Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Fired a .40 for the first time today

Birdwatcher,

That VAnimrod fella is obviously troubled by something called "high standards". I'm betting he's a handsome lawyer...

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

"High standards" came after enough coyote mornings to stock a good trapper's cabin... bt/dt, ain't going back.

Hey, my daughter and my girlfriend think I look good. That's all that counts...

Your mom probably does too. Don't forget about her...


SS

I carry a .40 Glock 22C at work everyday and can say after carrying a few other calibers that the .40 is one sweet shot. We shoot out to 100 yards and knock down heavy steel with them consistently. The .45 is nice too, but does not carry the capacity. The 9mm is good but I prefer it in a SMG. Wheel guns are fun to shoot and the airlight Smith .38 plus P is a great concealed carry, but give me my Glocks for everyday...Also Vam is right, that girl could use some airbrushing....

I have two 40's, a Glock 35 I just bought and have about 200 rds through it and a 4046 Smith and Wesson, DAO with several thousand rounds through it. The Glock has a better trigger, 8lbs and is a very short pull but bounces around alot for the last few rounds, it's really light. It holds 15 total. The S&W holds 11 has a heavier trigger 12 or 13 lbs but it's easier to hold on target shooting fast right down to the last round.

The model 35 has a 5.25 inch barrel and fully loaded weighs less than the 4.5 inch 4046 which is all stainless steel. kwg

JOG, don't talk to me, I'm PO'd that, out of all my thousands of erudite posts, all you could recall on that other thread was the one about that little catfish that swims up yer schlong.

And speaking of schlongs, not being a wealthy attorney my own approach to women back then involved much begging and grovelling, and I STILL think that one in the pic would be a better deal then one that couldn't use "a bit of airbrushing".

But then, I like Glocks.

A few random thoughts from this thread not addressed to anyone in particular...

Doesn't the .357 Sig pretty much duplicate that famous 125 grain .357 revolver load that has performed so well? Ain't heard a bad thing about the Sig round in use, and I know some PD's are using it. Prob'ly has phenomenal feed-reliability with that bottleneck cartridge.

As far as the .40 being hard on guns, while I know some .40 Glocks infamously burst maybe ten-fifteen years back I'll hazard a guess that yer average new-design (as opposed to something antiquated; Hi-Power f'rinstance) purpose built .40 pistol would last pretty much several of my own shooting lifetimes.

I'll concede the point on the reloading difficulties though...

Birdwatcher

If she shows me her 40's i will show her my 9.3!!!!

Birdwatcher,

Well, that's exactly why I remember - you're the only guy I know that can write about schlong-swimming-catfish in such an erudite fashion.

I like Glocks too, but the handguns I merely like don't make it to my gun safe. I'd have to own several hundred if that were the case. I'm a loony after all...

As for how long a pistol in .40 S&W will last - I dunno. I can say with absolute certainty it will be far less than an equal quality 9mm or .45 ACP. I'm not referring to kBs or anything catastrophic - just an arbitrary line where maintenance and replacement parts either exceed the price of the pistol or just become too much of a hassle to put up with.

What we define as our "shooting lifetimes" is the key to the whole thing. I've worn out a bunch of handguns and saw the handwriting on the wall with a lot more. It's easier to do than lots of people believe.

Quote: (regarding 40 cal. pistols)
-- (as opposed to something antiquated; Hi-Power f'rinztance)

Me:
-- Poor choice of "f'rinstance. When many handgun mfg.'rs began to produce sem-autos in the 40 S&W- they basically used their existing 9mm models and only increased the bore dimension- to the larger 40 cal.

What FN did, when producing the 40 Hi-Power was; a re-engineering and modifying of the new handgun almost completely, for the higher pressures involved in utilizing the 40 rnd.

I cannot now recall all the improvements and changes that were made regarding the BHP 40. But there were several new components that were designed only for the 40 model- including stronger metallurgy, springs, it's own heavier slide, and also an extra (3rd) locking lug was added.

Hey! The BHP 40 is: ... "not your father's Oldsmobile".

As to the "antiquated design" of pistols- One hears that frequently, often regarding the BHP. But seemingly, not so much- regarding the "older" Browning design: The "fabled" 1911. Of course 1911 mfg.'rs must be making them so much better now.

But that's also true with the BHP's. I was reading an article that listed and rated the most powerful and effective types of ammunition available. They also listed and rated handguns as regards to their strength and dependability in general- and also their ability to handle this type of ammunition.

There were 3 handgun catagories:

The 1st being "Unacceptable".
--I was sad and surprised to see (amongst others) the Browning Hi-Power listed in this catagory. (I didn't know then that this was in reference only to older models.)

The 2nd was "conditional".

The 3rd was "Approved & Reccomended"
--I was more surprised to "now see" the Browning Hi-Power again listed here.

But this time the BHP inclusion was followed by the statement,
"Assembled in Argintina (of course)". (This being the most recent version of the BHP).

Those designs may be "old", but some manufactures just keep making them guns "better".

And J M Brownings designs, might, ... still be the best.

--Weed

PS: As to the gun-girl pics. CZ makes better guns than girls.

There, see how a few well-chosen sentences can ignite responses? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> What I REALLY meant to say was that if it was a 1911 that girl was holding, why they'd just use a guy in drag. 1911 fans turning up in unusual numbers for "Brokeback Mountain" after all...

