.40 vs 9mm

[someguyfromnc]

I'm actually surprised at ammo prices right now. A box of 50 HST is selling for 25 bucks. I can't remember a time when .40 SD ammo was cheaper than 9mm.

This might be the year I pick up a 40 and just stock up on ammo. I wouldn't mind it becoming less popular as long as it doesn't go the way of the 45 gap.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

When I carry a 9mm I like Standard Pressure Speer GDHP ammo w/124gr bullet. I always preferred the standard over the +P and finally found several tests of then both side by side. It seems there is very little to no difference in performance so IMO the added report and recoil is not worth it.

Some of the numbers were with the 124gr Gold Dots of both flavors were:
From a 3" carry gun barrel

Standard pressure AV 1021 fps
P+ pressure AV 1088 fps

Weight retention was 124gr exactly for both.
Bullet expansion .540" standard pressure round and the +P was .572"

Ballistic jelly penetration for standard 17.5" and the +P was 16"
The wound channels were almost identical through 4 layers of denim.

IMO there is really no reason to use the +P version of that ammo since you will probably have better control with less recoil.

 

[Autonomous]

Intuitively more is better and sometimes it is.
Modern handgun terminal ballistics prove more is not automatically better.

 

[pittpa]

The 30 Luger has a 93 gr bullet at 1200 fps for 304 ft ponds of energy. Just over 34,000 PSI pressure

The 30 Super carry has 1250 fps with a 100 grain bullet for 347 ft pounds of energy. Just over 54,000 PSI pressure
out of a 4" barrel

I suspect the Luger data is a 4 1/2" (120 cm) barrel

This is a great caliber thread, and one of the most polite 40 versus 9 mm threads I’ve had the privilege to read. I’m responding to your post because of the muzzle energy data. I carried a 340 PD revolver with 135, grain 357 mag Speer ammo at about 300 pounds muzzle energy which was all I felt I could reasonably shoot out of this 11 or 12 ounce package.
Then I found that I could shoot Better with an underwood 9 mm 124g round out of a 16 ounce Ruger LCR 9 mm revolver that put out about 350 foot pounds of energy with less felt recoil.
Later I happened upon the Sig P65 which had a footprint smaller than a J frame with a 10 rd mag and with a 12, 15 or 17 round back up. And of course, much easier to reload. I carry that
I happened upon my first Glock purchase, an impulse, buying a used Glock 27 which really opened my eyes. It was a delight. I purchased 9 mm and 357 Sig conversion barrels. I don’t carry it because I prefer smaller.
It was so much fun though, that I bought a Glock 29, but then I found out how downloaded most of the 10 mm rounds were. I bought some hot, coated lead semi wad cutters and I carry it when I bicycle with an extended mag. I figure critters are my worst enemy there.
I bought a Glock 22 impulsively when my LEO friend was selling his used service pistol, as I never had a full-sized Glock. Hard to turn down a deal at $350. He was a range master and he really didn’t shoot it much. When he wanted to shoot, he used a range gun. It came with a 9 mm barrel and he was happy to advise me that it would feed and shoot 9 mm from the 40 caliber Mag, which it does.
I feel very secure with Speer 124g plus P in the Sig P350.

 

[Echo40]

In hindsight, it really is funny how I went from viewing the .40 S&W as an unnecessary, excessive, and just outright undesirable cartridge to it becoming my absolute favorite duty cartridge.

When I first bought a pistol for self-defense in 2015, the .40 S&W cartridge was on its way out of the spotlight and just about every article/thread I read on it was decidedly negative, with haters having a field day proudly proclaiming their opinion that the cartridge was; "a solution to a nonexistent problem" or "the answer to a question nobody asked" or "a poor compromise between 9 and 45" complete with gross exaggerations about how harshly it recoiled, how it caused firearms to self-destruct, yet how it was "short & wimpy" with no more power than 9mm.

Needless to say, such overwhelmingly negative testimony against the cartridge was enough to turn a newcomer like me away from the cartridge completely. In fact, it wasn't until 2019 that I ever bothered to give the .40 S&W so much as a second look, and only because I was flat broke yet desperately in need of something with more power and higher capacity than my Ruger LCP, with the market being awash with cheap .40cal police trade-in pistols. I put a SW40VE I found in a LGS for $199 on layaway then started carrying it. Much to my surprise, the so-called "snappy recoil" of the .40 S&W cartridge paled in comparison to .380 ACP out of my LCP and the effect I saw downrange on various targets left me impressed. Also, my bottom dollar S&W Sigma never blew up, despite the fact that it had supposedly reduced better guns to rubble.

Now I own multiple .40 S&W pistols, each of which cost me under $400 because nobody wants them anymore, now I've got another one on the way, an M&P40c I found online in like new condition with 3 magazines and Trijicon night sights for $269.99.

I honestly have to wonder how many other folks out there got turned on to .40 S&W because it became so undesirable that the market became flooded with a seemingly endless supply of police trade-ins available for a fraction of what 9mm Pistols are.

 

[zeke]

In hindsight, it really is funny how I went from viewing the .40 S&W as an unnecessary, excessive, and just outright undesirable cartridge to it becoming my absolute favorite duty cartridge.

When I first bought a pistol for self-defense in 2015, the .40 S&W cartridge was on its way out of the spotlight and just about every article/thread I read on it was decidedly negative, with haters having a field day proudly proclaiming their opinion that the cartridge was; "a solution to a nonexistent problem" or "the answer to a question nobody asked" or "a poor compromise between 9 and 45" complete with gross exaggerations about how harshly it recoiled, how it caused firearms to self-destruct, yet how it was "short & wimpy" with no more power than 9mm.

Needless to say, such overwhelmingly negative testimony against the cartridge was enough to turn a newcomer like me away from the cartridge completely. In fact, it wasn't until 2019 that I ever bothered to give the .40 S&W so much as a second look, and only because I was flat broke yet desperately in need of something with more power and higher capacity than my Ruger LCP, with the market being awash with cheap .40cal police trade-in pistols. I put a SW40VE I found in a LGS for $199 on layaway then started carrying it. Much to my surprise, the so-called "snappy recoil" of the .40 S&W cartridge paled in comparison to .380 ACP out of my LCP and the effect I saw downrange on various targets left me impressed. Also, my bottom dollar S&W Sigma never blew up, despite the fact that it had supposedly reduced better guns to rubble.

Now I own multiple .40 S&W pistols, each of which cost me under $400 because nobody wants them anymore, now I've got another one on the way, an M&P40c I found online in like new condition with 3 magazines and Trijicon night sights for $269.99.

I honestly have to wonder how many other folks out there got turned on to .40 S&W because it became so undesirable that the market became flooded with a seemingly endless supply of police trade-ins available for a fraction of what 9mm Pistols are.

Only got started in .40 because couldn't resist picking up all the free brass. Used the brass for rationalizing several .40 pistols.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

Other than 22lr & 9mm I have more firearms capable of shooting 40S&W than any of the other calibers...

THEY can be easily reloaded from mild to (as?) WILD! as needed, and I don't find either recoil nor capacity to be problematic.

Cheers!