SIG Stops Production of .40 S&W Pistols

[learnerpermitted]

If only there were surplus .40 ammo to take advantage of the AIM Leo 229 I bought for $385 along with $12 mags. A potential hedge on .40 cal availability was my justification for getting one yet ammo stock no different from 9 for me. Surprised how compliant it is to shoot.

I was excited to get a no-rail legacy slide 229 in .40 but was saddened when I was unable to find any kydex holster for it. Nonetheless it was worth more to me to keep around than selling.

[Flat6]

I was excited to get a no-rail legacy slide 229 in .40 but was saddened when I was unable to find any kydex holster for it. Nonetheless it was worth more to me to keep around than selling.

I have the same legacy slide no rail. It fits my JMCK P228 wingclaw holster with the same ease.

[SecondsCount]

Back in the 2008-10 timeframe, I was shooting a M&P40.1 because the local police were using the range I belonged, and would leave buckets of 40 brass behind. There was a local guy that cast 155 grain bullets and total cost to reload was $88/1K.

Today I see no reason to carry a 40, and would rather have a 1911 in 45ACP.

[OfficeCat]

Nope. They'll just create a metal 365XL frame, call it the P365 AXG Viking or some nonsense, charge $1K for it and call it good. (I'm making this up, but wouldn't surprise me)

I'll wait for the P365 AXG Viking XXL Legion with a compass in the grip and a thing that tells time.

[Borderland]

40 dried up in the range brass bucket years ago. I was seeing more 45 acp than 40 about 2 years ago. It's like everything else, companies make more money on unit sales. Now that Sig can sell every 9mm pistol they make it makes little sense to make a small number of pistols in 40 that will have to be sold at discount prices.

I've never owned a 40 so I don't know what the benefit would be over 9mm. When mag bans go to 10, 45 acp will be the big winner, not 40. I already have mine because I know it's coming.

[OfficeCat]

I've never owned a 40 so I don't know what the benefit would be over 9mm.

For me, the benefits are 1) 40 was the caliber of a couple of nice pistols that would have cost significantly more had they been chambered in 9mm, thus putting them out of the "I really don't need that but it's a good deal and it's cool" bracket, and 2) 40 knocks down steel plates more satisfyingly than a 9mm.

[rcbusmc24]

The only thing still keeping .40 alive at this point is making major scoring for USPSA and such, and those guys aren't really buying factory ammo so...…

As to the Sigs, I'm pretty sure that the divisions that most of the guys that are running the Sigs in, IE: Production and Carry optics, don't have major scoring so their is little to no demand for those guns in that caliber..... Makes business sense to me.

[zaitcev]

I'm afraid that 10-round limit will not do much for the .40. If you look at the sources like Ellfritz, .40 is basically indistinguishable from the 9mm in effectiveness. The only thing it does better is barrier penetration (it is even more true for .357 SIG). So the people who want to make more use out of the limit will go straight to 10mm and .45.

[rcbusmc24]

I'm afraid that 10-round limit will not do much for the .40. If you look at the sources like Ellfritz, .40 is basically indistinguishable from the 9mm in effectiveness. The only thing it does better is barrier penetration (it is even more true for .357 SIG). So the people who want to make more use out of the limit will go straight to 10mm and .45.

While not the intent of this thread, I will say that the only issue with things like 10mm and 45 is gun size. .40 cal guns are generally the same size as 9mm ones. While .45 /10mm vice .40/ 9mm doesn't really matter much for service sized weapons, for small carry guns it does.... A lot, and in fact drove much innovation in the small pistol market in the late 90's and early 2000s as the concealed carry market grew. I find it interesting that the small carry pistol market really only exploded with a bunch of good options once the .40 was no longer really considered a serious contender for many. Thus I wonder if things like .45 GAP would have a chance of coming back if a new 10 round limit was enacted? As I recall it was developed to be a 10 round magazine .45 caliber cartridge that fit into a 9mm or 40 cal frame sized gun. If the AWB had never expired I wonder how popular that cartridge would be today, as well as how much effort would have been put in to 9mm improvements over the last 20 years if we could only have had 10 of them in the gun? Remembering of course that these improvements are what really makes it the de facto logical choice of today for many of us...

[HeavyDuty]

I think it was Mas who made the observation that .40 and .45 make a lot of sense for the winter in parka country - if you’re going to have a HP plug up with down parka and Carhartt, it’s better to have effective ball that pinches bigger holes than 9mm. That’s one reason I still like .40.