What is wrong with the 40 S&W?

[Univibe]

Yes. I saw the autopsy on a RIP 9mm round homicide. That's the only one I've seen. They aren't very common.

Erich is correct. After about 9mm or .38 spl, anything bigger is mostly overkill. A 9mm through the aorta is just as final as a .500 magnum would be. The mouseguns have problems with penetration and therefore are less reliable. The $1.50 a shot self defense ammo makes holes, but so do FMJ rounds. And experts really can't tell from the body the caliber or the bullet design.

Most all of this is simply marketing to people who seek technological solutions to human problems.

1. Placement.
2. Penetration.

That's about it.

We should all quit worrying about "ballistics" and study anatomy and physiology. Bullets of any size or type that hit the vitals stop people, sooner or later. Bullets that don't, don't.
So I carry Q4318 NATO FMJ stuff. It will, or won't, work as well as whatever you're carrying.

 

[bub075]

Back when hollow points didn't work very well, .40 may have made some sense. Personally, I don't think it would, but it may have. Also, during the bad, old days of the Assault Weapons Ban and no new mags over 10 rds (and available mags over 10 rds costing an arm and a leg), 10 rds of .40 in a gun the same size as a 10 rd 9mm may have also made some sense.

It's not that the .40 is necessarily a bad round. I was forced to carry a .40 for a couple of years at my PD job and found that the issued Glock 22 Gen4 was wonderfully accurate and reliable. Up till then, it was the most accurate duty style handgun I have ever handled. It seemed that all I had to do was point the pistol in the general direction of the target and I hit it. It also didn't have even a single reliability issue over several thousand rounds, but then again I have never had any reliability issues out of a handgun made by any of the major manufacturers.

I found that .40 also has some issues. It recoils more than 9mm and, in my experience, the recoil, while not necessarily greater than, is more harsh than .45. Muzzle flip was also greater than 9mm and .45. Recoil and muzzle flip weren't so bad that the pistol was uncontrollable or anything, but they were noticeably worse. In Glocks anyway, .40 also wears the guns more quickly and worse than 9mm and .45, largely because of the greater and more intense recoil. Parts breakage on .40 is more common, particularly locking blocks if the recoil spring starts to wear.

As was stated above, when using good quality hollow point ammunition, there really isn't any real difference between the major calibers. 9mm, .40, .45, they all expand to about the same size, give or take a tenth of an inch or so, and they all penetrate about the same. As a result, there really isn't much difference between them. There have been some studies that say .40 MAY (stress may) have a slight advantage when penetrating auto glass or sheet metal, but the results are inconclusive because there have also been some studies that show differently.

In the end, if you like .40, carry it. It certainly won't perform worse than 9mm and .45. I chose 9mm and don't even own any .40 guns and probably never will again. As long as it is reliable and you are accurate with it and practice with it, have at it. Just be aware that .40 isn't the hammer of Thor, but then again none of the handguns calibers are.

 

[Chino74]

I own 9, .40 & .45 as well as .44 mag. I carry .40 in a Glock 27 usually. I like the 180 grains in .40, fast enough & big enough...and for some reason the .40 recoil is OK with me,. doesn't bother me at all. I like the snappy feel & it's not hard to control w practice. Having said that I have no issues w 9mm, I like it & have 2 beretta older 92s.

.40 is not going anywhere, shoot it if U like it.

 

[Gene L]

When I went back to LE in 96, the .40 was what we carried. Mainly because the FBI records supported that round. I have no fault with the round, but think the 9mm will do just as well with a bit less recoil and a bit less wear on the Glocks we carried. Since I retired, my agency went to 9mm because a lot of data support it. I have no problem with that. I don't own a .40 and will probably never buy one since ammo isn't as available as it used to be. A good round in a sea of good rounds that are more available and less expensive without any appreciable advantages.

 

[white cloud]

I am pretty much a revolver guy but have owned a number of .40s and still have a Glock 27. Many bash the round but I think it has a lot to offer. I have been through enough flip-flopping on what makes a round effect to know that the "current wisdom" will change. Then some will start yelling that we are going to die because we carry 9MM or whatever. I am making sure that I have enough .40 S&W ammo on hand and I may pick up a police trade in.

