Author Topic: Why don't more people shoot the 40 cal (Read 7817 times)

bulletstuffer · « **on:** March 18, 2011, 10:15:16 AM »

Seems like it's the caliber of choice for the police but most people I run into at the range shooting semi autos are using 9mm or 45 cal. Is this one of those odd ball calibers that hasn't caught on yet with the general public?

Thanks,

Bulletstuffer

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #1 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:31:12 AM »

40 is relitivly new compared to 45 ACP and 9mm.
both are over 100 years old and the 40 is only from the early 90's
The 40 is the happy medium between the two.
Fits in the 9mm framed guns, power of the 45 with the 185 grain bullets
quite a few police departments are going to it.
But with budget restraints it is hard to get rid of a working platform of the 9 or 45.
As for most shooters, there really is not difference between the 9 and the 40 when putting holes in paper.
If you are limited to 10 rounds why not get a double stacked compact 40 to carry and make bigger holes with heavier bullets?
But same could be said bout the 357 Sig, shoot the lighter bullets at laser speeds.

I own 1 40, but 3 9's and 2 45's

saddlebum · « **Reply #2 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:44:31 AM »

I can only speak for myself. To me it's like the .357mag of autos. The .357 being in between the .38spl+P and the .41/.44mag.
The .40s&w has a sharper faster recoil than the other calibers that suround it. IMO, it is not as comfortable to shoot as the lesser or greater calibers and muzzle blast worse. The .357 is extremely popular, but not with me. I would prefer to shoot the .38 or .41/.44. I have the same feelings for the .40 compared to the 9mm and .45. I would rather shoot the .45 And then too is the ammo availability issue compared to the other two. The .40 is a fine round for it's intended purpose, if you like to shoot it. Evidently many don't.

This may all sound weird and disagreeable with most other folks. But, I'm a weird guy......what can I say?

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #3 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:48:48 AM »

saddlebum the 40 is like the 38 of autos , the 10mm is the 357 mag of autos

saddlebum · « **Reply #4 on:** March 18, 2011, 12:07:17 PM »

I think of the 10mm as the .357maximum of autos.
My whole comparison on this subject is strange, but I'm not sure how else to put it......I'm weird!

So I wonder what other factor there is besides the recoil factor, ammo and longevity and popularity of the standards?

cwlongshot · « **Reply #5 on:** March 18, 2011, 01:13:36 PM »

Conversely, I think it is very popular with defensive shooters, BUT I think its NOT so popular with re loaders or target shooters.

There is no appreciable target firearms so chambered, like there is for the 45 ACP, 38 Special or even 9MM. (I know of the 40 cal, HI Power long slide)

Comparing sales of defensive ammo, its a top seller under the 9MM. Sales running similar to the 45 ACP for us.

Comparing it with jacketed target ammo its much less popular.

Comparing it to lead target ammo its not sold very often. But same can be said for the lead 9mm. I again feel this is from defensive shooters and some manufacturers not recommending lead ammo be fired from there barrels.

I think we all know the story of its creation as well as its ballistics. FBI looking to replace the S&W 357Mag revolvers adopted the 10MM Auto. But where unable to maintain passing competency with the 10mm. Called for a 180 G bullet at 1000 fps in a auto got the 40 S&W. So with a 180G bullet it does what the 45 ACP claims to but seldom achieves. Being smaller its appropriate for smaller "9mm" framed guns. There are some really small, well made defensive 40 S&W handguns.

Personally, I like it allot as a defensive caliber. IMHO, the Sig 229, Glock 23 and Kahr 40 are great defensive 40 Cal's!

CW

1911crazy · « **Reply #6 on:** March 18, 2011, 02:04:38 PM »

With all the 45acp ammo i have plus the reloading stuff why change to another caliber now thats not that much different than my 45acp in my 1911? There's not that much difference in the two calibers until we get to the 10mm which most can't handle the power. I think the 45acp with the +P ammo will perform in any situation on the street. To me my beliefs are I just make sure the rounds go were they have to go no matter how many are in the gun. We need to be more accurate with less rounds required. I'm carrying the 41mag now. And i feel very safe with it.

williamlayton · « **Reply #7 on:** March 18, 2011, 03:00:39 PM »

The .40 Short & Weak is a 10mm kurtz.
It is a nitch caliber with no history and great sales hype.
Blessings

flintlock · « **Reply #8 on:** March 18, 2011, 03:32:30 PM »

Never worried about what others used...

