9mm/40sw-45acp real reasons

[crewchief888]

i havent owned, or even shot, that many auto pistols. they have been full size 45acp, mainly 1911's.
the only 40 ive shot is my glock 27
i cant ever recall firing a 9mm.

i watched my niece "struggle" with recoil with the glock, at least for her, she would be better off with a full size pistol in 9mm or a 38sp revolver

i shot a lot of 230gr hardball in competition before i ever started reloading, i shot the glock 27 at a couple bowling pin matches just for the hell of it.
i never thought about it much.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

BBI, Or anyone else. Could you expand on the .45 GAP? I never did understand why this cartridge was ever even brought to market.

Well, you have to remember the context of the time. The Clinton AWB was in place, so new magazines were limited to 10 rounds. The capacity advantage of smaller calibers was mostly eliminated. .40 S&W and .357 Sig had been out for many years and Glock didn't have a "vanity" cartridge with their own name on it. If you don't think that mattered, remember this is the company that left the "Sig" off the chamber on their pistols chambered for the .357 Sig cartridge. Marketing wise, the .357 and .45 were still the "man stoppers" in the popular mind (why is the .357 Sig not called the .355 Sig? Marketing). I suspect all of those factors, plus the logistics of fitting a .45 in existing frames, all played a part. It has beefed up brass, it's not a bad idea, it's just too late and competing against entrenched offerings and never really caught on.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The 40 came from the 10mm that police couldn't qualify with.

That's a gross oversimplification. The .40 IS the 10mm the FBI wanted, with shorter brass. The FBI 10mm was a 180gr bullet loaded to about 950 fps, which is what .40 S&W is. There's no need for the longer brass. There was a concern on the part of some agents of being able to shoot the larger gripped 1076, but the real problem across the board was th S&W 1076 was a complete dumpster fire in terms of reliability and service life. They would occasionally seize up to the point a mallet was required to open them and render them safe. The problem was so bad, and S&W couldn't figure out the issue, that the FBI cancelled the contract and went back to 9mm briefly.

keeping in mind that they were using fmj 9mm and and .38's, with no jhp's during the shootout!

No. The 9mm was a 115 gr Winchester Silvertip JHP. At the time, 10-12" of penetration was considered ideal. This was based on a squared up shot to the torso with no intermediate barriers, such as arms. Agent Dove hit Platt with a Silvertip which penetrated his arm, into his torso, through a lung, and stopped short of the heart. This was the direct cause of the penetration requirements for duty ammo being increased.

I believe the revolvers were loaded with .38 +P LSWC-HP, but am not positive. If anyone really cares, I know a guy to ask.

The problem was not all agents could handled the 10mm round. They went to S&W and asked for a 'lighter' 10mm

See above. The 10mm the FBI wanted was already the "10mm lite". The concern wasn't how hot the ammo was, it was the size of the grip and the fact the pistol that the S&W supplied pistol to go with the cartridge was a dumpster fire.

 

[NyleRN]

That's a gross oversimplification. The .40 IS the 10mm the FBI wanted, with shorter brass. The FBI 10mm was a 180gr bullet loaded to about 950 fps, which is what .40 S&W is. There's no need for the longer brass. There was a concern on the part of some agents of being able to shoot the larger gripped 1076, but the real problem across the board was th S&W 1076 was a complete dumpster fire in terms of reliability and service life. They would occasionally seize up to the point a mallet was required to open them and render them safe. The problem was so bad, and S&W couldn't figure out the issue, that the FBI cancelled the contract and went back to 9mm briefly.

Well, Gaston hadn't brought out the world's most reliable pistol yet, so just imagine how different service calibers may look today had the G20 been out Add purple if needed

 

[Ark]

I've always found the 45ACP to be less recoil than the 40sw, but I highly suspect this is due to the steel 1911 perceived Recoil versus the poly frame Glock 40sw and its perceived recoil. Add to that the 1911 trigger and well...... yea.

I've really only shot .45 out of a 1911 and a USP, but both were much more pleasant to shoot than the G23 I used to have. Not that the G23 was unmanageable or impossible to shoot accurately, I just find the .45 has a slower and milder-feeling push of recoil rather than the snap 'n smack of .40 out of a plastic gun.

Owning both .45s and 9mms, I didn't have a real need for the intermediate .40. Kinda like how I'd rather have a truck for hauling stuff and an efficient little car for commuting than a crossover that gets bad mileage and can't haul very much. It's not worthless, I'm just not restricted to one gun so why make a compromise?

 

[cosermann]

...Interesting that 9mm is so popular, but only with modern JHP. I know that there is a great of budgetary concern in here as well. ...

Not surprising. Less expensive means more training and practice is possible with the 9mm for a given budget. You also get higher capacity for a given size handgun, lower recoil and faster follow-up shots. There's a lot to like about the 9mm loaded with modern bullets.

 

[Tactically Fat]

I've personally never owned anything in .45 ACP. And I don't foresee myself ever doing so, either.

In the past, I've owned 3 different .40 S&W guns. I now no longer do.

I got away from .40 S&W due to feeding cost, costs of mags/accessories for the guns I had, and to simplify ammo storage and organization. Also because I like the firing/recoil characteristics of 9mm handguns more than I do .40 S&W. As of right now, I do not plan on buying another .40S&W firearm.

