Sub-$300 LE Trade-ins Available Again

[Robinson]

Those LE trade-ins are tempting.

I shot a M&P 1.0 40S&W years ago and I remember the recoil not seeming like a big deal to me.

I know it's a strange question, but I have my reasons -- can anyone tell me how the muzzle blast of the 40 compares to 9mm and 45ACP ?

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

If I get one will I be Magpul Dynamics FABULOUS????

I've never jumped on the M&P train, think I'm going to pass even at the really good price.

[Malamute]

A cursory perusal of gunbroker showed a fair number of used M&P 40s for pretty reasonable prices, some in the buy now category, many listed on regular auctions with no bids, so initial bid may likely take one.

40 ammo still seems like a safe bet for availability of decent types,selection and price. The trend of choosing a 40 over a 9 for a field gun seems valid to me.

[LockedBreech]

Those LE trade-ins are tempting.

I shot a M&P 1.0 40S&W years ago and I remember the recoil not seeming like a big deal to me.

I know it's a strange question, but I have my reasons -- can anyone tell me how the muzzle blast of the 40 compares to 9mm and 45ACP ?

For me the blast is almost indistinguishable, same with the noise. Maybe slightly, slightly more on both? It's the sharper, upward recoil impulse that is the only real notable difference, and because I learned on .40 S&Ws I feel that a lot less than most shooters. Though I really, really think the experience of .40 S&W is more heavily platform dependent than any other caliber. I shot my .40 PX4 for half a decade before buying my first 9mm pistol and I have 9mm pistols I think recoil worse than my .40 PX4. But I also have a Glock 23 and Glock 19 and people are absolutely right when they say the 23 is much less pleasant.

I think the PX4 does .40 best, but I also have my M&P40 and it does a great job with the round, very manageable especially if you have the large 2.0 grip on it.

My Glock 22 Gen 5 MOS gets here next month and I'm excited to see how it compares.

Malamute mentioned ammo, and in my experience that's a huge plus of the .40 right now. I recently got 300 rounds of Winchester Ranger 180-grain RA40B (a doc approved round) for $27 a box and 300 rounds of Speer G2 180-grain for $26 a box. The main round I keep on hand is the 180-grain Speer Gold Dot. What's nice about .40 is that due to a lot of years as the de facto law enforcement round, there are a lot of extremely well-proven defensive rounds for the caliber. Its star may have faded compared to modern 9mm but I have zero concern about Gold Dot or Ranger Bonded 180-grain failing to do the job.

I have accepted the demise of .40 into a niche caliber and most of my day-to-day guns are 9mm, but it will always have a place in my safe for an outdoors/field round, a travel round (in and around cars .40 still does sterling work) and a pure nostalgia round. I think if more people had shot the PX4 rather than the G23 as their first .40 the caliber would not be quite a maligned.

[Robinson]

For me the blast is almost indistinguishable, same with the noise. Maybe slightly, slightly more on both? It's the sharper, upward recoil impulse that is the only real notable difference, and because I learned on .40 S&Ws I feel that a lot less than most shooters. Though I really, really think the experience of .40 S&W is more heavily platform dependent than any other caliber. I shot my .40 PX4 for half a decade before buying my first 9mm pistol and I have 9mm pistols I think recoil worse than my .40 PX4. But I also have a Glock 23 and Glock 19 and people are absolutely right when they say the 23 is much less pleasant.

I think the PX4 does .40 best, but I also have my M&P40 and it does a great job with the round, very manageable especially if you have the large 2.0 grip on it.

My Glock 22 Gen 5 MOS gets here next month and I'm excited to see how it compares.

Malamute mentioned ammo, and in my experience that's a huge plus of the .40 right now. I recently got 300 rounds of Winchester Ranger 180-grain RA40B (a doc approved round) for $27 a box and 300 rounds of Speer G2 180-grain for $26 a box. The main round I keep on hand is the 180-grain Speer Gold Dot. What's nice about .40 is that due to a lot of years as the de facto law enforcement round, there are a lot of extremely well-proven defensive rounds for the caliber. Its star may have faded compared to modern 9mm but I have zero concern about Gold Dot or Ranger Bonded 180-grain failing to do the job.

