Why does everyone hate the .40s&w?

[ZA_Survivalist]

I disliked the round because I had thought it to be a "compromise round".. (Yes said by a few folks)
Because I was invested in 9mm and .45 WAY more and I looked at the .40 as an equivalent to the .380.. Kind of a useless round..
However after shooting it more and more often.. I can see the category I would carry it for.

Not to mention I have a boat load of .40 left over from when I had sold my .40's... So now I need a tool chambered for it.

.45 is great and all but they really try and up the price on it compared to the .40.. So from a fiscal standpoint (and availability) Im able to purchase it nearly where ever and when ever I should want.. And its only a few bucks more than a box of 9.

 

[billt]

Even today, I can go to some local stores and almost guarantee I'll be able to find .40S&W even if they're sold out of 9 and 45.

So, with that in mind, I have to wonder if 40 isn't perhaps a better choice to have on hand in the event of another 'ammo' crisis?

Choosing a pistol round because it's available and no one else wants it, is hardly a good reason.

 

[Trailboss]

I don't think we hate it so much as not respect it.

 

[orygun]

I'm a 45 guy. I believe I've stated that earlier in the thread. But, I can hide a 40 almost as well as a 9, which isn't much harder than a 380. So, my version of compromise? As much power as I can easily conceal.
I agree with Traiboss. I believe most people see it as a compromise caliber. But I feel it's better than the ones that are smaller.

 

[2Wheels4Ever]

I like .40 over 9mm. Ask yourself this; if you had to choose which one you would rather be shot with, which would it be? Most everyone's realistic answer would be the 9mm. I know that with today's 9mm and .40, if one were to be hit in a vital area the difference between the two would be minimal, but the perp is more likely to suffer life threatening wounds with a .40 shot over a 9mm.

With that being said the argument that .40 is way more expensive than 9mm is somewhat hollow. 9mm prices have skyrocketed and .40 has stayed the same. Another reason I prefer .40, at least in glocks, is the ability to easily convert rounds by a simple switch of a barrel. A .40 cal glock can shoot .40, 9mm, .357s, and .22 with relative ease. This cannot be said about the 9mm versions.

The versatility of .40sw handguns is undeniably superior to their 9mm counterparts.

 

[etrain16]

Choosing a pistol round because it's available and no one else wants it, is hardly a good reason.

Maybe I should clarify, I didn't mean 'better choice' as in owning it instead of other calibers, but rather that it may be a good choice to have on hand in addition to your other preferred caliber(s). Honestly though, I don't see how selecting a caliber that is effective, but also available when you need it, would be a poor choice. As to the comment on "no one else wants it" - if you go back and read the whole thread, I think you'd find plenty of folks that disagree with you.

 

[Brofessor Emeritus]

I think there is a lot of expectation bias with the .40 in any handgun. People hear about the "snap" and swear they feel it when shooting. Yet there are others who say they shoot it better than 9mm. The way I see it is, all handguns are underpowered and will require multiple shots to take down a bad guy (yes, even with a .45). That being said, bullets in the gun = time in the fight. I love the stopping power and kinetic energy of the .40 but find myself leaning towards 9mm just for capacity.

 

[billt]

I don't care for this guy personally. With that said, I do respect his opinion. He's got a lot of years and experience.

 

[bzltyr]

I don't care for this guy personally. With that said, I do . Flawlspect his opinion. He's got a lot of years and experience.

I think at one time this guy said glocks suck. He did a torture (rounds I forgot) maybe a 1000 straight flawless shooting. Only issue during test was a melted guide rod that bounced out. Handgun kept going. Yes 40's are snappier but controllable. New springs help.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I like .40 over 9mm. Ask yourself this; if you had to choose which one you would rather be shot with, which would it be? Most everyone's realistic answer would be the 9mm..

April fools was a couple days ago. you make me laugh

 

[40calruler]

I'm a huge fan of the round as I've got a couple glocks and USPs chambered for it, but I'm constantly noticing people looking for trades, saying "pistols" and then when I ask exactly what they're looking for it's "Well... something in 9mm or .45, but NO .40s".

I've also noticed that most of the gunshops down here are full of .40s and pretty scarce on all others except high end .45s.

My question is... Why the dislike of the .40? Personally, I wouldn't carry anything else. Ammo is readily available at a fair price, velocity and specs are good on the ammo I carry(HydraShock) and recoil is easily handled. I just want to know if there's something others see that I just haven't noticed yet.

Please enlighten me!

-Adam

I cannot say why the haters but I do know I am with you...My name may tell you that. I find it to be a perfect round for control and stopping power between 9 and 45. I like shooting a 9 but right now I can get all the 40 I want and no 9 at good prices.

 

[2506]

Maybe I should clarify, I didn't mean 'better choice' as in owning it instead of other calibers, but rather that it may be a good choice to have on hand in addition to your other preferred caliber(s). Honestly though, I don't see how selecting a caliber that is effective, but also available when you need it, would be a poor choice. As to the comment on "no one else wants it" - if you go back and read the whole thread, I think you'd find plenty of folks that disagree with you.

Same reason I'm in the market for a 17HMR for plinking. I see plenty of 17 ammo available. Meanwhile, my 22 hasn't been out of the safe in 8 months...

