These discussions are great. I have learned so much.

Thanks to everyone and may the new year be the best yet.

Great discussion, and lots of perspectives that I hadn't considered. I "thought" that I was getting pretty fast and good on the range, but didn't really consider that I could be faster and better. JJones, those real world scenarios are something I hadn't really thought about, not being in law enforcement ( but now will as an armed civilian!!).

Sigfreund-- thank you for the welcome. My handle was "given to me" from my staff. I aman Emergency physician, and quite a while ago we had a young lady come in pretty beat up and left for dead in a ditch. The cold water dropped her core body temperature pretty low, which wound up saving her. Essentially she went into cardiac arrest, and we resuscitated her for hours, with all kinds of invasive warming techniques. We "got her back," and despite no heartbeat for hours, eventually left the hospital whole. She became know as "the ditch lady" and I was anointed "the ditch doctor."

Great story, DitchDoctor911, and it’s good to learn that such things are achievable.

Probably more common in Colorado, but pretty rare here in Florida!!

quote:

Originally posted by DitchDoctor911:
Great discussion, and lots of perspectives that I hadn't considered. I "thought" that I was getting pretty fast and good on the range, but didn't really consider that I could be faster and better. JJones, those real world scenarios are something I hadn't really thought about, not being in law enforcement ( but now will as an armed civilian!!).

Sigfreund-- thank you for the welcome. My handle was "given to me" from my staff. I aman Emergency physician, and quite a while ago we had a young lady come in pretty beat up and left for dead in a ditch. The cold water dropped her core body temperature pretty low, which wound up saving her. Essentially she went into cardiac arrest, and we resuscitated her for hours, with all kinds of invasive warming techniques. We "got her back," and despite no heartbeat for hours, eventually left the hospital whole. She became know as "the ditch lady" and I was anointed "the ditch doctor."

That is an awesome story! You will go far here lad!

Great story.
Retired volunteer EMT here so can relate to some of your experience.

PC

quote:

Originally posted by DitchDoctor911:
We "got her back," and despite no heartbeat for hours, eventually left the hospital whole. She became know as "the ditch lady" and I was anointed "the ditch doctor."

^^^^Really great story and discussion in this thread !

The biggest difference I see in this 9mm craze, is some good prices on .40 guns if you like the caliber. I carry 9mm probably 75% of the time, but I have .40 and have no issues with it. The last pistol I bought was a FNX-40, got it for $150 cheaper than the FNX-9 was selling for.

You guys have brought up some great points, and this has been an informative read.

nothing wrong with the 40.....personally I get quicker hits with a 9mm and to me that makes a difference.

Breath easy. The 40 isn't going anywhere I prefer 9. No matter what gun I have it doesn't hurt my hands. I have a good amount of arthritis in my body. I did shoot an all steel STI in 40 and it shot smooth.

So here is a point that is often brought up during discussions such as these, but I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread yet:

While lots of folks carry standard pressure 9mm, lots of folks don't. Some opt for +P, and some for +P+.

Once we start hitting +P and +P+ territory in 9mm, just how much does that in and of itself take down on the speed advantage (read: split times of ACCURATE fire)?

I personally carry the 180s when I carry a .40, as I tend to be a 'heavy for caliber' guy.

That said, if you have a milder .40 load such as the 180s around 950 or so, and a +P+ 9mm (let's say 124 at around 1300-ish...), is it reasonable to believe that the speed difference of the two is getting smaller and smaller at that point?

How much would be difficult to quantify, and most likely completely subjective, depending on a ton of factors (shooter, gun, particular loading, etc).

However, at a certain point, I would think that the speed at which the two calibers could achieve quick, accurate hits would become a lot more similar than it is different.

Maybe.

: )

quote:

Originally posted by Sammael:
Once we start hitting +P and +P+ territory in 9mm, just how much does that in and of itself take down on the speed advantage (read: split times of ACCURATE fire)?

Ah, there’s some of that pesky logic again.

