Why I carry the .40 S&W
It wasn’t too many years ago (approximately 30 to be exact), that law enforcement was looking for a handgun cartridge that could inherently put down a bad guy more reliably than the .38 Specials and 9mms they had been carrying for several years. The shootout in Miami where multiple FBI Agents were injured/killed by two determine adversaries prompted this reevaluation of the defensive handgun rounds officers were carrying in hopes that such a tragedy might be avoided in the future.
Without going through the oft-told story of how Col. Jeff Cooper and his band of merry men first developed the 10mm which was then juiced hot during development and later juiced down for comfort at the request of the FBI and their “Army of Armed Accountants,” suffice to say that we ended up with a 10mm derivative cartridge, the .40 S&W. The new cartridge hit the market with much fanfare and myths surrounding its many (nee magical) positive attributes galore.
Looking back upon those innocent times, we recognize that the handgun ammunition industry seemed to have but one primary way of imparting better performance into a defensive cartridge, which was to add power and energy to the rounds themselves. More internal pressure or larger calibers with more powder in the casing were just the ticket. Never mind that this increased power also came with a cost, namely greater recoil and/or reduced capacity compared with their 9mm competition.
Today, in much more enlightened times, everyone recognizes that the Neanderthal of the early 90s were but partially evolved in their understanding of what makes a handgun cartridge effective. Since then, higher minds have realized that by simply changing the projectiles themselves, you can attain the same penetration of more powerful rounds without the discomfort and reduced capacity suffered in years past. Thus, the 9mm Parabellum has, according to those in the know, finally reached its true potential as the manstopper it was always meant to be. An equal to the .40 and .45 any day of the week. One has but to look at a single gelatin block test showing proof that the 9mm penetrates gelatin blocks every bit as deep as the .40 S&W and .45 ACP to know that there is, in effect, no difference in performance between the three cartridges.
Or is there?
A famous life coach once said, “It’s the journey, not the destination.” Probably cost some money to hear him utter those words, but, today, like most things, wisdom comes cheap. Unfortunately, such wisdom is rarely heeded and much less often understood.
Recently, the FBI switched back to 9mm for their Agents, while the US Secret Service moved away from their beloved .357 SIG (basically a.40 necked down to 9mm) to begin shooting 9mm. Reasons for this move are reportedly threefold: Less felt recoil, greater capacity (.40S&W pistols typically carry two fewer rounds than their 9mm counterparts), and less damage to their firearms (.40S&W is a high pressure round, which is why you never see the increased pressure +P versions of this cartridge). So, as with all things, if it is good enough for the FBI and the Secret Service, it must be good enough for the rest of us!
.40 S&W has the reputation of having a significantly greater recoil impulse than 9mm. Most often, the .40 S&W is deemed to be a “snappy” round. No doubt this is the case, but none of the traditional service calibers have what any experienced shooter would call “unmanageable recoil.” For that label to be applied appropriately, one would need to visit the Kingdom of Revolvers where the thunder of giants such as the .454 Casull or the .500 Magnum shakes the Earth and can be both felt and heard by those brave enough to wield them. Comparatively, the .40 S&W and the other service calibers are anemic. However, the fact that the .40 S&W does impart a greater recoil impulse than the 9mm (and, some might say, harsher even than the venerable .45 ACP) should provide some reassurance, providing one believes (or, better yet, understands) Newton’s Third Law of Motion is still in effect. This Law, that “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction,” does not seem to have any attenuating theorems regarding bullet design. What the law does indicate, at least to me, is that the more sting I feel in my hands when shooting a handgun, the more sting the person being shot will feel when the bullet impacts their structure.
You see, although the 9mm and the .40 S&W may arrive at the same depth in bare gelatin, each of their journeys made arriving at that depth may reveal a contrast more than a comparison. The energy of a 165 grain .40 S&W Speer Gold Dot (my chosen carry round) at the muzzle reportedly averages 484 ft/lbs., while the 124 grain 9mm +P Speer Gold Dot at the muzzle reportedly averages only 410 ft./lbs. of energy. While 74 ft./lbs. may not seem significant, it can have significance when bullets encounter more solid objects in the human body such as bones. Although bones in the human body can certainly have effect on the trajectories of any and all service handgun rounds striking them, the more energy with which a round strikes a bone, the more likely it will be to shatter and traverse that structure rather than simply deflect off of or be stopped by it. As well, this increased energy will likely also have a significance from a defensive standpoint in that the temporary wound cavity (the stretching of the body tissues caused by a round rapidly entering and displacing tissue creating a pressure wave in the vicinity of the impact) will likely be significantly greater than from a round imparting less energy into a target. It is not only where the bullet ends up in the body of the adversary, but also the trauma it causes while traveling to that final resting place.
