if I ever get to), and competition shooting (IDPA). I also want a pistol with a good capacity but safety features like the Smith gen 3 pistols (5906).

For HD, size and weight are not issues. For CCW, each certainly IS.

For IDPA, you simply have to meet the size criteria, which won't change with caliber in an autoloader.

Since you are not going to use it for CCW at present, let's eliminate that issue. This leaves HD and IDPA competition.

IDPA requires that an auto "must fit in the IDPA gun test box measuring 8 3/4" x 6" x 1 5/8" with an empty magazine inserted."

Plan to compete? Plan on shooting - a LOT. A box of plain .40 is cheaper than a box of plain .45.

Plan to CCW? Practice is A Good Thing. See above.

Given that either .40 or .45 will stop an attacker if the right ammo is placed into the right body parts, and that the size of the gun will be the same regardless of which caliber you choose, ammo cost seems to be the remaining criterion.

That makes .40 the cost-effective choice, whether you buy ammo or load your own.
 
"I prefer the .45 and find pistols chambered in it to have a more pleasant recoil impulse"
+1. Big and slow is more pleasant than smaller and fast. Like the 9mm., the .40 is a high pressure round that, to my experience, is a bit snappy and unpleasant compared to the "push" of a .45, a low pressure round even at full power levels. I own a few of each caliber, shoot in competition (BE and Police L primarily), and reload for both, so I'm not writing this without at least some background.
The stopping power of the .45 ACP is well documented and loadings ranging from 185 LSWC to 230 Ball are commercially available. The .40 S&W also has solid defensive credentials and there is the extra capacity advantage (unless you have a big hand and can handle the double stack .45's). With the proper recoil spring, almost any load will function, and in the 1911 configuration, parts and accessories are virtually unlimited.
Your choice in regard to competition may also be influenced by reloading options. The high pressure .40 needs more care in reloading, especially in regard to case examination and powder metering. The .45 is more forgiving in these respect, with cases lasting almost forever at target loadings.
All the above is JMHO.
 
Thanks for all the responses. Some of them pointed out things I need to think over some more. Our local PD carry 4006's and an officer I know cant stop talking about how good a weapon.

I need to shot a 40 cal and see what I think. Also, seems like 4006's are a bit easier to find than the 4566 or monster of a 4506.

Thanks again.
TD
 
The 4006 is a great gun. It has proven reliable, accurate, and fun to shoot for me. The 4006 would be a great model to try 40 cal out in. I am sure you will have fun making your decision, no matter which caliber you choose.
 
Why not both? I like anything with a 4 in it! That being said, I am starting to get arthritis and painful range sessions are not really my cup of tea. However I have several 45's. The only one that is a little tough is a light weight 3 inch barreled Colt New Agent 45 1911. The all around best shooter in 45's I have is a close race between a W. German made Sig P220 and the S&W 1911 PD, 4.25 inch barrel. The 40's are a scattered lot from a S&W CS40 to the S&W 4006. There is a Glock G23 and Sig P229 in there too. The best shooter in the 40's, for me is the Sig P229. The S&W 4006 though is a blast. It is so heavy that 40 cal feels like a 22 coming out of there. For nightime carry I resort to either a Colt New Agent (45) with a laser or a Sigpro Sp2022 (9mm) with night sites. So it boils down to where you are and what you have confidence in.
 
OK, to start the debate.

As some of you know I have been looking for 45 cal., however I have been hearing "look at the 40" a lot lately. So I throw it out to all of you, 40 or 45?

I am looking for something I can use for home defense, CCW (if I ever get to), and competition shooting (IDPA). I also want a pistol with a good capacity but safety features like the Smith gen 3 pistols (5906).

As always, any advice or hard facts would be great.
TD

Just get both the 1911 and the M&P and then carry whichever you feel like on any given day. Buy the M&P 40 first and then get the 1911 as soon as you can. There is no reason this has to be a hard decision!
 
If you want or need real power, get a 9x19. This supersonic screamer will devastate everything in its path. You can feel the power when the gun pounds your hands in recoil. This is the stuff men are made of!

motivator7977212-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Just my preference I'd choose either the .40 or .45. Both shoot well but if your limited to $ the .40 ammo is cheaper as noted earlier.
 
I would get both, finances permitting. The only S & W semi that I own is my M & P 40 full size. My next handgun purchase will be the M & P 45. One of the reasons that I bought the .40 caliber is that I could, and have bought a .357 SIG barrel conversion that turns one firearm into two, and now for the price of one handgun and $160 for the conversion barrel I can shoot 2 different calibers out of it. It does work well. I already had a Springfield Armory XD in .357 SIG, so I already have plenty of ammunition. Also, I already have a Colt Gold Cup Trophy and a Glock 21, so I thought I had the .45 ACP situation well in hand. ;)
 
Last edited:
.40 S&W

much better magazine capacity, 90% of .45's diameter, and equal if not better penetration. I'll trade .05" for an extra 5 rounds any time. The snappy recoil claim is largely a myth based on people comparing polymer .40's to steel 1911 .45's in my opinion. Compare them in a guns of that weigh the same and the .40 will have less recoil. You will also save some money as .40 seems to be at least 10-20% cheaper than .45 ammo lately.
 
Get the 45ACP. The 40 is already loaded as hot as it can get. That's why you don't see any .40+P as far as I know and I wouldn't want to shoot any. I'd much rather shoot a 10MM than a .40S&W.
 
I don't recall his name, but a famous old Texas Ranger was asked in an interview with a reporter.....'why do you carry a 45?' He responded, 'because they don't make a 46! The 45 ACP is and continues to be my choice.

