The 40cal on its way out?

[Chuck Haggard]

A whole bunch of horseshit that gave me Forest Whitaker eye.....

Literally every single thing you wrote in this post is wrong. Not just wrong, fractally wrong.

I have to wonder if you are a troll, because just as one would have to willfully try to get every single answer wrong on a test, you've trotted out every bad gunshop trope from the last 50 years and put it into a single post.

[DocGKR]

Tiro Fijo:

Is the US Army also currently using damage based metrics? Not Big Army

No more "computer man" calculations based on % hit probability, hit location, bullet energy, etc.? Nope--ORCA and its offspring are sadly very much alive in Big Army.

Is the gel standard the same as FBI, or still 20% gelatin, or whatever? Bizarrely, Big Army still clings to 20% gel.....and often fails to use standard, agreed upon ammo test protocols (ex. XM17 ammo testing).

[TiroFijo]

Wow... Big Army still has its "own ways"

One would think that someone very high in the command hierarchy of all US armed forces would push for unifying criteria on this very important topic.

What about the US SF community? Are they more receptive to damage based metrics, like the USMC?

Or each group has its own rules, way of thinking?

[mongooseman]

This I understand, although it can be mitigated by replacing guns more frequently, if .40 was desired. What I can not easily replace is ME, and .40, particularly in a service pistol size like the G22, 226, and P30, wears ME out faster. My elbows and hands have a hard enough time holding up to my round count of 9.

Which brings us probably one of the primary reasons that 9mm is more popular: Cost. Cheaper to purchase 9mm and guns last longer so the department doesn't have to buy new guns or replacement parts. Our main bean counter (who is actually kinda bean shaped) can tell you to the cent how much cash will be saved buying 9mm instead of .40 caliber. He also has figured that qualification scores will go up so that will mean less rounds (cents) expended. It makes him happy.

[DocGKR]

"One would think that someone very high in the command hierarchy of all US armed forces would push for unifying criteria on this very important topic."

The JSWB-IPT participants, including Big Army, all agreed on a standardized test protocol in 2006. However, since then, Big Army, particularly Aberdeen, has not adhered to the criteria that was agreed upon. Most other elements, including SOF, seem to have followed the correct criteria....

[Jeep]

The JSWB-IPT participants, including Big Army, all agreed on a standardized test protocol in 2006. However, since then, Big Army, particularly Aberdeen, has not adhered to the criteria that was agreed upon. Most other elements, including SOF, seem to have followed the correct criteria....

It's cool. Compared to the Ordinance corps fiasco's like the M-73/211 coaxial machine gun that was usually a single-shot weapon (to name just one of a staggering number of disasters), their failure to enter the 21st century on the terminal effectiveness of pistol rounds is small potatoes. In fact, we're lucky that they still aren't shooting dead pigs.

[Gadfly]

As mentioned earlier in thread, the Feds go through tens of millions of rounds per year. In our case, all the ammo gets shipped by the pallet to the national firearms unit. There, the staff randomly pulls three cases per pallet, and pulls a few random boxes and checks them on the chrono and barrier penetration. If the rounds are not in spec, they can reject the lot, or designate it “for training only”.

But the point is, the national unit then ships the ammo out to the field. If for example a case of 40 weighs 25lbs, and a case of 9mm weighs 19lbs... work that cost of shipping out and multiply it out by millions of rounds. The 9mm ammo is cheaper and the shipping is cheaper. That’s a win/win all the way round. The switch may save us 10-20% on our ammo budget. That’s a good thing.


Sent from my iPhone
(So Excuse the typos)

[HCM]

As mentioned earlier in thread, the Feds go through tens of millions of rounds per year. In our case, all the ammo gets shipped by the pallet to the national firearms unit. There, the staff randomly pulls three cases per pallet, and pulls a few random boxes and checks them on the chrono and barrier penetration. If the rounds are not in spec, they can reject the lot, or designate it “for training only”.

But the point is, the national unit then ships the ammo out to the field. If for example a case of 40 weighs 25lbs, and a case of 9mm weighs 19lbs... work that cost of shipping out and multiply it out by millions of rounds. The 9mm ammo is cheaper and the shipping is cheaper. That’s a win/win all the way round. The switch may save us 10-20% on our ammo budget. That’s a good thing.


Sent from my iPhone
(So Excuse the typos)

For scale, our office's last shipment was 300k rounds.

[Jeep]

As mentioned earlier in thread, the Feds go through tens of millions of rounds per year. In our case, all the ammo gets shipped by the pallet to the national firearms unit. There, the staff randomly pulls three cases per pallet, and pulls a few random boxes and checks them on the chrono and barrier penetration. If the rounds are not in spec, they can reject the lot, or designate it “for training only”.

But the point is, the national unit then ships the ammo out to the field. If for example a case of 40 weighs 25lbs, and a case of 9mm weighs 19lbs... work that cost of shipping out and multiply it out by millions of rounds. The 9mm ammo is cheaper and the shipping is cheaper. That’s a win/win all the way round. The switch may save us 10-20% on our ammo budget. That’s a good thing.


Sent from my iPhone
(So Excuse the typos)

Yeah, but better be careful. Next thing you know the bean counters will be demanding a 10-20% reduction every year! ("You did it last year. I don't understand the reluctance about doing it again")

[MDFA]

Here's my experience with the .40. In 1995 my agency converted from 9mm S&W 6906 to the first Gen Glock 22 .40 at my recommendation. I was the head firearms instructor at the time. During a Blackwater class the trigger pin and trigger spring broke in my pistol, we shot 2500 rounds in 5 days in that class. I'm not recoil sensitive but I was done shooting for a few days anyway after 2500 rds.

I had to repair a couple of our guns for similar parts breakage over the years. After around 15 years we changed over to Gen 4 M22, and did the RSA replacement soon after getting them. About a year before I retired in 2016 our new Chief asked me about changing over to 9mm, which I was in favor of. The previous Chief would not entertain the idea when I brought it up.... no surprise.... they are now converting over to 9mm.....

For what it's worth I agree as others have said. The .40 is a good round, but I don't think it brings anything to the table that isn't answered by quality 9mm now. The pros just don't out weigh the cons for most people... If you shoot it well and it makes you happy march on...

That being said my duty gun that I received upon retirement will be converted to 9mm or sit in the safe as I carry a M19.

Be Safe