Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Talk me out of a 40 S&W

Since this will be a ccw is suggest picking the platform first and then deciding from there. I favor the 9mm due to my practice times and economy. As far as "stopping power" I don't think the 9mm gives up anything to the 45 and 40 in regards to human assalients. I am a firm believer in what you do before, during, and after a gunfight is far more important than the choice between a 9mm, .40, or 45.

Same here. Both were Glocks.

Yeah, it means that it's less popular than 9mm and .45.

I believe (now) you are correct:

> > http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Caliber-Popularity1.jpg < <

I have always used a simple test to see if a hardware or software change had a real ability to affect performance in my tool selection. I had the whole glock family, a 17, 22 and a .22lr conversion kit and I wanted to examine the effects of ammo selection on external performance, ie, how fast and how accurate.

There are plenty of test such as the bill drill, 5x5x5 etc but this works for me. Two sheets of 8x11 paper spaced three feet apart at five yards. I started with the gun up and on target, I did not want to measure my ability to be consistent on the draw, just shot to shot and target transitions. I fired three separate strings, one with both hands, one strong hand and one running a white light. One shot on the left target, two on the right and then three on the left again. The .22 kit allows me to understand how fast and accurate I can be with the platform when all I have to worry about is trigger control. With the 9mm I ran white box 115 fmj, 147 hydrashok (best way to get rid of it) and Corbon 115 at 1300 fps. In .40 I ran the 165 whitebox and our duty load, a 165 SXT at 1200fps.

With both hands the .22 were .11-.13 between shots and .13-.16 between targets. 9mm fmj was .12-.16, 9mm corbon was .15-.17 between shots. .40 whitebox was .15-.17 and .40 SXT was .16-.18. Fair to say that when I was fresh, good grip and focused there was really not that much difference.

Moving to one handed and light techniques (hand held, not weapon mounted) the .40 was significantly worse and when I looked at the targets afterwards the shot placement was much better with the 9mm. With the .40 I used the entire 8x11 to keep all of the shots on target, with the 9mm the groups were about the size of a fist. Switch the target to a 3x5 card for the same drill and the 9mm is a big winner.

I am a firm believe in not just hitting center mass, but hitting my target within the center mass and the 9mm does it all much better for me. As always buyer beware, your results may vary etc.

Seafire: Go with a 40 S&W for concealed carry and home protection.
I am sold on them having seen them in use and using them for 28 years or so now!
I would NOT even consider the 45 ACP or the 9 m/m for the above useages anymore!
For many years I got to shoot top quality "man stopper" 40 S&W ammo out of my Glock high capacity pistol FOR FREE!
I fast fired countless high capacity magazines full of this top quality ammo and 95%+ of those rounds were kill shots on man size silhouette targets - don't let ANYONE tell you you can't rapid fire with accuracy, a 40 S&W full size Glock.
You CAN!
I know - I done it.
And now I also have the medium frame size Glock in 40 S&W and I am equally as happy with it.
Go with the 40 S&W - don't let anyone try and talk you out of one.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

This is a great example of someone who knows what they're talking about and someone who thinks they know what they're talking about.