"And No 40Cals!!" Why not?

[Magnum314]

38-40, people have been shooting it since the 1870s. Can't speak for the modern 40.

Ha! Love this!

 

[Leo]

A 180 grain .40 does not have to be driven overly fast to match .45 ACP energy. In fact, a 180 grain at about 950 fps is very soft shooting, and matches the energy of the typical standard .45 load of 230 grains at about 830 fps. Most .40 defensive ammo is hotter, though, with a 180 grain typical being driven in excess of 1000 fps. It can be a little snappy, but then again, so can a .45 +P, depending on your launching platform.

I don't care for smallish .40 pistols, especially polymer framed. But the .40 in a metal frame gun is a lot of fun to shoot.

I agree. There is nothing wrong with the .40 S&W. It is not a better or worse answer, simply a different answer. If John Browning made the 1911 in .40 originally, it would be America's favorite.

Route45 suggests a good load that I use with cast bullets. Along with that 180 grain load, a faster load with 165 grain jacketed bullets is a really good balance of performance and recoil. A 165 grain load will slap steel down with perfect reliability. It has easily managed recoil in both a heavy double stack 1911 and a lighter Beretta 96.

I was way late to the .40 game because it was only commonly seen in the poorly designed glocks. Once I was exposed to the .40 round in full sized metal pistols with properly supported chambers, I can appreciate them as a versatile, reliable pistol round.

 

[Mgderf]

I was way late to the .40 game because it was only commonly seen in the poorly designed glocks. Once I was exposed to the .40 round in full sized metal pistols with properly supported chambers, I can appreciate them as a versatile, reliable pistol round.

I agree.
My one and only .40 is a Magnum Research "Baby Eagle".
In a steel platform the .40 is fun to shoot, plenty of power, and not snappy at all.

I think I'll keep it.

 

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

I've got a 229, and a 226 in dak. DAK is not my thing, but the full sized 226 makes .40 recoil negligible. If given only one, I'd choose the 229, because of its natural balance, but nothing tames a powerful round down like a full sized metal frame.

 

[snowwalker]

I was way late to the .40 game because it was only commonly seen in the poorly designed glocks. Once I was exposed to the .40 round in full sized metal pistols with properly supported chambers, I can appreciate them as a versatile, reliable pistol round.

I guess there has to be some in every group with that kind of thinking, but some people are just that way.

 

[phylodog]

Hmmmmm, let's see now.....been at my current job for 7+ years now which equates roughly 6 million + rounds of .40 fired out of Glock pistols and I don't recall a single blown case. Clearly a flawed design.

 

[Leo]

I guess there has to be some in every group with that kind of thinking, but some people are just that way.

Do you own and shoot an original glock .40? Have you ever had a ruptured case blow the magazine out the bottom? I can introduce you to a retired officer that has the scars to back up his story.

This tool was not developed for 1911's.
Redding G-RX Carbide Base Sizing Die Kit 40 S&W,

The gen one glock 40's were poorly designed, With the unsupported chambers being the issue. Gen 2's were only slightly improved. I stand by that assessment. The fact that glock had improved the design 20 years ago does not change my opinion in the least bit. I really want you to enjoy your later gen glocks. What was true then is still true today with pistols from that time.

 

[hpclayto]

I'd switch everything over to 9 if I could.

 

[JettaKnight]

Someone needs to post Que's video; I can't find it.

No one has a link to it?

 

[Route 45]

Do you own and shoot an original glock .40? Have you ever had a ruptured case blow the magazine out the bottom? I can introduce you to a retired officer that has the scars to back up his story.

This tool was not developed for 1911's.
Redding G-RX Carbide Base Sizing Die Kit 40 S&W,

The gen one glock 40's were poorly designed, With the unsupported chambers being the issue. Gen 2's were only slightly improved. I stand by that assessment. The fact that glock had improved the design 20 years ago does not change my opinion in the least bit. I really want you to enjoy your later gen glocks. What was true then is still true today with pistols from that time.

There is no such thing as a Glock generation 1 .40 caliber. It does not exist. The only gen 1 Glocks are 9mm, and they are very uncommon.
The .40 caliber Glocks were introduced with the generation 2 frame.
I've owned several Glocks, every caliber except 10mm and .45 GAP, and I've never had a problem over thousands of rounds.
Phylodog speaks from experience with millions of rounds of .40 fired out of Glock pistols.
I'm betting that he has forgotten more about Glock .40 caliber pistols than you will ever know.

 

[Coach]

I have my gunsmith, George Huening of Brownsburg, getting the parts together to convert my STI Trojan from .45 to .40. GH can make them run which is tricky at best in the 1911 platform, and the split times on .40 are better even for me than .45. In addition I will be able to load less .45 ammo. Because my two limited guns eat 40 and now I can shoot single stack with 40 as well.

This under-powered non-sense is apparently not limited to 9mm. Never been worried about the .40 being under powered. If I had to gear up and move into a gun fight. I put on my limited gun and not feel insecure about the power at all.

Perhaps the recoil sensitive among us should gain a little weight, or shoot a full size pistol, or both.

 

[223 Gunner]

I never completely understood all the .40 "hate", in the 1990's it was the round to carry, gun owners couldn't get enough of the .40. I have to think a lot of what drives popularity of a caliber is good marketing and all the "chatter" on forums like ours.
I have a Glock 23, I am very pleased with. I wonder if in another 10 years gun owners will be starting threads with titles like this: I don't know why I ever abandoned the .40?

