.40 or 9mm

[cekim]

I have just grown to detest .40s because a few of them get mixed in with my .45 range brass (somehow) and pulling them out after they get stuck in the .45s is a bitch. (with the media wedged in it holding it in place) At least if they were 10mm it'd be like pulling gold nuggets out of the .45s instead of what is basically trash.

-Mike

Same things happens with 9 and 45. At least with .45, I toss the .45 case in for later reloading. With .40, I am stuck with scrap brass.

Ban .40...

 

[fencer]

I especially like the 40 because it is big enough for bear. Can't kill a bear with 9mm

 

[Patriot0717]

I especially like the 40 because it is big enough for bear. Can't kill a bear with 9mm

Don't forget moose, I know this dude that hangs out with this guy who shot a moose with a .40 cal. One shot bang, game over.

 

[fencer]

Don't forget moose, I know this dude that hangs out with this guy who shot a moose with a .40 cal. One shot bang, game over.

No way. Seriously? I am not saying it is impossible but have you seen proof other than I know a guy that knows a guy?

 

[yanici]

I especially like the 40 because it is big enough for bear. Can't kill a bear with 9mm

Don't forget moose, I know this dude that hangs out with this guy who shot a moose with a .40 cal. One shot bang, game over.

Don't laugh. I know a guy who hunted with a guy that shot a LARGE black bear with an air rifle. I believe it was in Maine.

Pic here: http://www.quackenbushairguns.com/
Click on the pic of the guy with the bear to read the story.

 

[EddieCoyle]

Not to start a caliber war inside of another...but wasn't the M16/NATO 5.56 developed with this exact logic.

Year - Cartridge
1873 - 45-70
1906 - 30-06
WWII - .30 Carbine
1954 - 7.62x51 NATO
1963 - 5.56x45 NATO​

Over time we've traded down to a less powerful round in exchange for smaller, lighter, higher capacity, low recoil rifle. In short we started with buffalo hunting round and ended w/ the third most powerful .22 caliber woodchuck round. So why isn't the 5.56 NATO held with the same contempt as the .40?

You skipped the .30 Army (a.k.a. .30-40 Krag) and .30-03.

There was a good reason (other than "It hurts my hand') for the changes you cited.

Dumping the .45-70 had nothing to do with going to a 'less powerful' round. It had everything to do with selecting a more effective long range cartridge that would both reliably feed in a magazine rifle, and work in a light machine gun.

The problem with the .30-06 was that it was too much cartridge for the way wars were fought in the 20th century. Garand and Pedersen knew this and designed their rifles for a .276 caliber cartridge. The Army tested the cartridge on pigs and found it to be as effective as the .30-06 out to 1200 yards. MacArthur nixed the idea because of the huge stockpiles of .30-06, and the fact that all of the military's light machine guns fired .30-06.

The Germans forced another change when they developed (and proved the effectiveness of) select fire rifles.

The 'problem' with the .30-06 is that it is uncontrollable in full auto. The only successful full auto .30-06 rifle was the BAR, and that was way too heavy to use as a standard infantry rifle. The .308 replaced the .30-06 because it was shorter (so rifles didn't need a long action) and saved a lot of money (less brass), but it had the same problem with full auto fire.

Before the adoption of the .308 NATO round, the Brits were about to adopt the .280 British cartridge that was almost as effective as the ,308 and a lot more controllable in full auto, but the US made them go with the .308.

The US realized very quickly that the M14 was not a good select-fire rifle, so it went with the M16 in 5.56. In testing, the additional velocity of the 5.56 round proved sufficiently lethal, and was way more controllable in full auto fire.

Only recently has the lethality at longer distances of the 5.56 come into question. Calibers like the 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, and even the 7.62x39 are the solutions-du-jour, and coincidentally have ballistics similar to the .276 Pedersen and .280 British.

The .40 was different.

The FBI switched from the 10mm to the .40 S&W not because of a performance advantage but because non-field agents found the full power 10mm uncomfortable to shoot. The field agents loved it. Rather than force everybody to practice more in order to qualify with the 10mm, the FBI had the ammo manufacturers download the cartridge. S&W realized that they could shorten the case and still make cartridges to the downloaded spec. This allowed them to make guns for it using their 9mm frame sizes, so the .40 was born. There's no additional capacity or killing power with the .40 over the 10mm.

 

[wacky_doug]

Seriously? Um, duh. That whole part is understood and doesn't need to be stated. Really ever.

