PDA

View Full Version : P30 .40 cal. Durability?



UpDok
05-01-2011, 08:19 AM
The P30 is certainly a sweet pistol.

I made the mistake of handling one at the local gunstore and now I'd like to purchase a P30 in the (hopefully) not to distant future. I'm considering getting one in .40S&W. The 9mm has certainly been well proven by Todd's test but I think I'd like to get one in the larger 40 cal.

The .40 S&W is a different cartridge than the 9mm and it has more recoil. Does the P30 in .40 cal hold up well or is the 9 a better choice for the P30?

JM Campbell
05-01-2011, 09:46 AM
I have no first hand experience on the 40, but you can rest assured with the same internals in use on the P2000 you have absolutely nothing to worry about. I have the P30 in 9mm.

GJM
05-01-2011, 09:51 AM
Better can be answered or defined many ways, depending upon what you are trying to accomplish.

I have had a number of P2000 and P30 pistols in .40 over the years, with round counts of 1,000 to between 5,000 and 10,000 rounds on each pistol, and have yet to experience a stoppage or breakage. Speaking with CBP folks, their P2000's seem to be holding up, even with that 155 grain hot load that was being used. I do shoot my P30's in 9 more than in .40.

TCinVA
05-01-2011, 10:50 AM
The P30 is a tank. Even in a larger caliber you can reasonably expect the weapon to be durable to the point that the cost of the ammo you run through it is many times greater than the cost of the weapon.

The thing about the .40 is that the United States is the only country in the world where people seem to believe that a few extra hundredths of an inch in bullet diameter is a significant factor in making bad people stop doing bad things in a hurry. Larger calibers do have some advantages, but those advantages are often not terribly applicable to the situations the average person is likely to face with a handgun. So while .40 is certainly a valid chambering and the P30 is certainly likely to give you a very long and reliable service life, I'd ask why you really want the bigger caliber.

I find that lots of people seem to think that the 9mm is somehow a compromise in selecting a handgun. In truth all handguns are weapons of compromise. The 9mm is, objectively, no more of a compromise than the other major service calibers. There are a number of police departments out there using 9mm handguns as issue weapons and to the best of my knowledge they aren't having any more trouble killing bad guys with it than departments that issue larger calibers. Given that there's a world of real data out there that shows the basic equity of service calibers using good loads, what are you hoping to gain from the selection of a .40?

If you have a ready supply of .40 that is cheaper than 9mm, rock on. Free or inexpensive ammo is the best ammo in the world. Shoot as much of it as possible. If you reasonably expect that the bad guy you are most likely to have to shoot is going to be in or around a vehicle, the .40 might be a good idea.

If you don't find that either situation applies to you, however, all the .40 is likely to give you is a higher ammo bill. When you look at using a handgun for stopping bad people from doing bad things to you, training has the biggest impact on one's ability to bring the confrontation to a happy conclusion. It is many orders of magnitude more important than practically anything else...including caliber selection.

The higher the cost of training, the less of it you'll do. So stop to consider: Are the slight performance advantages of the .40 really worth giving up the training you'll forfeit due to the extra expense?

In other words, by selecting the more expensive weapon to feed, are you really getting a return that you can readily identify, or are you laying out the extra cash for a largely theoretical advantage?

JM Campbell
05-01-2011, 12:25 PM
In other words, by selecting the more expensive weapon to feed, are you really getting a return that you can readily identify, or are you laying out the extra cash for a largely theoretical advantage?

Great post TC!! That is some of the best handgun selection requirements that I have seen in print.

UpDok
05-01-2011, 02:26 PM
I find that lots of people seem to think that the 9mm is somehow a compromise in selecting a handgun. In truth all handguns are weapons of compromise. The 9mm is, objectively, no more of a compromise than the other major service calibers. There are a number of police departments out there using 9mm handguns as issue weapons and to the best of my knowledge they aren't having any more trouble killing bad guys with it than departments that issue larger calibers. Given that there's a world of real data out there that shows the basic equity of service calibers using good loads, what are you hoping to gain from the selection of a .40?



Thank you for the thought provoking comments.

I have no problem with the 9mm as a Self Defense caliber with good loads. I think my biggest motivation for considering the 40 caliber is the possibility that "good loads" may not always be available to me as an ordinary citizen for SD use.

