I thought the .40 caliber was dead?

[charlie sherrill]

40 cal is less popular because of several things. The FBI is pushing the 9 MM for several reasons. The ammo cost less than the others. Availability is better. The military uses 9 MM. 9 MM has improved specs from years ago. People with smaller hands can shoot them better. (use your imagination here) And they aren't as menacing as the higher caliber rounds. Usually whatever the FBI says is the thing to do most major PD's do the same. When we transitioned from revolvers to bottom feeders we were issued the Glock 17. We had issues with that round (without the new and improved bullets) and moved on to the Glock 22. We shot folks with nines who shot back at us. Not so much with the 40. I know, shot placement is king. I'm retired now but mostly carry a full sized 40, my retirement pistol with my name, badge, and department engraved on it. I've been a life long deer hunter and have taken three with a Glock 22, more than that with a 10 MM. That impressed me. I've wounded a couple with a Glock 17 and a M&P 9 and they ran off. Maybe it wasn't my day. The criminal element seem to prefer the 40 with 25+ round mags maybe because there are so many cheap ones out there right now. They mostly don't use holsters and carry them in their crotch. There's been some interesting happenings with this. Thankfully some of them can't tell a cheap mag from a good one. Bottom line is I feel protected with either caliber, but prefer the 40 (180) just a little more.

 

[rwsmith]

I shot my sister's Llama.....

......Seriously, my Walther PPK/S and Ruger LCP chambered in .380 ACP are more snappy than any pistol I've ever fired chambered in .40 S&W, including an M&P40 Shield. ......

....it's a very THIN gun and that little sucker HURT to shoot. Very unpleasant indeed.

 

[rwsmith]

After seeing how much Autumn....

...on 'Autumns Armory' gets a kick out of shooting her 10mm, I think I want one. That's one cool S&W 3rd gen she's got.

 

[Glenn R. McMannly]

I'm a .45 ACP man myself.

With guns such as the FNX-45 and Glock 21 holding a large capacity there's not much I don't like. Not that I feel I need it, I feel JUST FINE with my 1911s.

Those stories of .45 hardball effectiveness didn't come from thin air. And yes the 9mm has advanced a lot with modern bullet tech. But that same exact tech has also been applied to .45...

 

[Chuck Edwards]

Please if you could answer these questions?
Is there any truth to the claim that the 180-grain bullet is too large for the case? I saw a chart showing that pressures go up drastically as the bullet is seated slightly deeper in the case even from a few re-chamberings of an individual round. Some shooters refuse to chamber a round twice. Some shooters are double checking, measuring case OAL every time they chamber that +1 round.
Is there truth to the claim that 180-grain factory ammo is being loaded to lower pressures than 165-grain ammo as a safety margin because of this seating depth criticality?
Is it true that the 1:16 twist rate is inadequate to stabilize the 180-grain bullet but adequate to stabilize the 165-grain bullet? There is a 1:14 twist match grade barrel available from Nowlin for the 1911 platform (requires fitting).

So, I have a CS40 which is wonderful with Hornady SubSonic 180 gr. bullets. It works great so end of search. But I wonder because I have a Model 411 which cannot shoot any 180-grain round accurately but can put every 165-grain bullet in the x-ring. Okay fine I have got plenty of those so I will keep using this tool this way no problem. But I still wonder why...

Thanks for any insights.

Kind Regards!
BrianD

Brian - Bullet setback can be an issue. .40 S&W is a high-pressure cartridge...and so is 9x19, and the pressures go up with it too. I'll re-chamber that round once or twice, but after that, it gets shot. I keep several 50-round boxes of my carry ammo (HST), so it's no big deal and cheap insurance.

As to why your 411 doesn't shoot 180s well, I guess it's just persnickety.

FWIW, there are two velocity levels with the 165s - one is full power, the other is a slightly reduced load for reduced recoil. There's just one level that I know of for the 180s.

