The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 19, 2013, 10:55 PM   #1
SonOtheSouth
Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2013
Posts: 28
Why the 180 grain is a bad choice for .40 S&W

http://greent.com/40Page/ammo/40/180gr.htm

I found this and was wondering what you all think... I just bought a crap ton of 180 grain .40 S&W, so please... say it aint so !
SonOtheSouth is offline  
Old January 19, 2013, 11:03 PM   #2
laytonj1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2005
Location: Alabama
Posts: 3,461
I think it's not worth worrying about. With todays litigious society the ammo makers are not going to produce ammo that will easily grenade.

Jim
laytonj1 is offline  
Old January 19, 2013, 11:04 PM   #3
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 4,221
My dad used to say opinions are like a certain part of our bodies, everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.

I respect TLG. That said I've heard this story before. Plenty of shooters have been using 180 gr 40SW for years without issue. Personally I don't care for the recoil characteristics of the 165 gr 40SW. The 180 gr 40SW isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Shoot what you like best.
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Apes with guns kill people! - Robin Williams
TunnelRat is offline  
Old January 19, 2013, 11:15 PM   #4
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,797
Quote:
With todays litigious society the ammo makers are not going to produce ammo that will easily grenade.
That was the whole point of the article. With 180's they have to purposely download to reduce the possibility of an overpressure load. Lighter bullets, according to the article, can be loaded to their full potential with less risk of a gun blowing up in your face.

I'm neither agreeing, nor disagreeing with the article. It is an interesting concept that may have some truth to it, but I'd need to see more evidence I no longer own a 40, after buying a 10mm I didn't see the point, but I did always felt the 165's were a better choice from the 40 when I owned one.
jmr40 is offline  
Old January 19, 2013, 11:21 PM   #5
Hammerhead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 31, 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,559
IIRC, that's an old article from the height of the .40S&W 'kaboom' hysteria.
I think they are right about one thing, .40 is more efficient with 165's, but it's not dangerous with 180's.
I've loaded scads of 180s without any issue.
Hammerhead is online now  
Old January 20, 2013, 12:07 AM   #6
Sharpsdressed Man
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 1,176
With respect to the receiving end of the bullet, does anyone really think that a 15 grain difference on a .400" projectile is going to be noticed by the target/victim/bad guy? There will be pain, bleeding, tissue damage, and some shock. I doubt a little weight difference will be noticed.
Sharpsdressed Man is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 02:26 AM   #7
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 8,551
I have a couple of issues with some things on the page. Otherwise, he does make an interesting argument.
Quote:
Also, the 10mm was designed for a peak mean pressure higher than the .40 … which means the 10mm brass is engineered to handle greater pressure than the .40 case.
While it's true that the 10mm was designed for a higher peak pressure than the .40 S&W (37.5kPSI vs 35kPSI), it's not by a huge margin. But more to the point, 10mm brass is inherently weaker than .40 S&W brass, and that's due to the 10mm's insistence on a large pistol primer, the pocket of which eats up important case head real estate. Gonzo "blow 'em all up and learn from it" handloader and forum legend Clark has taken ridiculous .40 S&W brass loads further than he could push similar loads in 10mm brass. That primer makes a difference.
Quote:
As mentioned above, the .40S&W was never intended to be a high-pressure round like the .357 Magnum, 10mm, or 357SIG. In fact, the SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) specification for the .40S&W is the same as the 9mm spec (35kpsi).
Wow, tough argument. He claims that .40cal was never intended to be high-pressure at 35k, the same as 9mm, which -IS- high pressure, and same as .357 Magnum (also 35k) and just a blip below the 10mm and .357 Sig.
News: all of these are high pressure handgun rounds. If you want LOW PRESSURE handgun rounds, you are talking .38 Special, .32 S&W Long, .45 Auto. But SAAMI spec'd at 35kPSI max, which the .40 S&W is... is high pressure. There are a couple higher, but not many.
Quote:
The 165gr is really the optimum choice for .40S&W shooters. It tends to be more accurate, have greater muzzle energy and momentum, and it significantly reduces the dangers associated with possible bullet setback (a bullet can, through normal handling, seat itself more deeply just by being loaded into the chamber of a gun, etc).
I have to argue with his assertion that the 165gr slug greatly reduces the dangers associated with bullet setback.

In fact, I do agree there are SIGNIFICANT dangers with regard to bullet setback, and I also believe that unintended and/or unnoticed bullet setback is likely the leading cause of otherwise unexplained or "theorized" reasons for KB's, especially when they occur to a handloader.

