6 Dead, Dying, and Soon-To-Be-Obsolete Handgun Cartridges

[Benchrest]

If people realized the 44 was actually a 42 maybe it would have been different.

Bit closer to a 43

 

[JRuby]

.429 to be exact

 

[Longwalkhome]

I don't particularly buy into that. It's in larger part the other way around, IMHO.

I don't believe many people make EDC choices based solely on the cost of the ammo to run them. Moreso on the firearm and caliber characteristics. It does remain a considering factor, in small part (cost and availablility), but mainly just on how often you train with them.

It's only when the market abandons the chambering that you'll see a caliber meet it's demise.

It's good to have a difference in opinion I guess my best example is the 357 magnum, there are a lot of firearms made for 357s. Cost per round starts at a low of 70 cents and goes way up from there. 9mm starts at about 26 cents and goes up from there. Both rounds are near the same bullet size, primer size and near the same powder. Yet the magnum cost near triple.

 

[nwslopoke]

I EDC every pistol I have at some point including my favorite 40, a Sig P229. Though, it is a chunky boy for all day carry. It's been a while because I never found a really good all day system for concealment.

I prefer single stacked 9mms because sub compact 40s and even 45s I've tried just don't suit me. But in terms of ballistics or real world applications, the 40 is my preferred round.

When I stocked up, 40 was $12-13 a box and about the same as 9mm on sale for defense stuff. 2016~2018 was good for ammo.

 

[The Heretic]

It's good to have a difference in opinion I guess my best example is the 357 magnum, there are a lot of firearms made for 357s. Cost per round starts at a low of 70 cents and goes way up from there. 9mm starts at about 26 cents and goes up from there. Both rounds are near the same bullet size, primer size and near the same powder. Yet the magnum cost near triple.

economy of scale

most 26 CPR 9x19 ammo is FMJ - the defensive 9mm ammo starts at about 50 CPR and goes up from there - the most common projectile is 115 gr

most .357 ammo is JHP (some JSP) defensive/hunting ammo. a LOT more 9mm ammo is sold than .357 mag ammo.

 

[40Garand]

Glad this thread came back, I've noticed 40S&W is much less common now and 10mm has taken its place! I see 10mm everywhere. It's one of the reasons I picked up a 10mm.

Very surprised 40S&W has tapered off, at least from what I've seen.

Limp wristed pansies, keyboard ballistics professors, and few folks with media credentials indoctrinated us. That's the reason for the demise of the 40. The bright side, over the past 6 + years while agencies and fanboys started dumping their guns is the chance it has afforded me to pick up Glock 23's, Sig 229's and ammo for cheap. People tried to raise their prices during the pandemic panic but I stood my ground when it came to haggling. I'll take a 40 over a 9 any day.

 

[Longwalkhome]

economy of scale

most 26 CPR 9x19 ammo is FMJ - the defensive 9mm ammo starts at about 50 CPR and goes up from there - the most common projectile is 115 gr

most .357 ammo is JHP (some JSP) defensive/hunting ammo. a LOT more 9mm ammo is sold than .357 mag ammo.

Very true. Yet there are a huge number of 357 magnum guns and 9mm guns. However the 357 can shoot 38 specials which can be cheaper with some bullets.

 

[Capn Jack]

Disagree on the .40S&W but the rest sounds about right. Whats interesting is the 45GAP might be the shortest lived of them all. What other calibers do you think are dying out?

1: .32 ACP
2: .25 auto
3: .41 magnum
4: .32 H&R magnum
5: .40 S&W
6: .45GAP

6 Dead, Dying, and Soon-To-Be-Obsolete Handgun Cartridges

Some of these cartridges began as a good idea—some were doomed from birth. But all of these old handgun cartridges are waning in popularity.

www.fieldandstream.com

View attachment 894385

Say it isn't so....

 

[DeanMk]

10mm is the shiny new kid on the block and makes sense that demand is going to remain higher for awhile. I dunno about it outright taking the place of .40 though. It's in a different class that doesn't significantly overlap enough to shut out the .40.