One of the problems firearms manufacturers face when designing guns chambered for 9mm Luger is that the cartridge’s loads vary so much. Based on my own measurements of different factory loads fired from a SIG P229, 115 grain bullets can be driven anywhere from an average of 1070 fps to over 1320 fps. The hottest 9mm load I’ve tested was the Winchester Ranger 127 grain +P+ at 1230 fps. A very popular defensive load is the Speer +P 124 grain Gold Dot that runs ~1200 fps from a P229, and a common velocity for 115 grain training ammunition is about 1100 fps from the same gun, so let’s consider some. A useful way of comparing felt recoil in similar guns is to calculate the so-called “Power Factor” of the different loads:

115 gr at 1070 fps = 123
115 gr at 1100 fps = 126*
124 gr at 1200 fps = 149*
115 gr at 1320 fps = 152
127 gr at 1230 fps = 156

* So, in just comparing these two popular loads alone, the more powerful has 18 percent greater recoil than the lighter.

But how many privately-funded students show up for a training course with 1000 rounds of Gold Dot? How many non-Federal law enforcement agencies go to the expense of training their officers solely with premium self-defense ammunition? Not many is my guess, and that contributes to a common phenomenon.

Shooters, including trainers, who use just a few similar guns and ammunition—and especially if they use those guns and ammunition to shoot a lot of rounds—tend to develop filters that they view the process through. If all one shoots or sees other people shoot is 9mm ammunition, that affects how we view other cartridges. A recent experience of my own drove that home to me.

At one time I described the 44 Magnum as my favorite handgun cartridge. I owned several revolvers chambered for the cartridge and fired it more than others. That was long ago and, no, I didn’t do the type of practical defensive shooting that has been my focus for going on 15 years now, but I was quite comfortable with the cartridge and the guns chambered for it. A couple of months ago, though, I decided to dig out an 8 3/8 inch S&W model 629 to demonstrate the round to a couple of friends who had never fired such a gun, but who owned autoloaders chambered for 9mm.

None of us—not even me—got through more than two cylinders of factory ammunition. I was a little disappointed at my own response (and was thinking of what it would be like to shoot my 44 Magnum 4 inch “Mountain Revolver”), but realized that the primary reason was because I was no longer accustomed to the gun’s muzzle blast and recoil characteristics.

A less extreme example was the experience of a friend who acquired an AR chambered for 300 Blackout. That is a very mild cartridge as compared with others that such rifles are chambered for and we wouldn’t expect its recoil to be anything worth commenting on. In fact, though, my friend did comment about it because it increased his shot split times when firing the course we run regularly. That doesn’t make the 300 BLK a bad ass round, but he is so finely attuned to shooting an AR chambered for 5.56mm that any slight increase in recoil was readily noticeable (as it is to me when I fire the gun).

The point of all this is that when shooters become accustomed to a particular load, any difference becomes very noticeable. The measurable differences between a wimpy 9mm training load and the 40 S&W aren’t so great, but they still matter to people who seldom shoot the latter. The Power Factor of a 180 grain load I shoot regularly from a P229 is 172; others are higher, up to 180, but because I mostly shoot 40 ammunition, it doesn’t bother me even with my old, arthritic hands. I can shoot 9mm loads a tiny bit faster, but that’s the only difference. The 40 doesn’t seem “snappy” or otherwise unpleasant when fired from any of the many SIG models I own.

The filters people develop to view what happens around us do have their effects. Just as I no longer care to shoot 44 Magnum revolvers, it’s not surprising that those who shoot only very light loads in 9mm handguns would lose their taste for (or never develop the taste for) pistols chambered for more powerful cartridges.

My first auto loader was a Sig 239 DAO in 40. I got it for concealed carry. I had followed the 10/40 development since the beginning. After a deployment to the sandbox I had a few extra bucks in my pocket and didn't even consider a 9.

Over the next few years, I have aquired 9mm conversion and 357 Sig barrels. I have shot thousands of 9 and 40 and hundreds of 357. I reload for all, but shoot 9's for practice due to cost. But for carry, it is 40 or 357.

I really enjoy 357 most these days, I am more accurate. It may be the 40 barrel is just worn out .

I have acquired 9 and 45 pistols too and enjoy shooting them too. When I go to range, I always take the 239 and one or two others just for fun.

I'm pretty sure the 40 will be around for a long time, and if something fades away it will be the 357 Sig first. Cost is the biggest factor to shoot it, but is pretty reasonable to reload.

Great discussion, I've been off line for a while, good to be back.

quote:

Originally posted by Sammael:
So here is a point that is often brought up during discussions such as these, but I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread yet:

While lots of folks carry standard pressure 9mm, lots of folks don't. Some opt for +P, and some for +P+.

Once we start hitting +P and +P+ territory in 9mm, just how much does that in and of itself take down on the speed advantage (read: split times of ACCURATE fire)?

