JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
627
Reactions
485
I know the 9mm is probably thy most popular caliber out there and the advancements in the ammo is fabulous. But just curious how many still prefer the S&W .40 over the 9mm and why. Thank you in advance.
 
I still prefer .40. As a hunter and reloader, I use oddball cartridges and find most of the vanilla stuff boring. Also as a hunter, I don't hunt dangerous animals with something "adequate with propper shot placement". I like a little more margin of error and bigger bullets going just as fast as smaller bullets are never not better. Recoil is negligibly greater and capacity is a round or two less, yet double what a 1911 provides.
 
:s0093:


for me, its really a wash but it depends what im doin. the capacity capabilities of a 9mm is nice. 40 makes a bigger hole though. i get the whole "bullet technology" argument for 9mm but 40 ammo has the same bullets available so....:rolleyes:. TBH, i like 40 more because it flips my buddies dualling tree better than 9mm and doesnt flip it and flip it back like my 45 does LOL. with my glock 23, i can shoot 9mm,40 and 357sig with just a barrel (and 9mm mag) change if i wanted.


:s0093:
 
While I shot matches with .40 for decades, never really cared for it. Finally quit reloading that caliber. Now I 've been saving 10mm for later, and begin to enjoy it.
 
:s0093:


for me, its really a wash but it depends what im doin. the capacity capabilities of a 9mm is nice. 40 makes a bigger hole though. i get the whole "bullet technology" argument for 9mm but 40 ammo has the same bullets available so....:rolleyes:. TBH, i like 40 more because it flips my buddies dualling tree better than 9mm and doesnt flip it and flip it back like my 45 does LOL. with my glock 23, i can shoot 9mm,40 and 357sig with just a barrel (and 9mm mag) change if i wanted.


:s0093:
I had a Gen 4 22 but traded it for my current M&P FS 9mm. The Glock just really seemed blocky in my hand. But I do like the .40
 
When I was looking for a drop in the pocket semi-auto for when I ride dual sport motorcycles in the way back country the scenario I played through my head was I've fallen and can't get up. No cell service so my buddy's got to go get help and that might be a while. I figured I might look like a target of opportunity for either Cougars or Crack-heads. What I wanted was enough impact to break a charge and just wasn't convinced that 9mm would do that 100% of the time. My first choice was the 45 acp but with some research I found the 40 S&W would get to 1200 fps with a 155gr Speer Gold Dot. That's what I carry.
 
Woah. A .40 vs 9MM thread. This feels like 2009 again!

.40 is great. 45 ACP Great, 357sig great. I just don't own those calibers anymore.

I own guns that come in handgun caliber. I own several. I don't shoot as much as some. 5000 to 6000 a year. It's cheaper to shoot and you can carry more ammo.

As for ballistics. I'm not an expert. Either are any of our FUDD friends. I feel well armed with a 9mm. Unless there is a bear.

The only handgun I own that isn't 9MM is my 10mm. Because of bears. Duh!!! o_O
 
So here's my take: I shoot mostly 9mm and am perfectly comfortable defending myself with one. However; if I had to pick which round I'd rather be sending downrange, I want a heavy hitter. When shoot steel, the 9mm makes an audible contact but the 40 moves my target with a lot more authority. Screw gel tests, it's obvious to me the 40 hits harder. Then I look at kinetic energy and find that velocity is worth the square of itself while mass is worth itself alone. So that brought me to the .357 Sig. Hits steel "right now" and with a good bit of energy. I don't worry about expansion because they're traveling fast enough I don't have to. Finally, I will note that if I were to get my carry gun in 9mm, I'd only gain one round and that's the final nail in my decision coffin. So for me, I chose 40 case and 9mm bullet. But again, if I had to choose, I'd rather defend myself with a 40 over a 9, but shoot 9 in volume for cost
 
The capacity issue only speaks to me of a lack of confidence in abilities. Practice. Inability to deal well with recoil? Life is uncomfortable, deal with it snowflake. Ballistic gel tests? Thank God we haven't been attacked by the ballistic gel zombies. Face it, people die rather easily. We stand upright exposing all of our squishy bits. A pointy stick or a round lead ball works well enough.

The authority of a 40 or 45 works for me. What works for you, works for you.
 
This is not the OP's question, exactly, but I prefer .40 guns, even though I don't always prefer to shoot that. All of my 9mm Glocks are actually converted from their 40 or 357 counterparts. My bedside gun is a G22 (in 9mm), and a couple carry guns are a G32 and G27, both converted to 9mm.

A .40 gun gives options where a 9mm gun only offers 9mm.

Now, my Sub2000 is in 40 because I have reloaded a 40 round to get a 155gr XTP to over 1500fps. That's a 800ft-pound screamer that could NEVER happen from a 9mm.
 
I didn't pick .40 specifically, it found me. I had a Kahr 9mm and really didn't like the ten mile long trigger pull. My son in law gave me a Shield 40 to try out. I suppose I would have liked the gun if it was 9mm, but I also like big bullet holes. I heard that the 40 is snappy in recoil, but I can't tell.
What I ended up with is the best shooting small(ish) gun I've ever shot.
Shield.jpg
 

Upcoming Events

Redmond Gun Show
Redmond, OR
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top