.40 S&W: Love It Or Hate It??

So what's the consensus on the .40 caliber? I fall in and out of love with it, myself.

Sometimes I think it recoils sharper than the 9mm and .45. Other times I've got no problems with it at all. Sometimes I think it's the perfect middleman between the 9mm and .45.

For me, it's depended much on the gun I've shot it out of. I've liked it better out of the Browning Hi-Power, the Sig 229, Beretta 96 and Cougars, and the USP full size.

I haven't liked it out of the Glocks, though the 27 seems to handle better than a full-size. Weird.

There was also some talk a few years back that one couldn't obtain tight groups with it, that it was an inheirently inaccurate cartridge. I haven't found that to be the case, personally. Has anyone a gripe about the .40's accuracy? Does anyone have a favorite .40 and hate the others??

Or is it just me??

U should have put a poll up with your post :p

Me, I do not care for the round. I have had many 45s over the years - right now, I have all 9mm pistols except for a Keltec 32. I prefer 9mm and 45s over the 40, however. And, I do not have any plans to own a 40.

I have the .40 in a Sigma. It does real good for me. I had to shoot it a lot to get use to the gun and caliber but that all fell into place after awhile. I like it well enough to use it for one of my home defence guns.

Everytime I had to qualify with my Beretta 96, I shot expert or better. I like the 40 it's a good round. :smt023

I enjoy my XD40.

I have noticed something relative to .40 vs. .45.

Two friends I shoot with every week have .45's and I have the .40.
They reload as do I and we are using the same powders. Sometimes Win 231 and sometimes Vihtavuori N320 or N340.

When we are finished for the day their guns, XD45 and a Glock, both have a significant coating of carbon around the muzzel end where as my XD40 or M&P9 is as clean as when I started.

Is this due to the different pressures during burn or something else?

My Sig is a .40, and I like the round a lot. Unless I'm broke and staring at a box of ammo I can't afford. I got mine instead of a 45 probably for a silly reason, but it wasn't at the time. I bought the gun for armored transport work and didn't think I'd be able to qualify with a 45 (that and I was told the 1911 wasn't allowed for carry on that job... there's a gun I'll never see again :smt011 ). But I like the recoil on it when shooting, I like the accuracy, etc. I'm not married to the round at all, though.

I love the .40 S&W


I have the SW99 in .40 and it's the gun I'm most accuracte with. *shrugs*

I will buy another gun in .40 in the future, but right now I'm buying 9mm's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shipwreck

U should have put a poll up with your post :p

---

No. We do not need another senseless poll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TOF

Is this due to the different pressures during burn or something else?

---

It might be because you're using different ammunition, perhaps?

I like the 40 S&W. I like the power available, the larger diameter (compared to a 9mm) and the many choices available in factory loads. As a result, I shoot a lot of 40 S&W. However, I would not feel uncomfortable with either the 9mm or 45 acp in my holster.

Out West

I like it. First gun I owned was in .40 and I plan on getting a sigma in .40. I don't own a 9mm...two .45's a .357 sig and a .40. I don't find it nor the .357 Sig unpleasant to shoot at all, maybe becasue I learned on them??

I shoot mostly 9 mm's but I do own a .40 in the Glock 35, which I bought for IPSC competition where the .40 makes major caliber (more points for off center hits on target). I notice the recoil is sharper but only a little so. I shoot 9's mainly because the ammo is a little cheaper while the round can still be used in IPSC or IDPA competition. As you undoubtedly know since you reload, the .40 is a high pressure cartridge and is harder on guns than the 9 mm. As far as being a self defense round, more leo agencies use the .40 than any other cartridge because it is an excellent compromise between the mag capacity of the 9 and the stopping power of the .45. There should be no appreciable difference in accuracy unless the greater recoil causes the shooter to anticipate or multiple shots are being fired quickly and the stronger recoil interferes with sight alignment.

The 40 cal has a aweome 1 shot stop ratio, it is a terriffic defense round. I have 9mm, 38's, 357's, 44 mag's and a few others and it is the 40 in a Glock model 23 that I chose to carry. My next gun may be the new Cougar in 40 cal.

I'm not a fan of it at all.

To the person noticing carbon on the front end of guns, its a .45. When i'd leave the range my stainless finish was black. A .45 holds a lot of powder in such a small shell. I have pics of other .45s same thing black tip, but i don't know how to post them. I've personally never seen a clean .45 leave a gun range after 100 rounds.
As for the debate I'd prefer .40cal over a .45 and a 9mm, for combat. .45 doesn't have the penetration and 9mm doesn't have the stopping power. I wouldn't say the .40cal was the best but it was my first choice when it came to self defense. For target shooting I like 9mm and 45s. Nothing makes you feel more alive then dumping a .45. I don't seem to shoot consistently with my .40cal but haven't had much opportunity's to shoot it. I've only shot about a few hundred rounds through my Glock23 personally. Me and my friends have pumped about 1000rnds through it combined.

Forty S&W is a good round, but for the price I'd prefer .45 ACP. I don't think there is enough of a stopping power advantage to .40 over 9MM to justify the higher cost of ammo. It feels more snappy in some guns than others. I don't mind the kick on .40 in my Beretta PX4, but the Glock 35 really snaps. I'll give a plus to .40 for having a little more stopping power than 9MM and having more guns available with higher mag capacity than .45.

I have a Glock 26-9mm, Glock 22 -.40, GP100-.357, and a Kimber CDP II-.45. I try to alternate firing each of them to stay accurate, but I find that I fire the .40 the least.

I think for the money, the .45 & .9mm rounds are a better value (more bang for the buck). Plus for some reason I just don't seem to enjoy the .40 as much as my other guns.

I like them all.

I don't mind it. I would rather take a .45 or 9mm though

I like the round. I have the P99 in 9mm and 40 and to tell you the truth, the only difference is cost of ammo and mag capacity. The recoil, to me, feels the same and I can get the same accuracy out of both calibers. So I am happy with it.

I'm a fan of the .40 myself. As was said, the .40 has an excellent one shot stop percentage (slightly better than the 9mm and .45). I've found its accuracy to be very good; out of my P99 anyway. I like the .45 and the 9mm as well, but the .40 S&W does have its merits.

See this website for some good info http://www.internetarmory.com/handgunammo.htm .

.40S&W calibers are the only thing I shoot...for now.

So I love them.

I don't care for it in small guns due to the snappy harsh recoil. It's OK in larger guns, but I still like the mild recoil of the 9mm Luger or the "push" of the .45 Auto better.

There is going to be a GLOCK 27 for sale soon.

I carry a Glock 23 so am bias. I scanned the latest Solider of Fortune magazine yesterday and saw that the military is considering the .40. That could change the supply and demand thing.

I do not have much experience with the .40 S&W.

I have only fired about 25 rounds from a well used Sig...and I think it was a Polymer Sig. Does Sig make a polymer?

I much preferred the 45 ACP Para-Ord 1911 and the Glock 9mm over the Sig 40 S&W.

It could be the weight of the 1911 absorbed much of the recoil from the 45ACP...I dunno...but as of now, I am not a fan. I will likley still get a 9mm as a first gun, and a 45ACP as my next (or third) gun. I probably will not bother with the 40 S&W.

i love shooting mine but the ammo is so expen$$ive.