I've carried a Glock 23 for over 10 years, I like it...

Just didn't feel the 9 was quite large enough, like
having 12 rounds instead of 8...

keith44 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 18, 2011, 04:50:55 PM »

While I may be a real oddball here I'll tell you all this. I have owned and used both 9mm, and .45 acp, and have fired two .40 s&w as well as one 10mm. Of the lot I prefer either a duty size .45 or 9mm. (no compacts wanted here) I am a revolver man period. My reasoning is not one of logic but feel. To me a 4" DA revolver in almost any caliber just feels better. For defense I carry a .38 or .44 spcl. not too worried about the number of shots, rather the effective placement of the shots I do take.

saddlebum · « **Reply #10 on:** March 18, 2011, 05:16:07 PM »

Seems like the .40 suffers from some of the stigma that the .41mag has. Both good rounds, but just can't quite surpass their predecessors in sales and popularity. The mountains they had to surmount from the classics may have been too big for them to be as successful. But there will always be guys like me, (.41mag fan), that will enjoy them. Probably the only reason I shoot the .41 instead of the .44 is I have always been able to pick them up cheaper and when they still produced them, they were easier to come by than a .44mag. And it does anything the .44 will. It just happens to be a stepchild. The .357 Sig may fall in that category too.

I think there comes a point when the market has all the calibers it needs............

Chilachuck · « **Reply #11 on:** March 18, 2011, 06:55:47 PM »

Quote from: cwlongshot on March 18, 2011, 01:13:36 PM

I think we all know the story of its creation as well as its ballistics. FBI looking to replace the S&W 357Mag revolvers adopted the 10MM Auto.

So far as I could tell, back when I read up on that Miami shootout, the real problem was weapon retention. The idiot feebs drew their hand guns and put them on the passenger seat, then lost them when they hit the brakes. To me that says they were using the wrong holsters, that they could not get to the handgun as quickly as they should be able to.

I have never read or heard anything about the feebs going to a better holster, but, by golly, they had a brand new firearm (two of them?) designed especially to... What? Stay put on the passenger seat?

1911crazy · « **Reply #12 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:41:04 PM »

No flame intended but the 40cal is for the guys who couldn't handle the 10mm or qualify with it. With all the 10mm hype and it being hard to qualify with the gun manufacturers needed to think quickly to come up with something under the 10mm that anyone could handle when the 10mm failed in "controllability" right? Now with that said the 40cal is also over shadowed by the 45acp too and its 100 years of populatiry too. Now will the 40cal be accepted I really don't think its popularity will ever match nor exceed the 45acp or even the 9mm luger round too. I think the 40cal is stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to growing in popularity. Its also about change too. Change can be very hard to us/me as an old timer too, were kind of set in our ways, sometimes i feel as old as the 45acp and molded and weened on the 1911/45acp auto too for eons. When we think of an auto pistol most of us will think the 45acp in the 1911 first. You guys just maybe right the 40cal is the 41mag of the auto's.

I carried the redhawks in 44mag for most of my CCW life. I been full circle now and have gone thru the 1911 and 9mm auto days recently only to return to the magnum revolvers again when i looked at the knock down power of the 9mm's. But this time its the 41mag thats my choice for my CCW weapon. The 4" barrel of my S&W model 58 is smaller and lighter to carry than my redhawks. As we get older size and weight does matter. I'm thinking a 41mag snubbie next. I like the 800ft.lbs. of energy.

