Page 2 of 32 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 316

Thread: The 40cal on its way out?

  1. #11
    Site Supporter Trooper224's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Wichita
    I started my LE career with a .357 magnum, that was fine. When I went to work for the staties it was a .45acp, fine as well. Eight years ago I transferred to a different division and now carry a .40, once again fine. After tweenty three years in LE work and military service before that, that only thing I've determined about pistol caliber is this: I don't care. With modern ammunition the performance gap is largely closed. The common service calibers have their differences, but it all seems largely academic at this point. The deciding factor is my ability to accurately place the projectile on target, not a few milimeters difference in bore size. If carrying a .40 makes you feel like you've strapped on the hammer of Thor than by all means carry one, it's not a bad choice, but don't fool yourself into thinking it gives you some inherent advantage.

    The .40 doesn't need to be driven to higher pressure? The .40 IS a higher pressure round all the way around. Forty caliber pistols will wear out sooner than the comparative nine milimeter. This is not vodoo, it's a fact based on physics not wishful thinking. Your .40 won't spontaneously disassemble on you, but shoot it to destruction next to the comparative 9mm and it will poop the bed sooner every time, garunteed. I suspect you don't believe it simply because you've decided not to.

    Debating caliber effectivness with those well versed in ballistic science will not result in an harmonious outcome.
    Last edited by Trooper224; 03-14-2015 at 07:14 AM.
    We may lose and we may win, but we will never be here again.......

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by DocGKR View Post
    .40 is a good cartridge and does some things very well. But physics is a harsh mistress, as is materials science. In otherwise equivalent pistols, .40 S&W generally wears the guns out faster than 9 mm. [/IMG]
    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.
    Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.

  3. #13
    New Member BLR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Left seat in a Super Viking
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich View Post
    First off I carry a HK P30S in 9mm and have used /carried the S&W M5906 and M6906 back in the 90`s
    But unlike most of you guys I truly think the 40S&W is a Better LE load than the 9mm +P 124gr and standard pressure 147

    I keep reading on forums why the 40S&W is fading away!

    Here are some of the things I hear others say.



    9mm = less wear ? Okay a lot of loads on the Docs list are +p rated and that cause extra wear and some pistol like my P30S aren't even rated for +P use(although I use +P loads under 1200 fps)
    The 40S&W doesn't need to be driven at a higher pressure. Therefore no extra wear or tear.

    40S&W pistol are built to 9mm specs therefore wear out faster ?? What current LE service pistol is built to 9mm specs in 40S&W? Even my retired 1998 P229 doesn't have this so called problem.

    9mm = less recoil faster follow up. The 40 cal can be loaded to any pressure or velocity the agency may want! JHP Bullets from 135gr to 200gr.
    What does Chuck say about recoil? Sorry Chuck I know you like 9mm over the 40S&W

    9mm cost less. When I buy ammo from my dealer (50rd LE ammo) I don't see much if any difference and sometimes even see the 40S&W for less.
    I also see 40S&W LE loads instock most off the time unlike 9mm LE loads like 124+P and 147 HST . BTW he seems to always have 180gr HST instock


    I'm going to have to shoot a M&P40 and G22 to see what up with the excessive recoil.


    BTW my hands ache all the time now and I have broken my hand and every finger once or twice now. So I'm some what a recoil sensitive and I'm only 50yrs old.
    But still enjoy shooting my retired P229 in 40S&W
    So not a lot of reasoning given in response to this, so I'll take a whack at it.
    1. Wear. This is the easy one. The reason for accelerated wear is a momentum/energy management issue. "Modern" designs are all essentially striker fired. Including the HKs and SIGs and Berettas. And there in lies the problem. Striker fired pistol operation are only 2 legs of a 3 legged stool. You can design a pistol as a 9mm, but getting it to work with a 357 or 40 really doesn't work unless you redesign the slide. You'll always have artificially high slide velocities. And consequently, durability problems. The common, and halfassed, solution is to stuff a heavier recoil spring in the gun. This is largely done because people really don't understand basic kinematics. This results is a slightly slower rearward slide velocity, but a much accelerated forward velocity. Which is why the more recent designs start with the 40, then modify to make 9mms. Which results in excessive closing velocity. Now, the much maligned 1911 and 1935 utilize the hammer correctly, and cocking provides upward of 75% of the slide velocity governing and slide closing force. Simple levers utilized correctly. Of course, it makes the slide harder to rack, but......

