What is wrong with the .40

[BCDWYO]

As others have said there is nothing inherently wrong with it. I've owned several over the years, but I'm down to just 2 left, and I have drop in .357 Sig barrels that I prefer for both, so the .40 S&W rarely gets shot. I much prefer the 10 mm to .40 since there is so much more versatility in how you can load it.

 

[spricks]

It's simply amazing how this issue is a issue at all....if you drive a Chevy then you don't like Fords....it is pretty much what one prefers....I love the S&W 40 Cal....it's not snappy, short, or any other label...it's the 40!

Peace....spricks

 

[cmort666]

Has anybody shot the CZ75 series in .40 S&W?

I imagine that the metal frame absorbs quite a bit of the recoil impulse.

Since FN/Browning no longer make the .40 S&W BHP, it's about all I'd consider in the caliber.

I can't stand D/A in an auto, so I've considered getting a CZ75SA in .40 S&W.

Anybody try the CZ75? Does it have a less violent recoil than say, a 2nd Gen Glock 22 (my only extended experience with the .40 S&W)?

 

[Farmer17]

I bought an EAA Witness in .40 S&W when they first came out in about 1989. It was my "go to" defensive handgun for about 20 years even though I had a bunch of other more expensive guns. It is basically the same gun as the CZ-75 and it was very manageable in recoil, very accurate, and perfectly reliable in many thousands of rounds but I foolishly sold it for something else. I recently bought a 9 m/m CZ75 and I couldn't really tell that it recoiled any less AND it had a very stout DA trigger and I just never warmed up to it so I sold it. Wish I had that .40 Witness back

 

[mtgianni]

Has anybody shot the CZ75 series in .40 S&W?

I imagine that the metal frame absorbs quite a bit of the recoil impulse.

Since FN/Browning no longer make the .40 S&W BHP, it's about all I'd consider in the caliber.

I can't stand D/A in an auto, so I've considered getting a CZ75SA in .40 S&W.

Anybody try the CZ75? Does it have a less violent recoil than say, a 2nd Gen Glock 22 (my only extended experience with the .40 S&W)?

I loved shooting a friends CZ 75 in 40 as much as he liked shooting mine in 9mm. I have never shot a Glock 40 and noticed little difference in recoil between his 40 and my 9 in the CZ's. Both were loaded with our own cast loads.

 

[cmort666]

I loved shooting a friends CZ 75 in 40 as much as he liked shooting mine in 9mm. I have never shot a Glock 40 and noticed little difference in recoil between his 40 and my 9 in the CZ's. Both were loaded with our own cast loads.

I'll have to consider a CZ75SA.

Too bad the decocker guns can't be converted to SA...

 

[HOUSTON RICK]

Let me start by saying that I do not pick up anything in 40. I have my calibers and it just is not one of them. Had I not been so closed minded, I could have had some good deals on 40 guns over the years, but it has never been one of my calibers.

 

[PR24]

Who said there was anything "wrong" with it?

Somebody on The internet?

Well, you know; they can't post anything on the Internet that isn't true......

 

[PR24]

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:

She is purdy!

 

[Dan Christopher]

Short answer: There's not a thing wrong with the 40 S&W. It works just fine.

Longer answer: Personally, I have no use for it. It's a fine semi-auto service round. I just happen to think that the pros don't outweigh the cons on this one. It's a snappy round, more so than either 9mm or 45 Auto. But all that extra snap doesn't translate to appreciably any more damage to the target.

All the service rounds, for all intents and purposes, perform about the same.

 

[Whitwabit]

I love the 40 .. I carry a 40c and the recoil is quite tame on the new compacts .. I just ordered another pistol in 40 S&W this last Thursday a Sig P229 Legion in 40 S&W ..

I expect to love it even more then my S&W Compact ..

Using the 40 platform in a pistol you can shoot 357 Sig with a simple drop in barrel .. the 40 mags work fine .. and with a 40 to 9mm conversion barrel and a few 9mm mags you can shot the 9mm ammo also for cheaper practice ..

After saying that I also believe there is a place for my 9mm pistols also .. mainly for the advantage of more rounds being carried as others have commented on ..

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

When ANY major LE agency changes calibers......The Lemmings run behind them off the cliff with whatever the LE agency has chosen..........40's just fine....Been shooting it since 89 when it first came out.......Remember back in 90 when it was the "hottest" thing going?.......In 20 years or so there will be a new "horse" to ride.

 

[Pointblank2U]

The market was saturated with .40s. They have to create "churn" to sell new guns and make money. In a few years the .40 will be in vogue again. It's a donkey and a carrot thing.

 

[Andrew2105]

From what I can tell it seems as though lots of Law Enforcement agencies are using the .40 S&W. A bit more bullet weight than 9mm and a bit more velocity than .45 ACP. Somehow I wonder if the same "magic wand" that made the 9MM so much better than in the past was passed over the .40 & .45 we would be back to where the whole mess started.

Some time ago I saw a supposed chart of FBI handguns from over the years. Choices (shown on this chart) were all over the place not in any logical to me order. Might just be the chart. Or perhaps the gun & caliber de jour?

 

[Rule3]

Has anybody shot the CZ75 series in .40 S&W?

I imagine that the metal frame absorbs quite a bit of the recoil impulse.

