Why I Carry the .40 S&W

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Vanguard.45

    Expert
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    83   0   0
    May 3, 2009
    1,082
    63
    NW Indiana
    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.
     

    223 Gunner

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    199   0   0
    Jan 7, 2009
    4,411
    47
    Red Sector A
    My EDC is an HK VP 40 LE.
    The .40 not only out performs the 9mm, but also out performs the .45acp too.
    And the only way to get close to it out of a 9mm is to carry +P rounds, most people leave that part out or forget about it.
    I noticed that you did mention it in comparison to the .40.

    Very nice write up, that took some time and thought.
    Well done.
     

    gglass

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Dec 2, 2008
    2,313
    63
    ELKHART
    My primary carry has been a .40 S&W in variety of handguns since about 2005. I have loved the .40 S&W since I first shot one, and I will likely continue to favor it as my EDC until I am so old and feeble that I need to switch to a 9mm.
     

    GLOCKMAN23C

    Resident Dumbass II
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Feb 8, 2009
    38,118
    83
    S.E. Indy
    It doesn't matter what you carry. JUST ****ING CARRY. I like the .40 and Glocks, so I'm probably dismissed faster than a witness against a Clinton. :p For the record you ain't professional enough fo' fotay!
     

    88E30M50

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Dec 29, 2008
    22,748
    149
    Greenwood, IN
    I’m quite happy with the .40. To each their own though. 9mm, .40 or .45 all will do the job if the shooter does their part. For whatever reason, I tend to shoot .40 better than 9mm. Plus, I do buy into the energy theory. Energy is what does the work when the bullet contacts a human target. Energy drives the bullet in and converts good tissue to crushed tissue. Energy is what allows a hollow point to expand while still being driven deeper.

    Energy is a pretty good thing in my opinion, so I opt to run a bullet that carries just a tad more. It’s a personal choice for me and I don’t expect others to abandon their favorites based on my opinions. Back to a gin and tonic and a decent book.
     

    ashby koss

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    18   0   0
    Jan 24, 2013
    1,168
    48
    Connersville
    For whatever reason I shoot the low pressure rounds better. Perhaps flinch,perhaps platform, perhaps a mix of all things considered.

    main thing is to carry. Personally - carry anything “.380acp and up” is fine
     

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    18,752
    113
    Arcadia
    I'm not going to type out what I have on numerous occasions, it's there if anyone wants to search for it.

    Energy output of handgun cartridges is completely irrelevant. They do not produce enough energy to make a difference between the calibers. Penetration, expansion and weight retention are all you're gonna get out of a handgun cartridge and anything from a .38spl on up with modern defensive ammunition will perform similarly.
     

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    18,752
    113
    Arcadia
    The .40 not only out performs the 9mm, but also out performs the .45acp too.
    And the only way to get close to it out of a 9mm is to carry +P rounds, most people leave that part out or forget about it.

    This used to be true, it no longer is. The only reason Federal Ammunition offers +P and +P+ ammo in 9mm is because some refuse to accept current performance testing results. In a prior life I tested 9mm against .40 and .45 in properly calibrated gelatin and the 9mm performed as well or better than either the .40 or the .45. It's not about the diameter or the bullet weight, it's about projectile design and construction and having those tailored to perform within a specific velocity range. As an example, the 147gr Federal HST standard velocity has a different projectile than the +P. They perform almost identically in spite of the difference in velocities. If you put a standard velocity HST projectile in front of a +P charge it will fail to perform and vice versa.
     

    ashby koss

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    18   0   0
    Jan 24, 2013
    1,168
    48
    Connersville
    This used to be true, it no longer is. The only reason Federal Ammunition offers +P and +P+ ammo in 9mm is because some refuse to accept current performance testing results. In a prior life I tested 9mm against .40 and .45 in properly calibrated gelatin and the 9mm performed as well or better than either the .40 or the .45. It's not about the diameter or the bullet weight, it's about projectile design and construction and having those tailored to perform within a specific velocity range. As an example, the 147gr Federal HST standard velocity has a different projectile than the +P. They perform almost identically in spite of the difference in velocities. If you put a standard velocity HST projectile in front of a +P charge it will fail to perform and vice versa.


    I generally agree with everything but there is one caveat to the whole thing.

    as we are seeing right now is great shortage of ammunition across the broad spectrum if given the choice to cast and reload and carry or use or depend on lead cast 9 mm - lead cast 45 ACP. in the world of lead cast or even full metal jacket‘s without high end defensive rounds I will always take the heavier bigger bullet just because of the kinetic weight pushing further. More lead to strip off and still hit a target deeper
     

    Ruger_Ronin

    Turkey Herder
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Aug 22, 2017
    7,879
    113
    Outer Heaven
    Good post OP. I currently EDC a gen4 27. Previously a gen3 22.

    One man's newfound distaste for all things .40 is my more readily available ammo and parts. Plus with all the local PD's trading in for Sig's, I can get g22 mags for dirt cheap. Yay me!
     

    1775usmarine

    Sleeper
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    81   0   0
    Feb 15, 2013
    11,264
    113
    IN
    I only shoot 40 now because I scored a great deal on 2 S&W 3rd gen TSW CHP and Brinks trade in's before the deals disappeared when the covid virus caused a drive on all guns irregardless of caliber.
     

    walleyepw

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Sep 9, 2012
    2,843
    63
    40 S&W, I like the round. I also like 32 acp, .380, 9mm, 45 acp, 38 spcl. and .357 mag. Have not ventured into 357 sig, or 10mm yet.
     

    Fixer

    Expert
    Rating - 96.3%
    26   1   0
    Nov 22, 2009
    1,157
    63
    Fort Wayne Area
    40 S&W, I like the round. I also like 32 acp, .380, 9mm, 45 acp, 38 spcl. and .357 mag. Have not ventured into 357 sig, or 10mm yet.

    I like the 10mm, but as stated and my personal experience I have not noticed much of a difference in recoil between 9mm, 40 S&W, 10mm, and 45acp. there is also ballistic testing that shows almost identical performance in penetration and cavitation in gel.
     
    Top Bottom