His argument is that a shorter 165gr slug eats up less space -- which makes every tiny bit of unintended/unnoticed bullet setback a bit less dangerous. That certainly could be the case.

However, my assertion is that a shorter 165gr slug does precisely that: it offers MORE space inside that case, and much less resistance to bullet setback. Where as the longer 180gr slug is much more resistant to bullet setback because:
a) there's less room to move, powder pushing back from under the slug*
b) no matter what slug was originally loaded in that brass, reloading with a 180 is putting fat bullet shank deep in to the brass, resulting in more bullet pull and more case mouth tension, reducing the chance of un/un bullet setback.
(*as I understand, this is one method that handloaders use to safely address such concerns with the .357 Sig at the load bench)

I realize fully that I'm making theories and assumptions of my own, but that's just as I see it. My theories are backed by over 3,000 loaded and fired rounds of .40 S&W...and I've not yet loaded any bullet weight in .40 S&W except 180 grain.

And there's a WHOPPER that he never once mentions while he's quite quick to talk about the myriad of KB's in .40 S&W chambered pistols: The 10mm Auto that was the predecessor of the .40 S&W was a smaller, .40cal hole drilled through a fat .45-gun sized barrel with beefy steel surrounding the chamber and launched from .45cal frame sized handguns.

Smith & Wesson and Glock, when they hit the market with this new round delivered to the shooting world a new round... NOT with a .45-sized frame and utilizing a smaller .40cal hole through a larger .45cal barrel with fat steel around the chamber... they gave the world 9mm frame sizes with 9mm barrel sizes and LARGER holes bored through them resulting in less critical steel surrounding every part of the round. And they used the same 35kPSI max in the cartridge.

When they made a 10mm from .45-sized handguns, they made a smaller hole and upped the pressure. They did the opposite with .40 S&W, they kept the same (high) pressure and bored away more steel.

As I said up front, I do think he's put a lot of time and thought in to his argument and I gained something from reading it.
__________________
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.
Sevens is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 02:57 AM   #8
MrApathy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2004
Posts: 520
180gr is fine in 40sw 200gr on the other hand is pretty dangerous surprised he doesnt mention that on his site.

I have shot many 1,000's of rounds of 180gr FMJ and JHP at all sort of velocities from 950fps to 1150fps all sorts of handloads and reloads with all sorts of brass and even wolff steel casings to no ill effects.

first batch of Federal 40sw brass was known to have thin webbing and when paired with poor chamber support would pop under the pressure.
avoid 40sw gun with poor chamber support.

some people use 40sw brass 200gr bullets and even 220gr bullets but they load them to 10mm lengths in performance 1911's that have full chamber support and ramped barrel with barrel free bore extended for loading long to no ill effects.
__________________
Divided and conquered, Gripped by fear
Wishful thinking that it can't happen here
It's well underways but nobody knows
A repeat of history, That's how it goes
MrApathy is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 08:30 AM   #9
CDW4ME
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2009
Posts: 615
As the article correctly stated, the 40 S&W was originally designed around a 180 gr. bullet @ ~950 fps

Compared to some of the lighter bullet loads, the standard 180 gr. may produce less recoil, advantageous for control / follow up shots especially out of compact pistols.

All of this data is based on an average of at least 5 shots from a Glock 27

Harder kicking 40 S&W loads:
Glock 27: Ranger T 165. @ 1,116 fps = PF 184
Glock 27: Speer Gold Dot 155 @ 1,171 fps = PF 182
Glock 27: Cor-Bon 135 JHP @ 1,332 fps = PF 180
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Softer" kicking 40 S&W loads:
Glock 27: Remington 180 HP @ 945 fps = PF 170
Glock 27: Remington 165 GS @ 1,018 fps = PF 168
Glock 27: Federal 180 gr. HST @ 930 fps = PF 167
Glock 27: Federal 155 gr. HS @ 1,072 fps = PF 166

PF = power factor and it is useful for quantifying recoil out of same size pistols.
Bullet weight x bullet speed / 1,000 = PF

I have shot plenty of 180 gr. 40 S&W ammo and never had a problem, have 180 gr. HST in my 27 now.
Regardless of bullet weight, don't chamber the same round multiple times - avoid set-back.
__________________
No internal lock or magazine disconnect on my pistols!
CDW4ME is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 10:31 AM   #10
Alabama Shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
Quote:
I just bought a crap ton of 180 grain .40 S&W, so please... say it aint so !
He is talking about:

Quote:
Constant reworking of the brass by reloaders
So have no fear. That said there were several factual errors on the site already addressed.

