Going Back to 9mm ( and .45 !)

sandog

Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Messages
772
Reaction score
1,444
Location
Arizona
For the last 4 years or so, my main M&P caliber has been .40 S&W.
I liked the combination of decent bullet weight and good velocity.
But lately I have become less enamored with the caliber.

I knew all along that I could shoot better with a 9mm ( or .45 ) but did O.K. with the .40's, a Fullsize 2.0 and a PC Shield.
The PC Shield I could shoot better than the FS, and with the two small ports it was more pleasant to shoot than the FS .40.
Most of my pistols and revolvers will do 2" to 2 1/2" at 25 yards, but the best I could do with that Fullsize M&P was 4" to 4 1/2".

The FS went down the road a couple weeks ago, replaced with a 5 inch FDE M&P in 9mm.
It had a sucky trigger like my 2.0 .40, so it got Apex parts too.
Right off the bat I was shooting 2 inch groups with the 5 " 9mm, and soft shooting enough that I can shoot it all day.

I still like the .40 PC Shield, but even it seems more harsh during range practice than I remembered, so I thought I'd keep it but convert it to 9mm.
I found a 40 to 9mm barrel made by Remsport that has the ports to match my slide, so it's on it's way here, and I picked up a couple 9mm mags to go with it. My PC .40 is now gonna be a PC 9mm.

I sold the 500 rounds of .40 I had to a friend, and now can stock up on 9mm for both pistols.
Yesterday I saw a .45 Shield at a good price, so I bought it.
Another caliber to stock, but I also have a Ruger Flattop SA that came with a spare cylinder in .45 ACP, so now I'll get some use out of that cylinder.

I had good memories of the 9mm and .45 Shields that I had briefly, so now I've gone full circle and came back to those.
I debated a long time over keeping the PC .40 or the .45, but part of my decision in keeping the PC .40 was that my Fullsize M&P was also in .40 caliber.
I ended up trading that .45 for a 9mm Shield that I gave to my daughter, it was also a nice shooter.

Man does this new .45 have a nice trigger ! I thought my Performance Center Shield had a nice trigger, this .45 puts the PC trigger to shame.
I'm going out to shoot them in a few hours, I'll add some pics later this afternoon.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
For the last 4 years or so, my main M&P caliber has been .40 S&W.
I liked the combination of decent bullet weight and good velocity.
But lately I have become less enamored with the caliber.

I knew all along that I could shoot better with a 9mm ( or .45 ) but did O.K. with the .40's, a Fullsize 2.0 and a PC Shield.
The PC Shield I could shoot better than the FS, and with the two small ports it was more pleasant to shoot than the FS .40.
Most of my pistols and revolvers will do 2" to 2 1/2" at 25 yards, but the best I could do with that Fullsize M&P was 4" to 4 1/2".

The FS went down the road a couple weeks ago, replaced with a 5 inch FDE M&P in 9mm.
It had a sucky trigger like my 2.0 .40, so it got Apex parts too.
Right off the bat I was shooting 2 inch groups with the 5 " 9mm, and soft shooting enough that I can shoot it all day.

I still like the .40 PC Shield, but even it seems more harsh during range practice than I remembered, so I thought I'd keep it but convert it to 9mm.
I found a 40 to 9mm barrel made by Remsport that has the ports to match my slide, so it's on it's way here, and I picked up a couple 9mm mags to go with it. My PC .40 is now gonna be a PC 9mm.

I sold the 500 rounds of .40 I had to a friend, and now can stock up on 9mm for both pistols.
Yesterday I saw a .45 Shield at a good price, so I bought it.
Another caliber to stock, but I also have a Ruger Flattop SA that came with a spare cylinder in .45 ACP, so now I'll get some use out of that cylinder.

I had good memories of the 9mm and .45 Shields that I had briefly, so now I've gone full circle and came back to those.
I debated a long time over keeping the PC .40 or the .45, but part of my decision in keeping the PC .40 was that my Fullsize M&P was also in .40 caliber.
I ended up trading that .45 for a 9mm Shield that I gave to my daughter, it was also a nice shooter.

