HAS THE .40 S&W FOUND REDEMPTION?

[U8395279]

This is not a thread about 9 vs 40, @mjbskwim . No, it's about whether the Great Flee From Foh-tee had possibly subsided or even reversed.

I don't understand all the dead horse beating claims in the thread. We're just talking about the perception, not the fact.

I think that part of this discussion is actually explaining that there never was any good reason to flee the .40 S&W in the first place. So what if the FBI dropped it and switched to 9mm? Was that really ever a good reason for folks to have jumped ship? Besides, what does the FBI know?

I'm still much more impressed that Playboy Penguin has endorsed using it in his Chiappa Rhino. He knows far more about handguns than the FBI does.

 

[ThemGunsThough]

Like others have mentioned, I like the .40sw for the sake of availability. Not only am I able to find the ammo more readily available but also a firearm. A few years ago I got a killer deal on an italian Baretta 96, looked just like a 92. The seller mentioned that he had a hard time selling it because most people overlooked the ad and thought it was a 9mm. More recently, I lucked out at a gun shop picking up a Kel Tec Sub2000 and got it for below msrp on sale. The 9mm version was $200+ more.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Well I could go back to you tube and find the doctor from harborview that said most pistol calibers leave about the exact same wound chanel,but I'll let all yalls that GAS do it yourself.
Caliber is second to placement. If you have a large caliber handgun and can hit shyt,then it ain't no good for you. If you can hit more with a smaller caliber then that's the gun for you.
I'm sure 40 in certain guns are perfect for certain people. Doesn't make it ant better or worse than any other caliber
Can I put this up again?

Knock yourself out.

 

[oremike]

I wanted something small and flat to carry while riding my motorcycle in the woods. My limited experiences with sub-compact 1911's have shown me that they can have issues. As a long time 45 auto shooter I'm not convinced a 9mm is enough. Hence the .40 as my carry piece.

 

[Trunkmonkey]

I'm happy the FBI ditched it as I've picked up 1000 hst boarder patrol contract overrun and 500 Winchester pdx1 FBI overrun, much cheaper than it was. Sig p239 in 40 has well over 7k rounds through it and doesn't have a problem with the pressure of 40. I just picked up an Fns 40, so in time I'll see how a modern polymer gun does

 

[Certaindeaf]

Perhaps in a steel frame that was designed for 9mm and then up-calibered to 40. That argument is so 1990. Ever hear of a Glock 22 splitting? They have the exact same frame as a G17. I haven't heard any stories of polymer frames having any problems.

They had to "up-build" the Browning Hi-Power to accommodate the .40, fail that that is.
The tableau is brimming with scabbed .40's and then folk winge about using full-power loads in a duty-size 9mm.

 

[No_Regerts]

I think that part of this discussion is actually explaining that there never was any good reason to flee the .40 S&W in the first place. So what if the FBI dropped it and switched to 9mm? Was that really ever a good reason for folks to have jumped ship? Besides, what does the FBI know?

I'm still much more impressed that Playboy Penguin has endorsed using it in his Chiappa Rhino. He knows far more about handguns than the FBI does.

Cherry picked statistics, conjecture of bullet performance without any real world knowledge, a bunch of false bravado and rhetoric, and voila! 9mm it is!

The real reason? Fewer failures to qualify and cheaper supply. There has been a shift from basic marksmanship training to move and shoot training. Thats fine and all, but most LE dont have the basic marksmanship foundation or firearm familiarity needed to operate with a gun vs putting holes in paper while standing still.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I for one have no real gripes with the .40! Until I made the switch to 10 mm, I didn't really give the .40 much of a look, having all ready been running 9 mm in the service and .45 for my own edc. After the 10 mm switch folks were claiming you could run the .40 in your 10 mm with out any mods to the firearm, so after looking into it, I started running .40 as a practice round and for when 10 mm got to be hard/ very expensive to get! Now days I shoot the factory load .40's a lot! I use them for training and class work, as well as certain CC work where the big 10 would be too much! So, for me, the .40 has earned a place in my collection, but I do not have any thing in .40!

