One of the better lgs I deal with has a new Ruger sr40c. He would take my SW MP9c and 50 bucks. From things I read the 9mm, .40 and 45 have about the same ballistics. In gel anyway. I don't believe gel is the best indicator of what a bullet may be capable of. I've shot a .40 before and do not find the recoil as horrendous as some say. I think I'm back on target about as quick as a 9. Without starting a caliber war am I only gaining a slightly bigger hole with the ,40 all things considered? Thanks.
should I go with a .40sw?
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
What are you trying to accomplish? Don't like the MP9, want the sr.......? As you stated there are not miles of different in performance using good rounds between the 40 and the nine. Personally the easy availability of cheap good 9mm ammo, practice and duty loads, coupled with the higher capacity and lighter recoil makes the nine the superior choice. If I want to throw bigger slugs the 45 gets the nod. The 40 splits the difference in recoil and capacity between the two.
With the 40 you will, as you stated, make a bit larger hole. The price is a bit more recoil, less rounds and a higher cost to practice.
With the 40 you will, as you stated, make a bit larger hole. The price is a bit more recoil, less rounds and a higher cost to practice.
I'm happy with the 9 for the reasons you mention. On reflection I think I'll stick with the 9 as I see more con's then pro's with the 40. Thanks.
Joined
·
2,824 Posts
Muzzle energy foot-pounds out of a 4" barrel with typical ammo:
9MM Luger: ~300-350
.45 ACP: ~350-400
.40 S&W: ~400-500
A lot more power without much sacrifice in number of rounds or recoil.
Practice ammo (Tulammo 50rd box):
9MM Luger: $10.13
.40 S&W: $11.39
.45 ACP: $11.39
A whole $1.26 a box difference
.But in the end what do you get for "more power" 45 or 40? Better penetration? More internal damage? What is the end game of 45-40 over 9mm with todays ammo?Muzzle energy foot-pounds out of a 4" barrel with typical ammo:
9MM Luger: ~300-350
.45 ACP: ~350-400
.40 S&W: ~400-500
A lot more power without much sacrifice in number of rounds or recoil.
Practice ammo (Tulammo 50rd box):
9MM Luger: $10.13
.40 S&W: $11.39
.45 ACP: $11.39
A whole $1.26 a box difference
Without starting a caliber war?
OK, no, seriously....
Barrier performance would be where I would specifically choose the .40 S&W and choose to suffer the capacity trade-off and the recoil penalty.
While I subjectively understand that you don't find the recoil penalty as harsh as some other shooters think - and I believe this is a perfectly reasonable and valid claim on your part - I would be remiss to point out that "about as quick" is not the same as "as quick," and that unless you've got yourself on a timer, that time span can be greater than you think.
In going back to your subjective perceptions of the .40 S&W's recoil, you may want to ask to test-drive your friend's SR40c before committing to the buy, as how the firearm subjectively "fits" your hands can significantly affect your subjective perception of recoil.
And there's one more thing to think about with the .40 S&W.....
It's undeniably fallen out of favor as the flavor-of-the-month over the last half-decade. As such, even during the last ammo-frenzy, most shooters continued to see good-to-reasonable availability/pricing of this cartridge, over-the-counter and via Internet ordering, while supplies of 9x19 and .45 ACP virtually dried up overnight, and even .357 Sig follow not too shortly thereafter.
Whether this trend will be true this time around is anyone's guess, as this incident still is fresh on the minds of many, and also as many are or have already prepared for the coming election cycle. Nevertheless, there is something to be said for diversifying.
Finally, in tying back to this rather pragmatic consideration, think about whether the firearm you choose offers easy caliber-conversion capabilities. Although I own a SR9c, I am not familiar with the platform as I am with others, and I don't know if the usual barrel/magazine-change can allow for the interchange between .40 S&W/.357 Sig/9x19 as one can easily effect on, for example, the Glock platform.
Hope this helps!
Joined
·
4,828 Posts
For the same reason men buy cars/trucks with more horsepower, when the least powerful one available will break the speed limits, and women go for breast and buttock augmentation.
P.S. You didn't address the obvious alternative. Why would you trade anything in? Keep one and buy one. They can play together.
Cash Poor. LOL. I have other nines so I wouldn't have a 40 only. But glad you brought that up. As I have to watch my P's and Q's I don't buy something just to buy it. Have to have a valid reason as to an advantage it would give me to justify the purchase.For the same reason men buy cars/trucks with more horsepower, when the least powerful one available will break the speed limits, and women go for breast and buttock augmentation.
P.S. You didn't address the obvious alternative. Why would you trade anything in? Keep one and buy one. They can play together.