    2. I tend to agree with the 40 being more effective. I recently sat through a meeting where the presenter discussed a ramped performance threshold of effectiveness. I don't think anyone will argue that the 25ACP isn't as effective as a 45ACP which isn't as effective as a 308. But no one, not even the SMEs here, can articulate a reasoned "why" this is. The theory I'm currently buying into is this: effectiveness (assuming identical shot placement, identical target, etc) is determined by a mix of rate of energy transfer, absolute energy transfer, and total volume of tissue disruption. Each individual responds differently, and the amount and type of external stimuli affect the outcome. Which is why the 9mm fans say "he was shot with a 45 and didn't die right there, so 9mm is just as effective." Well, sort of. That is a massive reductionist argument, and it demonstrates a desire to engineer an argument. If it's all shot placement, 38SPL 125LRN would be as effective as a 300WM to the chest. And it just isn't. The key is getting smarter in this area, and determining where the threshold is. And I'm sorry, "Because Favorite Special Operations Guys" isn't a logical, well reasoned justification. Otherwise, LL would be preaching the virtue of the M45.
    3. Recoil is subjective. I can shoot 170PF all day long out of a steel frame 45. Doing so out of a LW Commander is more less fun. Another fun little part about shooting style and stance. Locking your wrist and elbows, then shooting 1000 rounds of hot ammo out of a light gun, and you'll be whimpering about your joints in fast order. Yes, it might be slightly better in some respects for when you are shooting back at a bad guy over the hood of your cruiser, but if you are going to bang out 1000 rounds per day for a week solid in pie slicing school, you'll pay for it.

    Like GKR said, physicas and materials are hard, cruel mistresses. And they govern everyone and everything. Even if you are a ninja.

  4. #14
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    SC
    Ballistically in a shot to shot comparison only. The tip of the hat does go to .40, slightly.

    However, there's more to the equation because we're not looking to just shot to shot performance.

    Most professional shooters realize a single shot from a handgun cartridge will usually not stop a threat on first shot (considering non-CNS shots).

    Shooting events historically have led large organization analysts to say "We're not seeing anything appreciable between these two with their current JHP loadings".

    So, now that that's established.

    9mm recoils less (which leads to faster follow up shots; which may be necessary), wears less on the gun, is cheaper to load and shoot, gives you more capacity, and is available in more platforms. 9mm yields the benefits of a caliber that's been around since 1902, IIRC and is therefore more widely available.

    I realized this and went from an 8 round 1911 .45 ACP magazine to a 17 round 9mm Glock magazine.

    If we were forced to conceal carry Thompson contenders in pistol calibers; .40 S&W would be better than 9mm.

    However, since we're not; 9mm is more widely used.

    .40 S&W was adopted by the FBI because 10mm recoiled too harshly. That was adopted what, 20-30 years ago? In that time modern JHP has closed the gap on performance.

    If it was an FMJ world; this might be a different story.

    If you like .40, great. But that's my perspective on it.

  5. #15
    I love caliber debates.

  6. #16
    [QUOTE=DocGKR;303196 FWIW, I just got in some new practice ammo today; I can assure you that 9 mm is indeed less expensive than .40...

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, I am now officially jealous. Is that 18,000 rounds are something? Actually, I think I am officially insanely jealous.

  7. #17
    Chasing the Horizon RJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Quote Originally Posted by gtmtnbiker98 View Post
    I love caliber debates.
    Me too.

    Without meaning to add any additional derp, could this Dental Student respectfully ask the SMEs here a question about SAAMI "Maximum" pressure of 9mm vs 40 S&W, and how it relates (or does it?) to the perceived / actual snappier recoil / increased wear and tear on ones joints?

    "Other" fora discussions on this issue sometime cite SAAMI max pressure as an indicator of recoil. I've never understood this. For example, Wiki lists the Maximum Pressure of a 40 S&W round as 35,000 psi, with the same value listed for the 9mm Parabellum is 35,001.

    If these are indeed representative Max Pressures in PSI, then why does the 40 have the (deserved, apparently) reputation for higher felt recoil / decreased firearm service life?

    Does the SAAMI max pressure not have to do with the recoil impulse?

    I'll just be here cleaning my pistol.

    Thank you sirs.

    Rich in Tampa

  8. #18
    Chasing the Horizon RJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeep View Post
    OK, I am now officially jealous. Is that 18,000 rounds are something? Actually, I think I am officially insanely jealous.

    I confess, I did a quick estimate this morning and 18,000 was the number I came up with also.

    Dayum.

  9. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Isn't it 36,000?

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by uechibear View Post
    Isn't it 36,000?
    Both have the same saami pressure rating of 35ksi( or is it 36?). But that is only a piece of the puzzle. Remember that pressure is force over area. Case diameter is larger on a .40, so for a given pressure total force on breach face is higher.

    Really though you are concerned with force over time.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •