40 better than 9 ?

[BehindBlueI's]

There certainly nothing wrong with .40, but eventually, it will assume 357 Sig status, out there and a useful, but not a significant part of the conversation. Even now, The Ruger American pistol is only available in 9 and .45 and other manufacturers are paring down their .40 offerings.

Given it's popularity in gaming and the magazine limits in some states, I don't think it'll decline quite that much. I suspect it will remain part of the "big 3" duty calibers, but in 3rd place.

 

[HoughMade]

Given it's popularity in gaming and the magazine limits in some states, I don't think it'll decline quite that much. I suspect it will remain part of the "big 3" duty calibers, but in 3rd place.

I can't really disagree with you, but as a carry caliber, I think that in 5 years it will be a distant, distant 3rd.

 

[VERT]

Given it's popularity in gaming and the magazine limits in some states, I don't think it'll decline quite that much. I suspect it will remain part of the "big 3" duty calibers, but in 3rd place.

The Clinton AWB is really what propelled the .40 into the market. Coming off the heels of the Miami shootout the FBI was hot to trot for a new cartridge. So along comes 10mm and .40S&W. After Brady the gun manufacturers could basically give away the new .40s to departments because the market for used HiCap magazines and wonder nines was exploding. Then guys like me who graduated in 1993 were looking for pistols. Since 10 rounds was max it negated any advantage that 9mm enjoyed. If I have only 10 rounds why wouldn't I want a bigger bullet. Price difference between 9mm and .40 was about a buck a box back then. My very first new handgun was a 1st gen P99 in .40. Wife bought it for me in 2000.

Reason for the story is this, we don't know what the political environment will look like in the future. 9mm is an evil, military, hi capacity pistol.

 

[Thor]

.40 sucks because .40 S&W won't fit in my Luger?

 

[phylodog]

I own both and like both. With a well placed shot, either one would be painful. I carry a .40 at work. Rumor has it that IMPD is going back to the 9mm. Not sure if this is true or not. Just heard it through the grapevine. Accuracy, capacity, reliability, ammo availability, and cost are all factors.

Cost was not a factor

 

[rhino]

If the words "stopping power" are used in your argument for selecting a handgun cartridge, I'm likely done listening immediately.

Ah, the good ol' days when Marshall & Sanow displayed their complete lack of comprehension with respect to data analysis and statistics. And people believed them!

 

[phylodog]

What nobody in the current 9mm fad will ever consider is kinetic energy and energy transfer. While it's true that 9mm 40S&W and 45ACP all penetrate ballistics gel practically the same distance, that's because the bullets are all designed and manufactured to all penetrate similarly. What ISN'T equal is the amount of energy each round carries with it. If just poking a hole into a target and penetrating approximately 14-16" (or whatever distance the FBI etc considers to be optimum) was enough, everybody would be carrying a 22LR or 25ACP with a bullet that's designed to penetrate 14"-16" because there's less recoil, you can shoot faster and more accurately, and carry more ammo(which is the 9mm argument). But for some reason, apparently 9mm has all of the "modern bullet technology" but 40S&W and 45ACP are still shooting 30 year old FMJs. If 9mm bullet technology has gotten better, hasn't that technology been carried to all other calibers using the same style of bullets???

In case you can't tell I'm NOT a fan of 9mm as a duty/personal defense etc. round and unfortunately those that do not understand history are doomed to repeat it. While 9mm does have it's place, to me it's better suited as a range/competition gun, or for a small/micro sized gun that's either a backup gun or an ultra deep concealment gun where size is the biggest concern. Maybe for somebody who is extremely recoil sensitive, but that's more of a training (or lack there of) issue. I work with some people who aren't 5' 100lbs soaking wet with a gun belt and vest on, who figured out how to shoot a 12ga shotgun but don't like 40S&W because of the recoil. 40S&W is a decent compromise caliber to have a 9mm size frame gun but to have a round that carries more energy. Personally I'd much prefer either 45ACP or 10mm to keep a decent amount of energy per round. But until the next Miami style shootout when people realize yet again that 9mm is an underpowered round, I'll just be considered "the guy that's overcompensating".

As BBI alluded to, energy transfer and kinetic energy are meaningless at handgun velocities. Knock down or stopping power are myths. What matters is expansion, penetration and weight retention. The only meaningful damage a handgun round is going to inflict is to the tissue it comes into direct contact with. You want a round which will expand reliably and penetrate deeply enough to reach vital organs.

We tested the Federal HST rounds in 147gr 9mm and 180gr .40 (among others).

Expansion / Penetration / Weight Retention

9mm .71" / 13.5" / 97%

.40 .79" / 13.08" / 98%

That's an average of shots into bare gel, through heavy clothing and through safety glass. Is the 180gr .40 better? Sure it is but at what cost? There is a significant increase in recoil which invariably leads to a reduction in average accuracy when looking at a group of shooters. Either is easily capable of acceptable performance if the rounds are delivered onto target appropriately. I'll take an accurate hit from this 9mm over a marginal hit with this .40 any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'll answer your quote "unfortunately those that do not understand history are doomed to repeat it" with another...

“The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.”
- Albert Einstein

 

[brogers261990]

I carry a 9mm and one of my best friends carries a .40 S&W. After breaking down the guns, comparing ammo, etc., it was determined that being on the receiving end of either was a poor choice. They are very similar, and while the .40 S&W may have better barrier penetration, there are rounds you can buy in 9mm if you're worried about not being able to shoot through barriers. At that point, however, I'd question the philosophy of use (if it's your EDC) since most CCW handguns are carried for personal protection, not carrying Mjolnir.

 

[Ddillard]

I prefer 9's but am partial to whatever fancies me at the moment. I guess you could say that I love shooting. As opinions, calibers are a choice of each individual. Shoot what you feel comfortable with. Just develop thick skin and take the jabs as just that, friendly jabs. BTW you are all info-satiable. --"One Man's Opinion!"

 

[Hohn]

I can't really disagree with you, but as a carry caliber, I think that in 5 years it will be a distant, distant 3rd.

Possibly, but then again it was created as a duty caliber for full size weapons on duty belt. CCW of a .40 was never part of the design parameters for the round. Even less so for its 10mm predecessor, which was intended to be a combat pistol cartridge for military use.

I'm going to fault the performance of the Kia brand in capturing the exotic hyper sports car market. They have not competed in that market.

.40 remains relevant in terms of roundcount*muzzle energy for a typical loadout. Most duty size weapons carry more energy per magazine load than a .45 does. Whether that matters or not, or is even counterproductive, that's up to debate.

The TN LEOs were carrying .40s both city and county when I saw them last week. They didn't know if state troopers still carried .357 Sig.


.357 Sig is yet again a step up in terms of muzzle energy per magazine. Many loadings are 500lb-ft. 15 rounds of that in a G31 is a good bit of firepower. Again, not arguing it's better or even a good idea.

 

[Double T]

Someone mentioned kinetic energy, I merely made an analysis. Nowhere did I say stopping power, nor did I intend for it to come off that way. I was merely meaning that with more muzzle kinetic energy it's directly proportional to recoil...which also effects the ability to make precise follow ups.

Then I wanted to see how much energy is still left at 50. was surprised to see 9mm and 45 had the same percentage loss.

 

[BogWalker]

Everybody knows .577 Tranter is the only round suitable for self defense. Well, 11mm Montenegrin might suffice.

 

[actaeon277]

40 is better

40 mm Bofors

 

[cedartop]

Ah, the good ol' days when Marshall & Sanow displayed their complete lack of comprehension with respect to data analysis and statistics. And people believed them!

Back when one shot stop % was king, and gun magazines were considered relevant. That is when I got on board with .40 because it was cool. We all start somewhere, some of us move on. (knowledge wise.)

 

[VERT]

Back when one shot stop % was king, and gun magazines were considered relevant. That is when I got on board with .40 because it was cool. We all start somewhere, some of us move on. (knowledge wise.)

.40 is still cool. But you gotta say it right. For-Tay.

 

[hopper68]

.40 is still cool. But you gotta say it right. For-Tay.

And you have to have the official INGO shirt!!

 

[MohawkSlim]

9 and 40 may drop bad guys.... 45 drops panties.