I remember in the depressing months after the last presidential inauguration that good first-rate hollow point loads for the popular 9mm were not all that easy to find. However even during the worst of the ammo shortage .40S&W caliber hollow point ammo was still available to me. Apparently the .40 is currently the most popular caliber among law enforcement agencies, so there is a lot of it made.

I may be wrong, but I figure that with the 40 it is probably less important to carry top-performing good loads for SD than it is with the 9. I don't trust that I will always be able to get Gold Dots, Ranger "T" series, or Federal HST's in 9mm. In that case second-rate hollow points in a larger caliber such as .40 would probably be better than second-rate hollow points in a 9mm. But of course I'd rather use top of the line SD ammo in either caliber if available

Certainly if it came to only comparing hardball to hardball, I'd rather have the larger caliber, but I hope it doesn't come to only having hardball as an ammo option.

TCinVA
05-01-2011, 05:38 PM
Unfortunatley bad loads will be bad loads even in a larger caliber. What makes for good performance from hollowpoint rounds is reliable penetration and reliable expansion. Poorly designed loads won't offer either for you.

jslaker
05-01-2011, 06:19 PM
I remember in the depressing months after the last presidential inauguration that good first-rate hollow point loads for the popular 9mm were not all that easy to find.

I'm not sure making long-term decisions on the basis of a once-in-a-lifetime event that was driven by largely irrational hysteria makes a whole lot of sense.


Apparently the .40 is currently the most popular caliber among law enforcement agencies, so there is a lot of it made.

9x19 is the most commonly used centerfire handgun cartridge in the world whether you're talking civilians, LEAs, or militaries.


I may be wrong, but I figure that with the 40 it is probably less important to carry top-performing good loads for SD than it is with the 9.

Better SD loads mean nothing if you haven't trained enough to put rounds accurately on target in the first place.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/57753/img/rule0.jpeg

Says it all, really.

gtmtnbiker98
05-01-2011, 07:30 PM
Not sure about overall longevity, but I have been carrying a P30S .40 on duty for just over a year. It has seen right around 4,000 rounds, no issues and most of the round count was Speer 165 GDHPs (department issue).

UpDok
05-01-2011, 08:47 PM
Better can be answered or defined many ways, depending upon what you are trying to accomplish.

I have had a number of P2000 and P30 pistols in .40 over the years, with round counts of 1,000 to between 5,000 and 10,000 rounds on each pistol, and have yet to experience a stoppage or breakage. Speaking with CBP folks, their P2000's seem to be holding up, even with that 155 grain hot load that was being used. I do shoot my P30's in 9 more than in .40.



Not sure about overall longevity, but I have been carrying a P30S .40 on duty for just over a year. It has seen right around 4,000 rounds, no issues and most of the round count was Speer 165 GDHPs (department issue).

Thank you gentlemen. I was looking for some basic information on the durability of .40 cal H&K P30's and you supplied it. :cool:

GJM
05-01-2011, 10:32 PM
Geography, and the kind of four legged critters you have, can also play a factor in your caliber decision. This past weekend, we were up the road in Anchorage, and hiking on a trail in town, stumbled on two moose -- a cow and a year old calf. The closest I have come to being hurt by an animal, was a charge by a cow moose this past January, and a single round of .40 out of a P30 in front of the moose's nose, stopped the charge at 3 yards. Is a .40 a bear and moose gun, no, but I would rather have a .40 than a 9 in an urban environment like Anchorage where there are possible two and four legged threats.

fuse
05-02-2011, 12:38 AM
Geography, and the kind of four legged critters you have, can also play a factor in your caliber decision. This past weekend, we were up the road in Anchorage, and hiking on a trail in town, stumbled on two moose -- a cow and a year old calf. The closest I have come to being hurt by an animal, was a charge by a cow moose this past January, and a single round of .40 out of a P30 in front of the moose's nose, stopped the charge at 3 yards. Is a .40 a bear and moose gun, no, but I would rather have a .40 than a 9 in an urban environment like Anchorage where there are possible two and four legged threats.

Interesting. This seems like one of the few legit reasons for 40 over 9 Ive read.

Pistol Shooter
05-02-2011, 09:37 AM
I have a 9mm P30 L and absolutely love it, it's a fine handgun by any measure.