 

[Yendor357]

So our beloved government shot some denim and gel, slapped a fresh coat of paint on the 9MM, and suddenly declares the 9MM as THE round to be carrying. Yeah, I don't know. My little sister is a CPA for a corporation. She always says with a smile: "What number do you want?"

Personally, I put a whole lot more faith in what our Friend Charlie has said.
You can test, and theorize all you want, I'll never disagree with someone with real world experience.

 

[Furrball]

Please if you could answer these questions?
Is there any truth to the claim that the 180-grain bullet is too large for the case? I saw a chart showing that pressures go up drastically as the bullet is seated slightly deeper in the case even from a few re-chamberings of an individual round. Some shooters refuse to chamber a round twice. Some shooters are double checking, measuring case OAL every time they chamber that +1 round.
Is there truth to the claim that 180-grain factory ammo is being loaded to lower pressures than 165-grain ammo as a safety margin because of this seating depth criticality?
Is it true that the 1:16 twist rate is inadequate to stabilize the 180-grain bullet but adequate to stabilize the 165-grain bullet? There is a 1:14 twist match grade barrel available from Nowlin for the 1911 platform (requires fitting).

So, I have a CS40 which is wonderful with Hornady SubSonic 180 gr. bullets. It works great so end of search. But I wonder because I have a Model 411 which cannot shoot any 180-grain round accurately but can put every 165-grain bullet in the x-ring. Okay fine I have got plenty of those so I will keep using this tool this way no problem. But I still wonder why...

Thanks for any insights.

Kind Regards!
BrianD

Some guns are picky on ammunition. It is not unusual. Different bullet weights and velocity will make differences in point of impact.
Find the ammo your gun likes.
All I can tell you is I have fired thousands of 180 grain bullets and other weights as well, made by many different manufacturers, out of Glock 22's and Glock 27's for over two Decades. I will shoot most anything practicing and different weights and manufacturers generally make litte practical difference unless you are competition shooting. I like Federal Defensive Ammunition.
I have Never in all that time had a jam or failure to fire. Ever.
As to accuracy, a quarter inch here or there due to different ammunition or bullet weights should not matter in practical, center of mass aiming inside of 25 yards.
If you can't put most of your shots into an 8 inch paper plate at 15 yards, shooting at a brisk pace you need to get yourself a quality gun and some decent ammo and Practice with it.
The .40 is not for everyone. My wife shoots it well.



Sorry no interwebz charts.

 

[Well Armed]

I consider 180 gr "heavy for caliber" in 40 S&W. It's like 147 gr in 9 mm. I feel that would be a more fair comparison. I shot 155 gr and 135 gr from my buddy's G23, and found both a bit punchy. One of those loads left me with a zinging hand, but I cannot remember which. I do recall it was damned loud, suggesting a lot of muzzle blast and maybe supersonic velocity at Vegas altitude.

40s&w was developed from it's genesis to be. 180 gr and was typically issued to law enforcement and the FBI using 180 gr... Next, from the ballistic test I seen, the 135 and 155, 165 grain 40s&w is not performing better than 180 gr..

Also, I consider 180 40s&w to be the most popular and common for carry, and 124 gr 9mm to the most popular. The facts still remains, as I pointed out, that 40s&w is NOT monolithic. You can't just shoot one manufacturer's offering in one particular grains and design, and then factually proclaim that all 40s&w is snappy. As I pointed out, there are several popular 9mm offerings that have more or similar velocity and muzzle energy than several popular 40s&w offerings and vis versa. That's why I believe it's outright wrong and ignorant to make the blanketed claims (not that you did but in general).

 

[Well Armed]

I'm a .45 ACP man myself.

With guns such as the FNX-45 and Glock 21 holding a large capacity there's not much I don't like. Not that I feel I need it, I feel JUST FINE with my 1911s.

Those stories of .45 hardball effectiveness didn't come from thin air. And yes the 9mm has advanced a lot with modern bullet tech. But that same exact tech has also been applied to .45...

