I think the .40 is an excellent round. I have more than 1 pistol in .40S&W, not counting my issued Glock 22. Although the 9mm will provide a couple more rounds, I feel most confident in the .40S&W.

When hiking, I carry the .40 because I believe the 9mm will only aggravate a bear unless the shot is perfect. Have I seen a bear hiking? yup, multiple times! My 13 shots of .40 vs 15 9mm is not important. I feel the 13 shots will kill the bear or keep it moving in a different direction.

I practice with many calibers and feel most confident with the .40!

I got news for you: The .40 S&W will likely only aggravate the bear, too. Only a little more than the 9mm

YEs, but will aggravate the bear a bit harsher. maybe cause it to rethink it's strategy. (that's my argument) LOL

I've long said .40 was an answer for a question nobody asked. I also said it was a fad that would eventually pass. Law enforcement took it up and the herd mentality ensued. Law enforcement began to move away from it - and here we are.

There were no notable advantages over commonly available calibers. Especially versus cost early on. That's turned upside down now with the waning of interest. For those into the caliber - it is a great tide.

No, I don't care to be shot by one (hoping to head off the agitprop that will posit that pearl of inquisition). Oh, wait, I just noticed that he has already been in here.

I've never owned one. Was carrying a 4" .357 Magnum every day, so the .40 was not even a contender, along with 9mm and .45 ACP. Shot some .40's - meh. Nothing there for me.

10mm with standard loading is nice. .357 Sig is what I consider ideal. But cost and availability for factory ammunition are a deterrent for most. I'm in that group.

Eventually, I got rid of all handgun calibers (45 Colt, 44 Mag, 41 Mag, .357 Mag, .38 Special, .380.....) except 9mm and .45 ACP. Cost, logistics and availability drive it for me. I practice as much as want, whenever I want. Both calibers can be reloaded for half the cost of factory ammunition.

.40 faded in popularity because the bandwagon had a great band early on. Motley Crue in the day. But it largely disbanded. Today it's more like an organ grinder monkey.

It will be around for awhile. But it's heyday has passed.

quote:

Originally posted by Jager:
I've long said .40 was an answer for a question nobody asked. I also said it was a fad that would eventually pass. Law enforcement took it up and the herd mentality ensued. Law enforcement began to move away from it - and here we are.

There were no notable advantages over commonly available calibers. Especially versus cost early on. That's turned upside down now with the waning of interest. For those into the caliber - it is a great tide.

.40 faded in popularity because the bandwagon had a great band early on. Motley Crue in the day. But it largely disbanded. Today it's more like an organ grinder monkey.

It will be around for awhile. But it's heyday has passed.

Jager - I'm surprised you didn't mention the .45 GAP. It's another "answer for a question nobody asked."

I am a .40 sorta guy. I got into firearms (as others have shared) when it came out after the Miami shooting.

It was my first love. Actually, it was 10mm. Oddly, I have never owned a 10mm. But .40 was easy to get, learned on it, load it, shoot it, compete with it. love it.

I carry a G43 in 9mm But I have a G23 in my go bag, and another that defends my home. And something like 30+ G22 mags.

But when folk ask me "If I can just buy one gun" I always reply, "Glock 19"

My first firearm was a Beretta 96 I got in late 1992. So it was riding the big wave. I shot it very well, but I first learned to shoot from a future FBI firearms instructor, so I had no bad habits and an expert mentor...

I got married in 1997 and kids soon followed. I pretty much did not shoot again until I got back into it in 2011 (and when I joined SIGforum).

I no longer enjoyed shooting 40. I got a Sig 229 in 40 that shot very low, and I did not enjoy it. Sold-off both and got into 9mm (I have 3) and a Dan Wesson in 45. I highly doubt I'll ever get back into 40. But for fans of 40, it must be good times.

quote:

Jager - I'm surprised you didn't mention the .45 GAP. It's another "answer for a question nobody asked."

When .45 GAP popped up - it was an instant "Uh, no" from me. I've never met anyone that owned one, haven't ever seen one and doubt I ever will.

.40 is a decent caliber. Load one up with some 165 grain JHPs and I'd carry it. I just never saw the necessity from the perspective of carrying a .357 Magnum loaded with 125 grain JHP's at 1450 fps or so. When officers carried those, they were recording something around 92% one shot stops, many with semi-wadcutter loads. I don't think that percentage has ever been surpassed by any commonly issued caliber (.38 Special, 9mm, .45 ACP, .40 or even .357 Sig), however, I'm sure .357 Sig has some respectable percentages. Again, I think it is the ideal caliber - all things considered.

If I have to shoot a .40, it will be a 10mm.

Is it out of favor? One failed shoot as in '86

Once that happens will 40 return?

90's at the range with 40 cal requests......this is CA, so a lot of shooters. AWB ban. Old gals were rocking .40 as primary no worries.

fact is its doable, fast, and lethal. You like it, keep it. the worm will turn and .40 will be vogue again.

quote:

Originally posted by Jager:

quote:

Jager - I'm surprised you didn't mention the .45 GAP. It's another "answer for a question nobody asked."

