Why all the 40 caliber bashing?

[blujax01]

When you were aiming at that bird you had all day to figure it out. In a SD situation I would like to have some pretty good muscle memory built up. And for me that comes with practice - and lots of it.

 

[OKFC05]

if you're competitive marksman working with razor thin margins I can certainly understand the need for lots of practice, but I don't know how this would apply to someone interested in self-defense.

Regarding the need for routine practice for self defense, suggest you go try an IDPA match.
Lots of folks who stand and shoot flatfooted a few shots (or even blast away a lot) and are "legends in their own minds" find out even a llittle stress of a timer and folks watching shows their gunhandling is nowhere near as good as they thought.
The gunhandling, shooting on the move, and keeping cool with malfunctions are definite assets if you have to shoot in self defense.
Under high stress, you fall to the level of your training (at best), and do NOT rise to the level of your expectations. And there are no second place winners in a gunfight.

 

[M29since14]

The phrase "Shoot the (blank) out of it!" seems to be an internet creation that has little to do with anything. I have known a few pistol shooters who taught me more watching me shoot 3-4 cylinders full through my 44 Magnum than I would bet any number of the gentlemen I see at my local indoor range learn blazing their way through a case of 9mms with their plastic fantastics. So the operative thought might be, "Are you trying to learn something or just making noise?" Quantity is only functional in the latter case. JMHO.

Jeff Cooper always used to say if given a reasonably fit and interested individual, he could produce a fair defensive pistol shot in 12-16 hours with 500 rounds of ammo. After that, routine maintenance of your skills should be sufficient for an ordinary citizen. Most of us shoot more just because we enjoy it.

 

[Blueface2]

Great thread as my interest in my next gun is for a .40.
I am just one of those guys that rather than focus on a select caliber, I like the idea of eventually owning one of each.
I have landed on the Glock 22 or 23 as my choice for this caliber.
I have fired at least 100 rounds on a .40 and didn't find myself liking it any less than a 9 or .45.

 

[ma deuce]

I will confess that I was once the owner of a Glock 23, but gave it up because I found that I really didn't enjoy shooting it. I did find the cartridge to be too snappy, and there were other things about the Glock platform I decided, after owning several, that I just didn't like. The G 23 was my last plastic gun; it went in a partial trade on my first Hi Power, and I've never missed it.

The ".40 is gay" thing has taken on a life of its own as an internet meme. One can argue that given the improved performance of current 9mm rounds and the availability of .45, there's no need for it, but the same can be said of a lot of other rounds. .45 GAP, anyone? Here in the greater Baltimore-DC area, .40 is commonly pronounced, and not just on the internet gun forums, as "Fo-tay", and it does enjoy a certain mystique amongst the enterprising street-corner entrepreneurs that increasingly dominate our urban commerce, just as it does with their opposite numbers in the LE ranks. And traditionalists, of which there are many, believe that sufficient proof of its "otherness" is provided by the fact that JMB, of blessed memory, never designed a gun around it.

Just a fad, really. I personally wouldn't want another gun chambered for it, but then again, I wouldn't want to get shot by one, either.

Oh, and like some of the earlier responders, I'm trying to hold down the number of calibers I have to stock ammo for. With .22, 9mm, .38 Special, .357 Mag and .45, that's enough to deal with.

 

[Jeff1000]

Regarding the need for routine practice for self defense, suggest you go try an IDPA match.
Lots of folks who stand and shoot flatfooted a few shots (or even blast away a lot) and are "legends in their own minds" find out even a llittle stress of a timer and folks watching shows their gunhandling is nowhere near as good as they thought.
The gunhandling, shooting on the move, and keeping cool with malfunctions are definite assets if you have to shoot in self defense.
Under high stress, you fall to the level of your training (at best), and do NOT rise to the level of your expectations. And there are no second place winners in a gunfight.

The way I look at it is that I've gone through my entire life unarmed and I'm still alive to talk about it, and I've been in some tough neighborhoods/ situations as well. It seems to me that just having a weapon on my person and being able to adequately operate it would be all gravy to me. Maybe I wouldn't be able to shoot like Rambo taking on the National Guard, but it seems that my chances of survival would be increased by being armed and understanding how my weapon shoots.

I can see if someone just enjoys shooting, and I might fall into that category, then by all means have fun and burn through tons of ammo.