I have accepted the demise of .40 into a niche caliber and most of my day-to-day guns are 9mm, but it will always have a place in my safe for an outdoors/field round, a travel round (in and around cars .40 still does sterling work) and a pure nostalgia round. I think if more people had shot the PX4 rather than the G23 as their first .40 the caliber would not be quite a maligned.

Thanks for the detailed reply!

When I mentioned muzzle blast, I was talking about the noise. My ears have gotten to where shooting 45 in a Commander is a little problematic even doubled up, so I have to be careful about that. I should probably try to rent a 40 at the range before stepping in.

[LockedBreech]

Thanks for the detailed reply!

When I mentioned muzzle blast, I was talking about the noise. My ears have gotten to where shooting 45 in a Commander is a little problematic even doubled up, so I have to be careful about that. I should probably try to rent a 40 at the range before stepping in.

Really interesting question and probably depends a lot on ammo used, I usually shoot 180-grain which is the slowest (and presumably quietest) and use very heavy duty earmuffs (34db) so perhaps I don't appreciate the sound difference as much as I ought. There's never any shame in doubling up plugs + muffs either.

It'll probably be too late but next time I shoot I'll try to pay attention to that.

Googling around a bit about it, it seems that 9mm may actually be slightly louder on average, there was an old list on TheFiringLine putting .40 at 156db and 9mm at 159db. .45 at 157db. But I'd need to do a lot more research before I considered any of that credible.

[Thy.Will.Be.Done]

Really interesting question and probably depends a lot on ammo used, I usually shoot 180-grain which is the slowest (and presumably quietest) and use very heavy duty earmuffs (34db) so perhaps I don't appreciate the sound difference as much as I ought. There's never any shame in doubling up plugs + muffs either.

It'll probably be too late but next time I shoot I'll try to pay attention to that.

Googling around a bit about it, it seems that 9mm may actually be slightly louder on average, there was an old list on TheFiringLine putting .40 at 156db and 9mm at 159db. .45 at 157db. But I'd need to do a lot more research before I considered any of that credible.

db is only part of the equation, the larger caliber tends to draw out the impulse longer which makes for more effect overall. I definitely notice .40 as different, from hearing others shoot next to me compared to what i was shooting. I recall one instructor pulling out a Glock 22 to demonstrate for me and compared to my G26 it was quite a profound difference. This was indoors in standard partitioned range stalls.

[TheNewbie]

For me the blast is almost indistinguishable, same with the noise. Maybe slightly, slightly more on both? It's the sharper, upward recoil impulse that is the only real notable difference, and because I learned on .40 S&Ws I feel that a lot less than most shooters. Though I really, really think the experience of .40 S&W is more heavily platform dependent than any other caliber. I shot my .40 PX4 for half a decade before buying my first 9mm pistol and I have 9mm pistols I think recoil worse than my .40 PX4. But I also have a Glock 23 and Glock 19 and people are absolutely right when they say the 23 is much less pleasant.

I think the PX4 does .40 best, but I also have my M&P40 and it does a great job with the round, very manageable especially if you have the large 2.0 grip on it.

My Glock 22 Gen 5 MOS gets here next month and I'm excited to see how it compares.

Malamute mentioned ammo, and in my experience that's a huge plus of the .40 right now. I recently got 300 rounds of Winchester Ranger 180-grain RA40B (a doc approved round) for $27 a box and 300 rounds of Speer G2 180-grain for $26 a box. The main round I keep on hand is the 180-grain Speer Gold Dot. What's nice about .40 is that due to a lot of years as the de facto law enforcement round, there are a lot of extremely well-proven defensive rounds for the caliber. Its star may have faded compared to modern 9mm but I have zero concern about Gold Dot or Ranger Bonded 180-grain failing to do the job.

I have accepted the demise of .40 into a niche caliber and most of my day-to-day guns are 9mm, but it will always have a place in my safe for an outdoors/field round, a travel round (in and around cars .40 still does sterling work) and a pure nostalgia round. I think if more people had shot the PX4 rather than the G23 as their first .40 the caliber would not be quite a maligned.

I have an odd desire for a PX4 .40 and nice leather gear to go with it. No idea why, but the desire is there.