Actually, the .40 S&W started off as a lower powered, "training round" varient of the 10mm.
The Bren 10 pre-dates the 4006.
However, you make a good point, which leads me to ask... what the heck is so bad about the .40?
A lot of people seem to degrade the round but no real reason is ever given.
I've shot .40 S&W. It doesn't kick much different than a 9x19, but empirical data shows the bullet hits almost as hard as .45 acp, a well known man stopper.
It seems it exhibits the better qualities of certain points, so why all the bashing?

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

10mm is the shiny new kid on the block and makes sense that demand is going to remain higher for awhile. I dunno about it outright taking the place of .40 though. It's in a different class that doesn't significantly overlap enough to shut out the .40.

I mean... I like my 10mm just fine and all. It has it's purpose, but my EDC's largely remain .40's and not a single 10mm. Backcountry sidearm...yeah. I can see that.

I'd hope not! I just picked up 2 new .40's and plan on getting a 40-1911 as well as a dedicated 10mm 1911.

But I've got enough 40's now to where I've noticed a significant dip in common shelf availability which is odd. You are spot on about the 10mm being the new fan favorite.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Limp wristed pansies, keyboard ballistics professors, and few folks with media credentials indoctrinated us. That's the reason for the demise of the 40. The bright side, over the past 6 + years while agencies and fanboys started dumping their guns is the chance it has afforded me to pick up Glock 23's, Sig 229's and ammo for cheap. People tried to raise their prices during the pandemic panic but I stood my ground when it came to haggling. I'll take a 40 over a 9 any day.

I've came around to the 40 quite a bit. What sold me was my 4006 pistol.. my god does that thing shoot well. Better than my 1911 or 92fs.

 

[Yarome]

Actually, the .40 S&W started off as a lower powered, "training round" varient of the 10mm.
The Bren 10 pre-dates the 4006.

I didn't mean to suggest the .40 pre-dates the 10mm... I meant that 10mm chambered firearms only just recently saw a proliferation and wide spread attention. Of course.... to me... "recent" is maybe relative. At my age, a decade is really just a drop in the bucket to a young man's "my entire adult life".

 

[ma96782]

LOL....
IMHO.....
Speaking of the .25 auto and/or the .32 ACP (or 7.65 Browning Short) well, there are a lot of old guns out there. And although they may be "less popular" today.....well for some, using what you got, is still a fact of life. YUP......and then, some might swear by them, or swear at them. It is, what it is.

That being said......


Your decesions have (are supposed to have) consequences.

Aloha, Mark

 

[CLT65]

I tried to like the 10mm. I really wanted one for the longest time. I finally bought a Glock a few years ago. It was a good gun, accurate and reliable, but it just didn't feel right in my hand. I don't have small hands, but I've been shooting regular sized handguns for so long, that the big-frame Glocks just don't fit. I would still have it, but my brother-in-law wanted it so I passed it along to him.

The disappointing thing that I found with the 10mm was ballistics. A lot of modern ammo is downloaded to barely more than a .40S&W. What's the point of such a bulky gun if it's downloaded? Modern load data is downloaded too, from what the round originally was. I'm still mildly intrigued by the round, so I can't say I won't buy another one if I found one I really liked, but for now I think I have all the guns I'll ever need, maybe all I'll ever want, (though that might be a stretch).

As to people shooting less .44 Magnum and .45 Colt because it's so expensive per round, that's clearly true, but I think it's also true that it's more expensive because so much less is shot (and made). Since I cast and load my own, I can shoot both of those cartridges for nearly as cheap as 9mm. Even though they're cheap to load, I don't shoot nearly as many because frankly, a little goes a long ways with the big ones. I know a lot of tough guys can go through hundreds of rounds in magnum handguns, but I can't, at least not anymore. A couple boxes of 9mm is easy, but a half a box of .44 mag and my hands get tired.