You mods have to stay well medicated on booze to do this everyday, don't you? Is there ever, ever, EVER anything new in a caliber war thread?

Ok, I do like fortay because I can shoot the gun sideways and it just works.

New Years resolution: stop reading caliber threads.

 

[Deezul]

As an update. .40 has been fine so far

 

[CrackPot]

My only 40s&w is a full size M&P that I bought for some unknown reason. I fixed it by buying 9mm and 357sig barrels and a pile of 9mm mags. So now the question is irrelevant...

 

[Supermoto]

The FBI switched from the 10mm to the .40 S&W not because of a performance advantage but because non-field agents found the full power 10mm uncomfortable to shoot. The field agents loved it. Rather than force everybody to practice more in order to qualify with the 10mm, the FBI had the ammo manufacturers download the cartridge. S&W realized that they could shorten the case and still make cartridges to the downloaded spec. This allowed them to make guns for it using their 9mm frame sizes, so the .40 was born. There's no additional capacity or killing power with the .40 over the 10mm.

Who are non-field agents?

 

[jasons]

Thread is super gay, and the historical fiction is Feddie Mercury. (As is anyone who thinks it's true and / or cool.)

 

[Patriot0717]

Don't forget moose, I know this dude that hangs out with this guy who shot a moose with a .40 cal. One shot bang, game over.

No way. Seriously? I am not saying it is impossible but have you seen proof other than I know a guy that knows a guy?

Absolutely not. Sorry totally fabricated on my part. That was my feeble attempt to bring some validity to the .40 and its awesomeness.

 

[Dench]

The US realized very quickly that the M14 was not a good select-fire rifle, so it went with the M16 in 5.56. In testing, the additional velocity of the 5.56 round proved sufficiently lethal, and was way more controllable in full auto fire.

Not only was it easier on full auto, soldiers could carry much more ammo and throw much more rounds down range.

 

[wolfrage]

My only 40s&w is a full size M&P that I bought for some unknown reason. I fixed it by buying 9mm and 357sig barrels and a pile of 9mm mags. So now the question is irrelevant...

I'm thinking of the same with my M&P40 -- I bought it with the intention of putting in a .357sig barrel for pin shoots. Not sure I want the 9mm barrel (afterall, I have a Browning HP if I wanna shoot 9mm )

So I'd say .357sig, if you can find one, and you can always put a .40 or 9mm barrel in if you want; otherwise get the 40 and a .357 barrel (get one from S&W directly as they're cheap)

 

[Slowdive]

There was a good reason (other than "It hurts my hand') for the changes you cited.

Excellent historical analysis EC. I agree there is more historical context in the case of the 5.56 NATO, but I'll play devils advocate (below)

Not only was it easier on full auto, soldiers could carry much more ammo and throw much more rounds down range.

I'm a fan of the 10mm, but I could make the same arguments that weight and controllability were motivating drivers (just like the 5.56) in the 10mm vs 40 debate. My Sig 229 in .40 is much lighter (by nearly 12 oz), higher capacity (well it would be outside of MA) and easier to shoot fast than my S&W 1006.

My problems w/ the 40 are this:

• The .40 seems suited to mid-sized guns and I prefer either a compact pistol for CC or full sized pistols for target/HD/Open Carry. I think the 9mm works well in compact pistols and I'd rather have 45 or 10mm in full sized. This is why my P229 doesn't see alot of range time. (I state this as a personal preference, not a fact)
  
  
• It's not a great reloaders cartridge. It has a short brass life w/a fine line between under and over pressure, especially w/ bullet weights over 175 gns. I don't want to count firings on my pistol brass and don't need to w/other common pistol calibers. My .40 is also less tolerant of lead, presumably b/c of the pressure, for some reason my 10mm doesn't have the same problem w/ barrel leading even though they slug the same.

 

[Supermoto]

.40 is a great round to reload
there is a wide range of bullet weights to fit any need. 135g loaded light will recoil less than 9mm. You can take the 155 bullet and push it to 1150fps. Load 180-200 to major makes for a nice comfortable round to shoot.