 

[Echo40]

The FBI switched to 9mm Luger, made the excuse that after performing rigorous testing the .40 S&W and .45 ACP performed no better than modern 9mm without disclosing any load data, then people ran with it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that it's possible to duplicate the performance of .40 S&W/.45 ACP with the right 9mm Luger load, but I doubt that said load is your garden variety 115gr 9mm load, more likely a 147gr +P load, if not a +P+.

I honestly think that the FBI just wanted to save money in the long run, and 9mm Luger was the way to go since the cost of ammo is cheaper and the service life of weapons longer, plus it has the fringe benefit of being easier to shoot, which makes qualification courses for new agents easier as well.
Furthermore, I doubt that the FBI is even using an equivalent 9mm load to match their previous .40 S&W loads, they just told a convenient half-truth that 9mm could potentially match .40 S&W, regardless of having no intention of making such an equivalent load the standard issue, because they knew it would look bad otherwise if they merely adopted a weaker cartridge without an explanation.

In their defense, modern 9mm Luger self-defense loads are most likely adequate for their needs regardless, so it's not like they're putting their agents lives at risk by equipping them with an inadequate cartridge, but the insinuation that 9mm Luger in general is equal to .40 S&W is misleading at best. So unfortunately now there are folks who parrot the whole "9mm is equal to .40 S&W/.45 ACP" assertion without really understanding it, as if that means the 115-124gr standard pressure loads they're carrying are somehow magically equal to a standard 155-180gr .40 S&W load.

 

[Bobafett]

I don't care for the cartridge personally

In my opinion it can't do anything better than a 9mm 124gr +P+ or a 45ACP 185gr +P

I had owned 3 40S&W chambered autos previously (during the clinton era) but having a case blow out sealed its fate in my head and I won't waste time ever considering a 40 again

 

[CH4]

Nothing at all wrong with the 40, it’s still doing the job it was designed to do. LE and government agencies are fickle and often go with the prevailing wind, especially if it’s cheaper. I also looked at the .40 as a compromise between the capacity of a 9 and thump of a 45; others think it’s neither fish nor fowl. I carried my 229 for the majority of my career and if starting over, would confidently carry it again. Great gun/ammo combination. FWIW, Sig is the first company to build a gun around the .40, while everyone else was converting their 9mms.

 

[cadmike]

The 9 mm cartridge is under rated. The .45 acp is over rated. The .40 is a good compromise between the two.

 

[Ribwizzard]

A better question is: What's wrong with 9mm?
Meaning: Why add another caliber to your arsenal that really adds no benefit?
9mm does the job just as good, uses same cleaning supplies as .38, and .357, usually holds more ammo and is cheaper to shoot.
I guess if it's your only gun, or dont shoot much, it shouldn't be a big deal, but sticking to .22, .357/9mm, .45 & .44 mag for handguns keeps my shooting hobby simpler and more efficient.

 

[rickflst]

I live in a state where we can only have 10 round mags. I carry my SW compact 40. My though twas 10 of 9 or 10 of 40? OK I will take the 40. If the persistent push to limit magazine capacity continues I am sure it will hit more states. I am far from an expert but can shoot equally well the 9 or 40. I practice and practice some more.

 

[walnutred]

A better question is: What's wrong with 9mm?
Meaning: Why add another caliber to your arsenal that really adds no benefit?
9mm does the job just as good, uses same cleaning supplies as .38, and .357, usually holds more ammo and is cheaper to shoot.
I guess if it's your only gun, or dont shoot much, it shouldn't be a big deal, but sticking to .22, .357/9mm, .45 & .44 mag for handguns keeps my shooting hobby simpler and more efficient.

Good question, I guess I just never liked the 9x19 round. I saw it as a good SMG round and a functional handgun round. Not that there is any logic behind my caliber preferences. 32-20 as been one of my favorites since I picked up my 1st one in the mid 70's. When the Army adopted the Beretta 92 I had a t-shirt made that front said, 45 ACP, Cocked and locked since 1911. The back said 9x19, the choice of defeated armies since 1902.

It's not that I avoid 9mm completely, I think between my wife and I we have three or four pistols in that caliber. And I tend to dance all around 9x19 with 9x17, 9x18 and even 38 S&W.

 

[CDR_Glock]

What is wrong with the 40 S&W?

I have pistols in 9 mm, 40 S&W and 45 ACP.