I'm very surprised that the 357SIG never caught on with its ballastics being so close to the 357mag in power in an auto. I would of bet it would of surpassed the 40cal in popularity by now. With the ballastics of the 357SIG being close to the 357mag and the 10mm ballastics being so close to the 41mag it leaves the 40cal by itself to compete with the 45acp which it can't in popularity.

1911crazy · « **Reply #13 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:52:58 PM »

Quote from: keith44 on March 18, 2011, 04:50:55 PM

While I may be a real oddball here I'll tell you all this. I have owned and used both 9mm, and .45 acp, and have fired two .40 s&w as well as one 10mm. Of the lot I prefer either a duty size .45 or 9mm. (no compacts wanted here) I am a revolver man period. My reasoning is not one of logic but feel. To me a 4" DA revolver in almost any caliber just feels better. For defense I carry a .38 or .44 spcl. not too worried about the number of shots, rather the effective placement of the shots I do take.

I'm an old wheel gun guy too. One of my local gun shops has way more auto pistols than revolvers. I would say the ratio is about 50 auto's to 1 revolver its that bad. He has one little case of used revolvers thats it nothing new in the revolver market. I'm thinking the younger crowd is mainly after the auto's because of what they see in TV.

cwlongshot · « **Reply #14 on:** March 19, 2011, 02:02:14 AM »

Quote from: Chilachuck on March 18, 2011, 06:55:47 PM

Quote from: cwlongshot on March 18, 2011, 01:13:36 PM
I think we all know the story of its creation as well as its ballistics. FBI looking to replace the S&W 357Mag revolvers adopted the 10MM Auto.

So far as I could tell, back when I read up on that Miami shootout, the real problem was weapon retention. The idiot feebs drew their hand guns and put them on the passenger seat, then lost them when they hit the brakes. To me that says they were using the wrong holsters, that they could not get to the handgun as quickly as they should be able to.

I have never read or heard anything about the feebs going to a better holster, but, by golly, they had a brand new firearm (two of them?) designed especially to... What? Stay put on the passenger seat?

Yup, your correct. That shooting will forever be a training aide for law enforcement. Lots of mistakes and it cost many lives.

1911,
I hear what your saying. I too measure everything auto against the 45 ACP. Hence my comment about the 40's 180 G ballistics. The 45 with a 185 can do 1000 from most 5" barrels but the 40 will do it from shorter. But it lacks diameter of the 45, yet its superior to the 9mm. For me its ability to fit in smaller, more compact package is huge as concealment is where its at around here on the liberal east coast. I'm a bigger guy and concealing my Commander thru the fall winter and spring is pretty easy. The summer presents a problem. A KAHR is very small in comparison and feels right to me.

William,
Short and Weak...

Come on now you know better than that... No history,

I beg to differ, the 40 has been here for over twenty three years now and in that period of time its amassed some very respectable performance ballistics and shooting results. Look on the shelves or catalogue pages. EVERYONE who loads defensive ammo ans multiple offerings for the 40 S&W. Also as stated in one of the first posts here, its used by countless LEO's country wide. Look at it this way, it's ballistically better than a 9mm while holding nearly as many rounds in same sized gun. Heck, most 9mms are available in a 40 S&W too! Power wise, measured against the bench mark 45 ACP. a 180 grain bullet at over 1000 fps form a SHORTER barrel. That's some very respectable credentials if your asking me!

I ~~cannot~~ will not argue the revolver to auto, cause I too love my wheel guns. But I'll never be without my 1911!!

CW

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #15 on:** March 19, 2011, 02:29:04 AM »

Almost all the law enforcement officers I know of use the .40. Two police departments and county locally use them. The .40 is far more popular than the .41 mag. This is just because of the police departments. I find hundreds of spent .40 cases at the local shooting range. More 9mm, then .40's, then .45's, and a few .380's when I pick up brass. I think this is a nation wide situation, mostly .40's with LEO's thus ensuring its popularity.

williamlayton · « **Reply #16 on:** March 19, 2011, 05:23:14 AM »

CW
Your both correct and incorrect--20 years, to these old eyes, is a short time.
The .40 is a short and weak 10mm.
To say that it is a better round than the .45 takes some clarification of thinking.
It caught on with the game crowd and PD's because of the double stack ability--more ammo. That is a viable argument.
The round, as a stopper, is not a viable argument when compared to the .45.
Blessings

mechanic · « **Reply #17 on:** March 19, 2011, 06:33:49 AM »

I'm just kinda' stuck on wheel guns. I like my 357's. If that don't stop them, it's time to run anyway. Cheap reloads and no stove pipes.