 

[etrain16]

Same reason I'm in the market for a 17HMR for plinking. I see plenty of 17 ammo available. Meanwhile, my 22 hasn't been out of the safe in 8 months...

Good for you that you can find 17HMR - I haven't seen much of that around here either. I've been fortunate to find enough .22lr online to at least keep plinking for now.

 

[1stklass]

I like the .40. but i love the .45. It doesnt snap quite like the .40 does, i guess 14 rounds of .45 kinda weighs down the recoil a bit. I never had any any any problem with feeling like the .40 is underpowered. I shot my Sig 2340 next to a glock 9mm. we both were shooting copper jacketed ammo. Not sure of the bullet weights but it was both PMC cheap plinking ammo. The .40 was penetrating a 6 inch thick oak board and then penetrating the hill behind the board anywhere from 12 to 18 additional inches. The 9mm had a few bullet tips penetrate the backside of the board but none of the bullets actually made it completely through. Myself personally i dont want to be shot by any of them, i dont have the same attitude as some of the guys on here that they are immune to anything smaller than a .45

 

[Certaindeaf]

Talk about penetration.. the 9 sure gets some special attention now and again. there's little that it won't do for an old mule

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ZyKMz3tYx-M

 

[orygun]

A handful of years ago most handgun ammo was scarce. (I think it was after Obama got elected the first time). One thing I noticed then was that Sportsman's had a stack, I don't mean a few, I mean cases, of 40 S&W ammo. That's when I first thought a 40 might be something to think about. I don't think it was because people didn't like it, I think it was because the factories were already cranking a ton of it out because it's probably the most popular police caliber.

By the way, if I have to shoot and have a choice, I want my 41 Mag. It just don't pack and hide easy. I think Dirty Harry was on to something.

 

[YOURSUPREMECOMMANDER]

I like .40 over 9mm. Ask yourself this; if you had to choose which one you would rather be shot with, which would it be? Most everyone's realistic answer would be the 9mm. I know that with today's 9mm and .40, if one were to be hit in a vital area the difference between the two would be minimal, but the perp is more likely to suffer life threatening wounds with a .40 shot over a 9mm.

With that being said the argument that .40 is way more expensive than 9mm is somewhat hollow. 9mm prices have skyrocketed and .40 has stayed the same. Another reason I prefer .40, at least in glocks, is the ability to easily convert rounds by a simple switch of a barrel. A .40 cal glock can shoot .40, 9mm, .357s, and .22 with relative ease. This cannot be said about the 9mm versions.

The versatility of .40sw handguns is undeniably superior to their 9mm counterparts.

I too like the 40. However I have chosen the best of both worlds. I have an M9 (Beretta FS96) that is a 40 but I have a conversion kit (Barrel and slide). When I'm in the woods I pack it as a 40 because of the much higher horsepower. When I'm in the city I pack it as a 9 because I have 20 rounds per mag instead of 12. And I agree that shot placement is of utmost importance. But when the lead is flying all over the place, the person with the most ammo usually wins.

 

[YOURSUPREMECOMMANDER]

A handful of years ago most handgun ammo was scarce. (I think it was after Obama got elected the first time). One thing I noticed then was that Sportsman's had a stack, I don't mean a few, I mean cases, of 40 S&W ammo. That's when I first thought a 40 might be something to think about. I don't think it was because people didn't like it, I think it was because the factories were already cranking a ton of it out because it's probably the most popular police caliber.

By the way, if I have to shoot and have a choice, I want my 41 Mag. It just don't pack and hide easy. I think Dirty Harry was on to something.

I used to pack a 44 mag. But one day in the woods, when a large black bear was coming at me, I started to worry that six rounds just wasn't enough ammo! *smile*

 

[YOURSUPREMECOMMANDER]

I disliked the round because I had thought it to be a "compromise round".. (Yes said by a few folks)
Because I was invested in 9mm and .45 WAY more and I looked at the .40 as an equivalent to the .380.. Kind of a useless round..
However after shooting it more and more often.. I can see the category I would carry it for.

Not to mention I have a boat load of .40 left over from when I had sold my .40's... So now I need a tool chambered for it.

.45 is great and all but they really try and up the price on it compared to the .40.. So from a fiscal standpoint (and availability) Im able to purchase it nearly where ever and when ever I should want.. And its only a few bucks more than a box of 9.

It is my understanding that the 40 S&W (short & whimpy) is a result of the 10mm that was developed for the FBI, but the women agents had trouble with the recoil so they just shortened the case. I'm not positive but I thought I read the the 40 has slightly better terminal ballistics than a 45?

 

[orygun]

It is my understanding that the 40 S&W (short & whimpy) is a result of the 10mm that was developed for the FBI, but the women agents had trouble with the recoil so they just shortened the case. I'm not positive but I thought I read the the 40 has slightly better terminal ballistics than a 45?

I doubt is was only the women that had trouble with it. Some of them boys are fairly limpwristed.
First they backed the 10mm down in power (the 1omm light) then S&W came up with the 40.
It's possible the 40 has better percentage of expansion and creates a larger temporary wound cavity than the 45 due to it's higher velocity, but the 45 won't shrink.