[JonInWA]

For me the blast is almost indistinguishable, same with the noise. Maybe slightly, slightly more on both? It's the sharper, upward recoil impulse that is the only real notable difference, and because I learned on .40 S&Ws I feel that a lot less than most shooters. Though I really, really think the experience of .40 S&W is more heavily platform dependent than any other caliber. I shot my .40 PX4 for half a decade before buying my first 9mm pistol and I have 9mm pistols I think recoil worse than my .40 PX4. But I also have a Glock 23 and Glock 19 and people are absolutely right when they say the 23 is much less pleasant.

I think the PX4 does .40 best, but I also have my M&P40 and it does a great job with the round, very manageable especially if you have the large 2.0 grip on it.

My Glock 22 Gen 5 MOS gets here next month and I'm excited to see how it compares.

Malamute mentioned ammo, and in my experience that's a huge plus of the .40 right now. I recently got 300 rounds of Winchester Ranger 180-grain RA40B (a doc approved round) for $27 a box and 300 rounds of Speer G2 180-grain for $26 a box. The main round I keep on hand is the 180-grain Speer Gold Dot. What's nice about .40 is that due to a lot of years as the de facto law enforcement round, there are a lot of extremely well-proven defensive rounds for the caliber. Its star may have faded compared to modern 9mm but I have zero concern about Gold Dot or Ranger Bonded 180-grain failing to do the job.

I have accepted the demise of .40 into a niche caliber and most of my day-to-day guns are 9mm, but it will always have a place in my safe for an outdoors/field round, a travel round (in and around cars .40 still does sterling work) and a pure nostalgia round. I think if more people had shot the PX4 rather than the G23 as their first .40 the caliber would not be quite a maligned.

Unfortunately, the PX4 was a relative latecomer, and those interested in a Beretta .40 more probably tried the 96 (which pretty much proved the axiom, "Merely putting a .40 barrel and .40 magazines on a 9mm is NOT a great for durability...") and the Cougar, which, despite excellent ergos, came replete with its own host of debilitating issues. If Beretta had properly vetted the Cougar, or brought the PX4 on earlier (with the PX4 arguably being the vetted learning curve from the Cougar) I might have been more interested.

My .40s these days are HK (P30L LEM and VP40) and Glock (Gen4 G22) and my FN High Power. I don't doubt the PX4 is a viable solution, but don't see it as having any advantages over what I've already got.

Best, Jon

[HeavyDuty]

For me the blast is almost indistinguishable, same with the noise. Maybe slightly, slightly more on both? It's the sharper, upward recoil impulse that is the only real notable difference, and because I learned on .40 S&Ws I feel that a lot less than most shooters. Though I really, really think the experience of .40 S&W is more heavily platform dependent than any other caliber. I shot my .40 PX4 for half a decade before buying my first 9mm pistol and I have 9mm pistols I think recoil worse than my .40 PX4. But I also have a Glock 23 and Glock 19 and people are absolutely right when they say the 23 is much less pleasant.

I think the PX4 does .40 best, but I also have my M&P40 and it does a great job with the round, very manageable especially if you have the large 2.0 grip on it.

My Glock 22 Gen 5 MOS gets here next month and I'm excited to see how it compares.

Malamute mentioned ammo, and in my experience that's a huge plus of the .40 right now. I recently got 300 rounds of Winchester Ranger 180-grain RA40B (a doc approved round) for $27 a box and 300 rounds of Speer G2 180-grain for $26 a box. The main round I keep on hand is the 180-grain Speer Gold Dot. What's nice about .40 is that due to a lot of years as the de facto law enforcement round, there are a lot of extremely well-proven defensive rounds for the caliber. Its star may have faded compared to modern 9mm but I have zero concern about Gold Dot or Ranger Bonded 180-grain failing to do the job.

I have accepted the demise of .40 into a niche caliber and most of my day-to-day guns are 9mm, but it will always have a place in my safe for an outdoors/field round, a travel round (in and around cars .40 still does sterling work) and a pure nostalgia round. I think if more people had shot the PX4 rather than the G23 as their first .40 the caliber would not be quite a maligned.

I was about to make a “young whippersnapper” comment about the nostalgia aspect, and then I realized - .40 S&W came out 32 years ago when I was in my late 20s!

I still like .40, and my 27.5 makes a great carry gun - especially since I had it milled for an RMR to assist my no longer young eyes.