Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 9mm vs. .40s&w

I'm mostly carrying a G19 these days.. for no particular reason other than I enjoy hearing people tell me how bad it sucks.

Ask them if there's one thing the G19 can't do.





Dave

I guess I'm just a Neanderthal.



L.W.

I'm partial to the 40 S&W and shoot it better than the 9mm for some odd reason. I do miss my Glock 17, that was an accurate 9mm!

The 2 Glock 19's I've shot have not been as accurate for me? No issue carrying a 40 or 9mm.

Ask them if there's one thing Rosie O'Donnell can't do.

Using an M&P as an example, there is zero difference in the time it takes to recognize the threat, draw, aim, and fire the first shot - it's the same pistol for all purposes. The difference is limited to fractions of a second in the subsequent splits, which is far down the line in importance.

Time and what you do with it, throughout any contested event, matters immensely.

What's stupid and dangerous is parading the notion that any part of that can be quantified with a stopwatch.

It's stupid to quantify time with a device that measures time?

Between shots are fractions of seconds.

But that's not all that we're talking about.

IME, seeing the results of well over a thousand people shooting identical polymer pistols in both .40 and 9mm, MOST people are more accurate on that first shot and far more accurate on subsequent shots.

So it's not just about the time, it's about what happens during that time. Not only are more shots fired, but they're typically more accurate shots as well.



I'm sure all the He-Men here can defy the physics, but IME experience of seeing more shooters than most that vary in ability from tiny females to pretty stout guys fresh out of the military and college athletes, people are more accurate with a 9mm than a .40. Not just a little, but a lot. And that's been true for everyone.

Blue, don't talk about experience and common sence (sarcasm).

40's are snappy, no way around it. I found that out with my G35.

Do you drive a Model T also? LOL.

No, seriously, John Browning's design was a huge advance in handgun technology, which remained the best choice for a very long time, far longer than did the Model T.

the only need I would have for a .40 is if I was hiking in black bear country when the cubs were around for mama if she got upset with me. A G23 would be fine with hard cast ammo. There is no reason to own one over a 9mm other than that and then Phil killed a grizzly with a 9mm! Never mind...

I don't shoot as much as used to. Want to, but don't.

To me, the 9 mm is a lot easier to shoot. I even think the 45 acp is easier to shoot than the 40. And all my pistols are Glocks: 20SF, 21,35,17,27/26.

For what ever reason I do better with larger heavier rounds? Shot Expert with a 38 M&P revolver and a 1911A1. Only qualified with the M9.. No idea why, It and I just do not get along. Bought a CCW, CZ Rami had a choice between 9mm and 40 S&W. Bought the 40. It's snappy, but no issues at 25 yards with a silhouette target. Not knocking the 9mm, but they don't seem to work for me. Only one I have owned that I could shoot well was a Star Model B, FIL asked to borrow a pistol for an Alaskan RV trip. Have yet to get it back after 15 years. Use what works for you.

I'll pass on your assumption that the first shots are equal in speed and accuracy, and focus some other faults in your logic.

First of all, you stated a singular "threat," and you can't possibly know how many threats you'll face. Secondly you stated that subsequent shots were far down the line of importance. That's making the assumption that your first shot was all that was needed, and again, against a single threat. In your perfect scenario, you're prepared for one bad guy, and assuming he'll toss in the towel after being hit once.

Since none of us gets to dictate our perfect scenario fight, we have to expect and train for one where there are multiple bad guys who require multiple doses of correction. That's where those followup shots come in............and they're way up there on the list of importance. Shooting the M&P accurately and quickly, can be done better in 9mm than .40.

Accuracy always count supreme, but so does speed. The 9mm does both better than the .40 for almost all shooters.

There seems to be a lot of evidence that with the common pistol rounds 9mm, 40sw, 45acp the wounds are almost indistinguishable in the operating room, and I personally can shoot a lot faster and more accurately on the follow up shots with a 9mm.

On the other hand, I do recall before I found out that it was not politically correct to shoot lead bullets in the 40 and having had a G23 at that time, I scored a bag of reloaded semi wad cutter 200 grain practice ammo at a gun show, lord knows who made them or what they were. At the time I had cut up a beam composed of laminated plywood about 2 inches thick IIRC, it was kind of cool the way the thing knocked a big hole in that plywood. I almost think the common 10mm ammo does not have a lot over some of the 40SW ammo.

Watered down 10mm = .40 S&W.

Exactly. 40 S&W=40 "Short and Weak". That said, I don't need a 454 Casull, only a 45 Colt. The 40 S&W is a useful cartridge, perhaps the best self-defense cartridge we have, leaving recoil out of the equation. With recoil factored in, make mine a 9.

A fat 200 grs at 1050 shoots like a 45 ACP in my P226 40 cal, easy to get back on target and 16 of those would have to leave a pretty good mark.

I think most of the factory 10mm is under loaded.