Question/Opinion

[BodyShieldGuard9MM380ACP]

Hey all...I've been going back and forth between carrying a 9MM vs carrying a .40.

I wanted to get your thoughts on why you carry what you do if you carry either of these calibers. I know the main thing is hitting your target regardless of what you shoot, but I wanted to hear some personal feedback as to why you prefer one over the other...

Pros/Cons...feel...preference...ballistics...I wanna hear it all!!

Thanks!

 

[Nomadic Vagabond]

Having recently moved to a free state, I purchased my first firearm under a year ago and selected an M&P40 4.25" Pro Series. About a month later I purchased an M&P Shield 40. I've only ever trained with 40S&W - I have about 4,000 rounds in.

I recently shot 9MM via a G19 and Shield 9 and I was very pleased by how much easier follow-up shots and target reset was with the caliber. While I do have better groupings and a lot more accurate with 40S&W, I don't think I'll be buying another 40S&W firearm in the near future - I'm happy with my current duo but want to diversify my caliber a bit.

On my wish-list are the G19 (maybe) and Shield 9 (definitely). Also want a 1911 in 45ACP (eventually) and a S&W 686Plus 357magnum (gotta have a revolver).

Sticking to the topic, I prefer 40S&W in a full-size platform and 9MM in compact/subcompact/concealed.

 

[Bkreutz]

I carry a 9mm because that's the caliber I shoot in competition. I shoot over 50K a year so I'm fairly proficient with it . I have a .380 pocket pistol for those really difficult concealment situations but don't expect I'll be shooting anything over 10 feet away with that one. . If you have any indication that you'd want to shoot .40 S&W then I would get a .40 M&P and look for a 9mm barrel and magazines then you would have the best of both worlds. I don't have any interest in .40 but that's all personal preference.

 

[johnnyk71]

I bought a Model 410 (.40 cal) from a friend, and shot it some. I was all set to buy a Shield .40 for CCW, mostly to be consistent with ammo caliber.

however, after considering ammo prices (9mm is a good bit cheaper), reports of the .40 Shield having more problems, a thorough comparison of the calibers, and an honest assessment of my shooting with the .40, I went with the Shield 9.

I think I made the right choice.

 

[RobzGuns]

Every pistol (and my carbine) is 9mm.
I'm a Full-Time RVer and don't have room to store multiple calibers.
9mm is a caliber I can control the easiest for quick followup shots. I can control .40, but I do better with 9mm.

 

[Trons]

When I was trying to choose a caliber, the two things I looked at were availability of ammo and price. Given those two factors, the 9mm was the wise choice. I have, since, shot a few .40's and am glad I choose the 9mm. The last .40 I shot was a Kahr CW40 and there was a significant difference in every aspect, compared to my Shield 9.

 

[Captain Skippy]

There is no argument that a bigger caliber is usually better. But...
I am a 55 yr. old retired police officer. When I retired I was carrying a Kimber 1911 with 4 mags, taser, OC spray, sometimes a baton, and a walkie to call more guys with guns, tasers, etc. Now it's just me. I have hung up the heavy low capacity 1911 and generally carry a Glock or S&W Shield 9mm. 10-15 years ago I never would have carried a 9 but with the increased bullet technology a 9 is a decent man stopper especially since most pistols that are 9mm hold lots of them. Follow up shots are easier too. There's a lot to be said for 10, 15, 17 rounds of Federal HST. Yes, .45 bullets have improved too and will always expand more, but you'll carry less ammo and usually a larger gun. Since most .40s usually only have 1-2 round difference it is a good choice. But for me and the shield I wanted that one more bullet. Defensive Shooting stats for the .40 are good. It works. If a few less rounds and snappier recoil are ok to you by all means get a .40, but you can carry a 9 without concern. And look in your area for ammo availability and ask what was available during "the craziness". In my area .40 was usually at Walmart even then.

 

[Jiman]

I went with 40 because I found it was the platform you could change out barrels/mags to go to 9mm and 357 Sig.

I've been issued and carried all 3 calibers throughout my career, and 9mm is the easiest to shoot and it's generally cheaper than the other two calibers. 40 is obviously popular, holds a little less than 9mm, but has a snappier recoil compared to 9mm. It's also a little bit more expensive. .357sig is very similar to 40, both in the way it feels and mag capacity, but is much more expensive. It's only an option for me because over the course of the years I've accumulate A LOT of loose rounds from range days and I want the option of being able to shoot it after I retire…although at that point I'll probably just carry a 45acp. Agency won't allow it now.

