[Sherman 53]

Is 40 S&W dead? I have a pistol and a Carbine I would hate not to be able to fine AMMO

 

[bumthum]

No... I think 40 S&W has become niche, but it isn't dead by far. I mean... it's still a credentialed caliber for street thugs, so their purchasing alone should keep in on shelves. My interpretation is that it retains status because so many police departments adopted it and hoodrats are all about status, etc. The "Glawk-Forty" is a meme among gun folks for a reason and I don't see that market dying down until there is some new hotness that draws the attention of police and street thugs.

Realistically, beyond the niche cult-market that has developed around it, the 40 S&W doesn't hold much appeal or really do anything particularly better than it's main competitors the 9mm and .45 ACP. Still though, I see 40 ammo on the shelves in quantities and variations that lead me to conclude that it's still selling well. My local stores regularly go through everything 40 that they have in stock, its still selling and boy does it ever shoot nicely from my JCP.

 

[ajole]

Realistically, beyond the niche cult-market that has developed around it, the 40 S&W doesn't hold much appeal or really do anything particularly better than it's main competitors the 9mm and .45 ACP.

What it does is give you more capacity in a given sized gun than a .45, while offering more oomph than a 9 mm.

No 9 mm I know of offers 165 grain loadings at 1150 fps, or 135 grains at 1400 fps, with 400-500 foot pounds of energy. No .45 handgun I know of puts 16 rounds in a flush fit mag….although there was one that did 14.

So in the real world, the 40 DOES do things measurably better than the 9 mm and the .45.

The thing is, it’s a compromise. If you’re into tiny splits on double taps, the immense and uncontrollable recoil of the 40 might slow you down to only 3 shots per second, rather than 4. If you’re into 22 round mags in a duty gun, the 40 is going to look like it’s happy to see you, while the 9 will just about fit into a large grip. If you’re an old Fudd…well, it isn’t what grandpa used to win the war.

While you are right about the 40 being pretty much out of the game…the rationale used to create that situation is weak

So….the go fast guys go 9 mm to maximize capacity and minimize recoil, while the “moar mass” bigger is better guys stay with .45 because it’s a soft shooter that throws rifle weight projectiles fast enough to penetrate meat. Or they go 10 mm, because it’s a very effective cartridge, and they aren’t wussies that are afraid of a tiny extra bit of recoil. And anyone choosing the middle ground .40 better have a large stash of brass, powder and primers, or catch a great sale every so often on a bulk pack.

For instance, I have a Winchester in 22 WRF, which is the round that was 22 Mag, before 22 Mag. It’s made in a run about once every 18-24 months by Winchester. No new gun has been chambered in it for maybe 60-80 years? No idea how long Winchester will keep making it. And being a rimfire, re-loading is problematic. Would I buy a gun in 22WRF? Well….I have about 2000 rounds, so….maybe? But I also have 22 mag guns, and that ammo is made by three or more makers. So maybe not.

 

[bumthum]

What it does is give you more capacity in a given sized gun than a .45, while offering more oomph than a 9 mm.

No 9 mm I know of offers 165 grain loadings at 1150 fps, or 135 grains at 1400 fps, with 400-500 foot pounds of energy. No .45 handgun I know of puts 16 rounds in a flush fit mag….although there was one that did 14.

So in the real world, the 40 DOES do things measurably better than the 9 mm and the .45.

That's a fair assessment, I guess I meant my statement as a practical matter. For example, someone might make the argument that 5.7 penetrates better than pretty much any other handgun round, but I would argue "So what?" for most use cases. .40 S&W is the middle ground between 9mm and .45 ACP across a lot of loadings, but on average 9mm can kill people just as dead at normally higher capacity, or in more controllable smaller guns, and .45 ACP gives you the larger meplat and defo kills, although at slightly less capacity. As a shooter and a consooomer I don't think, on the balance, what advantages .40 S&W offers really are it doing something subjectively "better" (in relation to practical use) than either 9mm or .45 ACP. But yes, clearly it does actually have a clear performance edge on 9mm and a capacity edge over .45 ACP. I should have better qualified what I said in my first post.

As a side-note, I have a Keltec P-40 (P-11 in .40 S&W) and I consider that to be a horrible gun to fire, frankly miserable, but it's also a lot of firepower in a gun that can be carried in a coat pocket.

Much of what I've heard/read on the subject says PDs are ditching .40 for 9mm because their people shoot better with the reduced recoil of 9mm and modern gun fights have revealed that capacity is a game changer. 15+1 of modern "kills them dead" 9mm hollow points means fewer reloads and more rounds downrange than 13+1 of .40 S&W... with the additional benefit of 9mm hopefully delivering more accurate shots for a given officer. Given the number of rounds many police officers end up firing at offenders, I suspect they're really using capacity and volume of fire to make up for poor marksmanship under stress, but that's another issue probably off topic.