The issue with 45 acp that 9mm and 40s&w do not have is that the size and weight of the pistol is bigger, the capacity is lower, JHP do not perform well out of shorter barrels, and JHP doesn't penetrate and defeat barriers as well. 45acp only has a .2 of an inch advantage over 40s&w with only a few commercial offerings, and that's where the advantages end.

Several offerings of 180 gr 40s&w can reach .70" to .80" diameter, and only like 3 or so commercial offerings of 230 gr 45acp are reaching 1" of diameter. Majority of 45acp on the market isn't performing OR explanding better than 40s&w.

For a higher capacity home defense or truck gun, 45acp makes the most sense with at least a 4" barrel. For a carry gun where size, weight, and concealablity is a factor, 9mm and 40s&w has the advantage over 45acp IMHO. Both of the latter calibers come in smaller and lighter pistols, the rounds perform better and more reliablely out of smaller pistols, and you do not sacrifice capacity.

 

[forindooruseonly]

You guys need to stop defending the .40 Short and Weak... If they are undesirable and out of fashion, that means those of us who like the cartridge can buy them cheaper.

 

[biku324]

I do contracting, sometimes in conflict zones, most recently Somalia. There the 7.62 Tokarev is prized over the 9mm Luger because the Tokarev penetrates better.

Not interested in any pistol round that doesn't perform using FMJ; I also much prefer 45 or 40 FMJ FP. I've carried 9mm because we had no choice, but I had no confidence whatsoever in NATO 9mm rounds.

 

[Smoke]

It's cyclic. Not because the popularity of the caliber changes, but because of the way manufacturers build their guns.

They tool up and build a boat-load of 9mm and the stores are full of 9mm. They afterward tool up for .40S&W and likewise. People think they build all the calibers simultaneously but that's not reality in manufacturing.

I'm not sure I agree with that. I've never worked in a Firearms Factory but I have worked in several factories and every Factory I worked in had different lines for different products.

I also know (from reading not experience) that a lot of the major firearms manufacturers subcontract out a lot of their parts.

I would be willing to bet that if you went to the Glock Factory in Georgia right now they would have multiple lines running parts for multiple different caliber Glocks.

 

[cololab]

I can't speak for any trend beyond my circle of acquaintances, but in that group the .40 is alive and well.

 

[AJ]

I just picked up 3 boxes for 6.5x55 Swede. It's out lived all those silly super duper short mags.

You Sir, are correct. I have a Swede CG-63 in 6.5X55. It only has iron sights and has no need for a scope (besides no provisions to mount one). As you can see by the target is does pretty good on its own.

 

[Well Armed]

I'm not sure I agree with that. I've never worked in a Firearms Factory, but I have worked in several factories, and every factory I worked in had different lines for different products.

I also know (from reading not experience) that a lot of the major firearms manufacturers subcontract out a lot of their parts.

I would be willing to bet that if you went to the Glock Factory in Georgia right now they would have multiple lines running parts for multiple different caliber Glocks.

I worked as a technician at STIHL and at other manufacturing plants. In my experience, there is NOT a different line for different products. We had different departments for different processes. We had a Blow Molding, Plastics, Extrusion, Heat Treat, CNC, Quality Control, etc. departments with a finite number of equipment. I primarily worked in the Extrusion and Injection Molding (Plastics) department. We made all the plastics needed for all the different models that we sold depending on what orders we had, and other departments did the same. These parts would be stored in our warehouse and later ordered, when needed, to the assembly line who would assemble parts based on what was scheduled at that time. That is, the assembly line was on departments responsible for assembling all the parts made in the other departments. They assembled different items at different times based on what orders needed to be fulfilled.

Based on the firearm factory tours I've seen on YouTube and industry standards for manufacturing, I believe firearm manufacturers are set up the same way. I know for a fact that barrel manufacturers and Beretta manufacturer their products in batches.