The way I see things transpiring for me is that when I first acquire my pistol I'll go through a lot of dry runs getting a feel for the trigger. Taking the gun apart and putting back together, operating all the controls until I can do it my sleep. Then I'll go to the range and shoot as many rounds as I feel I need to get comfortable with the gun and see how it shoots. After that I don't see why I wouldn't be all set for street self defense if, god forbid, that situation ever arose. Maybe go to the range once-a-month, or every other month to reaquaint myself. Maybe I wouldn't be trained like a Navy Seal but I should be in better shape than if I was unarmed. If this scenario transpires for me then getting a 9mm because ammo is cheaper would be a moot point since I wouldn't be burning through tons of ammo anyway.

Thanks for your response.

 

[StatesRightist]

The way I look at it is that I've gone through my entire life unarmed and I'm still alive to talk about it, and I've been in some tough neighborhoods/ situations as well. It seems to me that just having a weapon on my person and being able to adequately operate it would be all gravy to me. Maybe I wouldn't be able to shoot like Rambo taking on the National Guard, but it seems that my chances of survival would be increased by being armed and understanding how my weapon shoots.

I can see if someone just enjoys shooting, and I might fall into that category, then by all means have fun and burn through tons of ammo.

The way I see things transpiring for me is that when I first acquire my pistol I'll go through a lot of dry runs getting a feel for the trigger. Taking the gun apart and putting back together, operating all the controls until I can do it my sleep. Then I'll go to the range and shoot as many rounds as I feel I need to get comfortable with the gun and see how it shoots. After that I don't see why I wouldn't be all set for street self defense if, god forbid, that situation ever arose. Maybe go to the range once-a-month, or every other month to reaquaint myself. Maybe I wouldn't be trained like a Navy Seal but I should be in better shape than if I was unarmed. If this scenario transpires for me then getting a 9mm because ammo is cheaper would be a moot point since I wouldn't be burning through tons of ammo anyway.

Thanks for your response.

Trained LEO's average less than 50% connect rates in shootouts....you might want to shoot quite a bit, take a class that includes timed combat shooting etc. It will prove or disprove your theory on how much you need to shoot. It will also help you in your quest to get a Class A. Good luck!

 

[Chuck Jones]

Really, "Col. Cooper says..." I must 'a missed that one, I thought he ran a school.

You guys obviously have a different view of competence than I do if you think you'll achieve it in 500 rounds with a handgun. Either that, or some pretty extraordinary talent.

500 rounds wouldn't even break-in a gun. I wouldn't trust a gun, certainly not a pistol, holster, and magazines, that I haven't run a lot more than 500 rounds through.

What are you guys, Cops?

How many draws in those 500 rounds?
Positions?
What distances?
Any movement (you and/or the targets)?
Lighting?
Cover?
Clothing?

I'm not saying you need to be Bill Hickok... ah what's the point, suit yourselves.

and thank God modern guns and gear are as safe as they obviously are.

/c

 

[carbofan21]

Before you plunk down money on a new pistol, its never a bad idea to go rent a few at an indoor range, if possible, to get a feel for a particular platform and caliber. No amount of reading or gunboard opinions will help you determine what feels good in your hands, what is reliable, what is controllable, or what you will shoot well, etc.

Any of the service calibers will serve you well as a primary or backup ccw. .38 +p, .357 magnum, 9mm, .45 acp, .40, 357 sig, etc, etc.

One last thing. Gun skills are perishable. Just because you could shoot well 20 years ago or 20 months ago doesn't mean you will shoot well today, or tomorrow. The idea that you never need to practice once you learn how to do it is simply false. Please get some knd of training, for everyone's sake.

 

[Prof_Fate]

The .40 is not less accurate than the 9mm or 45acp! That statement is not verified by targets shot.


A 115gr 9mm bullet cannot do what a 180-200gr .40 or .45 bullet can do.

The tests I read over the winter of pistols in magazines ALL show 40 to be less accurate (group size) than 9 or 45. In your hand, your gun may of course be different.

As to the 'can't do' - can't do what? There is no definitive proof that anyone round has more 'stopping power' than another. Maybe 357 mag has an edge. It depends so much more on accuracy, and the extra velocity of a 9 over a 45 can indeed make a difference in how a HP opens.

