What is wrong with the .40

Of all the pistol calibers I have shot (32 thru to 44 Mag), I felt .40 S&W was the most uncomfortable. I find the recoil sharp, the muzzle blast excessive and my recovery time is longer than with a 9mm or a .45 ACP. Only a .357 is a 3" 65 comes close to the same sensation IMHO. From what I read on the Web, my experience is typical of many. As a result it takes longer to train to use 40 S&W effectively.

That's time I don't have, and it's time and money most agencies don't have, either. Having agents that shoot better with a 9mm and have fewer misses endangering others is also very important in these litigious times. Add in that the performance of 9mm has greatly improved over what it was 20 years ago and it's easy to understand the FBI's decision.
 
I agree that with the proper platform, there's nothing wrong with the 40. Other than that the 40 was an answer to a problem that only existed in the minds of certain people.

My carry guns are 9mm, 45 auto, or 357. The last thing I need is another caliber. If I shoot someone, they aren't going to know the difference.
 
I have a .40 S&W Sig 226. An outstanding gun in an outstanding caliber. The blue grips with the hex screws really complete the outfit:

5e398a9d-58e4-4733-a205-fec421a73f32_zpsblqwiujm.jpg


But if I had it to do over I would go for the 9 mm. The .40 is a bit zippy and 9 mm costs less per round.
 
Back about 93/94 I bought my first pistol, a Ruger P91DC. One of my best friends thought I was crazy for buying a 40 S&W, thought it'd never catch on. We don't see each other very often with a couple of states between us these days, but he still reminisces about his thought process back then, admitting how popular the .40 is to this day.

The second pistol I bought was an M&P 40c. My smaller pistols eventually went the way of 380 and 9mm, but I still shoot the 40 the most. And I still have that P91DC.
 
I agree that with the proper platform, there's nothing wrong with the 40. Other than that the 40 was an answer to a problem that only existed in the minds of certain people.
To put the caliber war in perspective, most working brains know that the "lethality difference" between the major defense calibers is very small, but the difference of effectiveness based on shot placement is about 1000X as important. The problem is that shooting skill is a difficult problem to solve, buying a new gun is relatively easy especially when the taxpayer has to pay for it anyway. I will be looking forward to seeing the published accuracy data from the FBI based on after action reports in the future: if it's still under 30%, they will have a lot of 'splainin' to doo.........
 
The answer is "nothing," other than the fact that it's now considered out of vogue. I never experienced the "snappy" recoil others complain about in the caliber.
It's funny about that. For me the 9mm always felt snappier, but the 9mm gun almost seems to cycle in slow motion (I have to wait on it). The .40 cycles at the same speed I do, comes back down exactly when I am ready. The .45 was always too slow, I feel like I am waiting for the "push" to get over so I can get back to shooting.
 
I have owned a wheel barrow full of defensive handguns and I really don't have a need for the 9m/m or .45acp. The 9 is a good round and I have confidence in it, I just have more confidence in the .40 S&W. I also love the GI style 1911 and 45 acp is the only caliber I would want it in, so I will probably pick up another. But for defensive purposes I like the 16 shots in my M&P .40 and the slightly higher velocity and hard barrier penetration. I don't think the recoil is bad at all and I'm surprised so many people have trouble with it but I also don't mind a 12 gauge. A 30-06 on the other hand, that dude kicks!
 
After the Miami shootout, the FBI spent several years, tons of research, lots of time in testing, to determine the best cartridge for their use. It turned out to be a 10mm downloaded with a 180 grain bullet at 980 fps. They then spent tons of money on purchasing and transitioning to the big Smith auto. There were some issues with the first guns but they were exchanged for refined versions. These were big, heavy guns and most agents I knew kept them in their briefcases as they were too heavy to carry on their belt. :-)
Smith determined they could shorten the cartridge with the same ballistics as the 10mm and stuff it in a 9mm size gun for the best of both worlds.
The .40 S&W was the best police cartridge of the day, and still is. Me thinks the FBI change is misguided! I don't believe that the improvement in 9mm cartridge performance is limited to the 9mm. Better bullets can be designed across all calibers! All of them are better now than they were 30 years ago.
I really could never feel any difference between 9mm and .40 S&W in the Glock 17 and 22 models.
Just my opinion and I notice we all have one. :-)
 
To put the caliber war in perspective, most working brains know that the "lethality difference" between the major defense calibers is very small, but the difference of effectiveness based on shot placement is about 1000X as important. The problem is that shooting skill is a difficult problem to solve, buying a new gun is relatively easy especially when the taxpayer has to pay for it anyway. I will be looking forward to seeing the published accuracy data from the FBI based on after action reports in the future: if it's still under 30%, they will have a lot of 'splainin' to doo.........