 

[ajole]

I completely agree with that^^^^.

 

[RACHGIER]

What it does is give you more capacity in a given sized gun than a .45, while offering more oomph than a 9 mm.

No 9 mm I know of offers 165 grain loadings at 1150 fps, or 135 grains at 1400 fps, with 400-500 foot pounds of energy. No .45 handgun I know of puts 16 rounds in a flush fit mag….although there was one that did 14.

So in the real world, the 40 DOES do things measurably better than the 9 mm and the .45.

The thing is, it’s a compromise. If you’re into tiny splits on double taps, the immense and uncontrollable recoil of the 40 might slow you down to only 3 shots per second, rather than 4. If you’re into 22 round mags in a duty gun, the 40 is going to look like it’s happy to see you, while the 9 will just about fit into a large grip. If you’re an old Fudd…well, it isn’t what grandpa used to win the war.

While you are right about the 40 being pretty much out of the game…the rationale used to create that situation is weak

So….the go fast guys go 9 mm to maximize capacity and minimize recoil, while the “moar mass” bigger is better guys stay with .45 because it’s a soft shooter that throws rifle weight projectiles fast enough to penetrate meat. Or they go 10 mm, because it’s a very effective cartridge, and they aren’t wussies that are afraid of a tiny extra bit of recoil. And anyone choosing the middle ground .40 better have a large stash of brass, powder and primers, or catch a great sale every so often on a bulk pack.

For instance, I have a Winchester in 22 WRF, which is the round that was 22 Mag, before 22 Mag. It’s made in a run about once every 18-24 months by Winchester. No new gun has been chambered in it for maybe 60-80 years? No idea how long Winchester will keep making it. And being a rimfire, re-loading is problematic. Would I buy a gun in 22WRF? Well….I have about 2000 rounds, so….maybe? But I also have 22 mag guns, and that ammo is made by three or more makers. So maybe not.

Well SOMEBODY says he can get 100grs of 9mm going 1800fps with 705ft/lbs of energy..

 

[TNTRAILERTRASH]

Johnny the Praktical nurse whowl works the E.D. at a Texas hospital makes YouTube video says .40 does more damage than 9 or .45. I could dig up the video if you can't.

 

[Hipointer]

Well SOMEBODY says he can get 100grs of 9mm going 1800fps with 705ft/lbs of energy..

Well, we all know that is not happening...not unless you dropped a 9mm bullet into a large case, with lots of powder. Maybe he was talking about a .357 Mag, with a 100 grain bullet?

 

[ajole]

Probably just a revolver…..

 

[RACHGIER]

Well, we all know that is not happening...not unless you dropped a 9mm bullet into a large case, with lots of powder. Maybe he was talking about a .357 Mag, with a 100 grain bullet?

Nope. Check the new guy out in one of his 8 threads about all his money and guns.

Claims he can get 1800fps out of a 9mm with slower burning powder. I called bullshit and suddenly he remembered that he neglected to mention he's running 65-98gr solid monolithics at +p+ from 10-12" barrels... I called bullshit again because anything over 90gr would have massive overpressure signs. Suddenly it was for his .357sig.

He's full of that kind of shit.

 

[lklawson]

No... I think 40 S&W has become niche, but it isn't dead by far. I mean... it's still a credentialed caliber for street thugs, so their purchasing alone should keep in on shelves. My interpretation is that it retains status because so many police departments adopted it and hoodrats are all about status, etc. The "Glawk-Forty" is a meme among gun folks for a reason and I don't see that market dying down until there is some new hotness that draws the attention of police and street thugs.

Realistically, beyond the niche cult-market that has developed around it, the 40 S&W doesn't hold much appeal or really do anything particularly better than it's main competitors the 9mm and .45 ACP. Still though, I see 40 ammo on the shelves in quantities and variations that lead me to conclude that it's still selling well. My local stores regularly go through everything 40 that they have in stock, its still selling and boy does it ever shoot nicely from my JCP.

I have a judo buddy who's a marine and combat vet. Spent time down in South America doing whatever they were doing down there in the '80s and '90s. Some of it involved Russians and some of it involved narcos. But he came back missing part of his calf muscle from a machete attack. I think that one was one that involved narcos. That's pretty much all I've ever asked. He's absolutely in love with the 40. Refers to it as "the perfect caliber."

So it's not just thugs and one of these. There are some, at least, genuine face shooters who really like the cartridge.