I personally carry the 180s when I carry a .40, as I tend to be a 'heavy for caliber' guy.

That said, if you have a milder .40 load such as the 180s around 950 or so, and a +P+ 9mm (let's say 124 at around 1300-ish...), is it reasonable to believe that the speed difference of the two is getting smaller and smaller at that point?

How much would be difficult to quantify, and most likely completely subjective, depending on a ton of factors (shooter, gun, particular loading, etc).

However, at a certain point, I would think that the speed at which the two calibers could achieve quick, accurate hits would become a lot more similar than it is different.

Maybe.

: )

I don't see much point in using 9mm +P or +P+ ammo now days. In the old days of ancient JHP designs, the extra velocity helped those early hollow points expand more reliably through heavy clothing than slower velocity loads and calibers(hence the success of the 125gr .357mag). In the 1980s, it was almost impossible to get a .45acp 230gr JHP to expand through heavy clothing which is why the FBI recommended using high velocity 185gr JHPs to make the .45acp a viable duty caliber.

The exception for 9mm high velocity projectiles would be if I needed armor penetration ability. The Russians have several +P+ and ++P++ loads in 9mm that will easily defeat level III-A soft armor.

All that being said, I still find that my shooting speed is faster using a 9mm/.357 caliber projectile at high velocities than using a "mild" .40S&W 180gr load. My shot timer splits are measurably faster with 9mm over .40S&W any day.....every day, regardless of the loads as long as each are at a power level that they pass the FBI testing protocols.

Ultimately, the vast majority of trained shooters will gravitate to either speed and finesse in their equipment(9mm), or they will go for strength and power(.45,10mm...etc). This is just human nature, and it also applies to any other form of competitive or defensive philosophies. The .40S&W tries to give you the positives of both worlds, but it also gives you the negatives of both worlds. It is "almost" as hard to shoot fast and accurately as a .45acp(but lacks the larger wound trauma), and it doesn't have the capacity, longevity, or shooter finesse of the 9mm(but better than .45acp). In a shoot and move 3-mag course of fire(3 mags loaded to capacity with no pauses), I see significant tiring of the most shooters about midway through their second mag of .40 resulting in poor accuracy and a slower rate of fire from that point on. The same goes for most .45acp shooters. 9mm shooters on the other hand, show much less fatigue, and loss of accuracy and speed even when they are finishing up their 3 mag.

Based on all the field data I have collected over the years with regards to terminal effects on perps in OISs, I would choose a "modern" 9mm the vast majority of the time as it maximizes the abilities of the operator. Given the other available calibers, I would pick the .40S&W as a second choice.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Fuego220,

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

But how many privately-funded students show up for a training course with 1000 rounds of Gold Dot?

I show up with hand loads.

I have a significant number of handguns in the safe(s), many of which are chambered in .40. There are various reasons for that. Presently I'm carrying .357 Sig.

The first time I encountered .40 was at an outdoor range. I was shooting a Beretta 92 and the guy next to me was louder, also shooting a Beretta. His was a 96. I own several 96's now, and just one 92.

.40 appealed to me at the time for very non-objective and unscientific reasons. The .40 brass disappeared into the .40 case and it was louder. It made me feel better to carry. I found that the difference when shooting was noticeable at first, but disappeared soon when I began shooting it a lot. I was aware that I was slower with the .40, but I was never a speed shooter or a particularly skilled shooter, so the difference was less acute or significant to me. The capability of the tool isn't so apparent if one lacks the elementary skill to exploit it.

At the same time I was reloading for 9mm, as it was still less expensive and I could shoot more with the 9mm.

I carry a .38 spl revolver a lot, pocket carry. .38 Special continues to be a very popular chambering across the country, despite it's lower power, age, capacity, velocity, etc.

.40 isn't going away any time soon. I find I'm not shooting it that much, but over the past couple of years as ammunition got more and more scarce and 9X19 became more and more popular, often .40 could be found on the shelf where 9mm was hard to come by. .40 handguns have become plentiful, less expensive on the used market, harder to sell...which is great for anyone that wants additional handguns.

One of my favorite handguns is a Sig P239, mine in .40. Most of the local law enforcement at the state, county, and local level uses .40. If I elect to carry .357 Sig I can shoot .40 out of the same firearm for lower cost training, if I wish (I usually don't, but it's an option). Quite a few shooters use it; I still find a lot of .40 in the desert where people shoot, though I find a lot more 9mm brass.