Exactly! A .22 to the cranium will beat any number of 45's in the wall every time. Although I don't advocate carrying a .22 for defense, I do advocate people carry whatever they will practice with. While a 44 mag is great for stopping power (Harry Callahan taught us that :p ), it's hard to conceal and few people enjoy practicing with it enough to become extremely proficient with it under stressful situations. 9mm is a very good middle ground alternative for many people, but it still boils down to the best caliber is the one you will practice enough with to become proficient at hitting your target, even at close range.
 
I have two 40's one is a P229 which I also have the 3357 sig barrel for and the other is an FNP 40. I like both only thing is I get a little trigger sting with the FNP. I do have both of them in my CCW line up. As far as re-coil I don't find it much more objectionable than my 9mm's.
 
Oh the agony pictures of glocks/plastic pistols oh it hurts lmao.

Kidding I may go glock someday.

I think every PD is packing 40cal glocks.

I still like packing a revolver in 41 or 44 magnum. I never feel out gunned. Harry didn't?
 
Last edited:
Here is what I have in the 40, like both and I would say that the Beretta is a little less snappy! ;)
I really like the Cougar and did use it as a carry piece for awhile.

beretta3.jpg_thumbnail1.jpg


glock27.jpg
 
Now that the FBI has returned to 9mm, 40 S&W, the round they lobbied for could go the way of the 357 Sig. On the other hand, there are a lot of 40's out there. We'll see.

Well now, don't forget that the USSS and USFAM's carry .357 Sig, more than a few State Police agencies carry it too & very likely other federal agencies I'm not aware of.

The .40? it's pretty entrenched in US, Canadian and Australian LE agencies. Just because the FBI has chosen to down grade (IMHO) by no means spells the death nell for the .40. My dept. still issues it to the majority of the officers as does the AZ DPS (Hwy. Patrol), AZ Game & Fish and numerous other AZ Agencies both county and local. Likewise, the .40 is also used by a lot of St. PD's.


Oh yea, the largest uniformed agency in the Federal Govt. also carries the .40; US Border Patrol. They're one of the largest police agencies in the country. Then US Customs, HSI, ICE and FFDO's also pack .40's. The aformentioned USDHS LE component is huge.

As a FA Instructor myself and a LEO who has carried a .40 for 20 yrs on duty, there is NOTHING WRONG WITH IT. With that said, I'm also of the belief that one should carry the biggest caliber they can handle. If a 9mm or .38 Spl is all one can manage, or hell even a .22 LR, then so be it. Carry what you can guarantee hits with. If you can handle a .44 Mag and dig that, well have at it! Both the .40 and .357 Sig have a proven street record, much better than the 9mm. I don't see either going the way of the dodo anytime soon. Both have planted plenty of felons.

Yea, they kick but if you can shoot straight, then by all means; the bigger or faster....the better! Kinda like the age old argument over the merits of the 5.56x45 vs. 7.62x51. The 7.62 always has a edge ballistically! The laws of physics have yet to be repealed.
 
Last edited:
Here is what I have in the 40, like both and I would say that the Beretta is a little less snappy! ;)
I really like the Cougar and did use it as a carry piece for awhile.

beretta3.jpg_thumbnail1.jpg


glock27.jpg

I had a G27 as my BUG to go with it's taller sibling; G35. But, like a dummy I sold it to get a S&W 638. I should have sold off a safe queen:confused: instead of my 27. I miss that bucking and snorting little hellion:eek:.
 
I think arguing about effectiveness differences in normal-sized handgun cartridges is just something people are going to do, despite any facts. 9mm and above, if you place it right, will do the job. However no handgun round is going to stop somebody immediately every time, unless the central nervous system is hit.

Of course confidence in what you carry is a good thing in and of itself.

Personally, I don't like the .40 in semiautos, but many people do - to each their own.

I do like this one (646) though:

standard.jpg
 

Latest posts

Back
Top