I say if you like it, keep shooting it. I guess since I already have one .40, maybe I should scoop up some more deals on .40 caliber handguns that no-one wants anymore.

 

[1775usmarine]

I would like to get some 3rd gen smith 40 cals like the 4006, 4013, and so on just to complete the collection.

 

[SSGSAD]

I have no dog, in this fight .....

However I do have bad wrists

and the "snappy" .40 cal.,

is just not for me .....

I shoot full size guns,

that is all I own, or carry .....

My full size S&W 645,

is really a handful for me .....

My S&W 59, and my CZ 75b,

is just fine .....

did not mean to interrupt,

carry on .....

Remember everyone is different,

everyone has their own experience,

and their own opinions .....

 

[Leo]

There is no such thing as a Glock generation 1 .40 caliber. It does not exist. The only gen 1 Glocks are 9mm, and they are very uncommon.
The .40 caliber Glocks were introduced with the generation 2 frame.
I've owned several Glocks, every caliber except 10mm and .45 GAP, and I've never had a problem over thousands of rounds.
Phylodog speaks from experience with millions of rounds of .40 fired out of Glock pistols.
I'm betting that he has forgotten more about Glock .40 caliber pistols than you will ever know.

You are right about me not being a glock expert. If your buddy is an expert, he can fill you in about the changes in the chamber design. The pictures are easily available if you want to look them up. I think I actually posted the links a couple years ago trying to help a guy work out a problem.

I don't have anything for them or against them. I have owned a few, including a 9mm that spit the left rear frame lug out. I was also on duty at the range to see a 9mm glock slide break right across the ejection port. No big deal, I understand that polymers get brittle with age and that metal can fatigue. I broke a cylinder latch in a minty Python once, stuff happens. This is America, if a person pays his own bills they can have what you want.

If you are ticked about improper terminology that does not change the story. I don't care what you call them 4 designs are four designs. The early 40 glocks had horrible case bulge out issues. Ones following after that got better. How this became some emotional glock lover against a guy that does not care one way or the other, I could not tell you.

Rewind to the early 80's. I had had my 1911, K38 and High standard target guns in bullseye competition for 10 years by then. If you saw a .40 S&W it was probably a glock. It was also leaving glock bulged brass on the ground. Reloading for it had mixed troubles. The gun people mostly (incorrectly) said it was because the .40 is a high pressure round. That kept a lot of people away from it. Once other .40's were available, it turned out that the problems were the glocks, not the round. The 9mm was already in that same pressure zone with no problems.

That is why I said I was late to get involved with the .40 S&W. When the problems turned out to be the unsupported chamber of one brand of pistol, I gave the round a chance. It turned out to be a pretty good round. Which was the point of my first post.

If you don't think an unsupported chamber is any problem, buy one, buy a dozen. I am ok with your choice.

Once again, experience with pistols of the last 20 years does not negate history of things that happened in the 1980's.


https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=475906

 

[snowwalker]

Do you own and shoot an original glock .40? Have you ever had a ruptured case blow the magazine out the bottom? I can introduce you to a retired officer that has the scars to back up his story.

This tool was not developed for 1911's.
Redding G-RX Carbide Base Sizing Die Kit 40 S&W,

The gen one glock 40's were poorly designed, With the unsupported chambers being the issue. Gen 2's were only slightly improved. I stand by that assessment. The fact that glock had improved the design 20 years ago does not change my opinion in the least bit. I really want you to enjoy your later gen glocks. What was true then is still true today with pistols from that time.

Route 45 is correct about the Glock Gens. Your answer is in your reply, he rolled his own and most likely made a mistake. My Glock 23 gen2 has never had any bulging shells, but I only shoot commercial ammo. Yes mine is old, works really well, and is not picky on the ammo I feed it. Carry on.

 

[Leo]

I never completely understood all the .40 "hate", in the 1990's it was the round to carry, gun owners couldn't get enough of the .40. I have to think a lot of what drives popularity of a caliber is good marketing and all the "chatter" on forums like ours.
I have a Glock 23, I am very pleased with. I wonder if in another 10 years gun owners will be starting threads with titles like this: I don't know why I ever abandoned the .40?

I say if you like it, keep shooting it. I guess since I already have one .40, maybe I should scoop up some more deals on .40 caliber handguns that no-one wants anymore.

+1

 

[Leo]

Route 45 is correct about the Glock Gens. Your answer is in your reply, he rolled his own and most likely made a mistake. My Glock 23 gen2 has never had any bulging shells, but I only shoot commercial ammo. Yes mine is old, works really well, and is not picky on the ammo I feed it. Carry on.

Happy for you, have fun with it.

 

[x10]

One of the great reasons to have a 40 is the size of the bullet, when I"m reloading on my 650 and trying to go fast, I can grab on to the 40 cal faster than I can grab 9mm bullets and 40 cases take up less room than 45 cases.

I know that doesn't seem like a reason to many but when you spend time reloading little things stack up after 100,000 rounds.

 

[Coach]

George has built guns for some rather big name shooters. If you are needing some work done on a 1911 or 2011 no matter what caliber you might think for him. Doug Koenig of bianchi cup fame has his guns built by George.