Ammo prices and caliber relevance.

[otis24]

I just turned 60 this month. Man, where did the time go??? It has only been in the past ten years or less that I have accepted "plastic" guns as viable defense options. I didn't know anything about them and didn't want to! Ignorance is bliss. I was firmly in the revolver camp and even aluminum framed revolvers were iffy as far as I was concerned. The .38/.357 was the go to caliber for me. It was sufficient for any of my perceived needs, was cheap and was readily available.

In the last ten years I've owned several polymer pistols (although I still prefer metal) with the majority being 9mm. I currently own a Ruger LCP Max for pocket carry, a Sig P365 for pocket/IWB carry (my primary firearm), a recently acquired Ruger Security Six and a 1976 vintage Browning Hi Power.

Now, I know that there have been many advances in bullet designs and as far as I am concerned, the 9mm is plenty adequate for self-defense from two legged predators. But I know that there are many who believe that the 36 caliber (9mm, .38 Special, and .357) are at the lower end of what is acceptable for self-defense. Personally, I often opted for a .357 knowing that I could shoot .38, .38 +P or .357. I'm not trying to start a caliber war or debate the effacy of any particular caliber for self-defense.

Here's my question: For the average guy on the street who lives paycheck to paycheck and who wants a handgun for self-protection and plinking, has the .40 S&W (and maybe the .45 ACP) become more relevant due to ammo prices? The price of .38/.357 is almost cost prohibitive, reaching "big bore" prices. So that would push me away from a revolver if I were so inclined and towards an auto. If I bought into the premise that you need something with a little more umphh than a 9mm, wouldn't the .40 S&W be a more logical choice based on availability, power, and price? From that perspective, it would seem to me that the .40 S&W becomes more relevant than ever before. Your thoughts?

 

[LVSteve]

40 S&W guns are cheap right now, but the ammo is still significantly more expensive than 9 mm. 45 ACP is also more spendy.

I believe that the issue today isn't the efficacy of an individual round, but the number in the mob that may face you. This is where the 15-20 round fullsize 9mm pistol comes in.

 

[oink]

Yeah, I like the .40, it seems like a nice compromise, but the ammo isn't cheap. The 9mm is the way to go for sure if price is a consideration. Being a reloader helps but not with actual carry ammo. I prefer things that start with a 4 but 9mm is just so cheap comparatively.

I really need to get back in a reloading mood as I've pretty much run out of 38/357, 40, 44 and 45 range fodder.

 

[Frailer]

If I needed a centerfire handgun for personal defense and ammo prices (and, for that matter, gun prices) were a concern, I’d opt for a 9mm.

 

[reddog81]

At this point in time, I'd have a hard time recommending 40 S&W to a new shooter. 9mm is just so much more prevalent. That doesn't mean it's a bad choice or that I'd be selling mine, just that I think the popularity is waning.

.38 Special / .357 Mag is great because because the versatility. For a new shooter you can start training with 148 grain wadcutters and move up from there. FWIW I just looked at SGammo website and cheapest 40 S&W is $.33 vs $.38 for 38 Special. Not a huge difference in my book. 40 S&W is still 50% more than 9mm.

 

[SWFan27]

I am a 38Spl/357Mag guy for sure, but I like 9mm too. I had been thinking about getting SW40 or a 45acp a few months ago before realizing I am pretty set already for self-defense handguns.

I am good for self-defense ammo and periodically look for deals on range ammo when I am getting low. I just bought another 357 Mag (Model 19-9) in December for Christmas, so I have been shooting more 357 Mag than usual lately.

 

[robertrwalsh]

My old agency, Cal D O C, changed over from revolvers to .40 cal due almost 100% to the ammunition costs. With (at the time) over 25,000 cops you go thru a lot of ammo. The .38 Special became a lot more expensive than .40 cal due to various market forces.

 

[dave1918a2]

The first thing I would consider is " How much is My life worth "?
Then I would look for ammo.

 

[Model52guy]

Just finished loading 100 rounds of 38 special 148 grain wad cutters. Since I bought most of the components prior to 2020, I loaded them for 0.16 per round.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

A M&P in 40 S&W can easily become a 357 SIG (just a barrel swap) & a 9mm with a conversion barrel and 9mm mags...

Makes even more ammo choices your personal perview!

Cheers!

 

[DWalt]

New ammunition prices are largely irrelevant if you reload.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

Here's my question: For the average guy on the street who lives paycheck to paycheck and who wants a handgun for self-protection and plinking, has the .40 S&W (and maybe the .45 ACP) become more relevant due to ammo prices? The price of .38/.357 is almost cost prohibitive, reaching "big bore" prices. So that would push me away from a revolver ...

Your thoughts?

Good question and is that "average guy" go to Thunder Mountain, Gunsite Academy or other Professional Training? Or will they fire five shots and say, that is good to go in my book.

What background does "average guy" have? For the last 40 years the military and Law Enforcement has gone to 9mm in either Glock, Beretta and others. For most people 9mm is the best choice but as a cop I had been to a lot of homes and people have .22s and .25s for Home Protection.

 

[cruiserdan]

New ammunition prices are largely irrelevant if you reload.

As long as you can actually get the components. Brownells recently had a "no hazmat charges sale" and they had almost NO powder of any kind available.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

Here's my question: For the average guy on the street who lives paycheck to paycheck and who wants a handgun for self-protection and plinking ...

