Any .40's out there that shoot as well as the 9mm versions of the same gun?

Kavinsky

Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2011
Messages
672
Reaction score
33
My general perception of .40 call guns like the glock 27 and from what I've read the CZ 75 is that they never quite shoot as well and as easy as the 9mm version of the same gun which in the glocks case is the model 26.

Ditto for guns that were originally first made in .32 acp like the PPK and the colt 1903 that were then brought out in .380 ACP

and that got me thinking what guns do shoot as well as their 9mm counterparts in .40 besides the 10mm's that have had .40 SW barrels made for them.

so does anyone know of any?
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Hmm...9mm is easy to shoot..the .40 got more recoil..could give tthe perception it ain't accurate.

Then you have pistols like my S&W 4046...The only .40S&W I own. Shoots fine..just took a bit of getting used to the trigger.

I don't think the .40 is any less accurate than any other handgun cartridge.
 
I have a 40 caliber Sig P239 that will shoot a 2 inch group for me at 25 yards if I use a bench rest and use some weak readers so I can see the sights. Don't know if that's any better than the 9mm version but it's good enough for me. Also have a 40 caliber P229 that I shot into 1 1/2 inch at 50 feet offhand but that was when I could still focus on handgun sights on a day when I was shooting exceptionally well. Finally, there is my 610 revolver that gets used mainly with 40 caliber ammunition and is equipped with a reflex sight. From a benchrest 3 inch groups at 35 yards are routine and on my best days I've been under 2 inches.

IMO what you've observed is simply a matter of shooter proficiency. In a lighter gun the 40 caliber has a sharp enough recoil to test the recoil management skills of the shooter and the result is throwing flyers.
 
Any whimpy cartridge ought to be easier to shoot, hence the perceived better performance with the 9mm. :)
 
It's been my experience that both the SIG P229 and the HK P30 will run with their 9mm counterparts in the accuracy departments.
The Performance Center .40s are good, and the M&P.40 isn't bad either. Dale
 
I think the question mostly involved mechanical function and reliability. It seems to me most all guns (semi-autos anyway) perform best in the cal. they were originaly designed for.
 
my beretta brigadiers both in 9mm and 40 both shoot the same,,the 40 may have a little louder report and a little snappier recoil but i can shoot both the same..
 
I have a 5906 and a 4006, configured identically except for caliber. The 5906 is noticably more accurate than the 4006. I don't find the 4006 to recoil all that much more than the 5906. The 4006 simply doesn't have the same degree of accuracy as the 5906.
 
Hmm...9mm is easy to shoot..the .40 got more recoil..could give tthe perception it ain't accurate.

Then you have pistols like my S&W 4046...The only .40S&W I own. Shoots fine..just took a bit of getting used to the trigger.

I don't think the .40 is any less accurate than any other handgun cartridge.

no I dont mean that the .40 is less acurate its just that from the one I've handled and shot which is a sized up version of the 17 it seems like its not as easy to control as the glock 10mm that I also shot and I'm kind of wondering why that is.

I mean why is the more powerful gun thats roughly the same size easier to shoot, its quite perplexing.

and I have to admit I've been playing around with the idea of going with a smith 1006 in addition to the 645 and order the .40 SW barrel for the 1006 as well that a guy makes here so I can shoot both calibers out of it.

although honestly while I understand why people love the 10mm I'd rather go for one gun ment only for the .40 smith and wesson and not the 10mm as its a nitch caliber now and I've got a M29 for when I want to play eastwood at the range with to begin with.

Just buy a 9. With good ammo they get the job done.

umm I dont know honestly after reading the horror stories about anything sub .40 call in Keith's sixguns book from the 50's which I just read while the power was out for 4 days thanks to a wimpy snowstorm here in MA I've kind of come to the belief that for a primary carry gun it shouldnt be any less than .40

plus theres actually an exact parralel to what one of the guys said here in the thread I posted about the standard police load for the .38 special with the porcupine thing and that 200 gr .38 special load.

and I dont want to screw around with the ammo just to have faith that my carry gun will do the job needed if and when its called upon to save my life or someone elses.
 
Last edited:
M&P 40 full size is the softest shooting 40 I ever shot.

Carry what your comfortable with. Personally the 9 doesn't bother me. As I've said before, the 40 was a compromise. There isn't that big enough difference between them to matter.

A couple of well placed Win 127 +P+ and the fights over.;)
 
I think it was Mas Ayoob who once said that a handgun is always more accurate and reliable in the caliber it was originally designed for. And lets face it HE SHOULD KNOW!
 
My Sig 229 is an absolute tack driver, but the 229 was specfically designed as a 40. I can put a 357 Sig barrel in it and it shoots great too.
 
My BHP in .40 outshoots all of my 9mms. My Colt XSE (.45) outshoots my BHP by a little bit. I have a dozen or so S&W revolvers in multiple calibers that shoot rings around any of my semis.:D
 
Back
Top