 

[Echo40]

I consider 180 gr "heavy for caliber" in 40 S&W. It's like 147 gr in 9 mm. I feel that would be a more fair comparison. I shot 155 gr and 135 gr from my buddy's G23, and found both a bit punchy. One of those loads left me with a zinging hand, but I cannot remember which. I do recall it was damned loud, suggesting a lot of muzzle blast and maybe supersonic velocity at Vegas altitude.

It actually isn't, 180gr was the original standard loading for .40 S&W, and it also just so happens to be the one which performs consistently in Ballistics Gel. 200gr is heavy for caliber, 180gr is standard, 165gr-155gr is mid, and 135gr is light.

I've personally always referred to 135gr loads as "Poor Man's .357 SIG" because that's essentially what it is. You get high velocity, expansion, and energy, similar to .357 SIG, but in a stark contrast generally poor penetration.

165gr is a decent balance between velocity and energy, but expansion isn't as good as 180gr.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

Please if you could answer these questions?
Is there any truth to the claim that the 180-grain bullet is too large for the case? I saw a chart showing that pressures go up drastically as the bullet is seated slightly deeper in the case even from a few re-chamberings of an individual round. Some shooters refuse to chamber a round twice. Some shooters are double checking, measuring case OAL every time they chamber that +1 round.
Is there truth to the claim that 180-grain factory ammo is being loaded to lower pressures than 165-grain ammo as a safety margin because of this seating depth criticality?
Is it true that the 1:16 twist rate is inadequate to stabilize the 180-grain bullet but adequate to stabilize the 165-grain bullet? There is a 1:14 twist match grade barrel available from Nowlin for the 1911 platform (requires fitting).

So, I have a CS40 which is wonderful with Hornady SubSonic 180 gr. bullets. It works great so end of search. But I wonder because I have a Model 411 which cannot shoot any 180-grain round accurately but can put every 165-grain bullet in the x-ring. Okay fine I have got plenty of those so I will keep using this tool this way no problem. But I still wonder why...

Thanks for any insights.

Kind Regards!
BrianD[/QUOTE

Those and claims are pure manure. Stated by the same people that claim the cartridge is dead..........Who in all likes have never owned/loaded for/ or fired a 40.......Just keyboard commandos on the net.

 

[Krogen]

I spend more time shooting 9mm and .45 ACP than 40 S&W. The two 40's I have gather dust. Don't ask me why; I really can't say. It's just the reality of it.

I think I'll run a comparative evaluation. My VP40 and VP9 are nearly identical except for chambering and the slide on the 40 is beefier. It will be interesting to shoot them alternately to judge their respective recoil. I'll use an assortment of bullet weights and put my Garmin to work measuring velocity. Of course there will be my subjective impressions. I'll also calculate the guns' recoil velocities and recoil energies from their masses and bullet weights/velocities. Different guns would likely yield different results, but these are what I have and they're are pretty similar to each other.

Sounds great eh? When I am I going to do it? Heaven only knows. But, I have a plan . . . .

 

[AJ]

I spend more time shooting 9mm and .45 ACP than 40 S&W. The two 40's I have gather dust. Don't ask me why; I really can't say. It's just the reality of it.

I think I'll run a comparative evaluation. My VP40 and VP9 are nearly identical except for chambering and the slide on the 40 is beefier. It will be interesting to shoot them alternately to judge their respective recoil. I'll use an assortment of bullet weights and put my Garmin to work measuring velocity. Of course there will be my subjective impressions. I'll also calculate the guns' recoil velocities and recoil energies from their masses and bullet weights/velocities. Different guns would likely yield different results, but these are what I have and they're are pretty similar to each other.

Sounds great eh? When I am I going to do it? Heaven only knows. But, I have a plan . . . .

The majority of my auto shooting is done with my M1911 in .45 ACP, next is my 10MM, lastly would be the .40.

 

[bananaman]

I only have 2 .40 Pistols. RIA Tactical II Commander, and IWI Jericho 941 steel. I like both guns. I don't plan on any more 40's, but plan on keeping these. Bob