If I recall, when the FBI did their 'famous' ballistic tests, their concluding statement was [the performance edge goes to the bullet with a greater diameter].

It’s been a while since I’ve looked at this thread, but thanks for your insights Fuego220.

There is much more that could be said about the subject, but little reason to say it other than (perhaps) to point out that if someone is truly interested in knowing whether there are valid bases to choose a more powerful cartridge over one that’s easier to shoot and permits us to shoot more times with the same type of gun, the information is available.

Excellent information Fuego 220. I see no reason to give away .40 cal. Of course I feel the same way about 9mm, .45acp, .357 Sig, .357 magnum, or .38 special.

I have quit on .380. Just too expensive for what it is.

Don’t see the need for 10MM, .41 cal., .460, 50 cal. etc. Too each his own. I have no problem with those who enjoy/prefer those and others.

The fbi had to change from 40 because they had 3 lawsuits/administrative complaints from agents who failed their range quals. One was because the agent had a gen3, and blamed her lack of backstraps for the inability to control recoil. So the fbi recalled all backstraps. Another was because of the dual recoil system in the gen4 that the gen3 didnt have. And a third one was for reasons unknown to me.

The fbi decided the most cost effective solution across the board was to adopt a new glock, made to their spec, in 9mm as “remedy”.

They then pushed that “penetration depth in 10% ballistic gel” was the most critical metric to judge a round by. They sole-sourced their round contract with speer, and had the g2 made specifically for their purposes: get marginal shooters to pass qual and stop civil/admin actions. This is why the g2 only clocks about 825-850fps. It also failed every single test the fbi had, so a composite of the rounds fired were made for each round of each test until it “passed”. They are now on a version of the hornady critical duty.

I did follow up testing of the g2 for another organization, and not one single round i fired from a hand gun or sub gun expanded.

I realize debating calibers is a near pointless discussion, as it is very tribalistic. Imo LE agencies are switching to 9mm for one reason only- marginal shooters. I guess a second would be cost. Glocks are reliable and cheap to buy, 9mm is easy and cheap to shoot. Its easy to see why.


Nato use of the 9mm is what drives its increased use over 40 and 45 overseas. It just simplifies already overtaxed supply line and manufacturing issues. The rest of our partners shoot 9mm, so its easier for all of our units -regardless of where they are from- to use it too. Especially since they often attach to other supporting units that provide logistics.

There is also a cultural fad around 9mm in culture. Youtube and socials are wall to wall with “shooter personalities” that want to demonstrate the latest gizmo for glock, and talk about how their “new methodology” set to music during a smooth edit highlight reel is going to turn you into a shooting extraordinaire, and all you need is this product or “revolutionary technique” to “shoot stupid flat” and then they crack off a 10-15rnd “drill” with powder puff loaded 115. Simply put, its marketing that sells.

I did a few years in a major metro pd, and then quit for the military where ive spent the rest of my career in various formats of special operations. I can say for sure, shot placement is the most important. I can also say bigger bullets work better at making people die faster. Over the last decade, getting 45 issued has become almost unheard of outside of a few units under some circumstances….but its almost always what i always carry on my own, especially if i have a rifle close by and dont need capacity…which in civilian format is nearly never a critical concern; and if it is chances are you need a rifle.

I think a sober minded, non biased approached works best: carry the largest caliber, of the best quality ammunition, loaded as hotly as you can handle, in the largest pattern pistol you can readily conceal. Sometimes thats a 9mm subcompact, and its still better than nothing. Ive got a p365 i really like having for times i cant tuck my custom 19/2011. Im convinced from what ive seen and done that 45 works better against people than 9mm, and that is unlikely to change anyone elses opinion. Time spent debating caliber is better spent on training and mindset, as those are more important than anything else. Fat bellies and slow minds get more “good guys” killed than the wrong caliber ever will.

Interesting comments, kiwikurt, and your registration date is relatively recent, welcome to the forum.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Interesting comments, kiwikurt, and your registration date is relatively recent, welcome to the forum.

Thanks. Just signed up recently, mainly on recommendation as a good place to divest myself of my guns before i move out of the US for good. Might as well contribute here and there and maybe learn a couple things too.

Ok personally like 40SW for several reasons:

All my 40SW handguns also have 9mm and 357sig barrels, so I can shoot any of the three.