Given your environment, have you considered just moving past the .40 to a .45 ?

Maybe an HK 45 or 45C?

GJM
05-02-2011, 10:15 AM
When we bumped into those two moose in Anchorage, and for the record they were just grazing and minding their own business like most moose do, I was wearing my HK 45C, with the DPX 185+P load. That said, I am not sure how much difference there is between a .40 and .45 on moose/bear sized critters, although my hope is that the X bullet would hang together better than some others.

The Smith 329 with the Garrett Defender loads, designed for the Scandium .44 magnum, is really the ticket for lightweight carry with good penetration. Although quite commonly worn in rural Alaska, you don't see many .44's around the in town areas in Anchorage.

Pistol Shooter
05-02-2011, 01:59 PM
Understood. :)

UpDok
05-07-2011, 07:18 AM
I'm not sure making long-term decisions on the basis of a once-in-a-lifetime event that was driven by largely irrational hysteria makes a whole lot of sense.


I don't want to get political but I personally don't have a whole lot of confidence in the competence or the motives of the current US president, or in my State's current administration for that matter. I already have a 9 and a 45. I'd rather keep my caliber options open. Ammo availability and selection became limited in the recent past, It may become limited again in the near future.

"Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for"





http://dl.dropbox.com/u/57753/img/rule0.jpeg

Says it all, really.

I like your artwork, but the size of the bullet holes seem out of proportion with the size of the handguns. The holes look to be somewhat bigger than 9mm; perhaps 12 ga. slugs?

Why all the animosity for the 40? It is a useful and popular duty caliber in the USA. I think these caliber wars are silly. Any of the three standard duty calibers currently used by US police departments are satisfactory assuming high quality premium hollow points are used (such as shown in Dr. Roberts well publicized list).

To further illustrate the silliness of the caliber wars I remember reading that the late Col. Jeff Cooper once said, "40 S&W's are for people who are ashamed to be seen carrying a 9mm, But don't have what it takes to carry a .45" Hopefully the late Col. was "tongue in cheek" when he said that.

#08-76
05-07-2011, 10:08 AM
I like your artwork, but the size of the bullet holes seem out of proportion with the size of the handguns. The holes look to be somewhat bigger than 9mm; perhaps 12 ga. slugs?


I think we have several bullets going in the same place; It does say shot placement is king.

UpDok
05-07-2011, 01:51 PM
I think we have several bullets going in the same place; It does say shot placement is king.

Thanks for pointing that out. I thought it was a picture of holes from five 12ga. shotgun slugs. :D

jslaker
05-07-2011, 02:16 PM
I like your artwork, but the size of the bullet holes seem out of proportion with the size of the handguns. The holes look to be somewhat bigger than 9mm; perhaps 12 ga. slugs?

Not my artwork, something found at random online a while back. :) And as has been said, I think the implication is that the holes have been shot out by multiple rounds.


Why all the animosity for the 40? It is a useful and popular duty caliber in the USA.

I have nothing against .40, per se. I own and daily carry a gun in .40 S&W that was bought when I first started getting into shooting several years ago.

But I wouldn't buy a .40 now unless somebody else was paying for my ammo.


Any of the three standard duty calibers currently used by US police departments are satisfactory assuming high quality premium hollow points are used (such as shown in Dr. Roberts well publicized list).

Exactly. If decent ammo selection makes the major calibers relatively equal for defensive use, what reason is there to select a caliber that is going to cost me 30-50% more to shoot? The bottleneck is going to be me, not my caliber of choice. Selecting the caliber that allows for more training per dollar just seems sensible to me.

Glock17
08-07-2011, 03:58 PM
There was a time that I thought I would never use anything but 1911's with .45 hardball. Now I'm quite happy with a P30 in 9mm. The advances in propellant and bullet design in just the last 10-15 years have been pretty dramatic. 9mm is cheaper and more plentiful than .40 and vastly larger quantities of 9mm are produced around the world. Most importantly you are much more likely to be able to shoot 9mm quickly and accurately and that is what really matters. I have never owned a P30 in .40 but HK's are built like tanks, some say overbuilt, and I cannot imagine you will have durability issues.
But I would give 9mm a lot of thought.