As for ballistics, they are all pretty similar. IMHO, the only part about ballistics that really matters is the terminal ballistics of penetration (at least 12") in a variety of mediums, expansion, and mass. Again, just my experience from testing, is that FPS, muzzle velocity, foot pounds of energy, etc… are fluff numbers, and don't mean anything, if terminally… penetration, expansion, and mass aren't met.

It didn't used to be this way but 9mm tech has come a long way. 40 & .357 are almost identical. 357 has some advantage in penetration through laminated glass…but we're talking less than an inch difference, and the reality of, do you really need that for the difference in cost; For most the answer is going to be, no.

Ultimately my suggestion is to buy what you shoot the best. By best I mean the most amount of shots accurately (say in an 8" area at 7yds) in the fastest amount of time. For SD purposes, a tight group is for show. Accuracy without speed is for target shooting and learning the fundamentals/relationships of stance, grip, sights, trigger, and reset. In a gun fight it's about how quickly you can put shots in a reasonable area/distance, because that increases your chances of winning. For most that answer is going to be 9mm.

Or do what I did and get a 40 and buy a 9mm barrel/mags and have the option to switch at will. You cannot get a 9mm and go up though.
YMMV.

 

[B0308]

I've been shooting for a while, longer than I want to admit. By the time the .40 became commonly used, I had way too much invested in pistols and ammo in .45 and 9mm (we'll leave the whole 10mm thing for another thread). I knew if I jumped into the .40, at some point I'd f'up and cross load a caliber, so I never went there, even when I had a source for a reasonable amount of .40 for free.

Since then, I've fired a small amount of .40. Based on a small sample I don't see anything there that I can do with a 9mm or a .45 , with better control and less potential wear/damage in smaller packages like a Shield.

One guys opinion, YMMV

 

[dgyver]

I have been shooting 9mm for 20+ years. 92FS was my first pistol. Later I bought a Beretta .40 Mini Cougar for carry. I did not like shooting it. Snappy recoil and it hurt my forearm, due to a pair of plates in it from breaking it in half. I stayed with the 9mm in most of my pistols. Mainly to only have to stock 1 main caliber. I do have other pistol calibers (.32 and .22). I shoot competition with a 9mm so it only made sense. I considered an XDS 45 before the Shield 9mm but opted for the 9 for the same reason, one less caliber to stock. I never considered the 40 shield, and after seeing some of the failures of the composite frames failing in a variety of guns, I am glad I chose what I did. The 9mm has really benefited with some very good ammo choices. Plus I like capacity... an extra round or two may make the differnce needed...

 

[erj_pilot]

I am not a professional shooter or LEO by ANY stretch of the imagination. The only handgun I owned for years and years was a Model 686 .357 Magnum with a redonkulous 6" barrel. Still have it and it's the most accurate gun in my safe...just can't carry it unless I had on a HUGE overcoat.

Several years after I became a professional pilot with a major air carrier, H&K offered the FFDO-issue USP Compact 40 at a VERY SUBSTANTIAL discount to ALL Part 121 Air Carrier Pilots...bought my first semi-auto in 2010. It was such a great deal, it was one of those things where I just couldn't afford NOT to buy it. After I bought the USP Compact, I decided to get back into reloading. I figured to keep my costs down, I would reload one caliber ONLY and since I had gone down the path of .40 S&W, I'd stay on that path. BTW...have to reload 9mm and .45 ACP for my brother, but I made him buy all the parts.

I have since added the H&K P2000 SK and an M&P 40c to my safe, both in .40 S&W flavor. I look forward to purchasing my 4th very soon.....an M&P Shield 40 S&W by the end of the month if possible.

Since I reload, my decision doesn't have anything to do with ammo availability. I have enough components to make about 5,000 rounds of .40 S&W, which will keep me busy for a looooong time. I also have enough personal defense ammo that I hope to NEVER have to restock. If I have to buy more of that, it means I had to use my weapon in a situation I hope to NEVER find myself and my loved ones.

So from a personal perspective, it comes down to not wanting to reload several different calibers of handgun for my personal use. In my hands, that have nowhere NEAR the training of our fine LEO's and competition shooters, I find little difference between a 9mm and .40 S&W. I'm VERY satisfied with the purchases I've made.

Good luck in your decision!!

 

[M&Pmeister]

Felt recoil varies a lot with different firearms - even with the same caliber. I've had .40 pistols that were a pleasure to shoot and my speed and accuracy are just as good as with 9mm. That was the case with a PT101P (.40) and a PT92FS (9mm) I had. Practically identical firearms and I shot equally well with either.

I now have an M&P 40FS and 40C, with 9mm conversion barrels for both. I practice mostly with the 9mm barrels but do switch to .40 periodically. Back to back on the same gun, the difference in felt recoil is slight but noticeable. I would get a 9mm barrel for the 40Shield if I could (Stormlake says next yr). The cost of the extra barrels is negligible, compared to the rnds I put through them. Best of both worlds.