Joined
·
7,872 Posts
I don't know about the SR40c specifically, but many of the .40's are 9mm frames slightly altered to shoot the more powerful .40 cartridge. So the gun will be beaten harder and won't last as long - it was basically designed to shoot a lighter round than it is being called upon to shoot with .40. But that's pretty much a moot point for most of us. I've never worn out a gun, any gun, in my life. You have to shoot a whole lot to do that, like being a competitive shooter.
I don't find the recoil of .40 horrendous either, but I do find it "sharper" than other rounds. To me the recoil doesn't feel heavier, just quicker and more abrupt with more muzzle flip. I don't see those nice prices for .40 and .45 that BlakeHanson does, around here those cost much more than 9mm. I stopped reloading for the 9mm these days because I can find the ammo just about as cheap commercially. But .40 and .45 I still reload for, still significant savings there (just looking at the component costs and ignoring the value of your time reloading).
I used to be all hot to trot over buying a bunch of .40's. That was back THEN. We only ever ended up buying one, and that's enough for me NOW. I prefer 9mm and .45auto. But nothing against the .40, it is certainly a good cartridge. With modern bullet designs, there is not as much difference in terminal performance between these three rounds as there used to be. Sure, you'll see different numbers written down on a piece of paper, but I'm no longer convinced that this makes a big difference in the real world 99% of the time.
Personally, I would hang on to the M&P9c and pass on the SR40c. I have shot many M&P's and liked them all, but never any SR's that I can recall. I've handled SR's though, and they feel clunky to me, but that's just personal preference talking there.
I don't find the recoil of .40 horrendous either, but I do find it "sharper" than other rounds. To me the recoil doesn't feel heavier, just quicker and more abrupt with more muzzle flip. I don't see those nice prices for .40 and .45 that BlakeHanson does, around here those cost much more than 9mm. I stopped reloading for the 9mm these days because I can find the ammo just about as cheap commercially. But .40 and .45 I still reload for, still significant savings there (just looking at the component costs and ignoring the value of your time reloading).
I used to be all hot to trot over buying a bunch of .40's. That was back THEN. We only ever ended up buying one, and that's enough for me NOW. I prefer 9mm and .45auto. But nothing against the .40, it is certainly a good cartridge. With modern bullet designs, there is not as much difference in terminal performance between these three rounds as there used to be. Sure, you'll see different numbers written down on a piece of paper, but I'm no longer convinced that this makes a big difference in the real world 99% of the time.
Personally, I would hang on to the M&P9c and pass on the SR40c. I have shot many M&P's and liked them all, but never any SR's that I can recall. I've handled SR's though, and they feel clunky to me, but that's just personal preference talking there.
Joined
·
2,824 Posts
BINGO! The BG doesn't stand out in the middle of the street like the old west. Think about the BG behind a couch, behind a wall, door, or door jam. The FBI realized how important this was and developed the 10MM to replace the 9MM and .45's.
Now THAT round had recoil problems! That's when the 40 S&W was born.
Excellent point! If either caliber is in a gun that you do not shoot well, it is the wrong one.
There's also the 'fun-factor'. If it's not fun to shoot, you won't practice with it. The 9MM is definitely fun to shoot
.If you shoot both the same and you don't hate the additional recoil of the 40, it is superior when shooting thru a barrier and fewer rounds are needed to incapacitate a BG because of the greater energy.
A .223 and a .22 long-rifle are virtually the same caliber.
Same size hole.
The difference between the two is the energy. And it is significant
.Enough of the pro's, valid cons for the 40:
Possibility of over-penetration; a miss going into the neighbor's house. (you can't have both
)More punishing to unprotected ears nearby:rantscream:.
Momentum can be described as how hard something is to stop -- directly related to penetration. This is mass X velocity.
Energy is harder to explain; it is the "potential capacity to move mass". Energy can be devastating when its potential is used. In ballistics, it applies movement to things that should not move, causing damage. It is Mass X velocity X velocity.
Most handguns, with the exception of rifle chambered stuff like 223 pistol or weird magnum loads (think 357 pushing a 380) or oddballs like the 22 FN round, etc lack the ability to produce energy levels that cause hydrodynamic shock waves or other "interesting" and deadly effects that rifles produce. Rifles do damage with energy, and tumbling or expansion. Handguns do damage by poking a hole in vital anatomy. That is why a .25 and .30 caliber (diameter) rifles can be deadly to large animals while a .25 or 30 cal handgun is generally considered a smaller, weaker weapon; the hole is small in size but the energy transfer is brutal.
The 45 is going to have the most momentum most of the time. It will make the biggest hole and penetrate very well. The 40 has the most energy, but its not enough.
For reference:
308 energy: over 2500 and touching 3000 ft-lbs in hot loads with light bullets.
