First pistol purchase, can't decide between .40 or .45

[Departed402]

I say go for the .45. The fact of the matter is the .40 tries to maintain 9mm pressure with a larger bullet, and the result is higher pressures, snappier recoil, and guns wearing out quicker. On the other hand, most people won't shoot enough to see a difference in the longevity of their firearm, and the snappier recoil isn't something that you can't overcome.

The .45 is just a friendly round, and for what I'm going to guess your intended use will be the .45 should serve you nicely.

[Oceanbob]

First Purchase.?

Anything in .45ACP. 1911, Glock, FN...etc.

I am a long time reloader and .45ACP is a great round to reload. Being a low pressure round, you can get plenty of reloads out of one case. (inspect all cases carefully).

Before Plastic Guns, my to-go-handgun was a Colt 1911 in .45ACP. What a sweet shooter... Incredible trigger and a real pleasure to carry and shoot.

I still own several 1911s.

But I also love shooting my new Gen4 Glock 21.

Second purchase?

Something in 9MM. Reason being, 9 (was) so cheap I don't reload it. Times might be changing.

I also shoot .40 (and 10MM) and I reload 10MM. (yes, a weird choice)

I do it 'just because' I like 10MM.

But my favorite will always be .45ACP.

(save those components for the future; someday you will have a dozen handguns and several in .40)

Good luck and be well.
Bob

[Hundy]

The first firearm I ever purchased on my own was a 45ACP. I don't remember there being 40's in the store at them time. I think there were 10mm, but not 40's. The last firearm I have purchased was a 40, this year in fact. I am also trying to stock up on supplies and gear to reload 40.
I really like the 40, but I like my 45 auto better. My go to Pistol is still my 45.
My 45 is a Ruger P90, a pretty solid frame, built like a tank. My 40 is a S&W M&P40. I really like the frame of that one, I may try to get a M&P 45 in the future.
Good Luck

Jay

[Jim243]

45 ACP (Auto)

Jim

[Stevie-Ray]

.45 ACP. My favorite centerfire caliber for personal defense and also reloading. Personally, I wouldn't go with a .40 because frankly, I never have.

[45Gunner]

Nice choice of guns. Can't go wrong with either one. But you must take in consideration, especially for your first gun, that the .40 S&W round is very snappy as compared to the .45 ACP.

I have some guns in .40 that will leave me with a sore hand after shooting several hundred rounds while I can shoot a .45 all day long with no after effects.

Good luck with either one. I am envious that you have the ability to do your own reloads. I could never seem to have the space, money, and time coordinated at the same instant.

[Sarge]

The recoil of any firearm is determined by its weight and the specific load fired from it.

Tula .40 FMJ is comparatively cheap, sufficiently accurate for humanoid targets to 50 yards and it doesn't kick any harder than any other substantial service pistol cartridge.

Reloaders, battered by the .40's horrendous SNAP, need not live in fear any longer. Paul Scarlata's excellent article Make Right With a “.40 Lite” insures that mere mortals can enjoy the 40 w/o being tossed about like a paper sack in a hurricane.

[Brian Pfleuger]

The 40s recoil doesn't "bother" me... My carry gun is a Glock 33 in 357sig... It just seems oddly harsh for what the cartridge is/does. In fact, I've shot 40 in several Glock variants and even a full size feels like it has worse recoil to me than the equivalent load in my subcompact 357. Why? I have no idea, but others have reported the same. As with anything, some also disagree.

That's why I don't like the 40. It seems to have the harshest recoil of any of the major calibers and does it without any sort of real-world advantage over the others.

[dgludwig]

I have two pistols chambered in the .40 S&W and four pistols chambered in the .45 ACP and I've never noticed the 40's so-called "snap factor" in terms of recoil (others apparently have and I'm not disputing that). If concealment (smaller size and less weight) and magazine capacity are important considerations, I would give the edge to the forty for a pistol being carried concealed for use in self-defense. Most 40's are slightly smaller, less heavy and carry more rounds when compared to most pistols chambered in the .45 caliber.

All that said, my ccw pistol of choice is a SIG 220 Carry model, chambered in .45 ACP. I chose it because it fits my hand better, packs better concealed and comfortably for my body build and usual mode of dress and has proven to be accurate and extremely reliable. For a pistol being toted concealed for self-defense purposes, sometimes subjective factors unique to the individual out-weigh otherwise objective analysis "advantages".

But the op indicated that the primary intended use for the new pistol is "home defense/target/range shooting" and that he is already set-up for reloading the .40 cartridge. If target shooting is his main focus, over the years in my experience, I have found the .45 ACP hard to beat for "intrinsic" accuracy (if there really is such a thing). If the main priority is self-defense, how the pistol handles and fits the hand are considerations that might override extreme accuracy potential. Appropriate pistols chambered in either cartridge will probably be equally reliable.

But, as others have noted, I have detected a subtle, latent wish from the op to be talked into getting a .45. If this is the case, get one! There's really no "wrong" choice with either cartridge and you can always get the other one later.

[temmi]

when in doubt get a 45

both are good choices

snake

[45Gunner]

But, as others have noted, I have detected a subtle, latent wish from the op to be talked into getting a .45. If this is the case, get one! There's really no "wrong" choice with either cartridge and you can always get the other one later.

Perhaps that is the case.

My last issued "duty gun" was chambered in .40 S&W. It was a great match for the gun. No "snappy" issues. As the bullet flies, I have two identical guns in Officer Size, one being a .45ACP and the other in .40S&W. I can shoot the .45 ACP all day long, the .40 tends to hurt my hand after a couple of hours on the range. It might be noted that the frame on these guns was light weight aluminum composite while the slides were stainless.

So to sum it up, both rounds are good defensive rounds but if you are looking for a bit more mass in your bullet and a longer staying power at the range, go the 1911 route. I never met a 1911 I didn't like.

[lee n. field]

The recoil of any firearm is determined by its weight and the specific load fired from it.

Tula .40 FMJ is comparatively cheap, sufficiently accurate for humanoid targets to 50 yards and it doesn't kick any harder than any other substantial service pistol cartridge.

Reloaders, battered by the .40's horrendous SNAP, need not live in fear any longer. Paul Scarlata's excellent article Make Right With a “.40 Lite” insures that mere mortals can enjoy the 40 w/o being tossed about like a paper sack in a hurricane.

Interesting. I note that this particular guy is having to work up a load he can handle with carpal tunnel syndrome.

From the article (copy past doesn't format right) he's use 3 grains of Bullseye behind a 180 grain cast lead bullet.

For .40 with a Lee 180 grain truncated cone bullet, I've settled on 4.8 grains of Bullseye. I've never felt like my load was particularly harsh. I shoot .40 in an XD40 Service.

Maybe the lesson is, for .40, shoot it through a big enough gun.

[sheepman]

Between the two I would recommend the 45 ACP. It runs at a lot lower pressure and is easy to reload for. The 40 is a good round and in a full sized gun, pleasant to shoot. I have owned several sub compacts in 40 and did not shoot them as well as the same gun in 9mm.

No matter what gun you start with, you will probably find you want something different if you are like most of us. In the last 30 years I have owned more different hand guns than I can remember and am still looking for the perfect one.