Another reason the .40 S&W may not penetrate significantly farther than a 9mm round of similar make is that the frontal areas of the two rounds, both initially and expanded, are dissimilar. The 40 S&W starts out at a diameter of 10 millimeters, while the 9mm has an initial diameter of, you guessed it, 9 millimeters. Thus, the initial frontal area of the .40 S&W comes to 78 mm squared, while the 9mm has an initial frontal area of just over 63 mm squared. That is almost a 25% increase in frontal area the .40 S&W has over the 9mm. The average expansion of the .40 S&W 165 grain Speer Gold Dot round when fired into ballistic gelatin runs right at 17 millimeters, while the average expansion of the 9mm 124 grain Speer Gold Dot round is approximately 13.4 millimeters. This expanded diameter reflects a 25%+ increase in frontal area for the .40 S&W over the 9mm. In general, the larger the frontal area a round presents to a target, the more material it must displace while penetrating. This is a particularly good thing when it comes to causing damage to a target, but not so impressive if one’s major goal is to win “ballistics gelatin penetration contests.” I have never been attacked by a block of gelatin, so I have little interest in such a competition. I want a round that, no matter whether it can out-penetrate (read “over-penetrate”) a round with less energy or not, touches a target and imparts greater damage to that target as it plows through the territory.
Sure, 9mm can get the job done in many cases, and shot placement is very high on the list of priorities when talking about how reliably an adversary can be stopped, but those advocates of the 9mm using the “shot placement” mantra as justification for using a less powerful round may not have considered that precise shot “placement” in a dynamic and rapidly evolving deadly force encounter is easier pontificated than accomplished. I want to know that, wherever I hit an adversary during one of these situations, that area affected will be SIGNIFICANTLY impaired due to an abundance of energy having been imparted to it.
Do I suggest the .40 S&W for a beginning shooter? Rarely. Most beginners don’t seem to understand the amount of time and energy (and money for ammunition) it takes to become a skilled shooter, and there is no reason to scare them off so early in their quest with higher priced ammunition, greater recoil, and a carry round that they will find being ridiculed at every opportunity by gun magazine writers now solely devoted to those “highly evolved ammunition connoisseurs” and "tacti-cool firearms trainers" of the first half of the 21st Century praising the 9mm above all else sacred to man.
You remember them, right? The same ones telling us all in the early 1990s that the 40 S&W was the Excalibur of rounds pulled from the stone by the Colonel himself! I believed them back then, and I guess I still do. The 40 S&W is a more potent round than the 9mm. Period. And that is why I carry it.
As always, your mileage may vary.
It wasn’t too many years ago (approximately 30 to be exact), that law enforcement was looking for a handgun cartridge that could inherently put down a bad guy more reliably than the .38 Specials and 9mms they had been carrying for several years. The shootout in Miami where multiple FBI Agents were injured/killed by two determine adversaries prompted this reevaluation of the defensive handgun rounds officers were carrying in hopes that such a tragedy might be avoided in the future.
Without going through the oft-told story of how Col. Jeff Cooper and his band of merry men first developed the 10mm which was then juiced hot during development and later juiced down for comfort at the request of the FBI and their “Army of Armed Accountants,” suffice to say that we ended up with a 10mm derivative cartridge, the .40 S&W. The new cartridge hit the market with much fanfare and myths surrounding its many (nee magical) positive attributes galore.
Looking back upon those innocent times, we recognize that the handgun ammunition industry seemed to have but one primary way of imparting better performance into a defensive cartridge, which was to add power and energy to the rounds themselves. More internal pressure or larger calibers with more powder in the casing were just the ticket. Never mind that this increased power also came with a cost, namely greater recoil and/or reduced capacity compared with their 9mm competition.
Today, in much more enlightened times, everyone recognizes that the Neanderthal of the early 90s were but partially evolved in their understanding of what makes a handgun cartridge effective. Since then, higher minds have realized that by simply changing the projectiles themselves, you can attain the same penetration of more powerful rounds without the discomfort and reduced capacity suffered in years past. Thus, the 9mm Parabellum has, according to those in the know, finally reached its true potential as the manstopper it was always meant to be. An equal to the .40 and .45 any day of the week. One has but to look at a single gelatin block test showing proof that the 9mm penetrates gelatin blocks every bit as deep as the .40 S&W and .45 ACP to know that there is, in effect, no difference in performance between the three cartridges.
Or is there?
A famous life coach once said, “It’s the journey, not the destination.” Probably cost some money to hear him utter those words, but, today, like most things, wisdom comes cheap. Unfortunately, such wisdom is rarely heeded and much less often understood.
Recently, the FBI switched back to 9mm for their Agents, while the US Secret Service moved away from their beloved .357 SIG (basically a.40 necked down to 9mm) to begin shooting 9mm. Reasons for this move are reportedly threefold: Less felt recoil, greater capacity (.40S&W pistols typically carry two fewer rounds than their 9mm counterparts), and less damage to their firearms (.40S&W is a high pressure round, which is why you never see the increased pressure +P versions of this cartridge). So, as with all things, if it is good enough for the FBI and the Secret Service, it must be good enough for the rest of us!