All that said, by and large everything above (including) 9mm has roughly the same one shot stop %s from what little data we have. Some of this stuff is hard to quantify. If 223s don't tumble, they don't do jack. The energy is deadly but it has to transfer, and a straight in and out without transferal does minor damage, its like a .22 lr. If it hits a bone or something and can transfer, its a whole different story.
Joined
·
704 Posts
A couple of years ago, I looked at the increased power of the .40S&W, bought some ammo, and then went looking for a gun. I have a number of good .40's for carry, but they are mostly for winter carry. I bought a Beretta 96, Glock 22, a couple of Beretta Cougar 8040 minis, a Taurus .40 revolver, and finally found a Kel-Tec P40.
I liked the Beretta, but ended up selling it in favor of the Glock 22, which I carry during the winter. Sometimes during the summer, I carry the Kel-Tec P40. However, for everyday "discreet carry" during the non-winter months (ahem, work), I usually have a Diamondback DB9, or more recently, my Sig P290 9mm. Still love the .40 tho! But it's more of my winter carry, because my 40's are harder to conceal.
I liked the Beretta, but ended up selling it in favor of the Glock 22, which I carry during the winter. Sometimes during the summer, I carry the Kel-Tec P40. However, for everyday "discreet carry" during the non-winter months (ahem, work), I usually have a Diamondback DB9, or more recently, my Sig P290 9mm. Still love the .40 tho! But it's more of my winter carry, because my 40's are harder to conceal.
I solved that problem years ago...I bought a Glock 23, and then got a after market storm lake 9mm conversion barrel. I shoot more 9mm and when I want .40 I just change out the barrel and magazines and then I have a .40.
I have no complaints with 9mm, hotter loads with modern HP's and your good to go.
I have no complaints with 9mm, hotter loads with modern HP's and your good to go.
Joined
·
4 Posts
One of my deciding factors to "return" to the .40 was the UNOBTANIUM 9mm. S2KG2. Not to mention the upcoming "election" which i'm confident will be a lose/lose situation for most of us. I just can't risk waiting and hoping a mass-shortage of S2Ks magically disappears.
That said, the .40 IS a great "man-stopper". While technological advances have come a loooog way regarding powders and projectiles in recent years, the fact remains the .40 is a stopper. A boomer,not hardly. It will perform. Period. Looking at availability of ammo was NOT a major factor for me as I reload all calibers I own. Also owning multiple handgun platforms that work with my S2K is a huge factor for me. Familiarity with the cartridge is important.
The single most important factor for me was to complete my quest to fill a void in my tool box.:Cooltu:
That said, the .40 IS a great "man-stopper". While technological advances have come a loooog way regarding powders and projectiles in recent years, the fact remains the .40 is a stopper. A boomer,not hardly. It will perform. Period. Looking at availability of ammo was NOT a major factor for me as I reload all calibers I own. Also owning multiple handgun platforms that work with my S2K is a huge factor for me. Familiarity with the cartridge is important.
The single most important factor for me was to complete my quest to fill a void in my tool box.:Cooltu:
My brother in law had to shoot a fella that pointed a 22 mag at him. Solid hit to the chest with his 40. He did stop what he was doing and got a quick ride to the emergency room. So it was a one shot stop but he didn't drop like a wet bag of flour, he stopped because he didn't want to get shot again. Several years ago 180 grain of some flavor. He was out of the hospital and in jail before my brother in laws finish with the paperwork. There are no hammers of Thor to be found in common hand gun caliber options. The 40 is fine, the 9 does well and the 45 still soldiers on. One picks the attributes that they find more important, # of rounds in a mag, lighter recoil, less flash and blast, faster follow up shots, chunks of lead weighing a ton..........DEPENDABILITY!!!!!
........ what's important is being able to put rounds on target quickly with a round that has enough mass and energy balanced to achieve adequate penetration. A kid that shoots squirrels every day after school with his single six 22 ( no I am not saying a 22 single six is the ideal carry gun) is a more formidable advisory than a Rambo with his 460 Saturn V that gets shot twice a year. Practice with a pistol enough to gain familiarity and it really doesn't matter if it's a nine, 40, 45 or 357 ,loaded with good ammo, they will all work except when they don't
As to barrier penetration, a valid concern for an officer of the law. The rest of us would be well advised to retreat once the siege begins. Your entering a whole other world in the eyes of the law.
Joined
·
5,584 Posts
For what it's worth I used to be a 40 fan but I sold them all last year. Most of my pistols are now 9mm with a few other calibers I have one each of, 22lr, 22wmr, 32acp, 380 and 45lc. The 40 was just one more flavor to worry about that really didn't add much over the 9mm. I haven't missed it in the least either.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