When .45 GAP popped up - it was an instant "Uh, no" from me. I've never met anyone that owned one, haven't ever seen one and doubt I ever will.

.40 is a decent caliber. Load one up with some 165 grain JHPs and I'd carry it. I just never saw the necessity from the perspective of carrying a .357 Magnum loaded with 125 grain JHP's at 1450 fps or so. When officers carried those, they were recording something around 92% one shot stops, many with semi-wadcutter loads. I don't think that percentage has ever been surpassed by any commonly issued caliber (.38 Special, 9mm, .45 ACP, .40 or even .357 Sig), however, I'm sure .357 Sig has some respectable percentages. Again, I think it is the ideal caliber - all things considered.

If I have to shoot a .40, it will be a 10mm.

While .357 magnum is a great round, I believe the percentage of 1 stop shots with it were so high because of it's capacity and training. During that era, a higher percentage of police officers went to the range often, and the shots they took were better aimed due to the capacity (6) and time it took to reload. Compared to officers carrying guns with 15-20 round magazines and taking more, less aimed shots.

As for 9mm, I'd feel comfortable using it for personal defense (as well as .40,.45,10mm, .357 mag or sig) in most any situation involving Humans. I think .40 is very slightly better on larger animals than 9mm, due to bullet weight, velocity, and it's a little flatter shooting, but then you lose around 15-20% in magazine capacity, so it is a trade off.

We still use it on our dept. I don’t think we will be getting rid of it soon.

A couple months ago an officer on my crew was shot by a suspect. Suspect used a six inch 357 Mag revolver. Officer took a round through his upper Right leg about an inch under the skin from the outside of his leg out through the inside. He took another round through the right side of his stomach clipping a small organ and out his left side.

Officer returned fire with 3 maybe 4 rounds. Suspect made it about 20 feet before going down. One 180 grain Gold Dot got him in the femoral artery.

I have multiple caliber options available to me. I like my 9mm in the summer in polymer, and 40 in winter. I'm in a ban state now, and know people who prefer bigger bullets when they can only carry 10.

And if shtf, I like the big flat point on a 40 over round 9mm when only FMJ is available.

I just don't understand the hatred for the .40. I did hate my first .40, a glock 22. I later realized it was the glock I hated, not the caliber. It seems like a lot of conventional wisdom and me tooism going on here. I wouldn't be surprised if many haters never owned a .40.

I usually dress for the occaision in my daily carry. It's usually 9 when I'm going to a crowded place, due to slightly larger round count and first-round-out speed.

If I will be behind the wheel, I'll go with the .40 for it's reputation in penetrating car bodies, windshield glass and barriers.

When the wife and I walk the dog in a nearby semi-wilderness area, It will be the .40 or .45 because we regularly see or hear wild hogs.

You 9 mm does-all folks, If you encounter a 350 lb. bore or find yourself in the middle of a sounder, try to behonest with yourself, which caliber would you prefer to find in your hand... 9 or .40.

I'll unashamedly wish for the largest caliber possible.

I'm generally fine with carrying any of the top 3 antipersonnel cartridges now days(9mm/.40S&W/.45acp).

In the 1980s and 1990s, there simply were not any 9mm bullet/cartridge designs available that could reliably punch through commonly encountered barriers and still have good terminal effects in soft tissue. Bullet technology was simplistic, and crude during that time, and the bullets that performed well in the field were bullets with beefier bullet construction fired at good velocities. In fact, the FBI modeled their ballistic gel test after the physical performance of the robust .357 magnum. The .40S&W with its short ogive and robust bullet construction was able to make the best out of those crude bullet designs and the resulting loads defeated common barriers well with good reliable terminal effects. So, the .40S&W was an answer to making the best from that old technology, while the 9mm failed to work well with this old technology.

Today, ammunition technology has turned cartridges that were deemed inadequate 20-30 years ago, into impressive tools for the field. The 5.56 was deemed by SOCOM and the US Army to be inadequate pre 9/11(Desert Storm/Somalia) and post 9/11(Afghanistan/Iraq), leading to a push for alternative calibers like the 6.8 SPC. Once loads like the MK262 and Mk318 using the equivalent Trophy Bonded Bear Claw entered the theater of war, operators in the field were very happy to be carrying 5.56. Field results were very impressive within the operational range of the 5.56, and even beyond its intended range. The 9mm has seen a similar transformation domestically and overseas with advanced bullet technology. FMJ ammunition in 9mm or .45acp generally has poor field results unless good shot placement is used..........hard lessons learned in our overseas conflicts.

For me, I'm still carrying .45acp on duty because I shoot it incredibly accurately in meaningful, "timed" courses of fire and it makes me feel warm and fuzzy with its long history of working well in the field provided that the operator is skilled and do their part. I emphasized "timed" courses of fire and drills, because you have to be faster and more accurate than the other guy. We are all the best gunfighter at the gun range when we are alone, and/or don't adhere to stressful peer standards.