So much rambling to simply say that I don't think the .40 is a dying cartrdige. It's in use with a lot of law enforcement, a lot of sport shooters, a lot of private carry, and its still produced and sold in large quantities. If .38 special continues to sell well, continues to be a popular reloading and carry cartridge, despite its age and low power and disadvantages, then .40 isn't going anywhere any time either.

Never really understood the "caliber wars" or what if anything they solved, but I've been shooting since I was 15 and am nearin 50 now.
Started with .357 Mag, still love it as it does its job on critters of both varieties especially with the 125gr.full load or 145gr. Silvertip.
Went to the .45 as I was joinin the Navy at 18 thought I'd better get up to speed on a 1911, turns out as a Gunner's Mate I worked on em more than inshot em, VERY COOL platform the 1911, .45 it works but kinda lackluster least till the loads were tuned for it.
9mm was next and I loved the idea of standin watch with at least 15 rounds onboard versus 7 but not the whole ball ammo only thing.
Desert Shield then Desert Storm came and feed back from Marines and Army combatants filtered back as did scuttlebutt from the heavy hitters there, 9 either worked or it failed miserably. Same was being said in the various gun rags of the period but I was happy when off duty and carrying a S&W 669/6906 with Federal 9bp and 12 rounds onboard.
The .40 showed up around the same time and I yawned while LEO went nuts over it overnight it was the new police round and reports from the street said it was working right off the bat!
Still I ignored and kept to the 9mm. The horror stories of the 9 failing made the rags and I got caught up in it eventually switching to a +P 115 and searching for the +P+ rounds.
Stories of breaking pistols from the over pressure round started to show up and after a few conversations with friend and fellow forum member The Sarge got me thinkin maybe give this .40 a look/see! I did and the rest was history!
Though I enjoy the 10MM more in the outdoors and am currently trying out the .357SIG, the .40 is proven and I have grown to really like it for what it does.
And just to jog a memory or two.
.40 was designed with law enforcement in mind and the pistols of the era were feed reliable with hollow point ammunition (4006 Glock 22).
The "snappy recoil" comments seem to follow it like the plague, yes it does kick more than standard 9 and possibly .45 but I don't shoot enough to really notice it.
For some it might be a deal breaker, for me I'd rather deal with the .40 and enjoy the better performance of the larger round without resorting to +P ammo or scrounging for my preferred load during the next shortage.
.40; some say it's a compromise or an answer lookin for a question.
Me .40 is the sum of a great many things.
Dale

I'm only halfway thru reading this discussion. Great comments to a recent born again shooter -
I want them all - P226/40 w/Light bedside. P220/45 because it's so much fun to shoot. My Pico to carry 24/7 and as much as I can in winter LCR 357.

357 Sig is my special fun one to shoot and GP100 357.

I want the 22 TCP for another one to shoot -

Reloading for all my shooters is the icing on the cake.

Thanks all.

In his last post, Fuego220 made this point:

"All that being said, I still find that my shooting speed is faster using a 9mm/.357 caliber projectile at high velocities than using a "mild" .40S&W 180gr load. My shot timer splits are measurably faster with 9mm over .40S&W any day.....every day, regardless of the loads as long as each are at a power level that they pass the FBI testing protocols."

I'm going to turn his statement about 90 degrees and use "follow-up shot controllability" rather than "shot timer splits" as it applies to self-defense and law enforcement.

Yes, the .40 is ballistically superior to the 9mm, but some of the 9mm +P loads make up a lot of ground. Yes, the .357 Sig recoil is snappier than the .40, but it's straight back rather than the muzzle flip we see with the .40 S&W. I think most of us would rather take a double-tap with two closely-placed rounds where it counts over a double-tap with one well-placed round and a flier.

Having carried all three calibers in my law enforcement career, I'd take the .357 Sig first, the 9mm second, and the .40 S&W third.

Yeah, but if you're buying your own ammo, as I do, you get a lot more practice out of .40S&W than out of .357SIG.

And in all seriousness, my own shooting ability is not good enough to rely on tight groups of 9mm.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:
Yeah, but if you're buying your own ammo, as I do, you get a lot more practice out of .40S&W than out of .357SIG.

I agree, and that's why all of us who carry .357 Sig on duty practice with .40 S&W.