Since FN/Browning no longer make the .40 S&W BHP, it's about all I'd consider in the caliber.

I can't stand D/A in an auto, so I've considered getting a CZ75SA in .40 S&W.

Anybody try the CZ75? Does it have a less violent recoil than say, a 2nd Gen Glock 22 (my only extended experience with the .40 S&W)?

Yes, it along with my other CZ's is one of my favorite guns. It is also the compact version. I had others in 40 SW before the big sinkhole swallowed my guns. The recoil (to me is less than the Glock) The HK USP handles it well , just something about the Glock 40. But the Glock 10 mm is less recoil to me than the 40SW It is a larger frame gen 4 ,10mm with better spring.

The recoil is not bad at all. Less than shooting revolvers in 357Mag But it is all what individual like or perceive.

The 40 SW round is so common that even I do not stop to pick up empty brass anymore and I am a brass scrounge (why I don't know!)

 

[31FordA]

There is nothing wrong with .40, I think it's a question of preference. I have shot a bunch of .40's over the years from a bunch of different makers and didn't have any complaints. What I did notice is that, especially in smaller polymer guns, the .40 has a snappier/sharper recoil than a 9mm or .45ACP. I only own one .40 pistol, a Star Firestar, which is actually a pleasant pistol to shoot. That may be because the Firestar is all steel.

The .40 may not be a popular as it was, but it isn't going to disappear. A lot of agencies still use it, and there are boatloads in private hands. If .38 Super, 10mm etc can still hang on then .40 should do just fine.

By the way, the Firestar was Pistol of the Year back in 1993.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

When i got my first .40(adj. sight 4006) back in early 89 ammo was not readily available since it was so new......I cut and inside reamed 10mm brass to make my cases.......They worked just fine.........Now......I have buckets of brass.

 

[TRE]

When I worked armed security, a 40 (Glock) was my choice. I've carried and shot guns my entire life, carried everything from 380 to 45, etc. I simply felt that the 40 gave me a good balance of ammo capacity (15+1 in the gun and 2 more 15rd mags on my belt, LOTS of bullets in the hose) and power. I always carried a 180gr load that wasn't far behind the 185gr 45 ACP loads. I never had to fire it in anger, but I felt comfortably well armed.

It did seem a bit "snappy" out of the polymer frame Glock, high recoil velocity maybe? But, having shot hundreds of thousands of rounds in my life (I shot a lot of competition as a younger man) I never found it objectionable.

Nowadays, I don't carry a gun for a living anymore, so my tastes for carry gun run towards 9mm, 357 Mag or 45 ACP, but I would carry a 40 again in a minute and feel comfortable.

TRE

 

[PR24]

^^^^^^There it is right there! I was appalled by the tactics employed by the FBI in the Miami shootout incident. If the reenactment in the movie was even close to accurate it looked as if they never even heard of small team tactics, much less practiced any!

Right you are &, Platt & Matix had 0% of anything onboard. Their toxicology shows that they were two VERY motivated dudes with no compunction about killing. The hapless agents likely never expected to encounter 2 men with that level of fortitude. Platt & Matix were dead on their feet, but failed to read the memo before injuring EVERYONE & killing two! Several agt's had .357's but were limited to .38 Spl+P's for duty ammo.

Most bad guys will give up when multiple guns are pointed at them. But not Platt & Matix. If you look at the autopsy reports, the FBI was hitting them. It wasn't a spray & pray scenario. But, the perps were moving & shooting back. That makes accurate marksmanship dicey @ best.

The two morons: Phillips & Matasareanu in N. Hollywood were hopped up on phenobarbital which kept them calm & a bit numb. Remember how cold & calculated they were?

Going back a bit, Baby Face Nelson was lit up by a .45 ACP Thompson & struck 17 times! He was able to kill both FBI agents & stagger off to die later. He wasn't high, he wasn't drunk he was 5'4" & 133 lbs. He fought well above his weight & did a lot of damage in his time.

There is no magic bullet. I've posted on here before about two different shooting incidents I was on scene at where the exact opposite occurred. Synopsis: 1st vic center punched with a 230gr .45 Starefire JHP- Lived to testify against attacker. 2nd vic shot in abdomen with .22LR- Lived for about 10 minutes, then expired right in front of me. Autopsy showed his liver was evicerated & he bled out.

One never knows what a bullet is going to do, nor what he intended target is going to do. With that said, you don't hunt rhinos with a .223, so why hunt the most dangerous game on earth with some thing smaller? History shows that they .357 Mag is a devastating cartridge from numerous police & felonious shootings....but it's a handful for many. However, if a person can hit the target better with a minor caliber, that is far better than 6 misses with a .357 Mag. At the end of it all, it really boils down to practice, mindset & using the best ammo you can in your chosen caliber.

 

[CCantu357]

While I am no personal fan of the 40S&W, I have to say it is a good round. As a 10mm fan, I never liked it because it was a watered down version of a superior round. And because it was rechambered in many 9mm framed guns, the recoil appears to be quite snappy. The 10mm and forty-five have the advantage of being built on larger framed guns.

I sometimes run the Federal Hydra-Shok 180 grain in my Glock. At 1050 fps or so it is pretty much a forty. In that big Glock 20 it feels quite comfortable.