 

[VAdoublegunner]

My favorite illustrative example of the issue, in summary:

 

[ma deuce]

Trained LEO's average less than 50% connect rates in shootouts....you might want to shoot quite a bit, take a class that includes timed combat shooting etc. It will prove or disprove your theory on how much you need to shoot. It will also help you in your quest to get a Class A. Good luck!

Way less than 50% from the published accounts of many incidents around Baltimore. Practice always helps, unless you're Superman.

 

[StatesRightist]

Really, "Col. Cooper says..." I must 'a missed that one, I thought he ran a school.

You guys obviously have a different view of competence than I do if you think you'll achieve it in 500 rounds with a handgun. Either that, or some pretty extraordinary talent.

500 rounds wouldn't even break-in a gun. I wouldn't trust a gun, certainly not a pistol, holster, and magazines, that I haven't run a lot more than 500 rounds through.

What are you guys, Cops?

How many draws in those 500 rounds?
Positions?
What distances?
Any movement (you and/or the targets)?
Lighting?
Cover?
Clothing?

I'm not saying you need to be Bill Hickok... ah what's the point, suit yourselves.

and thank God modern guns and gear are as safe as they obviously are.

/c

Try re-reading the quote, it said fair defensive shot, not proficient defensive shot. As for your generalizations, I know a lot of cops who are Ex-Seals, comp shooters etc who I'm sure will out shoot you there Wyatt. Though I will admit, I also know some who couldn't hit a bull in the butt at 10 yds.

 

[StatesRightist]

Way less than 50% from the published accounts of many incidents around Baltimore. Practice always helps, unless you're Superman.

You want to be truly afraid, Baltimore had the best shooting % in the Nation percentage at least one yr, 2008 I think it was.

 

[StatesRightist]

What I want to know is how, I say how, did this become another inane caliber wars thread?

What's next? I wonder which caliber would work better on a bear?

 

[Big45]

The .40 is not less accurate than the 9mm or 45acp! That statement is not verified by targets shot.


A 115gr 9mm bullet cannot do what a 180-200gr .40 or .45 bullet can do.

I agree,,, the .40 is not a less accurate round.. out of a quality pistol, & Barrel... how could one, even think that with todays barrel tolerences...more then likely.. its a shooter issue... of the increased recoil, and snap as some call it... I have fired 1000s of ea and certainly have not seen a less accurate round in reality. and ohhhh so much more punch... its called Foot lbs of energy.

 

[Jeff1000]

Trained LEO's average less than 50% connect rates in shootouts....you might want to shoot quite a bit, take a class that includes timed combat shooting etc. It will prove or disprove your theory on how much you need to shoot. It will also help you in your quest to get a Class A. Good luck!

Absolutely StatesRightist, training is a requirement for a license; in fact, it's the first step I need to take.

If the connect rate is less than 50% is it possible that it's not so much a training deficiency but maybe how a person reacts under pressure and stress? I could imagine that someone who was cool under pressure, without thousands of hours of training, might perform better than someone who fell apart in a life threatening situation and had a lot of training. What about things like street smarts, how you project yourself, how you relate to different types of people?

I'm not saying that training is unimportant, but is it possible that there's much more to successfully dealing with a dangerous situation than just formal training?

It seems if you were able to shoot well at the range but not so well in an actual situation then maybe other factors are more important than training. Just thinking out loud really. Thanks.

 

[Jeff1000]

What I want to know is how, I say how, did this become another inane caliber wars thread?

What's next? I wonder which caliber would work better on a bear?

So which caliber would? I wanna be prepared.

 

[blujax01]

... Though I will admit, I also know some who couldn't hit a bull in the butt at 10 yds.

Or less than 3 yards (eight feet) - as evidenced by two of the NYPD's finest totally missing the target with 9 of 16 shots and wounding 9 separate bystanders in the process. And it wasn't like they were surprised - in this case they were the predators hunting the suspect!

Current proficiency requirement is to hit 78% of 50 rounds fired twice a year. My guess is that there are thousands of NYPD cops who shot exactly 100 rounds per year.

 

[S&WOkie]

What's next? I wonder which caliber would work better on a bear?

So which caliber would? I wanna be prepared.

I guess Mr. Moore has the answer to that.

Short form: if you put your bullets in a vital area, it doesn't matter how big or fast they are. If you don't put your bullets in a vital area, it doesn't matter how big or fast they are.