The same is true with .357 Magnum. My .357 revolvers see a lot more .38 Special ammo than .357. In a big N-frame like the Model 28, full power .357 Mag is fairly tame and doesn't hurt my hands. It's loud with a big flash, and fun for a few rounds, but if I'm shooting a bunch, I use the light .38 Special. I expect that the average person just wouldn't shoot a lot of magnum rounds, even if they were cheaper.

 

[The Heretic]

However, you make a good point, which leads me to ask... what the heck is so bad about the .40?
A lot of people seem to degrade the round but no real reason is ever given.
I've shot .40 S&W. It doesn't kick much different than a 9x19, but empirical data shows the bullet hits almost as hard as .45 acp, a well known man stopper.

All true. I've stated that a number of times. I am not sure where the reputation for the .40 being much harsher recoil comes from, but I've read the assertion a number of times. I have 9x19, .40 & .45 ACP and shot them in similar guns (SIG 226 & 227) - my subjective opinion is that .40 recoils slightly more than 9x19, but .45 ACP noticeably more. I can shoot .40 almost as fast as 9mm, but with .45 ACP I have to slow down to stay on target when shooting rapidly.

It seems it exhibits the better qualities of certain points, so why all the bashing?

Hard to say - when it comes to why people have certain opinions I am not sure they know themselves for sure. I've often read the recoil of the .40 vs 9mm is the issue for LEOs/PDs, but I don't really understand how that can be true.

All of my 226s have both 9mm & .40 uppers, and as for the cartridge itself I prefer .40 since I think the ballistics speak for themselves when compared to the 9x19 cartridge. That said, both the flush fit and extended 9mm mags in the 226, have 5 more rounds of capacity than the same sized .40/.357 mags. Given that the 9x19 projectiles penetrate as deeply in gel as the .40 projectiles, there is something to be said for having five more rounds of ammo.

I do think when barriers or heavy fleshed/boned animals are an issue, the 180gr .40 bonded ammo will be more effective, or may be more effective in certain situations, than the popular 115-124gr 9mm ammo.

It is a trade off IMO - which is why I have both .40 and 9mm capability in the same guns. I have more .40 ammo because the various orgs/people switched back to 9mm, so I was able to pickup some .40 ammo for good prices, while 9mm has had such demand that prices for good defensive ammo have been significantly higher. If SHTF I would shoot up the .40 ammo first then switch to 9mm - unless I need to be able to swap mags/etc. with people shooting 9mm (unlikely that everybody in a private neighborhood would have the same guns - most will have Glocks, while I have SIGs).

 

[Yarome]

I've often read the recoil of the .40 vs 9mm is the issue for LEOs/PDs, but I don't really understand how that can be true.

Well... LEO's a good chunk entering the academy are first time shooters that need to be as proficient as possible in only weeks. I'm sure they get their share of limp wristing and females where it's easier to go with a lighter caliber than it is to try and train them up.

Then you have you're old timers and desk jockeys that still have to qualify with their firearms annually.

The impression I got was them wanting to have a more "one size fits all" caliber across the broadest type of LEO's... vs... having people requiring additonal training, more range time to remain proficient or maybe not being able to pass their qual's with "too much gun"(??)

 

[echo1]

I like the .41 mag and recently acquired a Henry (NIB) to go with my Blackhawk, so if they're still making firearms in that caliber, mist be some life left in them.
I also have two .357 revolvers and two .357 Rossi 92s, a carbine and a rifle. Those too are rumored to be headed for extinction. PAX

 

[homeuser6]

richard mann will be obsolete long before the .41 mag

 

[oremike]

So from my perspective, there are not dead cartridges, just guns in drawers you can't buy ammo for at Calbelas. I go to gun shows selling my ammo so converse with people looking to buy ammo. When enough people ask me about a cartridge loading I look to see what it takes to make it and generally do. That's why I make something like 31 calibers. Some times I get asked to make something a little different like a 45-70 load that is safe to shoot in an original Trapdoor Springfield or something like the original 10mm load from before it was de-tuned and became 40 and a half. 41 Mag is another that when I make it, it all sells.

 

[Longwalkhome]

I should go into cartridge history and the gun culture but heck you old gunners don't need refreshing.