Man does this new .45 have a nice trigger ! I thought my Performance Center Shield had a nice trigger, this .45 puts the PC trigger to shame.
I'm going out to shoot them in a few hours, I'll add some pics later this afternoon.
The .45 has more recoil than .40 so in a compact pistol I cant see as how it's more comfortable to shoot than a .40

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
tnmandpshooter, the .45 recoil is more of a push, and doesn't come back against the web between your thumb and forefinger as hard.
It helps that the .45 Shield has a bigger grip, and is slightly heavier than the 9mm or .40 Shield.

I'm sure I'll be putting more rounds downrange with the FS 9 and the PC 9mm as ammo is a lot cheaper. I never saw a need to reload 9mm as it is so cheap, but I might break out my dies for the .45 ACP.
 
40 has never been a favorite caliber for me to shoot, but I shoot it just as well as 9mm & 45 auto. I have 4 S & W pistols in 40 and just picked up a Glock 22; so 5 total in 40 cal. If I were going to "thin the herd", the 40's would go first, so I understand....
 
I dropped the .40 over 9mm, mostly because of ammo prices and terminal performance. I can double tap and mag dump faster with the 9mm round, it's ubiquitous worldwide, and I have a ton of brass for reloading.

I also kept some .45 handguns because nothing says American like a .45!

Nothing wrong with the .40, just decide to consolidate.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
I like my 9 mm 40 and 45 for defense but if I had to pick one it would probably be the 40. I have confidence in the 9 mm but I just have more confidence in 40 and 45 and I like how the 40 holds a lot of rounds. In a little tiny gun I doubt if I would want anything bigger than a 9 mm.
 
At work, we are buying plenty of LE used guns. All 40's. They are getting rid of them big time, & going back to 9mm. We have these guns priced cheap, but they are not selling like we hoped they would. Nobody wants them, even though most are in top shape. GARY
 
Last edited:
Pic of the 9mm, .45 and PC .40.
The PC .40 is soon to have a 9mm barrel.
I put a Hi Viz rear sight ( that came off of my .40) on the .45 before I took it out. A bit more contrast not having 3 dots the same. Eventually the .45 will get TFO's like the other two have.

I took a friend out shooting today, so didn't spend a lot of time on paper with the .45, but it is pretty well on for now.. Next time out I'll dial it in better and shoot some of the Hornady XTP's I have.
4BkS218h.jpg
 
It is accurate. More powerful equates to more recoil.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
No, wrong once again. Muzzle energy is pretty similar for both, and the .45 is a low pressure round, about half of the working pressure that the .40 has.
The .40 has much quicker, sharper recoil.
The .45, just like the last Shield .45 I had, is a *****cat to shoot compared to the .40.
 
It's kind of annoying how I hear about SIGs, Walther, HK, and even Canik pistols come with good triggers and people still complain about the triggers on some 2.0 Smith and Wesson's. That's the reason I haven't bought one yet, I don't want to have to put a Apex kit in a brand new gun just to get a decent trigger pull.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnmandpshooter
The .45 has more recoil than .40 so in a compact pistol I cant see as how it's more comfortable to shoot than a .40

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


This statement is not accurate

It is accurate. More powerful equates to more recoil.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Most commercial 40 S&W loads have more muzzle energy than commercial 45 loads.

Perceived recoil has little to do with power as pointed out by the OP. For me, a Beretta 85 shooting 380 has as much if not more perceived recoil as a 9mm pistol of similar weight. In this case it's down to the Beretta being straight blowback instead of locked breech.
 
It's kind of annoying how I hear about SIGs, Walther, HK, and even Canik pistols come with good triggers and people still complain about the triggers on some 2.0 Smith and Wesson's. That's the reason I haven't bought one yet, I don't want to have to put a Apex kit in a brand new gun just to get a decent trigger pull.
I have a 5" M2.0 with the full Apex kit and a compact M2.0 without. Both are great triggers IMO. Almost the same trigger pull and reset, just no slack on the Apex.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Never bought into the 40. Not that there's anything wrong it, but I had standardized the calibers in my collection, and I was always a huge fan of 45acp with 9mm a close second. Both calibers being very attainable at reasonable prices.
 
Last edited:
I never bought into the .40 either. Solution looking for a problem. But then, so was the .45 ACP.

Now my .45s are range toys. 9mm is my defense handguns and carbines.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top