I've seen a few posts mentioning a general disdain for .40 cal? Shipwreck is one who has mentioned it. Any particular reason why folks? My wife has her P345 but I was looking toward something a little lighter.
.40SW recoil is too much for a round that isn't a true .45
Not only that, but you're fixing a problem that doesn't exist. You have 9mm which travels at upwards of 1200fps. Then you have .45 which is around 850fps. The .40 sits between this but doesn't have the size of the .45 or the velocity of the 9mm. So it's IMO a waste.
Also, you have a number of reported kabooms with .40 chambered pistols. The round is packed hot so that there is a chance for it to blow up in the chamber. Also, the .40 was evolved from the 10mm which is a very high powered round. The 10mm was too much to handle so the .40 was basically a slimed down version of it that can fit into a gun that is the same size of a 9mm. The 10mm required a larger firearm.
I like that the 9mm is cheaper to shoot and a little easier to conceal, and I like the idea of defending my home with .45acp. The 45 is a blast at the range too but so expensive.
In my opinion the .40 is the best of the three.
You can use 1200 fps 155 grain rounds or 200 grain 950 fps rounds.
The .40 produces more energy than either 9MM or .45
You have to use +P+ 9 or 45 to come close.
The .40 is a modern round designed based on modern powders and bullets.
9MM and .45 are both 100 year old designs.
If you want .45 or 9MM performance just load .40 to a wimp or double wimp level.
Bring on the torches.
Nothing wrong with .40, and it is certainly a useful round. It is more powerful than 9mm but fits in compact guns with a 9mm cycle length, which is something that can't be done with .45ACP. The allows smaller guns with smaller grips - easier to conceal and easier to use for smaller-handed shooters.
9mm is fine for defense, but some people prefer more horsepower. .40 is a logical chocie for them, especially if they want a 9mm-sized pistol rather than a .45-sized pistol. .40 has turned in excellent results in both gelatin testing and actual shootings.
"Ka-Booms" have been an issue in only a very, very tiny minority of pistols.
It kicks more than 9mm, but isn't at all difficult to control by a shooter who knows how to manage a pistol, unless we're talking about miniature pocket pistols. I have attached a pic of me shooting a Glock 23 with full-charge .40 ammo, pistol in full recoil. Anyone who thinks .40 is horribly difficult to control in reasonably sized pistols needs to shoot more or get some training.
Last edited by Mike Barham; 08-28-2008 at 08:00 AM.
I like the 40. The 40 is more of a snap and the 45 is more of a push, is how I discribe their respective recoil. 9mm is the easiest of the applicable self defence rounds, but I get bored with it easily sometimes. I can shoot the 40 pretty accurately, and at $4 less per box of WWB than 45, I can shoot it more.
I really like the 45, but haven't shot mine in about six months. At $31/ 100, I find myself going the 40 or 9mm route more often than not.
A couple of my better targets from this weekend, both from a standing position and non-supported:
1) From 7 yards. 3 mags/ 36 rounds...
2) From 50 feet. This was my best of the grouping from this distance. Less than 1"!!! I couldn't believe it. Not typical for me . One of the other four targets on the page had a bullseye, too.
Next time I get some 40 ammo I will take the Steyr out again and try to duplicate the results. Here is a target I kept from 7 yards and a rest.
Don't get me wrong, the HK is definitely more sturdily built, but for under $400 the Steyr is almost half the price. The trap sights are way cool, too. Great gun for the price.
Just Because......I like the .45ACP! It is a lot easier than I thought it would be to shoot and it makes BIG HOLES Never shot a .40 but I'm thinkin it ain't as bad as a .357....or am I wrong?????
The only "issue" I've noticed with the Steyr, is when I fill the mag to maximum capacity (12), the slide can be stubborn to load the first round. Not sure why, and it can be racked, it just takes more force than if the mag only had 11 rounds in it.
But, with my experiences with the gun, I'd put it in my nighstand for sure.
I only chose to dump the 40, to eliminate one caliber. I've owned and Glock 23C, and a Kahr PM40. The 40 is a good round, butNASTY in the paocket-size Kahr. That said, I'm all 9mm and 45 ACP now ('cept for my Keltec).
Personally, for small guns, 9mm is plenty of power, and more controlable. In a full size frame, nobody has proven to me that there is ANYTHING better than a 45ACP. For accuracy, or stopping power.
I plink with my 22 Buckmark, and my two 9mms. Mine and Carla's. Cheaper.
I carry at LEAST the Kel Tec. (Pocket gun)
Most often, the 9mm XDSC. (IWB/OWB Shirt-Hem Concealed)
When possible, the XD45. (Jacket OWB Concealed)
I've yet to find ANY 1911 more accurate than my personal 4" XD45. Period.
Too bad you don't live closer to me or I'd let you shoot the hell out of mine to decide for yourself. It's not a very accessible gun, unfortunately. I took a shot in the dark with it after reading the trails-and-tribulations on Steyrclub.com. They come in 9mm and 357sig (though very rare in 357S) also.
If you have any more questions or want me to take some detailed photos of it together or apart, let me know.
I really like the look of that grip and it seems size comparable to the Beretta 92 which fits my hand better than my wifes p345.
Make sure you don't go by pictures as far as the grip is concerned. Pictures can be deceiving. It may look like it would feel one way but you get it in your hands and you don't like it at all. Have you held one? Just my .02
Hang on a sec and I will get some pics and put a post together...