I find the larger bullets to suppress very well. I was surprised that 40 S&W actually suppressed but it is naturally subsonic in 185 gr. I’d like to find some 200 gr just for shooting Suppressed in my Keltec Sub 2000 (Sub 2K).

I like carrying 9 mm for capacity and practical weight. I prefer 40 S&W over 45 ACP for capacity, as I get 3 more in a pistol of the same sized gun.

In end, it’s all about shot placement, what you’re comfortable shooting accurately and quickly, and what fits your budget. I have the different pistols, and I stock a lot of ammunition in all three calibers. I have progressive reloaders for the 9 and 45, but I’d love one for 40 S&W .

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Goldstar225]

There's not a thing wrong with the .40. People have their preferences, biases and opinions. Before the .40 it was 9mm vs .45 or 9mm vs .38/.357. The .40 just added to the debate.

It will never end and is kind of like the dog chasing his tail.

I have and use 9mm, .40 and .45. My safety is not dependent on other peoples choices nor is their safety dependent on my choice.

 

[Old cop]

My agency initially transitioned to the Glock 19 9 MM, but switched to the Glock 23 in .40 after a couple officer involved shootings that failed to stop the suspect. Glock swapped the guns at no charge but ammo technology has narrowed the gap since then. The chief recently purchased G43s for narcotics officers so things may be changing.

 

[Sevens]

I find it at least mildly entertaining that so many make these concise, bold statements that .40 S&W offers nothing (nothing!) as in (nothing at all in any way) that isn't covered by 9mm or .45...

...even though some have listed multiple tangible bits that the .40cal provides clearly, including the opening posts that point out how .40 chambered guns are flooding the used market and can be purchased at great savings.

I could list benefits again, but this post here will already be received poorly or ignored entirely. This is no worry because I've eaten through 500 rounds over .40cal over two days of shooting this last week, through two different guns and my ammo chest has only 120 rounds of .40 in it.

I've obviously got a lot of loading to do!

 

[Farmer17]

The .40 is a little more powerful than the 9m/m about as much as the 9m/m is a little more powerful than the .380. There are Underwood .380 rounds that put a 90 grain JHP at about 1280 fps out of Beretta M84 and many LE 9m/m issue loads only shoot a 115 grain bullet at about the same speed out of a short barrel. I never quite understood how the 9m/m is considered the "man stopping death slayer" and the .380 is inadequate and should not even be considered for defense. The .40 shoots a bigger and heavier bullet at roughly the same velocity and I can handle the recoil well, shoot it accurately, and I have confidence in it so that's what I prefer. I do like the 9m/m for soft recoil and cheap ammo costs.

 

[Doug M.]

When I retired my Sheriff's Office had just replaced model 645 with the model 4506. I haven't kept track the whole time I have been gone, but last year they had .40 Glocks. I was recently told they were going back to 9 mm Glocks. The reason, I do not know. I have carried a .45 since we changed to semi autos from the .357 revolver. I still carry a .45, and expect I always will.

*
The Glocks in .40 have had well known functionality problems, and when there was a short period of getting them to work well a couple of years ago, it messed up the 9mm variants. I know of several agencies that have had trouble with the .40s, going back well over a decade (it was heavily discussed on the old 10-8 forums and has been the subject of quite a bit of knowledge based hate on LF). A friend's agency had an awful time with them and had to recall and replace them pretty soon after purchase and before issuing them was complete. It is a clear discipline issue for incompetence for command to allow them.

I don't care about the .40, and there are good arguments for buying one just in case I need to use that ammo. If I did, it would almost certainly be an M&P 2.0. FWIW, I was at a class with an FBI instructor a few years ago, and he had regular malfs with his issue pistol. He had also found that smaller shooters actually did better with the Glocks in .45 - they were easier to shoot well.

 

[Erich]

Have you seen many shootings with the more exotic 9mm projectiles?

Let's please not drift the thread but I am not sure I understand your question: nothing more exotic than a variety of hollow points.

 

[Sevens]

Let's please not drift the thread but I am not sure I understand your question: nothing more exotic than a variety of hollow points.

Not true. They make all kinds of (silly, ignorant, cash-grab) ammunition products that often have sintered metal projectiles, ultra-light weight and extremely high velocity type rounds. Glaser Safety Slugs were some of the earliest of these, more recent silly rounds marketed as "DRT" rounds.

All of these are poor, over priced alternatives to a quality bonded JHP, but they do exist.