HOWEVER - have thought about it in the past - especially a cheap LEO trade-in G22. If I can ever find one cheaply enough for my tastes, I may jump on it just to have it in reserve, so to speak.

 

[IndianaGlock85]

I only have one .40 S&W in a Glock 22 and that’s the last .40 I’ll buy. At least in my local gun stores they say the value in .40’s is dropping.

 

[russc2542]

I only have one .40 S&W in a Glock 22 and that’s the last .40 I’ll buy. At least in my local gun stores they say the value in .40’s is dropping.

price vs value: precise wording makes a difference. Store is out to make money, that's based on the price. the demand for 40 is dropping so the price is falling but the effectiveness is the same so the value to the shooter is, in a way, rising.

 

[STEEL CORE]

Shoot what YOU can handle. I can handle the all, I prefer .40.

 

[randyb]

origins developed after the Miami firefight in 1986 (Which Morales book is AWESOME). The .45 had too much recoil, but they wanted a bullet with more mass to better penetrate. Thus a 180 grain pill at about 1000 fps was developed. Of course the 10mm was available but recoil was a bit much for folks in the studys and capacity was also an issue. I have had several .40 and never carried them much. I either went to .45 or to 9mm. I carry 9mm most these days. The reason is I can put faster followup shots on target. Practice ammo is cheaper and I get more trigger time as a result. As far as actually street performance, they all are sub par to a rifle round, but with good hollow point ammunition, they are work and its up to personal choice.

 

[Disposable Heart]

origins developed after the Miami firefight in 1986 (Which Morales book is AWESOME). The .45 had too much recoil, but they wanted a bullet with more mass to better penetrate. Thus a 180 grain pill at about 1000 fps was developed. Of course the 10mm was available but recoil was a bit much for folks in the studys and capacity was also an issue. I have had several .40 and never carried them much. I either went to .45 or to 9mm. I carry 9mm most these days. The reason is I can put faster followup shots on target. Practice ammo is cheaper and I get more trigger time as a result. As far as actually street performance, they all are sub par to a rifle round, but with good hollow point ammunition, they are work and its up to personal choice.

The sad thing is that the agents in the Miami fight had access to MP5s (volume of fire) and M16s (quality of fire) but they chose to leave them behind... Could have ended that fight ricky-tick had they had the right equipment as the training level was there...

 

[Trapper Jim]

In short; What is the reason for the 40SW and what role does it play for us civilians and edc?[/QUOTE]
Sometimes profit opportunities lie in having a solution to invented problems. Shot placement greatly enhances any cartridge.

 

[BluePig]

Dug this up from many years ago.

 

[patriot574]

I have a glock 23 and its the only .40 I'll ever own. It's a nice round and the Federal HST 165 grains are great. But I wouldn't buy another firearm chambered in it again. Mainly got it for SHTF caliber access.

 

[doubleeagle4]

I like .40 in my carry guns. My main carry is a XD Mod 2 Subcompact. We all have different reasoning and theories.. My thoughts are that out of a 3" barrel, you aren't going to get a crazy amount of velocity difference between a 9mm and .40. Most self defense situations are within 15 feet. Because of these 2 things, I want a bigger bullet. I carry 180 grain HSTs. I guess I could go with a 45 with this theory, but 40 ammo is a little cheaper and I can practice more . I also shoot the XD very well because the heavy slide and dual recoil spring both really calm the muzzle rise. I barely feel any more recoil out of it than I do my 5" 9mm.

All 3 calibers are probably effective at that range. Just go with whatever you are comfortable with and makes you feel safe.

 

[Disposable Heart]

I have a glock 23 and its the only .40 I'll ever own. It's a nice round and the Federal HST 165 grains are great. But I wouldn't buy another firearm chambered in it again. Mainly got it for SHTF caliber access.

Man after my own heart. I bought a cheapo Savage .270 and have a Smith and Wesson 4006 stashed away just for that reason: Only two calibers left on the shelves of local stores!

 

[Disposable Heart]

I like .40 in my carry guns. My main carry is a XD Mod 2 Subcompact. We all have different reasoning and theories.. My thoughts are that out of a 3" barrel, you aren't going to get a crazy amount of velocity difference between a 9mm and .40. Most self defense situations are within 15 feet. Because of these 2 things, I want a bigger bullet. I carry 180 grain HSTs. I guess I could go with a 45 with this theory, but 40 ammo is a little cheaper and I can practice more . I also shoot the XD very well because the heavy slide and dual recoil spring both really calm the muzzle rise. I barely feel any more recoil out of it than I do my 5" 9mm.

All 3 calibers are probably effective at that range. Just go with whatever you are comfortable with and makes you feel safe.

I kinda liked .40 in subcompacts because it didn't lose the velocity like .45 does with short barrels and gives you more rounds.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I only have one .40 S&W in a Glock 22 and that’s the last .40 I’ll buy. At least in my local gun stores they say the value in .40’s is dropping.

I'd not push the .40 on anyone, but basing your opinion on it from a Glock 22 is a disservice to the .40, and to Glocks. Firing it from a gun actually designed for it is a world of difference. The Sig P229, for example, makes it a much more enjoyable caliber to shoot. On timed drills I shoot a 9mm Glock and 9mm Sig almost exactly the same. .40 Glock vs .40 Sig, the Sig is better my a good margin on both the timer and the target.