Is the .40 S&W REALLY dying?

[Cosmodragoon]

FLJim wrote:

Agree on both counts. For me, personally, that had been the .40 S&W. Lately I have more often carried 9mm. But I'm idly considering reversing course, back toward .40 S&W.

I think I need to rent something the size & weight of my PPS M2 in .40 S&W and see how it works for me.

I end up carrying 9mm more than I do .40 S&W. It's just because the size of gun I can comfortably carry tends to push the balance in that direction. I really only enjoy shooting .40 S&W in full-sized handguns with decent recoil mitigation. That's easy to do in the winter but the rest of my year is either 9mm or .327 Federal.

I've tried .40 S&W in the original PPS and the P99, which is relatively light for "full size". Both are fantastic guns in 9mm. Both were relatively unpleasant in .40 S&W.

[cslinger]

9mm vs .40......
PC vs MAC
NVIDIA vs Radeon
Mustang Vs Camero

A whole lot of hardware argument and no talk of software application.

I like both......I would be in utter terror if a Navy SEAL/Army Delta operator etc. wanted me dead and had a .22CB and a kids garden trowel.

Calibers (rifle, pistol etc. ) all have pros and cons that fall into the statistical noise. I hope nobody ever has to face a old guy with nothing to lose who has only shot a .22 revolver his whole life.

Again I say.......I think I may have bought the LAST BOX of .40 yesterday.

[cslinger]

9mm vs .40......
PC vs MAC
NVIDIA vs Radeon
Mustang Vs Camero

A whole lot of hardware argument and no talk of software application.

I like both......I would be in utter terror if a Navy SEAL/Army Delta operator etc. wanted me dead and had a .22CB and a kids garden trowel.

Calibers (rifle, pistol etc. ) all have pros and cons that fall into the statistical noise. I hope nobody ever has to face a old guy with nothing to lose who has only shot a .22 revolver his whole life.

Again I say.......I think I may have bought the LAST BOX of .40 yesterday.

[tipoc]

I think your trying to obscure the statement. The purpose of a defensive firearm, worst case, is to be used to stop a threat and, again in worst case, means actually having to shoot someone with it.

I don't buy for a moment that the few hundredths of difference in diameter, or the few clicks of a shot timer, are going to matter in the least when comparing similar quality ammunition in accomplishing that goal. Even the most substantial difference that we are likely to quantify, energy, I don't believe is going to make a functional difference for that purpose.

You're kinda stuck on the functional difference part where you dislike explaining what function exactly is fulfilled. You keep skirting around it. You "stand by my statement" which you already said requires alot of additional explanation to explain to others. I don't think you've actually explained exactly what you mean by "functional". I you agreed with my attempt to understand it, I didn't see that.

The origins of the 40 S&W go back to the development of the FBI standards for testing and the establishment of their protocols for testing. The standards that we now have are built on the premise that a few inches of penetration, a few thousands of diameters and increased disruption of tissue actually count and make a difference in a defensive encounter. (Actually everyone believed that until recently. That's why the 9mm became the handgun caliber of the German Army and not the 30 Luger).

It goes back to the alleged failure of the 9mm in the Miami shoot out. The efforts to develop a more effective defensive handgun bullet led to the adoption of the 40 S&W by law enforcement. It also led to the development of improvements in handgun ammo that led to the improvement of the 9mm so that it could reliably meet the standards of the FBI. If a few inches of penetration and increased disruption of tissue, heavier bullet, etc. don't count, then why improve on the 9mm in the first place?

But they do count and we acknowledge this all the time.

Small handguns for concealed carry these days are the same size or smaller and lighter than the the Walther PPK in .32 or .380. Unlike the Walther they are available in 9mm and sell alot. Particularly in 9mm. Why do we choose them in 9mm? Because it is the most powerful caliber that many people can shoot well in a small pocket pistol. They also make these in 40 S&W and 45 acp, some of them anyway. But most folks prefer the 9 as they shoot it better. Also because the 9 works.

I carry and use 9mm guns for a variety of things especially where weight and capacity are an advantage. For other tasks I carry other things. But where and whenever possible I do knowingly what others do regularly. I carry the most powerful round for self defense that I can shoot well, in a size and design that fits the job.

tipoc

[Lohman446]

You have erroneously added “a few inches of penetration” to my argument. I never made that portion of the statement. Penetration, in a defensive handgun to be used against aggressive human attackers, matters to point X - the ability to exit most human bodies on a center of mass hit in a variety of circumstances (a quick google search says the “toughest” of the FBI tests is after penetrating auto glass). After that point excess penetration is, well excess, and may become problematic in it may cause injury to bystanders at worst or represent lost energy. At some point penetration becomes irrelevant but until that time an inch or two of penetration does matter.