.40 S&W has the reputation of having a significantly greater recoil impulse than 9mm. Most often, the .40 S&W is deemed to be a “snappy” round. No doubt this is the case, but none of the traditional service calibers have what any experienced shooter would call “unmanageable recoil.” For that label to be applied appropriately, one would need to visit the Kingdom of Revolvers where the thunder of giants such as the .454 Casull or the .500 Magnum shakes the Earth and can be both felt and heard by those brave enough to wield them. Comparatively, the .40 S&W and the other service calibers are anemic. However, the fact that the .40 S&W does impart a greater recoil impulse than the 9mm (and, some might say, harsher even than the venerable .45 ACP) should provide some reassurance, providing one believes (or, better yet, understands) Newton’s Third Law of Motion is still in effect. This Law, that “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction,” does not seem to have any attenuating theorems regarding bullet design. What the law does indicate, at least to me, is that the more sting I feel in my hands when shooting a handgun, the more sting the person being shot will feel when the bullet impacts their structure.
You see, although the 9mm and the .40 S&W may arrive at the same depth in bare gelatin, each of their journeys made arriving at that depth may reveal a contrast more than a comparison. The energy of a 165 grain .40 S&W Speer Gold Dot (my chosen carry round) at the muzzle reportedly averages 484 ft/lbs., while the 124 grain 9mm +P Speer Gold Dot at the muzzle reportedly averages only 410 ft./lbs. of energy. While 74 ft./lbs. may not seem significant, it can have significance when bullets encounter more solid objects in the human body such as bones. Although bones in the human body can certainly have effect on the trajectories of any and all service handgun rounds striking them, the more energy with which a round strikes a bone, the more likely it will be to shatter and traverse that structure rather than simply deflect off of or be stopped by it. As well, this increased energy will likely also have a significance from a defensive standpoint in that the temporary wound cavity (the stretching of the body tissues caused by a round rapidly entering and displacing tissue creating a pressure wave in the vicinity of the impact) will likely be significantly greater than from a round imparting less energy into a target. It is not only where the bullet ends up in the body of the adversary, but also the trauma it causes while traveling to that final resting place.
Another reason the .40 S&W may not penetrate significantly farther than a 9mm round of similar make is that the frontal areas of the two rounds, both initially and expanded, are dissimilar. The 40 S&W starts out at a diameter of 10 millimeters, while the 9mm has an initial diameter of, you guessed it, 9 millimeters. Thus, the initial frontal area of the .40 S&W comes to 78 mm squared, while the 9mm has an initial frontal area of just over 63 mm squared. That is almost a 25% increase in frontal area the .40 S&W has over the 9mm. The average expansion of the .40 S&W 165 grain Speer Gold Dot round when fired into ballistic gelatin runs right at 17 millimeters, while the average expansion of the 9mm 124 grain Speer Gold Dot round is approximately 13.4 millimeters. This expanded diameter reflects a 25%+ increase in frontal area for the .40 S&W over the 9mm. In general, the larger the frontal area a round presents to a target, the more material it must displace while penetrating. This is a particularly good thing when it comes to causing damage to a target, but not so impressive if one’s major goal is to win “ballistics gelatin penetration contests.” I have never been attacked by a block of gelatin, so I have little interest in such a competition. I want a round that, no matter whether it can out-penetrate (read “over-penetrate”) a round with less energy or not, touches a target and imparts greater damage to that target as it plows through the territory.
Sure, 9mm can get the job done in many cases, and shot placement is very high on the list of priorities when talking about how reliably an adversary can be stopped, but those advocates of the 9mm using the “shot placement” mantra as justification for using a less powerful round may not have considered that precise shot “placement” in a dynamic and rapidly evolving deadly force encounter is easier pontificated than accomplished. I want to know that, wherever I hit an adversary during one of these situations, that area affected will be SIGNIFICANTLY impaired due to an abundance of energy having been imparted to it.
Do I suggest the .40 S&W for a beginning shooter? Rarely. Most beginners don’t seem to understand the amount of time and energy (and money for ammunition) it takes to become a skilled shooter, and there is no reason to scare them off so early in their quest with higher priced ammunition, greater recoil, and a carry round that they will find being ridiculed at every opportunity by gun magazine writers now solely devoted to those “highly evolved ammunition connoisseurs” and "tacti-cool firearms trainers" of the first half of the 21st Century praising the 9mm above all else sacred to man.
You remember them, right? The same ones telling us all in the early 1990s that the 40 S&W was the Excalibur of rounds pulled from the stone by the Colonel himself! I believed them back then, and I guess I still do. The 40 S&W is a more potent round than the 9mm. Period. And that is why I carry it.
As always, your mileage may vary.