40 or 45?
Can you tell me the advantages of a 45 over a 40 or visa versa?
Im interested in knocking power, recoil, ammo cost, reliability and size.
thanks for your input,
I'm a fan of the 45acp, I don't think there is much of a cost difference and the 45 is the one to pick for stopping power. I fine the S&W 40 to be a pretty snappy round as recoil is concerned. The best bet is to rent both and make up your own mind. If my life depended on one round I would take the 45 over the 40.
HGF Forum Moderator
I like 9mm, but 45 is my second fav. I prefer it to 40. Less snap, and less pressure in the round (means less likely to have an explosive issue)
Here are the SAAMI pressures for the 9mm, 40 S&W and 45 ACP.
Originally Posted by Shipwreck
9 mm Luger 35,000
9.mm Luger +P 38,500
.40 S&W 35,000
.45 ACP 21,000
.45 ACP +P 23,000
You will get lots of opinions when you ask a question like this. Take a look at the velocity and energy figures for both 40W&W and 45 acp. The 40S&W clearly out performs the 45 acp. I shoot both and don't find much difference in the recoil. If your goal is quick follow ups, you are going to need more practice with either of these calibers than you will need with a 9mm. One other thing, the platform makes a difference too. Some makes of guns are easier to shoot well than others.
I shoot the .45 more than I do my .40 but I would grab either one in a fight. I practice enough with both to hit what I am aiming at. I carry a .45 and I have a .40 as one of my house guns. It's a subjective topic on which is the best. I like them both.
I prefer .45 hands down. More knocking power, lower recoil (to me. It is a roll instead of a snap like the .40. I can get back on target faster with a .45) both are reliable and what do you mean by size? Odiously the .45 is bigger...
Originally Posted by HannibalTheCrow
Around here the .40 is about $2 less then .45
I like the 45 over the 40.My preference nothing wrong with the 40
but when I go to the range I'll shoot 9mm 3to 1 over 45 due to cost
and recoil.I guess old age is starting to set in.
The pressures and whatnot might measure out the same for a 9mm and a .40, but the .40 has a weird upward crack to it that the 9mm and the .45 just don't have. Don't ask me why. I have found the 40 does better out of the metal framed guns, for some reason. I like the Beretta 96 and Beretta Cougars in .40. The Smith 40's are pretty solid as well.
I think it comes down to the gun and the shooter's choice. How the gun fits in the hand seems to make a big difference, and different guns fit different people.
Good thing there's such a good gun market. You can find what you want in whatever platform best suits you. I'd recommend trying a few before you make the big decision.
Shot placement > anything else IMO.
I'm not a huge fan of the .40, but since the gubmint has decided to issue one to me, I carry it.
If I were given a choice between the .40 and the .45, I'd take the
.45 GAP!! (ducks for cover)
I really like this round and hope it catches on. The G37 has a wonderful feel and balance. I have only shot it in the Glocks, but I expect it performs well in the other makes and models as well.
It offers more frontal area and cross-sectional density than the .40, and it can be pushed at nearly the same velocities as the .40 while doing it with heavier bullets. Plus, it can be done in the same size frame as a 9/.40 offering more capacity than a single-stack ACP and a slimmer grip than a double-stack ACP.
I agree with spacedoggy, he really knows his stuff.
Originally Posted by spacedoggy