The run to “scientific testing determined” argument based on testing done in the initial switch to 10MM, birth, and rise of the .40 ignores that both technology and science are fluid and evolving. It ignores advances that result in statements as presented by this article. https://loadoutroom.com/51037/the-re...o-back-to-9mm/

· There is little to no noticeable difference in the wound tracks between premium line law Auto enforcement projectiles from 9mm Luger through the .45 Auto

[dpadams6]

Originally Posted by DirtyHarold

I suddenly heard this over the last month or so which I found a little upsetting because I only own one 9mm and several 40s. Apparently police and secret service or whatever are all just moving to 9. Then I thought about it, 45 isn’t dead, 10mm isn’t dead, 357 sig isn’t dead (it’s less popular but making a comeback), etc.

What is everyone’s thoughts on this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did you hear that the secret service is moving away from 357sig? They've stated that it is the best performing handgun round that they have ever tested.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dpadams6]

Originally Posted by Dave T

Everyone, and I do mean nearly everyone, says the 9mm has improved so much it is as good as the 40 & 45. I never hear why all this "new bullet technology" didn't improve the 40 S&W or the 45 ACP at the same time. Funny how that works to justify shooting a lighter recoiling and cheaper round.

Dave

Exactly!!!! While nThe 9mm is a good round, it will never be as effective as the 40s&w. PERIOD


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dpadams6]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner665

The 40 isn't, and never will be, dead....

Its heyday is over, that happens to them all, but it gained enough widespread acceptance during its heyday that the 40 will be around for a looooong time to come.

I don't really care for it and wouldn't miss it if it were gone, but that is irrelevant.

The wonder 9 is back in style, and rightfully so... With the latest in bullet and powder technology, and high pressure loads, the 9 is nipping on the heels of the 357 mag, for defense against human predators, in guns with barrels of 4 inches and less with bullets less than 135 grains.

What was old, is new again... Just like revolvers for CCW making a comeback in recent years....a 9mm auto rim round would send it out of the park (not the failed 9mm Federal).

9mm close to 357mag? Seriously?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[5whiskey]

Where did you hear that the secret service is moving away from 357sig? They've stated that it is the best performing handgun round that they have ever tested.

He didn’t, because they aren’t. I’m not a huge fan of 357 sig, but numerous large state and federal agencies swear by it, are committed to it, and aren’t backing off. While I believe it isn’t any kind of panacea for a defensive round, as others have said size and power matter. It may not matter as much as bubba tries to imply as he describes how his 45 will knock a man clean out of his shoes, but it does matter. To that end we wind up discussing follow up shots and capacity as caliber factors. This won’t be popular, but follow up shots in this discussion is a red herring argument. What is more deadly, 12 hits with 9mm or 10 with 40 assuming equal placement? That “faster” follow up shot will get you 2 extra hits with a lesser round in the same time, but is 12 really that much better than 10? When the 10 is from a more powerful round? Spoiler alert... no one can scientifically prove one over the other, but most will agree that there won’t be a significant difference. Btw, the 12 of 9 versus 10 of 40 arent numbers from thin air those are actual strings with similar times using a shot timer.

So then we can discuss capacity. Much less an issue between 40 and 9 than between 45 and 9 imo. And, of course, most of my references compare service sized weapons to service sized weapons. 9mm makes MUCH more sense in carry sized weapons.

[gojones]

I honestly don't know if the the 9mm, 40 S&W or 357 sig is better or worst. Fact is either will do the job if placement and quantity are sufficient. Our small town simply moved away from the 40 S&W because of the recession, drop in revenue and resulting budget cuts. Sig came into town and freely swapped out our Glocks in 40 S&W for the new Sig 320's in 9mm. Given the savings in practice ammo, it was gladly received. Many officers bought the Glocks and are now their personal firearms. By the way, you would not want to get into a gun fight with these guys. Their reflexes and shot placement is excellent. I have my Sig in 40 S&W and love it. I shoot their Sig in 9mm and love it.

[Lohman446]

I propose, without the means to put it into action, a test. Gather a handful of experts and a handful of handguns that are available in 9MM, .40, and for the heck of it .357 SIG with no markings indicating their caliber.

Each expert fires ONE gun, 9 shots, and then a final shot into ballistic gelatin. They are then allowed to examine the ballistic gelatin minus the projectile.

How accurate do you think each individual is going to be in identifying the caliber he or she fired?

I think you might be able to ID the 9MM vs the .40 vs the .357SIG if you fired them next to each other. But I am curious if you could without the benchmark of firing the other ones at the same time.

[Tallest]

I would submit that all the statistical evidence as to which is "more powerful", "has more stopping power", "allows the most follow up shots", "has greater capacity", etc... goes completely out the window when the shot is taken BECAUSE...

There are vastly more variables coming from the shooter and the situation than are produced by the differences in caliber.

So any and all conclusions to the debate are moot.

[Nanuk]

I would submit that all the statistical evidence as to which is "more powerful", "has more stopping power", "allows the most follow up shots", "has greater capacity", etc... goes completely out the window when the shot is taken BECAUSE...