 

[Sgt Nambu]

I started with the 9mm back in the Super-Vel and whatnot days. Browning Hi-Power for platform. There were pretty viable rounds back then. There are way more now. Have always cast and loaded medium to heavy semi-wadcutters for it too.
Underwood makes a nice +P+ 115 that goes 1550 out of a 4" and that pretty much rivals the classic .357 magnum stopper in my book. If you handload, a grain a powder costs like 1/7000 of $20 or whatever if you want to +P(+) your own.
I've never had a need for anything else.

Thanks for the info, deaf!

 

[3MTA3]

On the bargain front - Buds has Detroit PD M&P40 trade ins at $320 issued and $400 non-issued w/ free shipping to your FFL.

 

[Sgt Nambu]

This is not a thread about 9 vs 40, @mjbskwim . No, it's about whether the Great Flee From Foh-tee had possibly subsided or even reversed.

I don't understand all the dead horse beating claims in the thread. We're just talking about the perception, not the fact.

Wow, Chris got it!

'Scuse me! I'm gonna need a moment!

 

[etrain16]

On the bargain front - Buds has Detroit PD M&P40 trade ins at $320 issued and $400 non-issued w/ free shipping to your FFL.

I've got a Bud's police trade M&P40 marked CA State Parks with bear engraved on the slide. Nearly new condition under $350 about a year or so ago. Great gun. Got a 9mm conversion barrel (Storm Lake) and run both .40 and 9mm through it very well.

This is what the logo looks like - I'm not a CA fan, but I do like this:

 

[mjbskwim]

The little ammo company here in town said they are selling tons of 40 . And 45
So 40 being popular is bad for 10mm.

 

[3putts]

Love my CZ 75 P-06. Less recoil than my G-19. Very enjoyable to shoot.

 

[Lantraxco]

I've got .380, 9mm, .40.... gonna pick up a couple more, another 9 mil and a .45 I think, possibly a .22 LR handgun. Standardization I understand, but when the zombie apocalypse, or the Obama apocalypse comes I want to be able to shoot a wide variety of whatever caliber I can glean from the casualties.

 

[The Nothing]

.40 is all I've ever had. SFAIC every "advancedment" on 9mm can/will be done to any other caliber. If I could afford .45 or 10mm, I would, but, alas, I cannot. So .40 was the best on my wallet and in the chamber for me.
every time I see 1000rds/$200, though, I question my decision...

 

[Squidly]

I bought a several .40 S&W pistols when they were cheap and available (used) last year. I have quite an assortment of pistols, but I settled on a Kahr CM-40 for my edc. It's purdy snappy, but not like a hand grenade going off in may hand, like some have described. Fits in my office boy pants pocket very nicely at work.

For a truck gun, I have a Kel-Tek Sub 2000 in .40. They make a nice set, since I can't hit crap with my Kahr beyond the length of a pool table (sarc), but it's hard to miss with the Sub 2000, out to about 50 yds. So yeah, I like the .40 S&W. it works for me.

 

[teflon6string]

Great round, and not terribly expensive in SJHP (Remington) at Walmart.

Honestly, though? I just didn't feel like I was using it in the right weapon, and I'm still not exactly sure what that might be. So I'd be interested to learn what's a popular "platform" for the .40, and why.

 

[RMc]

One positive aspect of the .40S&W cartridge has been completely overlooked in this discussion: All FMJ .40S&W rounds have a large flat meplat. This translates into straight line penetration and greater wound channel size should circumstance require pressing "practice ammo" into serious use.

 

[L84Cabo]

The .40 is not for me. It doesn't represent a significant enough improvement over 9mm for me to justify the extra recoil and reduced round count. Particularly with the improvements we've seen in 9mm in recent years.

There's also a financial component to it for me. When I first started buying handguns I made a decision to try and minimize the number of calibers I was going to invest in. Not including .22, I've managed to keep my handgun calibers to 9mm and 45acp. And I can hardly afford all of those guns I want, let alone trying to feed them. I usually advise new shooters to give that some thought as well. And I'm not saying you have to choose the same two calibers that I did. But between 9mm, .40, and .45 I think there's some room for consolidation. YMMV