I carried, in my final years as a peace officer, an issued Glock 22 40 S&W, with a Glock 27 as a back up for obvious reasons. Other than reliability, I disliked the Glocks, but loved the 40. I have two Beretta 96's and a 4040 all of which I enjoy. The 40 is a very capable round and easy to shoot, especially in a large framed, double stacked pistols. However, the 45 is just as soft shooting in the right gun (like the 4506-the softest shooting 45 IMO), proven for nearly 100 years now and works under considerably lower operating pressures. Additionally, is there anything easier and more forgiving to reload than a 45 ACP round?

I must admit, however, that I believe the 45 ACP is best served in a Colt or similar 1911, single stacked semi-auto. It carries well and safely in condition three, slips into the belt of a pair of Levi's or slacks, and is just a fast into service, as accurate (arguably more so), and quick to reload if necessary, as any other make in my very partial opinion.

Having both is the best choice, but I still favor the large bore 45 in an auto for self-defense, plinking, target shooting or competition. Plus, I don't believe, when reloading, the 45 ACP costs more than a 40, especially in the long term. It was mentioned earlier that brass will last nearly forever, primarily because of the modest pressures. A few cents more per cast bullet perhaps, but Bullseye goes just as far in an ACP case. And, if you folks are still buying (and shooting) factory ammo in this day and age, then you should be commended for singlehandedly doing your share to boost the economy.
 
Last edited:
Like I said before, after shooting th 40 cal I was not that impressed. I shoot both the 40 and 45 in a Sprignfield XD. Same guns, diff cal.

The 40 recoil was very snappy and uncomfortable, the 45 was "heavier" but nicer to shoot. If I where to chose between those two I would go with the 45.

TD
 
Have carried both rounds as primary duty caliber, and will stay with the 45 ACP.

Whenever the debate is started, and it is a wonderful topic that will never be decided, I try to recommend to those new to defensive shooting the following:

1. Chose the largest caliber/handgun platform that you can accurately control. It is a true statement that a hit with a 22 is far better than a miss with a 44 Mag. - Cannot give adequate credit to the person I heard this from.

Two points here - a big hole is better than a little hole (this one is mine) but shot placement is King, adequate penetration is Queen, all else is angels dancing on the head of pin (I'm quoting my friend Erich on this board for this priceless wisdom).

2. Then practice, practice and practice as much as you can in the situations you find yourself in. They need to be real life situations, example drawing from inside the car, situations inside your house, night time, do a little exercise, get your heart rate up, have to breathe a little faster and deeper when shooting. Shoot with your weak hand.

You can certainly practice marksmanship, trigger control and such at the range but how many shoot outs (I hope you never have to find out) will be done under "sterile" conditions you find at the range.


3. Learn to avoid the situations that might put you in the position to be in a shooting.

Make keen awareness your very best friend, know your surroundings, know your escape routes, how can you get the hell out of there so you need not be in that situation.

I know I have drifted a bit from your original question and I hope you find this helpful.

Pawncop... I can't pass up saying that was some of the best advice and sage wisdom I've seen posted on a forum. It is all too easy to get embroiled in the subject of what gun/caliber one should buy and not consider or even know to consider the salient points you've mentioned, when making the choice.

"Practice using real life situations", absolutely! It really is different when the adrenalin is pumping, the shooting conditions and/or position not optimal, and the length of time that you're dealt with to do all of things needed to make an effective shot, that makes it important to practice in the areas of the home, in light and darkness, where you are most likely to find yourself needing to employ deadly force.

Those are factors that you may have little or no control over, and range practice alone can lull a person into a false sense of security because when they're at the range, they can consistiently put their shots in the black in a relatively controlled setting.

But the BEST bit of advice given was "Learn to avoid the situations that might put you in the position to be in a shooting".

I have some personal experience there, and without going into the sorted details, the aftermath taught me just how dumb of a decision it was for me to confront rather than exercise the smarter and safer option of evasion, and I'm lucky to be here writing this.

So hat's off to you.

Now to give my .02 worth on the OP's question, I've actually settled on two guns for self protection, one when I doing a lot of car travel, and the other for the rest of the time.

The "car gun" is a revolver for it's ease of operation (no safety to operate), ability to readily use it strong or weak hand, no flying brass in a confined space to potentially distract. It's carried cross draw for an easier draw while sitting, and it's
a .44 Spl.

The house gun is a 3rd gen 4516, the variety of factory ammo available in the .45acp to suit the need (defense or target) is 2nd to none, and I've found that it's compactness is easier to handle in awkward shooting positions.

I do like the 4006 for it's various merits and it's one of my favorite range guns, but I can't shoot it effectively as a SD weapon as the 4516, and to me that makes the extra rounds in the 4006 less meaningful.
 
I had a .40 for the last year and just recently sold it and went to a .45. That was based on personal preference. I think the .40 will work, but in my mind, the .45 will work better. B
 
The 40 is an effective round, as is the 9mm with proper loads. It helps to recall how it came into existence. Many agencies belived the 9mm was not an adequate police round. The 10mm was by all accounts a far more effective man stopper but it is not practical to teach large numbers of police recruits how to shoot it due to recoil, report, and muzzle flash. (We went through this whole discussion over revolver calibers in the 60's and 70's). Like Pawncop said, the bigger and deeper the hole the better but size doesn't matter if you can't put it in the right place. So the 40 is a compromise to the 10mm as a tamer round that is easier to train people to shoot accurately. Specialized military units and many SWAT teams and other special police units have stayed with or gone back to the 45-because they know what works. There is lots of discussion in military circles about returning to the 45 as our service pistol round.
 
Back
Top