Always thought the .40 was a solution to a non-existent problem. In 9mm sized guns, it has more recoil than a .45 and those guns will wear out WAY faster than a 9mm. .40 S&W is a notorious gun killer. That said, it's a very capable cartridge should you be inclined, and it will get the job done just fine. I just don't think the trade off's are really attractive for that cartridge (and others). Handguns are rather unimpressive when it comes to "stopping"...they all kill just fine, but they don't stop well. So I think most have determined that more bullets is more beneficial than bigger bullets. Of course this is an argument that goes back a century or more, and they'll be debating this crap long after I'm gone. I have always favored hi-cap 9mm's...but that doesn't mean the other cartridges won't get it done just fine..
^^^That^^^
It doesn’t do anything that a 9x19mm won’t do but at the expense of less bullets in the mag, more recoil and more gun wear. 9x19 and .45 ACP both have a lot of history behind them if that something that matters to you. The .40 doesn’t have the cool history and doesn’t offer anything over a 9mm.
Sigh. What a bunch of horseshit.
I've loaded some hot stuff for nines, but never have I been able to get a 200gr bullet close to 1100 fps. About 850 was tops. And I mean tops.
And history? You pick a semi-auto cartridge in a defense handgun for history? Interesting priorities. SMH
I’m talking about for a defensive situation. Sure a .40 S&W bullet is bigger and heavier than a 9mm bullet. Duh 🙄. It doesn’t from a defensive standpoint work any better than a 9mm. Hence it doesn’t do anything that a 9mm doesn’t do.
Nope I don’t pick a defensive weapon for it’s history. I own a whole lot more than one defensive pistol and when buying/collecting others as range toys or just something to buy than history of the gun and its chambering come into play.
There’s nothing wrong with a .40. Two general comments to the the OP’s post as to why it isn’t more popular. Do you disagree?