Ben

coyotejoe · « **Reply #18 on:** March 19, 2011, 07:03:09 AM »

Well I certainly wouldn't say the .40 S&W is not a popular round, every handgun which can be chambered for it is chambered for it and every maker of handgun ammo makes .40 S&W ammo.
When the round first appeared my reaction was a yawn. To split the difference between 9mm and .45 ACP, why bother? With best available ammo in both calibers the difference is not worth splitting. But now we have it and it is a best seller.
I prefer revolvers for all sporting purposes and for personal defense but for military and police purposes I can see the advantages of a semi auto and think it makes very little difference whether 9mm, .40 or .45 and I'd throw the .38 Super, .357 Sig or 9x21 in there too.

Slowpoke Slim · « **Reply #19 on:** March 19, 2011, 08:40:31 AM »

"Why don't more people shoot the 40 cal"..?

Because I have and have shot custom 1911's in 45 auto.

You can't mess with perfection.

I'm also a revolver fan.

Curtis · « **Reply #20 on:** March 19, 2011, 11:38:23 AM »

Don't know why it's not popular and don't care. When I bought my first defensive handgun a few years ago I chose a Smith M&P compact in 40 cal. I wanted more power than 9mm offered but wanted a small package in case I decided to carry later. I found it very shootable for "kind of a beginner". I say that because most of my handgun experience up to that time was many hours behind a Contender in various calibers. The M&P was a whole new animal and I was able to print this group as my first five shots ever (right out of the box) at 25 yards. I doubt I could have done this good with a 10mm, especially in this small a package:

I have since added a Springer 1911 in 45 and a Ruger Speed Six in 357. I still like the M&P for most instances. It usually stays in the truck, my 357 by my bedside and the 1911 is in the gun safe ..........so I guess that is my order of preference for now.

I think ammo cost is one of the biggest factors that keeps the 357 Sig from being more popular. When I bought my M&P I also bought 1300 rounds of JHP 40 cal ammo for $14 per box. I still have enough of that left for defense and will most likely hand load my practice rounds from here on out. I don't see anything "short and weak" about the 40, but then I don't try to hunt with it.

Curtis

Graybeard · « **Reply #21 on:** March 19, 2011, 11:45:15 AM »

I own no 45s and not a lot of 9mm as the .40 S&W is my choice. I have lots of them.

Brett · « **Reply #22 on:** March 19, 2011, 01:47:24 PM »

Around the time 'Zero-bama' came into office and ammo was in short supply I could hardly find any 9mm or .38SPL ammo on the shelves anywhere. However my local Waly-world had plenty of .40S&W in several bullet types/weights and by several manufactures on their shelves. That's when I decided my next defensive handgun would be a .40. I eventually came across a great deal on a like new S&W M&P and the rest, as they say, is history. More pep than 9mm in the same sized package. What's not to like?

Savage · « **Reply #23 on:** March 19, 2011, 04:02:06 PM »

For years I could see no reason for the existence of the .40 S&W. Then, my last duty gun before retirement was a Glock 22. My mind changed quickly. Comparable power to the .45 with twice the capacity of the 1911. It's also a great caliber for USPSA major. It makes power easily with sane loads. The 9mm can be loaded to major PF, but the pressure is off the chart! The .45 makes major, but is severely limited in capacity even in the large double stack pistols. I only have a couple of .40 pistols, but the .40 would be my choice in any new acquisitions. I'd love to have a Tanfoglio Match or a STI double stack for USPSA or even ESP in USPSA. Yeah, I like the .40!
Savage

cwlongshot · « **Reply #24 on:** March 19, 2011, 05:08:46 PM »

Quote from: williamlayton on March 19, 2011, 05:23:14 AM

CW
Your both correct and incorrect--20 years, to these old eyes, is a short time.
The .40 is a short and weak 10mm.
To say that it is a better round than the .45 takes some clarification of thinking.
It caught on with the game crowd and PD's because of the double stack ability--more ammo. That is a viable argument.
The round, as a stopper, is not a viable argument when compared to the .45.
Blessings

Ahh, but did I say it was better? I don't believe I did.

