Hey Comms - Is the .40 S&W Dead?

[Omega]

Comms will like this Article, I like the comments:

 

http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2016/2/26/keefe-report-seriously-is-the-40-sw-dead/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=insider&utm_campaign=0316

 

So what do you think, has 9mm really gotten that much better or are we just witnessing a budget driven choice?  I have carried a .40 almost since it's inception, done the whole wet phone book test (mid 80s) on it along with 9mm and .45 and just can't get past the fact that even though 9mm projectiles may of gotten better, the same can be said for the .40 and .45.  My decision to stay with a .40 for an EDC is simple, bigger bullet with a better mag capacity. 

[Randall53]

I plink with my 9mm when I want more than a .22. I carry my .40S&W.

[E4 No More]

I compromise with my .357 Sig.

[Sidecarist]

Historically the 40 is an interesting cartridge and this is part of Comms issue with it... As far as I know it is the only cartridge that was the offspring of a more powerful cartridge. 10mm begat 40S&W as opposed to 38spl begat 357mag. etc.

 

I find the 40 an agreeable compromise and have carried it extensively. I have also carried 45ACP a lot and am doing so now. I'm kind of old school in that I like big bullets. If it starts out big then reliable expansion (bullet performance) is less of a concern.

 

Terminal ballistic performance has improved greatly in the past few years. This has closed the gap considerably between the cartridges. Even 380 is beginning to be accepted as a decent defensive caliber. This is all because bullet performance has improved. Yes it has improved across all calibers but the smaller cartridges have benefited the most from the new bullet technology.

 

I carry single stack 45acp the most. I don't feel under-gunned, and most importantly I shoot it well. I'm comfortable with it. The 40 was the solution to the fact that some people don't shoot the 45 well, but the 9mm was under performing. This problem is less important today than it was when the 40S&W came into being. The performance gap is smaller than it used to be.

 

My recommendation... Carry the largest most reliable & most powerful weapon that you shoot WELL. For some that's a 9mm, or a 380. for others its a 40, 45, or 10mm.

 

I doubt that the 40S&W will be going away, but its on the decline for sure. Its decline is noticeable in part because its rise in popularity was so fast.

 

Be Safe!

[CommsNBombs]

.40SW is definitely not going anywhere - I'll say 98% of the people who carry it only do so because LEO/SOF carry it, and probably have never heard of the 10mm Auto, and if they have they did not know it came from the 10mm Auto.

 

I started with the 10mm, I already had a 9mm and .45ACP and did not feel the .40SW would fit the bill, especially since I knew it was an under powered 10mm - and, the FBI and their ilk can get bent.

 

The 10mm offers the same ammunition capacity, in the Glock 20 vs 22 frame there only added circumference is about .30" which is a non-issue even with my smaller-than-average hands. 

 

As Sidecarist pointed out - that is my major gripe, why settle for ammo that is weaker than what is available and offers the same ammunition capacity, but far better performance with bullets from 125gr-220gr?

 

I get it cost and weapon size is an issue, but I reload so it is a moot point.

 

However, I have sold all my 10mm stuff except the brass - I carry 9mm, with the advancement of smokeless powder technology, metullurgy of both projectiles and brass and the wide availability of platforms and components as well as the inherently high ammunition capacity and low recoil 9mm fits the bill.

 

End of the day - no matter what you get shot with it will hurt and if you do your job, the ammo will do its. I am sure in some extraplanar world I carry a .40 - I am just that 2% of the shooting population that heard of and used a 10mm before a .40SW was a thing.

 

ATW

[Sidecarist]

Well said

[Buddy]

I carry an S&W 40 myself, Have been reloading for many years. I find it to be in between a 45 and a 9mm. and I use premium rounds only for defense.

[Jonnin]

40 is established.   Its used by LEOs, some government (who was it that bought a few million a year or 2  back, the IRS or someone weird like that?),  and tons of individuals.  

 

They still make 38 S&W, and no one has made a gun chambered in that in 75 years or more.  

 

Its not going away.   It may drop popularity or fade over the next 50 years but so long as you can buy brand new glocks and sigs and other common brands chambered for it, the ammo will be out there.   And as long as those sell, they will keep making them. 

 

Its still a hammer looking for a nail.   But its a popular model hammer.

[1gewehr]

I agree that it's not going to disappear.  But, as was said twenty years ago; "All the penetration of the .45, and all the stopping power of the 9mm."

There are certainly more effective cartridges available now. 

 

Overseas, I stuck with 9mm due to cartridge availability.  Here, I stick with .45 since even if the hollowpoints don't expand, you still get a nearly half-inch hole. 

 

Some years back, I became enamored of the .400 Corbon.  I still like it since it's a nice fast .40 bullet that is almost as good as 10mm.  And the modification to my .45s just required a new barrel and recoil spring.  Brass is easily resized from normal .45 brass.  I still use it some, but the availability of faster .45 loads has diminished the appeal.

 

So, while I have a couple of .40s, they rarely see any range time and I don't keep much ammo around for them.

[rmiddle]

Comms will like this Article, I like the comments:

 

http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2016/2/26/keefe-report-seriously-is-the-40-sw-dead/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=insider&utm_campaign=0316

 

So what do you think, has 9mm really gotten that much better or are we just witnessing a budget driven choice?  I have carried a .40 almost since it's inception, done the whole wet phone book test (mid 80s) on it along with 9mm and .45 and just can't get past the fact that even though 9mm projectiles may of gotten better, the same can be said for the .40 and .45.  My decision to stay with a .40 for an EDC is simple, bigger bullet with a better mag capacity. 

 

It is funny in Maryland there were a handful of guys who really loved the .40 but most people were either .45 or 9mm fans.  Most police departments in the area used 9mm.  The few exceptions were mostly .45.  Here is TN it looks to be the opposite the majority of officers seems to be .40 and the .40 is alive and well.  

 

Personally although I did some hunting as a teenager I never actually fired a handgun until 3 years ago.  Once I started shooting one of the first thing I did was go to a range and rented everything i could get my hands on.  I shoot 9mm, .40 and .45 and in the end what I found was the 9 was the easiest to shoot.  Followed by the .45.  I found the .40 the hardest to shoot overall.  In case any one wants to know the one time out I shoot all glock full sized in 9, .40, and .45 to compare the actual rounds being shot.  I found the kick on the 40 to be terrible and my accuracy sucked I am sure with practice I could become decent shooting a .40 but I also didn't enjoy shooting it so I see no reason to continue shooting .40.  I do shoot 9mm and .45 pretty regularly.

 

Thanks

Robert

[TripleGGG]

I love the 40. Have several that see a lot of range time. I also have 9mm, 45 and 10mm. At the end of the day any caliber with the correct placement will do the job. My wife can drive nails with her 22. She handles it like an expert and can swap mags faster than you can blink. I would not want to be on the receiving end of a full mag from her. For me I would love to carry my 44mag Desert Eagle. Practice, practice, practice, practice, practice.