The same cannot be said about very small pocket pistols. I had a CW40 and sold it after one trip to the range. I now have a P938 and and a PF9, neither of which is a pleasure to shoot, but the felt recoil is manageable.

 

[Vinney47]

few topics have been discussed as much as which caliber for handgun between 9/.40/.45. Over time, though, arguments against the 9mm itself as a caliber have all but vanished. The self defense loads are capable and formidable, the practice rounds plentiful and cheap.

It's really up to you, and you can't go wrong.

 

[robertrwalsh]

As you noted, either will do the job if you hit, neither will do the job if you miss. Personally I prefer the .40 and am willing to put up with the fact it is a little whippier than the 9mm. Both are valid choices. Some law enforcement is moving back to the 9 from the .40 due to the fact that some of the cops can't handle the recoil well.

 

[BodyShieldGuard9MM380ACP]

This may have been addressed in an another forum post, but I know on the M&P FS and M&P compacts you can go from a .40 to a 9MM.

My question is, can you do the same on a .40 Shield?

Much thanks for all the responses. I personally shoot 9MM mostly. I've shot a .40 with a relative's Taurus (his was a piece of junk...4 FTEs in less than 2 mags).

I would expect a .40 in a full size or compact would shoot very similar to a 9MM Shield. I love my 9MM Shield and I've gotten down to a 6" radius at 7 yards. So it's definitely my preferable choice. But I've been EXTREMELY curious about the .40 caliber and wanted to hear some of your opinions on it.

 

[B3500]

Either caliber will be fine with the proper ammo. What caliber are you more accurate and comfortable with? I think most people can learn to shoot most calibers well, if they are determined to learn it and take the time and expense to do so.

While the caliber war will continue, one item not talked about so much is with more shorter barreled carry guns becoming available, not all JHP ammo will react the same as far as the velocity that can be achieved in a particular barrel length. The same bullet fired from a 3" barrel will be slower than the same round out a 4" barrel. Is that enough of a change to cause a good bullet caliber and weight combo at one length to not work as well in the shorter barrel - maybe.

To help reduce those variables, go with the longest barrel you are comfortable in carrying. If you end up going with a shorter barrel, research the ammo you want to use to ensure it will work properly, meaning the petals will open up and it penetrates enough at the velocity that barrel length will produce. Otherwise you may be carrying expensive FMJs with a hole drilled in the top if they won't open up. In that case the advantage of using a smaller gun and/or caliber would be diminished.

 

[M&Pmeister]

This may have been addressed in an another forum post, but I know on the M&P FS and M&P compacts you can go from a .40 to a 9MM.

My question is, can you do the same on a .40 Shield?

The Shield is set up the same way as the larger M&Ps. 9mm and .40 are dimensionally identical except for the width at the top of the breech lock-up notch. .40 is slightly wider than 9mm, which means a 9mm barrel will drop into a .40 slide... albeit with a little wobble. A .40 barrel will not fit on a 9mm slide (not without some dremel work, anyway).

Lots of 40Shield owners bought 9mm barrels and reported excellent results. Apparently, the popularity of these "unsanctioned" 9mm conversion rubbed S&W the wrong way, so they quit selling 9mm barrels to non-registered Shield 9mm owners.

I called Stormlake and was told 9mm conversion barrels are slated for production next year (2015). Stormlake make true 9mm conversion barrels that are identical to .40 OEM barrel. I prefer these anyway, so I'll wait.

 

[fdw]

I own both but shoot the 9 slightly better, so it would get the nod.

As far as performance, I guarantee you either will get the job done, but since placement and follow up are more important for me, 9 wins. Both are loaded with Corbon DPX.

 

[AGoyette]

My first carry gun was a 40. I tried for a year to make friends with the caliber. Just could not do it. I ended up trading it for a M&P 9c. I have shot various forms of 9mm in competition for years and am very comfortable with the caliber. I am also comfortable with 45 acp. I prefer the 45 over the 40 recoil wise. For my carry gun, the husband and I both carry 9c's with Apex parts in them. They are fantastic all around shooters (HD, CC, plinking at the range, etc) and I find that they are more accurate than my 5" 9mm Pro's. For competition the daughter has taken over my Pro 9mm. So the husband and daughter shoot 9mm 5" Pro's and I took over the husband's 1911 45.

 

[BodyShieldGuard9MM380ACP]

Great insight and thoughts on this subject. I appreciate the feedback. I think after reading this I'll stick with the 9MM Shield as a defensive carry and if I go with a .40 it'll be a larger frame pistol due to the snappy recoil that you guys state with a DC size.

Again, thanks for the insight...