I think I am an endangered species. The 40 S&W guy. I hear all of the criticism about the cartridge, and none of it matters to me. I've carried it off and on since I was 22 and have a lot of confidence in it. Here is my take: Yes, its a bit more "snappy" than 9mm or 45, but I think this is way overstated. I find it very controllable and I have competed with it and done pretty well. I have used the G22 and G17 in competition and find that how I feel on a particular day or a host of other factors have a greater impact on my shooting than the difference in cartridges. Yes, service life is 2/3 of what you'd expect out of a 9mm or 45. Thats still 20 or 30k rounds. No big deal, thats still a really long time. I had a 257 Weatherby that showed a decent amount of throat erosion at 1200 shots. But, to me, the performance was worth it. Yes, 40 usually has a round or two less in the magazine than a 9mm. But, it will have three to five more rounds than an comparable 45. If you can, in good conscience, feel like you have enough firepower in a 45, a 40 should be plenty. Yes, 9mm now has the benefits of new wonder bullets. So does 40 at the same or greater velocity with a greater cross section and more bullet weight. I only paid $21 for a box of 50 Federal 165 HST today. $14 a box for Remington UMC FMJ. Not much more expensive than 9mm and cheaper than 45. Yessir, I like me some 40.