That short barrel that CDW4ME is talking about on the 27 won't offer the same velocity as a full size model.

The glock myth comes up quite a lot:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=409618

Hand loaded ammo is most often the cause of KB, in all kinds of firearms.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday.
Alabama Shooter is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 01:50 PM   #11
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 1,690
The 180's are fine. I prefer the old BP load which was a 155 HST @1250 FPS, that is a hot load. The BP recently switched to a 180 grn HST so that the PC crowd can shoot them.
__________________
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 02:19 PM   #12
SonOtheSouth
Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2013
Posts: 28
I appreciate the replies...
Being that my pistol is a XD Sub Compact, with a 3" barrel, am I losing velocity with 180 grain that I could make up with a lighter bullet weight ?
SonOtheSouth is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 02:27 PM   #13
Alabama Shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
Quote:
Being that my pistol is a XD Sub Compact, with a 3" barrel, am I losing velocity with 180 grain that I could make up with a lighter bullet weight ?
All else equal yes you could make up some.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday.
Alabama Shooter is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 02:34 PM   #14
Colorado308shooter
Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 2012
Posts: 72
I like my 180 grain target loads.....they produce more of a shove, compared to a "snap" recoil on my 155's.

For HD, I run 180 grain Federal HST's.
Colorado308shooter is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 03:14 PM   #15
Sevens
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2007
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 8,551
Quote:
Being that my pistol is a XD Sub Compact, with a 3" barrel, am I losing velocity with 180 grain that I could make up with a lighter bullet weight ?
Running a heavy bullet gives you less velocity across the board -- so loosing some velocity due to shorter barrel might be a smaller percentage over loosing more velocity with a lighter bullet.

I think you'd need to specifically chrono the loads you wish to compare from your own pistol. But even after you've done that and gotten raw numbers, what conclusions could you draw?

I think your best bet is to shoot what you might be considering and find which you like to shoot and not worry a heap about the rest. Or look at some real-world chrono results with popular ammo such as those done at BBTI.
http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/40sw.html
Good guys, very interesting testing and results.
__________________
Attention Brass rats and other reloaders: I really need .327 Federal Magnum brass, no lot size too small. Tell me what caliber you need and I'll see what I have to swap. PM me and we'll discuss.
Sevens is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 05:56 PM   #16
militant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 454
There is nothing wrong with 180 gr. I wish people would put mroe focus on shot placement than whats hitting the target.
__________________
A hit with a .22 is better than a miss with a .44
militant is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 06:54 PM   #17
SonOtheSouth
Member
 
Join Date: January 17, 2013
Posts: 28
I guess the fact that Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel for .40S&W only comes in 180 grain says a lot about the effectiveness of the 180 grain out of a short barrel.
SonOtheSouth is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 06:59 PM   #18
alex0535
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 2012
Location: Georgia
Posts: 781
If you shoot a threat in the right place it isn't going to matter whether the bullet was 160 grain bullet or a 180 grain bullet, they won't know the difference.

Be more concerned with the type of bullet you keep loaded for defense than the weight of the bullet but you should be even more concerned with good shot placement because.
alex0535 is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 07:05 PM   #19
BerdanSS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2011
Location: to close to other houses
Posts: 915
This was a huge deal about 11 years ago. Heck a buddy of mine even said during his training to become a reserve sheriffs deputy, they used a shooting of a LEO as an example to blame the 180gr Hydra-shok. They said if the deputy had been loaded with the newly adopted 165gr Hydra-shoks his rounds would of expanded better in the perp. after passing through auto glass killing him rather than leaving him wounded, enabling him to return fire and kill the officer.

It was also said that the KB rate (in specifically in the G22 and G23) was increased by something like 92% by using 180 grain and heavier bullets, due to the "massive'' pressure increase from the (again specifically glock(s)) chamber pushing the bullet back after repeated reloading of the same round. And that in the glocks unsupported chamber, this problem would be cured by using lighter bullets.

I cant speak to the truth about all that...seems like bunk to me...But I will say the Glock, out of all guns I've owned and shot in 40 S&W...are the most inaccurate of all.
BerdanSS is offline  
Old January 20, 2013, 08:58 PM   #20
Guv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 24, 2012
Location: South Texas
Posts: 869
^^^ Sounds like more of a Glock problem that a 40S&W. The cartridge was designed around a 180 gr bullet, I wouldn't worry about it.
Guv is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12426 seconds with 9 queries