DocGKR
08-07-2011, 10:24 PM
After doing wound ballistic research and post-shooting incident analysis since 1989, I've come to the following conclusions:

For CCW and most urban LE duty, there are a lot of advantages in carrying a 9mm--easy to shoot one handed, relatively inexpensive to practice with, lots of bullets. Downside is less robust intermediate barrier capability.

While I am not a big fan of the .357 Sig, if I was issued one and had lots of free ammunition available, I would have no issues about carrying one on a daily basis, however I don't like the blast, weapon wear issues, or cost of ammo.

If I was in a place that issued free .40, was doing a lot of work around vehicles, or had to worry about potentially stopping larger aggressive animals and couldn't generally carry a large bore revolver, I'd be strongly tempted to carry a .40--lots of 180 gr JHP's that do well against intermediate barriers is a good thing. Generally .40's can be harder to learn to shoot well than 9mm or even .45 ACP for many folks.

The nice aspects of .45 ACP are that it makes large holes, can be very accurate, offers good penetration of some common intermediate barriers, and is what the 1911 is optimally chambered for. Unfortunately, magazine capacity is less than ideal, .45 ACP is more expensive to practice with, and in general is harder to shoot well compared with 9mm. A .45 ACP makes the most sense in states with idiotic 10 rd magazine restrictions, in places that give you lots of free .45 ACP ammo, or in situations where modern expanding ammunition is restricted due to asinine, illogical regulations.

ToddG
08-08-2011, 08:10 AM
Great post, DocGKR. Thanks!

Comedian
08-08-2011, 01:20 PM
The P30 is a tank. Even in a larger caliber you can reasonably expect the weapon to be durable to the point that the cost of the ammo you run through it is many times greater than the cost of the weapon.

The thing about the .40 is that the United States is the only country in the world where people seem to believe that a few extra hundredths of an inch in bullet diameter is a significant factor in making bad people stop doing bad things in a hurry. Larger calibers do have some advantages, but those advantages are often not terribly applicable to the situations the average person is likely to face with a handgun. So while .40 is certainly a valid chambering and the P30 is certainly likely to give you a very long and reliable service life, I'd ask why you really want the bigger caliber.

I find that lots of people seem to think that the 9mm is somehow a compromise in selecting a handgun. In truth all handguns are weapons of compromise. The 9mm is, objectively, no more of a compromise than the other major service calibers. There are a number of police departments out there using 9mm handguns as issue weapons and to the best of my knowledge they aren't having any more trouble killing bad guys with it than departments that issue larger calibers. Given that there's a world of real data out there that shows the basic equity of service calibers using good loads, what are you hoping to gain from the selection of a .40?

If you have a ready supply of .40 that is cheaper than 9mm, rock on. Free or inexpensive ammo is the best ammo in the world. Shoot as much of it as possible. If you reasonably expect that the bad guy you are most likely to have to shoot is going to be in or around a vehicle, the .40 might be a good idea.

If you don't find that either situation applies to you, however, all the .40 is likely to give you is a higher ammo bill. When you look at using a handgun for stopping bad people from doing bad things to you, training has the biggest impact on one's ability to bring the confrontation to a happy conclusion. It is many orders of magnitude more important than practically anything else...including caliber selection.

The higher the cost of training, the less of it you'll do. So stop to consider: Are the slight performance advantages of the .40 really worth giving up the training you'll forfeit due to the extra expense?

In other words, by selecting the more expensive weapon to feed, are you really getting a return that you can readily identify, or are you laying out the extra cash for a largely theoretical advantage?

I would say that 9mm is LESS of a compromise, just for the greater capacity alone.

Comedian
08-08-2011, 01:25 PM
Geography, and the kind of four legged critters you have, can also play a factor in your caliber decision. This past weekend, we were up the road in Anchorage, and hiking on a trail in town, stumbled on two moose -- a cow and a year old calf. The closest I have come to being hurt by an animal, was a charge by a cow moose this past January, and a single round of .40 out of a P30 in front of the moose's nose, stopped the charge at 3 yards. Is a .40 a bear and moose gun, no, but I would rather have a .40 than a 9 in an urban environment like Anchorage where there are possible two and four legged threats.

How do you know the result wouldn't have been the same with 9mm?