Your spot on with better being relative. Better than what... nothing, sure. Better than a box of rocks again yes. But better then the 45 ACP... in some things yes in others no. But to flatly state that the 40 is better then the 45, no, not in my book, it is not better.

I will say weather twenty years is long or short the respect and "history" this cartridge acquired in said time is as good as any and far better then most defensive calibers going today. I think most would that be a fair statement.

I have a healthy respect for the 40. But it will not unseat my 45 for my go to gun. Hi capacity is not everything. Hit what you aim at and do so with enough caliber and you will find 7-8 rounds in a couple mags, will satisfy anything most people will ever get into.

CW

mechanic · « **Reply #25 on:** March 19, 2011, 07:08:44 PM »

While this does not qualify as a scientific sampling, I just sorted a large box of range brass my brother brought me. At our local range, most just walk off and leave brass everywhere, a violation of the rules but they do it nontheless. We usually carry a broom and dust pan in the truck, and sweep up all the empty lanes and dump them in a box. I just went through about 3,000 pieces of brass, and of the pistol brass, the majority.....a LARGE majority was 40, with 45 ACP and 9mm coming in second and third. Obviously the 40 IS popular, at least here abouts.

By the way, in rifle brass, it was 223 hands down.

Ben

williamlayton · « **Reply #26 on:** March 20, 2011, 03:55:25 AM »

I didn't mean to imply that you said better. I used better in a general sense of the word and perception of many.
Blessings

1911crazy · « **Reply #27 on:** March 20, 2011, 05:20:17 AM »

When these new wizz bang calibers came out i looked at the ballastics and compared them to the 45acp 185gr +P ballastics. To me the stopping power, the "energy" (foot pounds) in close quarters is an advantage. I just stayed with the 45acp for all these many yaers. Were just learning this in Iraq and afganistan with the 9mm isn't cutting the mustard sort of speak but most of us already knew the 9mm round(luger) wasn't a stop dead in your tracks round to begin with. Now for some reason the 45acp is being reissued. Its in the close quarters combat is where the stop dead in your tracks is needed. In an auto pistol the 45acp ballastics still look good to me for an auto.

As i'm getting older I am interested in the 10mm, the 38 super and the 9x23 win. plus the 9x25 dillon getting a thought about too. I'm just not ready to go in that direction right now. But i never considered a 40cal yet anyway. But we never know. CZY

buck460XVR · « **Reply #28 on:** March 20, 2011, 05:21:23 AM »

Quote from: mechanic on March 19, 2011, 07:08:44 PM

Obviously the 40 IS popular, at least here abouts.

.........same around here. Maybe it's cause most .40 shooters don't reload, but at my range also, the majority of the brass I find is .40. I don't own a .40, only autos I own are .22 and .45. Mostly I'm a revolver guy. But, IMHO, the .40 cal is a niche caliber because that's what it was designed for. To give a platform for more power and penetration than 9mm in a high cap auto loader, without the harsh recoil of the 10mm that intimidated many female LEOs. I believe it is a viable round and does well within the parameters that it was designed for.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #29 on:** March 20, 2011, 06:46:05 AM »

That is what I find at my ranges, lots of 9mm's and 40 s&w's, very few .45 acp or 38/357. I've noticed a lot of Auburn University students at my range. All they shoot are 9's, 40's, and 223's, with some 7.62x39's thrown in. They don't reload. There are a fair amount of 30-06's, 30-30's, and 270's for the weekend hunters who don't reload. All other calibers are rare indeed because of reloading.