Per the original question; I don't think that "average guy" is going to get his first handgun and start reloading on the next pay check.

 

[tops]

Here's my question: For the average guy on the street who lives paycheck to paycheck and who wants a handgun for self-protection and plinking, Your thoughts?

My thought is a 10 shot .22 LR revolver. A .22 is a good plinking cartridge and the chances of the average guy seeing someone that will walk into 10 .22 LRs is slim and none. Larry

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

I just turned 60 this month. Man, where did the time go??? It has only been in the past ten years or less that I have accepted "plastic" guns as viable defense options. I didn't know anything about them and didn't want to! Ignorance is bliss. I was firmly in the revolver camp and even aluminum framed revolvers were iffy as far as I was concerned. The .38/.357 was the go to caliber for me. It was sufficient for any of my perceived needs, was cheap and was readily available.

In the last ten years I've owned several polymer pistols (although I still prefer metal) with the majority being 9mm. I currently own a Ruger LCP Max for pocket carry, a Sig P365 for pocket/IWB carry (my primary firearm), a recently acquired Ruger Security Six and a 1976 vintage Browning Hi Power.

Now, I know that there have been many advances in bullet designs and as far as I am concerned, the 9mm is plenty adequate for self-defense from two legged predators. But I know that there are many who believe that the 36 caliber (9mm, .38 Special, and .357) are at the lower end of what is acceptable for self-defense. Personally, I often opted for a .357 knowing that I could shoot .38, .38 +P or .357. I'm not trying to start a caliber war or debate the effacy of any particular caliber for self-defense.

Here's my question: For the average guy on the street who lives paycheck to paycheck and who wants a handgun for self-protection and plinking, has the .40 S&W (and maybe the .45 ACP) become more relevant due to ammo prices? The price of .38/.357 is almost cost prohibitive, reaching "big bore" prices. So that would push me away from a revolver if I were so inclined and towards an auto. If I bought into the premise that you need something with a little more umphh than a 9mm, wouldn't the .40 S&W be a more logical choice based on availability, power, and price? From that perspective, it would seem to me that the .40 S&W becomes more relevant than ever before. Your thoughts?

.......In reply all I can say is pick what you can afford and be happy.......45acp won it's reputation with BALL AMMO......40 was cool for about 25 years......Then the leo 'Little people" couldn't handle the recoil. So they adopted the 9.

 

[alwslate]

The .40 S&W, or short and weak, is about 3/64",three sixty fourths inch larger in dia than the 9mm. Draw the two circles on paper and if you're a bit older you might need reading glasses to see the difference. If you actually believe that because the forty "starts with a 4" that it is a big knockem down round compared to the 9mm then go ahead and spend your money on the mighty .40 ammo.

 

[chief38]

The reason that the 9MM is now King of the Hill is because of a plethora of reasons. First off, any place selling ammo will have 9mm in stock and it's been around successfully for over 100 years. Secondly, for it's size it is probably one of the most potent and efficient handgun calibers ever designed. It also comes in many many grain weights suited for different length barrels, pistol sizes and situations. Because if its relatively small size, you can buy many different 9mm micro pistols that will hold 11, 12, 13, 15, 18 etc. and come in a gazillion configurations with your choice of accessories. The 9mm round is also very controllable and even recoil sensitive people usually have no issues shooting and controlling it. Last but certainly not least, it is incredibly affordable - even in today's economy and rip off ammo price era. You can buy 9mm FMJ practice ammo for about $11 a box of 50 and a really superb box of 50 SD JHP rounds for around $35.

The 9mm has pretty much taken over most of the older carry ammo calibers like the .38 Special and the only exception might be the .380acp which has been become popular once again. Probably because so many women have started carrying concealed. Yes, there are still some carrying a .45acp, a 40S&W, a .357, etc. however I know very few people in my life that carry anything other than a 9mm or a .380acp. While revolvers are still a viable option in the SD carry arena, they are limited to half the rounds of a micro pistol weighing in at less weight, easier to reload, flatter and smaller with almost everybody who shoots them being able to reload them so much faster.

While other calibers are potent and effective as well, some such as the .357 magnum, 44 magnum, .38 Super, 357 Sig, 10mm etc. might be a bit overkill in largely populated areas as their penetration is sometimes too much. They are also extremely expensive and harder to find in the configuration you want.

While I also reload (for target shooting and practice only), I would never advise or suggest anyone to carry their reloads for SD purposes. No matter how much a box or two of SD factory ammo will set you back, it is worth lessoning liability at least in the ammo aspect.

So IMHO that is why the 9mm is King and .380 is probably Queen. All the rest are just players now days and I do suspect some will wain even more in the coming years. .

 

[glenwolde]

More than half of the handguns sold are 9mm. It's popular because ammo is cheap, ammo is cheap because it's popular. One of those self-reinforcing trends. It will continue.

 

[URIT]

I like to conceal carry either a 3953 or 4053. I use more 9mm rounds when training than .40S&W at the range.

I train mostly with point-of-aim at 7 yards using a 6" paper plate, 3X5 card, 3" Post-it, or 1.5X2 neon Post-it. I favor POA training because I'm focused on self-defense, and do not want legal trouble after the event.

I like both pistols, and ammo cost is a consideration but not enough to exclude my 4053 as a carry choice.