However, with the shooting reviews I've overseen or been a part of in the last 10yrs I've seen a trend with our OISs, and other agency officer involved shootings. Given good shot placement, I'm not seeing any observable difference between the major handgun service calibers if quality, modern JHPs are used and a fairly accurate apples-to-apples record of shot placement is available. Although, there is a higher percentage of perp death if the officer gets good .45acp JHP hits in versus smaller calibers. At handgun engagement ranges, our only real objective is rapid incapacitation. When you have a perp with an AR15, or a banger with his Glock 17 and a 33rd mag inserted, you don't have time for bleed-out or other pipe-dream ideas about rapid incapacitation, you just need to mechanically shut the bad guy down. Your caliber and load should have reliable penetration beyond your acceptable standard through a wide variety of materials and into soft tissue and bone, and then it must have a reliable and effective means of wound generation. The most dependable means is an expanded bullet presenting a wide, flat meplat that will crush and tear tissue much better than a rounded projectile. With modern bullet technology, all of the major service calibers do this well.

I know there are other theories of creating rapid incapacitation out there, but you should never compromise the proven physical mechanics of terminal effects in the process. Dr. Michael Courtney was working on some stuff a while back that kind of echoed my previous sentence for you .357sig or 155gr .40S&W guys(he preferred .357sig). The times that I have spoken to Massad Ayoob over the years, he was a big proponent of using either a very fast JHP if you were going small, or use as large of a caliber as you can manage. Ayoob was generally not a fan of the .40S&W, when 9mm+P(+P+), .357sig, or more powerful .45acp loads were available. Now days, Ayoob still adheres to his caliber/load philosophy, but he has admitted that modern 9mm loads in heavier bullets like the 147gr HST seems to be working quite well in the field.

My opinion is, carry what caliber you want, because now days they all work well. Just make sure that you don't sell yourself short by not engaging in meaningful training with good instructors. I say "instructors", because you should never stop taking classes and training with talented teachers. Defense/Gunfighting is about doing better than your opponent, and unless you regularly challenge yourself against the skills of other shooters, your abilities will stagnate and become irrelevant with age. Now days, more gun owners are taking meaningful training geared towards action pistol instead of the outdated bullseye skill set. As a result, I'm seeing more skilled and experienced shooters gravitating to 9mm over the larger calibers because it's just plain easier to shoot better in dynamic, multi-target, high stress scenarios against the clock than running lower capacity, higher recoiling calibers. In fact, I may be transitioning from .45acp to 9mm in the near future after I injured my shoulder and spent a heck of a lot of time training with only one handed shooting.

Have several pistols in 40. No problem with the 40 but also have no issues with the 9 or the 357Sig.

Still carry a Sig224 in 40 in my rotation stable as well as a 224, 229C in 9mm.

Just bought a bunch of .40 at Wal-Mart for 12.5 cents a round. I use it in my Glock 20 with a .40 conversion barrel for practice.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
I got news for you: The .40 S&W will likely only aggravate the bear, too. Only a little more than the 9mm

And only a little less than the .45 ACP?

I just got into .40 S&W because I only recently picked up a P229. I love it. I couldn't even describe the recoil because its just not something I think of while the gun goes off. There are so many other things im concentrating on at that moment that recoil isn't an issue.

What I can say is that the .40 with mere range ammo pushes my hand back much harder than every configuration of 9mm +P+, 38 special +P ive ever tried and is about on par with .45 ACP. Although I do remember one day renting the P245 right after it was released and was all the buzz and that little bugger kicked even with range ammo!

Anyway, that alone is why ill always take the .40 from now on. IMO it simply feels powerful.

quote:

Originally posted by matai:
Just bought a bunch of .40 at Wal-Mart for 12.5 cents a round. I use it in my Glock 20 with a .40 conversion barrel for practice.

Exactly. The mass exodus from a very good cartridge to the 9mm has left both .40 cal pistols and ammo as great deals for those who like multiple options. I have a pistols in .32ACP, .380ACP,9mm. 45ACP,357 Sig,and 10mm and revolvers in almost every caliber except the 41 magnum. So I shop price.
AS for carry it is a.45ACP,.357 sig, 40 cal and then a 9mm. I don't need 10K rounds as I am 1 individual. Why would I worry about a few dollars for my carry ammo?
One thing about this thread ( I read all 4 pages) that seems lacking is data. I am sure this many can back up the improved 9mm ballistics that now match the ballistics/ stopping power, gel test penetration of the .40 cal. (I am skeptical that this is true) But I did not see any links to this data. Personally I believe theh FBI and police department are going to 9mm because of price/ cost of firearm upkeep and less recoil for the weaker agent and the military uses it. But I have zero data to back that up. One thing that swings in favor of the 9mm from a global perspective is that it has been the handgun round of choice in Europe now since the German designed 9mm parabellum came out in the early 1900s. I think that why out military went to in the Beretta.

Personally I never understood these "caliber wars" I mean go to the range shoot something in the calibers that peek your interest and see which one works for you.
Once you find the one that's right, but good defensive ammo for it, practice often and like you mean it, and don't worry what Fred is carrying.

For my last purchase from a LGS, I LOVE it. He had a G27, like new for $250. Came with the box and two mags. I felt like I stole it.