I prefer the .40, but with the right ammo, there isn't much to choose between the two. The .40 has slightly more recoil, so follow up shots may be a tad slower. Might I suggest a .45 ? The XD45 is a super handgun. The XDM45 is even better. 14 rounds of .45acp should handle most "crazies".

Originally Posted by hud35500

I prefer the .40, but with the right ammo, there isn't much to choose between the two. The .40 has slightly more recoil, so follow up shots may be a tad slower. Might I suggest a .45 ? The XD45 is a super handgun. The XDM45 is even better. 14 rounds of .45acp should handle most "crazies".

Thanks for the reply! Anyone else have an opinion, im kinda worried about ammo cost too since im getting ready to go to college and funds will be kinda tight.

I like and have the .40 myself but the .9mm will be a lot cheaper on ammo.

I like the 9mm better myself. Not as snappy easy for newbies, can have 17 in a clip. Ammo cost is cheap if you plan on shooting alot

I vote for the 9mm.

I'd say 9mm as well. With +P/+P+ ammo available for the 9mm nowadays it just makes more sense to go the 9mm route. You can fire the cheaper, regular 9mm ammo when at the range and load your gun up with the +P/+P+ ammo when you are out in the wilderness etc.

I believe that the 9mm is much more functional for a new shooter.

It's much easier to shoot and the cost for 9 mm ammo is 1/2 of the .40 ca.

If you shoot much the money you save on ammo alone will pay for another gun.

Originally Posted by ozzy

I like and have the .40 myself but the .9mm will be a lot cheaper on ammo.

Yes, but is it enough to make a difference to the O.P.? I see CCI Blazer ammo listed on Able's Ammo:

9mm: 11.15/50 rounds
40: $17.50/50 rounds

This is practice ammo; if you shoot 50 rounds per week (2,500 per year), it adds $6.35 per week to your shooting expenses. Percentage-wise it is a big jump, but (for me, at least) the $6.35/week is not a persuasive argument.

If you are not recoil sensitive I think the .40 is a better round. If you are recoil sensitive then the 9mm is better.

I don't personally shoot blazer ammo.

I can buy 9mm on sale for 9.95 per 50 at Cabella's & Academy.

.40 Cal for $18 to $19 per 50.

$10 a box times 52 weeks = $520 = the money I'm saying to buy another gun.

But to each his own.

I carry a Taurus PT140 but am thinking about picking up the same gun in 9mm just for practice.

Originally Posted by dondavis3

I don't personally shoot blazer ammo.

I can buy 9mm on sale for 9.95 per 50 at Cabella's & Academy.

.40 Cal for $18 to $19 per 50.



$10 a box times 52 weeks = $520 = the money I'm saying to buy another gun.

But to each his own.

Yeah, but still that's just two beers a week.

My point is, if you think the .40 is a better round, I think you can come up with the $10.00/week difference. If you don't think it is a better round then it would be foolish to spend the extra money.

What kind of crazy animals could you run into? Crazy raccoon? mountain lion? bear? squirrel? A 9mm or .40 might due if it's small, otherwise I'd look at a bigger caliber.

Glock 17. If your talking about animals, why not go to a higher caliber? Better to overkill than not kill at all...

I do not like the 9mm too much never have, carried one in the field in Viet Nam that was picked up, but I think the 9 is your best bet due to economics. I have switched to one for a range gun and I am comming around to it but its fun to shoot and pretty cheap. Wally World sells Federal 115 grains for 10.47 a box.

You need low cost and good potential to learn about pistol. The 9mm would be best.

You might consider getting the .40 with a 9mm conversion barrel for range and practice......

Why limit yourself to 9mm and .40? If there are Bears or mountain Lions where you camp maybe you want a .357 which can also be cheap for practice with .38 ammo.

I have a 9mm and a 40sw. Let me just say that I'm glad I still have a 9mm. They are very capable caliber and are easier to shoot than the 40sw. Yes, the 40sw is more powerful but they both depends on the ammo you use, they make a difference.

9MM (of the Beretta 92/M9 variety).

i just got my first handgun about 2 months ago and it is a compact .40 cal. After shooting my friends M&P 9mm and 45ACP, i have started looking at those 2 calibers more and more.
I am thinking now on getting a 9mm for the heavier range use (and possible carry later on) and the 45 as a home defense gun that will get lighter range use, mostly due to ammo costs.
It just seemed to me that the .40 kicked harder than the 9mm and 45, thus making follow up shots longer to line up. Tho this is coming from a guy who has only had a gun for 2 months, so take it as you will but those are my plans. I have been working on my grip and stance, which has helped me control the gun better but it still too "sparky" for me.

As someone said, the 40 actually kicks harder than either the 45 or the 9mm. Actually, I think it's more "different" than harder. 40 tends to be a sharp and snappy recoil impulse - the 45 ACP is more a push.

In any case, I'd start with a 9mm. Easy to shoot, lot's of ammo out there. Some inexpensive ammo is quite good. Back when 9mm aluminum cased Blazer was really cheap, I bought quite a bit of it. Over the years I've shot many thousands of rounds of it -- never had any sort of problem. Always goes BANG, cleaner than WWB, never had a hard primer issue the way I did with some European Ammo.

9mm -- if you get to like shooting a handgun, you will tend to shoot more than 50 rounds a week. Doing that with a 40 or 45 can become quite expensive.

Also, 9mm self defense rounds seem to be quite efficient. Lots of choices.

Originally Posted by sonja

As someone said, the 40 actually kicks harder than either the 45 or the 9mm. Actually, I think it's more "different" than harder. 40 tends to be a sharp and snappy recoil impulse - the 45 ACP is more a push.

In any case, I'd start with a 9mm. Easy to shoot, lot's of ammo out there. Some inexpensive ammo is quite good. Back when 9mm aluminum cased Blazer was really cheap, I bought quite a bit of it. Over the years I've shot many thousands of rounds of it -- never had any sort of problem. Always goes BANG, cleaner than WWB, never had a hard primer issue the way I did with some European Ammo.

9mm -- if you get to like shooting a handgun, you will tend to shoot more than 50 rounds a week. Doing that with a 40 or 45 can become quite expensive.

Also, 9mm self defense rounds seem to be quite efficient. Lots of choices.

I agree with this post here. I have been shooting more 9mm due to expense. There is nothing wrong with the 9mm for self defense. There are lots of holes in the ground that are occupied by the bodies of those who found out the hard way.

The modern .40S&W is a premium self defensive pistol caliber and just about as good as it gets. But ammo is more expensive than 9mm so if range work is a priority and funds are limited, the 9mm is your better choice. With high quality loads, the 9mm would serve you well for defense against human predators. As for dangerous animals, between these two calibers I go with the .40S&W. Don't expect to be well armed against a bear or large cat with a 9mm or a 40. For animals like that, I would prefer a good .44 Magnum. Bears are tenacious and take some hard hitting bullets in heavy bone to bring them down.

So for self defense against two-legged predators and with a limited budget, I would go with the 9mm and practice with it a lot.

Go with 9mm. It is easier to control and cheaper to shoot.