In all seriousness, it doesn't matter. The "big three" are all just fine and any good-natured ribbing from your shooting buddies is just that.

Though I believe the joke is on them. With DOJ dropping the .40 and transitioning back to 9mm I'm predicting the overrun of .40 will disappear in the near future and .40 will become obscure like the .357Sig or .45Gap. It'll get really cheap as .gov auctions it off and all those big contracts dry up. Warehouse after warehouse will liquidate it in favor of 9mm and the bottom will drop out on the price. But, then, like Keyser Soze... poof. It'll be gone.

 

[VERT]

9 and 40 may drop bad guys.... 45 drops panties.

In all seriousness, it doesn't matter. The "big three" are all just fine and any good-natured ribbing from your shooting buddies is just that.

Though I believe the joke is on them. With DOJ dropping the .40 and transitioning back to 9mm I'm predicting the overrun of .40 will disappear in the near future and .40 will become obscure like the .357Sig or .45Gap. It'll get really cheap as .gov auctions it off and all those big contracts dry up. Warehouse after warehouse will liquidate it in favor of 9mm and the bottom will drop out on the price. But, then, like Keyser Soze... poof. It'll be gone.

Too many For-Tay out there for it to just become obscure. .357 sig and .45 gap never enjoyed the popularity of .40. But unless something changes in the law I do see that short and weak 10mm falling to the distant third spot for service cartridges.

I agree with the post about .40 being a service cartridge invisioned for service pistols. It is not the best choice for compact guns and is best left to pistols with 4" or longer barrels and that offer a full grip. As a service cartridge in a larger gun it really is a fine choice. Especially since some guns offer the flexibility of a conversion barrel.

 

[Tombs]

Hotter 9mm loads carry the same energy that 40S&W does.

9mm allows for additional capacity.

9mm is cheaper to practice with and has less recoil.

9mm is easier on your firearm.

Wound channel differences using modern JHPs are almost impossible to differentiate.

If you only use FMJ, then go for the 40, otherwise the 9mm is superior in almost every effectual way. But if your slide saying "40" as opposed to "9mm" makes you carry it, then go ahead and do what will make you carry it.

 

[88E30M50]

Hotter 9mm loads carry the same energy that 40S&W does.

9mm allows for additional capacity.

9mm is cheaper to practice with and has less recoil.

9mm is easier on your firearm.

Wound channel differences using modern JHPs are almost impossible to differentiate.

If you only use FMJ, then go for the 40, otherwise the 9mm is superior in almost every effectual way. But if your slide saying "40" as opposed to "9mm" makes you carry it, then go ahead and do what will make you carry it.

While some of this is true, a one item is bad and another is plain false. The bad item is regarding the fact that 9mm ammo is cheaper and has a lower recoil. Yes, there is value in practicing shooting lighter calibers to let you focus on trigger control and grip. But, once you've mastered those aspects of shooting, the more you shoot with ammo that's close to your carry ammo, the better you will be with your carry ammo. In a perfect world, once we have the fundamentals down, we would practice with carry ammo and if we had to use the gun in a self defense situation, we would perform better with more experience shooting our carry ammo.

The item that's wrong is highlighted above. Either calculate the wound volume using expansion and penetration values or, look at the FBI testing results for wound volume. There is a significant advantage in wound volume when shooting .40 S&W compared to the 9mm ammo. The best 9mm ammo comes in at a 4.9 cubic inch wound volume, with the least coming in around 1.9cu. Most fall around 4.0cu. Take a look at the .40 results and you'll see that the best comes in at 6.28 with the worst at 3.96 and an average somewhere around 4.8cu. The best .40 comes in around 29% more effective than the best 9mm.

Wound volume is what it's about. You can get impressive penetration with a .22lr and you can get huge expansion in rounds that don't penetrate, but wound volume tells you how much potential damage a bullet can produce as it moves through the body.

BTW, a good old 230g standard pressure Golden Saber produced an average of 7.89cu of wound volume.

Edit: Just noticed that I missed the Winchester Ranger T test results at the bottom of the 9mm data. That bumps 9mm up to a max of 5.37 for clothed gel, but it does not really matter since those don't seem to be available any longer.