My 180 hard cast have zero leading in any gun I shoot it through. Plus with a true rimless straight wall cases it stacks and feed off mags extremely well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jasons]

The FBI never fielded a "full house" 10mm, but rather a downloaded "FBI Load" 10mm that wasted a lot of space in the case but still required relatively large framed guns. The development of the .40 was not because the 10mm "hurt field agent hands," but rather because a physically smaller case that could be retrofitted to fit in most 9mm frames (which were already WIDELY available in many sizes and configurations) could provide the exact same ballistics as the FBI's 10mm load. (Which was the load that the FBI called the "top choice for law-enforcement use.")


http://www.bren-ten.com/website/id7.html

World-class competitive shooter Tom Campbell, who then worked in the model shop at Smith & Wesson, pointed out to S&W President Steve Melvin that if a .40/10mm-caliber cartridge with a shorter case could be loaded to the exact same performance level as the 10mm FBI, it would work inside smaller pistol formats originally designed for the 9mm Luger cartridge instead of the full-size .45-size guns required by the full-size 10mm Auto load. Melvin asked the head of Winchester/Olin, Jerry Bersett, if his company could build such a load. The answer was "Yes," and in January 1990, Winchester and S&W jointly introduced the new .40 S&W cartridge for the 9mm-sized S&W Model 4006. The .40 S&W is nothing but a 10mm Short powered to the FBI's performance specifications.

I do think it's kind of funny when 9mm shooters call the .40 "weak" though.

 

[Slowdive]

.40 is a great round to reload

Do you keep track of how many times you fire your cases? If so, how many do you load before you toss em?

 

[EddieCoyle]

There you go letting the truth get in the way of my irrational hatred of the .40 S&W.

 

[Supermoto]

Do you keep track of how many times you fire your cases? If so, how many do you load before you toss em?

I shoot them until the split but I usually lose then before that. 40 brass is everywhere so I only pick up brass during practice, but don't waste the time for a match


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cekim]

There you go letting the truth get in the way of my irrational hatred of the .40 S&W.

Stay strong, keep the hate alive.

 

[Badtangle]

I went .45, no regrets. Ammo is a little more expensive, but it's way more fun to shoot than 9mm. As for the M&P, you will definitely be needing a trigger job.

 

[cekim]

I went .45, no regrets. Ammo is a little more expensive, but it's way more fun to shoot than 9mm. As for the M&P, you will definitely be needing a trigger job.

If "fun" is the only issue, then you are doing it wrong. I have plenty of "fun" with 9mm.

 

[jasons]

Interesting reading:
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf

(Keep in mind that when they say 10mm, they're talking about the "180gr JHP subsonic developed by FBI" that the .40 was designed to replicate in a more efficient form factor.)

 

[wacky_doug]

The FBI never fielded a "full house" 10mm, but rather a downloaded "FBI Load" 10mm that wasted a lot of space in the case but still required relatively large framed guns. The development of the .40 was not because the 10mm "hurt field agent hands," but rather because a physically smaller case that could be retrofitted to fit in most 9mm frames (which were already WIDELY available in many sizes and configurations) could provide the exact same ballistics as the FBI's 10mm load. (Which was the load that the FBI called the "top choice for law-enforcement use.")

There you go letting the truth get in the way of my irrational hatred of the .40 S&W.

I summarily retract my previous post. I have now read something new on a caliber thread.

Life is complete.

EC, it's time for you to start a cat thread.

 

[wacky_doug]

Wait, there's hope. In the report above:

Since the .45 tested so well, why not adopt it instead of a new gun/caliber?

First, the 10mm (FBI load) tested better, albeit marginally better, than the .45 and we were committed to adopt the best round. Nevertheless, the 10mm has far superior accuracy, allows for slightly higher capacity than similar sized .45 weapons, is a new cartridge with room for further improvement whereas the .45 has been around for 80 years and is as good as it is ever going to be, and the recoil of the 10mm is softer than that of a comparably sized .45

EC, your hatred has just been misplaced. The existence of 40S&W (10mm FBI short) isn't because the original 10mm hurt too much, it's because the .45 did.

(Ok, I took this quote out of context a bit.)

 

[Acme.Armament]

There you go letting the truth get in the way of my irrational hatred of the .40 S&W.

If your going to do it. You might as well go BIG.

 

[Blitz1]

There you go letting the truth get in the way of my irrational hatred of the .40 S&W.

How do you feel about the .357 Sig. Sincere question.

 

[EddieCoyle]

How do you feel about the .357 Sig. Sincere question.

I don't hate it yet.

 

[Blitz1]

I don't hate it yet.

Hahaha. I asked just because you know your stuff about ammo, just curious what you thought.