Peace favor your sword (mobile)

 

[ajole]

Nope. Check the new guy out in one of his 8 threads about all his money and guns.

Claims he can get 1800fps out of a 9mm, but neglected to mention he's running 65-98gr solid monolithics at +p+ from 10-12" barrels...

Shoot…I can get 2300 fps out of a 280 grain 9 mm, at normal pressure.
Well, it’s more like 9.3 mm. And it’s a 63 mm case. In a Husqvarna rifle.

But .366 inches is a 9mm, right?

 

[lklawson]

That's a fair assessment, I guess I meant my statement as a practical matter. For example, someone might make the argument that 5.7 penetrates better than pretty much any other handgun round, but I would argue "So what?"

That would be a weird thing to argue. The point of the 5.7 is not deeper penetration, per se, it is better penetration through soft armor, with a flatter trajectory, longer maximum effective range, more magazine capacity, and lower recoil then the 9 mm. It does all of those things in spades.

My guess is that the reason the 5.7 isn't more popular with the sport shooting crowd is that the round is expensive, finicky to reload, and I don't know if it makes whatever their weird power factor rules are.

Peace favor your sword (mobile)

 

[RACHGIER]

I like .40 S&W.
I like 10mm.
I plan on getting a 10mm carbine so I can have a sidearm and carbine in each.

I can throw big ass chunks of fuck you down range at much higher velocities than one crowd. And more weight at the same velocities as the other.

 

[RACHGIER]

Shoot…I can get 2300 fps out of a 280 grain 9 mm, at normal pressure.
Well, it’s more like 9.3 mm. And it’s a 63 mm case. In a Husqvarna rifle.

But .366 inches is a 9mm, right?

All I need is a lawn mower and an expensive window. 😆 🤣

 

[LTP1]

Nope. Check the new guy out in one of his 8 threads about all his money and guns.

Claims he can get 1800fps out of a 9mm with slower burning powder. I called bullshit and suddenly he remembered that he neglected to mention he's running 65-98gr solid monolithics at +p+ from 10-12" barrels... I called bullshit again because anything over 90gr would have massive overpressure signs. Suddenly it was for his .357sig.

He's full of that kind of shit.

Okay, now I'm interested. Where can I find this thread "Which thou speaketh of."

 

[moona11]

Okay, now I'm interested. Where can I find this thread "Which thou speaketh of."

Start reading

 

[RACHGIER]

Okay, now I'm interested. Where can I find this thread "Which thou speaketh of."

It's in one of the half dozen threads the numbskull posted in trashing HP's, bragging about how expensive the rest of his guns are, and how he did thousands of dollars worth of work on a keltec to make run.... but he's too scared to pick up a pair of needlenose pliers to tweak the feed lips on his HP mags so he can shut the fuck up already and run the gun.

 

[bumthum]

That would be a weird thing to argue. The point of the 5.7 is not deeper penetration, per se, it is better penetration through soft armor, with a flatter trajectory, longer maximum effective range, more magazine capacity, and lower recoil then the 9 mm. It does all of those things in spades.

My guess is that the reason the 5.7 isn't more popular with the sport shooting crowd is that the round is expensive, finicky to reload, and I don't know if it makes whatever their weird power factor rules are.

Peace favor your sword (mobile)

That's kind of the point I was making. The 5.7 penetrates really well but that is meaningless to me on a subjective level, just like most of 40 S&W's advantages. The other stuff 5.7 does isn't really what I was trying to get at, I just needed an example of a round offering better performance in a given area, that I really don't care about on a subjective level.

So it's not just thugs and one of these. There are some, at least, genuine face shooters who really like the cartridge.

Yeah, the Coast Guard clung to .40 S&W for a long time, probably still plenty in service (although I seem to recall that they are transitioning to 9mm Glocks). If you're forced to use FMJ, which the military is basically everywhere except CONUS, a .40 S&W with a truncated cone has a lot to offer and, especially during the 80s-90s, those .40 FMJ rounds probably really outperformed the 9mm FMJ available to the military. There are definitely some operator tier users who still swear by 40 out there, but I think the street cred (and a lot of market presence) was likely driven by it being adopted en masse by Joe PD and street rats having caliber envy. This is primarily observational, but I can't count the number of people I know/knew in the 90s-2010s time frame who just had to have a Glawk-40 because _ (fill in your favorite asinine reason here). It never had anything to do with the performance of the round. I know the initial PDs that adopted it did so on the basis of performance, but a lot of other .40 S&W purchasers did so merely because that's what "people who did their homework" were buying... or at least that's the impression I was given at the time.

 

[TNTRAILERTRASH]

The "Gangsters Inc" video touting his Glock 40 was act3a JHP45