Weed,

Our pard Birdwatcher was just trying the flush the die-hard Hi-Power birds that flock here. He gotcha...

The Hi-Power in .40 S&W is a nice pistol in its own right, but the 9mm is still king. The Hi-Power 9mm is all about handling characteristics - there are many larger, smaller, higher quality or more accurate pistols than the Hi-Power 9mm, but none of them handle like one.

Gotcha.

Alaways wondered why one would choose ammo in .40SW over 10auto? In factory light it shares very similar balistics to the .40SW with lower pressures than the SW. In 200gr loads it will outperform the venerable .45+Ps. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

That's the beauty of the .40 --- the COMPROMISE it provides...albeit at the price of a little 'pressure'. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

"It throws enough decent weight projectiles in a package that most people can hold in their hand."
Did I just say that? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Ya, and my last couple of posts weren't the best I ever wrote, especially as they were replied to seriously.

Thanks for the info on the .40 Hi Power. Was just at the Denton TX gun show today. My own perfect 9mm or .40 would be a Glock 19 with an ambidextrous thumb safety, Hi-Powers don't fit my hand like the Glock.

Springfield XD's entirely escaped my notice until recently (shows ya how long its been since I thought about autos). Seems like the grip safety overcomes the major shortcoming (no safety) of the Glock, but contrary to popular opinion around here, I found XD ergonomics worse than the Glocks.

The real wonder of the show, Taurus's new hi-cap .45, the double stack grip about as user-friendly as a hi-cap 9 or .40, amazing.

I saw the .45 Kahr, great gun (the mini 9mm version is the mini 9 Kel-Tec SHOULD have built).

This month's gun show regret: a clean S&W Mod 36, the long-discontinued blued 3" j-frame .38, beautiful and downright handy little revolver, just a small matter of $360 separating me from it <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Birdwatcher

Birdwatcher,

Sorry to be a toothache, but don't give up on the Hi-Power's ergonomics just yet. Consider that a pistol's design should assist in controlling the sight picture, not just feel comfortable. Also, it's tough to gauge a pistol's feel, especially a hi-cap, with an empty magazine - a dozen or more cartridges in the grip changes the world.

After a refresher course in "trigger reset", the Hi-Power needs to be fired to be fully appreciated.

Birdwatcher, The Glock is NOT a no safety gun....It has several safeties that work together including a trigger safety and a drop safety.

sgt217... this is an old debate and I'm aware of the various "safeties" on a Glock. The beef I have with 'em is that every time you pull the trigger they go "bang", ergo, no safety as I understand the meaning of the term.

I'm also fully aware of training, trigger discipline etc, but what concerns me is stuff that can press the trigger other than my own trigger finger. I believe Glock themselves adress this concern by recommending that their guns use holsters that securely cover the trigger, ie the HOLSTER itself is the safety.

Pushing any loaded Glock down forcefully to snap into one of those form-fitting factory holsters always gives me a case of the willies, I mean sure there ain't anything in the holster that going to push on the trigger, but what if there is?

Likewise I knew a gun shop employee who commonly carried a mini-Glock WITH A STOCK 5.5lb TRIGGER loose in a pants pocket, with all the usual pocket stuff. Still gives me a case of the willies just thinking about it.

The "safety" on a typical double-action revolver is that long, heavy trigger pull. IMHO a stock 5.5lb Glock trigger is about like a Hi-Power, Colt or similar design single-action except with no grip or thumb safety (and no mag disconnect neither). "NY" trigger springs do help the Glock somewhat in this regard, but even an 8lb Glock trigger is still a much shorter trigger pull than an equivalent revolver, with all the attendant complexity to operate of an auto.

A couple of years back we had a Sherrif Deputy shot with his own Glock, he made the elementary mistake of "clearing" the chamber BEFORE he dropped the mag. In putting it back in the tupperware "Glock" box, he inadvertently pressed the trigger against the center pole common to Glock cases, discharging the round in the chamber which fatally wounded him in the abdomen.

Wouldn't have happened that way with a Hi-Power (magazine disconnect), nor any one of a number of semi-autos with a decocker/safety, nor maybe not even a 1911. Prob'ly wouldn't have happened with a revolver neither (which offer plenty of visual and tactile clues that they're about to go off when the trigger is pulled).

Birdwatcher

I agree with what you say in your second post and your explanation is much better then saying no safety. I have heard about the death of the deputy you mention and agree that other guns may not have resulted in the same result. I don't like firearms with magazine disconnects because if you lose the mag or do not seat the mag fully you are done. I shot one for several years and feel much more comfortable with the Glock. I guess it is a matter of semantics, but your second post with the explanation of the Glock safety is correct. I personally have to carry a Glock every day and IMO they are very safe. I guess we can agree to disagree on a few things...

The 10mm cartridge is longer, which means the magazines must be bigger fore-and-aft, and the grip frame must be larger to accomodate all of this. Many modern LE recruits do not have big hands. On the subject of the .357 SIG, IIRC, it duplicates .357 snubby ballistics, but not the ballistics of the longer barreled .357. So, it is still quite good stuff. John Farnam's website related instances of a couple of Glocks chambered for .357 SIG which suffered slide cracks, but this was after a high round count, something like 15000 to 20000. This did not change John Farnam's favorable opinion of the .357 SIG cartridge.