Author Topic: Looking for a good .40 Semi Auto, Price is not an issue (Read 1808 times)

Toad · « **Reply #30 on:** November 13, 2007, 01:35:39 PM »

I never thought much about the .40 until I received a .40 S&W M&P pistol as a gift. I have not shot it as yet but I did research the cartridge a bit.

I'm a .45 ACP fan and I love my Taurus 1911 but I no longer call the .40 a "short & weak" after reading the history. It got that moniker when it was basically downsized from the 10mm.

Do a little reading; it's a reasonably powerful handgun cartridge that is certainly competitive at making people stop what they are doing when you choose to stop them.

Quote

WIKI: The .40 S&W cartridge has become a huge success in the United States because, while possessing nearly identical accuracy[5], drift and drop, it adds 50% more energy over the 9 mm Parabellum with a more manageable recoil than the 10 mm Auto cartridge. In the rest of the world it has become a popular combat pistol shooting sports cartridge.[citation needed]

.40 S&W Load TablesThe energy of the .40 S&W exceeds all standard-pressure and +P 9 mm Para loadings and many standard-pressure .45 ACP rounds, generating between 450 and 600 foot-pounds of energy, depending on bullet weight, with mid to high 500's typical. Both the .40 S&W and the 9 mm Parabellum operate at a 35,000 psi SAAMI maximum, compared to a 21,000 psi maximum for .45 ACP[6]. Some small ammunition manufacturers offer .40 S&W ammunition consistently developing energy well above 500 ft·lbf in all their .40 S&W ammo as off-the-shelf items.[7]. While SAAMI has not established a +P standard for the .40 S&W, there are companies marketing ammunition claimed to be +P, but they do not provide pressure data to support +P labeling.

The .40 S&W is considered by some[citation needed] the best cartridge for law enforcement use available today, combining superior stopping power when using expanding ammunition and manageable recoil in a package that remains compact, even when using a double-stack magazine. The .40 S&W has an overwhelming share of the U.S. law enforcement market as a result.[citation needed]

Suave · « **Reply #31 on:** November 13, 2007, 02:05:47 PM »

I would say try as many pistols as you can and get the one that you like best. Most ranges have rental guns, although often not in the best state of repair. Also take your buds to the range and try their stuff.

If it's for general property defense and wife usage you should consider a double action revolver in my opinion. 357 magnum with a 4 or 6 inch barrel, she can start out practicing with .38 special cartridges.

Halo · « **Reply #32 on:** November 14, 2007, 09:03:18 AM »

I fired a couple .40 semiautos at the local range and enjoyed the cartridge. Funny how some cartridges just feel right, e.g., the .40 always felt good but for some reason I did not enjoy firing the .357 sig.

However, when it came to choosing the optimum for my needs, the .45 ACP seemed even more comfortable and effective. If I had to carry concealed, a .40 Springfield XD would be a candidate, but I'd still try the .45 ACP first.

I'm only a recreational shooter, so pay particular heed to the more experienced advice from law enforcement and military veterans.

lazs2 · « **Reply #33 on:** November 14, 2007, 09:13:39 AM »

toad.. the wiki energy tables are wrong.. there are no loads in .40 that have 600 lbs of energy that I know of. they all come in at around 300

http://yarchive.net/gun/ammo/cartridge_table.html

Energy = 1/2 (grains) x (velocity [ft/sec]) x C ft.lbs.

-6
where C = conversion factor = 4.44 x 10 (approximate).

lazs

Yeager · « **Reply #34 on:** November 14, 2007, 10:04:53 AM »

I've fired off a few rounds and I sure as hell would not want to get shot with a .40 under any circumstances. As a general rule of thumb, screw the math stats. Go for the head shot.

Toad · « **Reply #35 on:** November 14, 2007, 10:16:48 AM »

OK, I'll buy that; Wiki is what it is and it isn't much.

I did do a comparo on the Federal and Winchester Ammunition Ballistics sites. Now, I realize we're not getting into handloads here but for "off the shelf" performance, the .40 and the .45 are in the same realm for energy and better than the 9mm.

I compared HydraShoks, .40 in 165 and 180, .45 in 230 and 9mm in 124 (115 in Win, they have now 124's) and 147. There's a bunch of writing that the 9mm/147 is a crap combo that has feed and other problems but I tossed it in as the heavy bullet example.

Here's the list, with the Federal number first, Winchester second.

Muzzle energies (and face it, most of these when used as intended won't be that far from the muzzle):

.45/230 = F 404 * W 396

.40/180 = F 400 * W 408

.40/165 = F 352 * W 468

9mm/147 = F 326 * W 320

9mm/124 = F 345 * W 115 gr = 383

Again, it's not handloads but it's clear that the .40 and .45 are pretty close in energy in the commercially available stuff that most people probably use. Just about all CCH instructors I have discussed this with says that for legal reasons you're better off using commercial ammunition in case it ever goes to trial for some reason.