Secondly, other than this most recent ammo shortage I've always been able to find a supply of 40 SW ammo at various local shops in and around Fort Worth.

Thirdly, I feel more comfortable with a 40SW or 357sig at my side when I hog hunt, in case of a boar charge. My accuracy between the 357sig, 9mm, or 40SW is about the same.

It boils down to personal preferences, my wife and daughter both shoot 9mm, and I feel confident that 9mm will serve them fine if the time ever comes that they need to use their carry pistols for protection.

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Fads.

That would only be true if 9mm ballistics had not improved over the last 25 years.

9mm ballistics have not improved that much in the past 25 years, the Speer Gold Dot was introduced in 1991. What has changed is the availability of 9mm pistol that will actually fit in the pocket of a pair Blue Jeans. The 40 caliber just won't work well in a true Pocket Pistol and this type of pistol is probably the hottest selling handgun today.

As for the recoil side of this discussion, I for one don't find the 40 caliber to be too "snappy". However I have a fair bit of experience shooting 357 Magnums from a 36 ounce revolvers and that is a caliber that defines "snappy". Have a 40 caliber P239 with over 5000 rounds down the pipe and was never bothered by the recoil. However I now carry a Ruger LC9S Pro and am wise enough to know that if that pistol were a 40 caliber I would be selling it to the first sucker who wanted to buy it. What works fine in a 32 ounce P239 would be a beast in a 19 ounce polymer wonder.

Sum it up and IMO it isn't the FBI preference or the increase in round count that has bought about the 9mm resurgence, it's the widespread adoption of Pocket Pistols that did it. For that particular application the 9mm is a 100% Perfect Fit.

Does anyone make a 1911 in 40S&W?

Springfield makes the EMP4 in .40. Not a traditional 1911 but close.

quote:

Originally posted by 10x Sniper:
Does anyone make a 1911 in 40S&W?

Sure. Wilson Combat sells models, including their CQB and Classics in .40S&W. Les Baer makes their Premier II in .40S&W as well, and likely other models.

Doing some spring cleaning and look what I found. Federal HST 180 gr. that I bought a while back. You can barely touch fmj for that price now.

I sold my EMP 40 and .40 ammo both FMJ and JHP. I have a feeling I might end up doing the same with my .357 SIG one day and consolidate to 9mm and .45 ACP.

I love my 40's

I was in Academy yesterday and noticed .40 hasn't come down in price like 9mm and 5.56. They were still priced at $30 for 50 rounds of FMJ. Good thing I have plenty stashed away

quote:

Originally posted by BigSwede:
I love my 40's

I was in Academy yesterday and noticed .40 hasn't come down in price like 9mm and 5.56. They were still priced at $30 for 50 rounds of FMJ. Good thing I have plenty stashed away

Try Aim Surplus. They have .40 for $15.99 I believe.

All 40 vs 9 effectiveness and great steps forward in technology aside, the Feds changed from 40S&W to 9mm. The government made a lot of taxpayers dollars available to law enforcement across the country. Wouldn't you find a "very good rationale" to spend somebody else's $ if you had the opportunity.

quote:

Originally posted by Fuego220:
.....
Generally the push for us to switch to 9mm in years past was from management to improve the qual scores of struggling officers, and financial savings. Of course much of this is not quantifiable data points for someone's scientific, peer reviewed paper, but for long time field personnel those observed experiences carry weight.

Fine analysis. Couple of points (above) piqued my interest. While some aspects of LEO use are different from non-LEOs there are some similarities as well.

With the huge increase of newbie gun buyers from Sandy Hook to the present, it is easier to gain a given level of proficiency with a nine. Doesn't matter whether it's a recruit at the police academy, LEO quals or a civilian. Also the cost difference.

The unmentioned comfort (to some) of creating a hail of bullets to survive a lethal deadly force encounter. I'm a simple minded Old School guy that started with .357 Mag revolvers. Hits matter, even with 18 rounds in the pistol. To whit, a LEO friend of mine dropped an armed robber with three shots/three hits. He arrived as backup after over 100 shots had been fired during the initial engagement with two officers.

More involved than only the above, but the preceding points of yours dovetailed nicely with some of my thinking. IMO, "observed experiences" can be as useful as hard data. Primarily because there are very few volunteers for controlled scientific studies involving people getting shot.