There are vastly more variables coming from the shooter and the situation than are produced by the differences in caliber.

So any and all conclusions to the debate are moot.

Unless you are looking at rounds that have 10,000 plus successful shooting results. Then it is very much relevant as it includes all those variables.

[Tallest]

What is a "successful shooting result"?

And that seems a little bit like an arbitrary metric, especially since it only includes documented instances.

[agtman]

What is a "successful shooting result"?

DRT? ... Or a sufficiently incapacitated bad guy who's no longer a threat.

[Lohman446]

Psychologically or physiologically incapacitated?

[tipoc]

You have erroneously added “a few inches of penetration” to my argument. I never made that portion of the statement. Penetration, in a defensive handgun to be used against aggressive human attackers, matters to point X - the ability to exit most human bodies on a center of mass hit in a variety of circumstances (a quick google search says the “toughest” of the FBI tests is after penetrating auto glass). After that point excess penetration is, well excess, and may become problematic in it may cause injury to bystanders at worst or represent lost energy. At some point penetration becomes irrelevant but until that time an inch or two of penetration does matter.

The issue in the statement here is that you misread, or did not understand my point.

The improvements in construction of bullets for the 9mm came about as a result of the desire to get reliable bullets that met the FBI's criteria following the Miami shoot out. The bullets that met that criteria were initially the 45 acp with a specific 185 gr. load and the 10mm. They did not want to go with the 45 acp because they wanted guns with more capacity. So they went initially with the 10mm then the 40 which could meet their criteria.

This meant improving the the penetration and expansion of the 9mm JHP and to some extent retarding the penetration of the 10mm to the limits set by the FBI. This was working with the factors that you tend to dismiss, the energy of a round, the construction of the bullet, it mass and momentum.

As I said earlier in this discussion, a bullet in any caliber, built to the FBI standards, that hits it's target in the right spot will likely produce the same results when it comes to stopping a threat irregardless of the caliber. This is true. It's also like saying that a hole in one is a hole in one no matter the weight or make club being used. But it's true. It's why in many cases one service round and cartridge will produce similar results if the shots are well place. This is obvious and nothing new.

The problem you are having, and my only issue, so far, is in clouding the issue with your use of "functional" which you used unclearly.

tipoc

[Lohman446]

How is functional, as it relates to the use of defensive handgun ammunition, unclear? The function of a bullet is to cause enough damage to the target to either psychologically or physiologically stop the person it is fired at. What other definition of functional would you propose as being reasonably implied by my statement. We are sinking into an argument of definition here but I’m really curious the exact point that the word functional lacks clarity in the statement

[tipoc]

· There is little to no noticeable difference in the wound tracks between premium line law Auto enforcement projectiles from 9mm Luger through the .45 Auto

This is one of those phrases that seem to tell you something but actually don't.

In the article linked to:

https://loadoutroom.com/51037/the-re...o-back-to-9mm/

They reprint an FBI statement that explains why they went to the improved 9mm. Most of the reasons given were valid and good ones. But the one tossed in above is out of spec and tossed in to make a quota or parts.

That's because there is no way to accurately measure a wound channel in either ballistic gel or human tissue and consistently identify what bullet made it. For example, 38 Spl., 9mm, 9x23 Winchester, 38 Super, 357 Magnum, etc. all have diameters within a few thousandths of each other. With the others being close.

Don't expert gun "experts", or the folks from CSI to look at an inert block of gelatin and tell you what bullet went through it with nothing else to look at but that.

It's also the case that as bullets move through a medium it isn't the bullet itself that "cuts" a hole, it's the pressure wave in front of it that tears tissue as it advances. Human tissue is not like paper targets, bullets don't leave nice clean holes in us on average.

One other thing...

Look at these videos and watch what the blocks of 20% ballistic gelatin do when shot and compare. All blocks are the same size. Even where penetration is identical with good expansion note the disruption of the blocks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z49Lbnt16M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROHMBYlOcdg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqziWTq7X1c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EATsNiio-c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOSlhfCPJWY

You can see more on your own.

[tipoc]

How is functional, as it relates to the use of defensive handgun ammunition, unclear? The function of a bullet is to cause enough damage to the target to either psychologically or physiologically stop the person it is fired at. What other definition of functional would you propose as being reasonably implied by my statement. We are sinking into an argument of definition here but I’m really curious the exact point that the word functional lacks clarity in the statement

Thought I explained that pretty clear early on in relation to a particularl worded statement you made. You agreed, in fact, to the point that you allowed that it did take further explanation so that folks clearly understood what you meant and that you were not talking about the ballistics of the rounds or wear and tear on the gun, etc.

tipoc

[Lohman446]

So pages after the discussion and after modification of the original statement your creating an argument of definition that pertains to the original statement but not to the modified one.

To what end?

[JohnKSa]

Odd how caliber wars never seem to settle anything and have a tendency to descend into bickering.