I'm not saying muzzle energy is the be all - end all either. But it's something to use when considering penetration, along with bullet type, brand within bullet type, caliber, etc., etc., etc..

I'm still a .45 afficianado but I no longer view the .40 as "short & weak", the nickname it got when they downsized the 10mm. It's decent and likely better than a 9mm.

I own them all, btw, so I really don't have a dog in the fight. I just prefer the look, feel and whoomp of the .45 in a 1911.

Terror · « **Reply #36 on:** November 14, 2007, 01:47:08 PM »

According to the Muzzle Energy Calculator, The "Winchester 9mm 127gr +p+ Ranger SXT" ammo delivers about 441ft/lb energy. Looks like it sits right in the middle of the .40/.45 energy tables.

Not bad for a 9mm round.

127gr
1250fps
.355 cross section (9.017mm)

Terror

Toad · « **Reply #37 on:** November 14, 2007, 02:21:13 PM »

I didn't get into the +P or +P+ rounds.

That particular 9mm round is mentioned in the discussion article as very close to the .357/125 round.

I do think it's always a case of what an individual finds comfortable/suitable.

No matter what you pick, you have to be comfortable with shooting it and you have to practice enough to shoot it well enough to be effective when the time comes.

A .45 does you no good at all if you are uncomfortable with the recoil and flinch so much you just plain miss. In that case, you're better off with a .22 or a baseball bat.

Find the biggest/hottest concealable that you can shoot accurately and comfortably and get good with it. That's my advice.

lazs2 · « **Reply #38 on:** November 14, 2007, 02:43:00 PM »

well... hydrashoks are hot as are the rangers. terror is practicing for war.. multiple opponents.. I believe that in war they only allow ball ammo.

now.. you take the 44 mag and the 357 mag and you are getting into the 1100 and 700 lbs of energy range.

you take them light bullets the ranger and the .40 in 165 and such.. they are hollow points and they may or may not expand in people.. but... they will not penetrate cover.

You give up penetration in the hope that you will get expansion.

lazs

Masherbrum · « **Reply #39 on:** November 14, 2007, 03:29:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Terror
According to the Muzzle Energy Calculator, The "Winchester 9mm 127gr +p+ Ranger SXT" ammo delivers about 441ft/lb energy. Looks like it sits right in the middle of the .40/.45 energy tables.

Not bad for a 9mm round.

127gr
1250fps
.355 cross section (9.017mm)

Terror

Black Talon 2nd's are old school. The 9mm is a crappy round to have your life depending on it. Oh one other thing. You'll wear your Glock out something fierce with those rounds.

Toad · « **Reply #40 on:** November 14, 2007, 03:49:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
they are hollow points and they may or may not expand in people.. but... they will not penetrate cover.

You give up penetration in the hope that you will get expansion.

lazs

After reading that article and reviewing once again all the variables he mentions, I'm considering loading a mix of ball and heavy hollow.

Terror · « **Reply #41 on:** November 14, 2007, 04:38:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
Black Talon 2nd's are old school. The 9mm is a crappy round to have your life depending on it. Oh one other thing. You'll wear your Glock out something fierce with those rounds.

Actually not true. According to Glock, the 9mm Glock line was designed with high pressure rounds in mind for use with Special Forces. So these rounds are just perfect in the Glock 17, 19, or 26.

T

Terror · « **Reply #42 on:** November 14, 2007, 05:18:07 PM »

This is what I could find on 9mm pressure ratings...

9mm = 35,000psi
9mm (+P) = 38,500psi
9mm (+P+) = 40,000psi
9mm NATO = 42,000psi

Glock rates their 9mm pistol line to 43,500psi.

T.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #43 on:** November 14, 2007, 05:38:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Terror
Actually not true. According to Glock, the 9mm Glock line was designed with high pressure rounds in mind for use with Special Forces. So these rounds are just perfect in the Glock 17, 19, or 26.

T

Actually I know an armorer for Glock. They aren't designed for repeated use with +p+ ammo loads. I'd buy a new barrel if I were you.

I know my guns, including Glocks.

Terror · « **Reply #44 on:** November 14, 2007, 05:51:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
Actually I know an armorer for Glock. They aren't designed for repeated use with +p+ ammo loads. I'd buy a new barrel if I were you.

I know my guns, including Glocks.

According to my Glock Armorer, Glocks were designed for 9mm NATO pressures. They are more than capable of handling 9mm +P+ Ammunition. Actually, he was the one who recommended the ammo to me.

T