• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

OK, so who actually LIKES 40 S&W?

The .40 S&W is the only cartridge that resulted from pussification.

The .32 S&W gave way to the .32 S&W long which gave way to the .32 H&R Magnum which gave way to the .327.

The .38 S&W gave way to the .38 Special and then to the .357 Magnum and then the .357 Maximum.

The 9mm Luger gave way to the 9 MM Largo which gave way to the .38 Colt ACP which gave way to the .38 Super.

The .41 Colt gave way to the .41 Long Colt and eventually to the .41 Magnum.

The .44 Special gave way to the .44 Magnum.

The 10MM hurt the FBI agents hands so it was pussified into the ballistics of the old 38/40.
 
Last edited:
gerrycaruso said:
I like the .40 for one thing only and that is long range (beyond 100 yards) plinking in a full size gun. I'd love to try a 10 mm because I think it would be even better. For any other purpose, I use other calibers.
Click to expand...

I used to have a 610 Revolver. That was a great long range plinking gun. And with moon clips you could shoot cheap .40s in it.
 
It's an interesting dichotomy.

On one hand, it is the result of wimpifying the 10mm. On the other, it most commonly replaces 9x19s with something bigger, rather than replacing 45s with something smaller.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
It's an interesting dichotomy.

On one hand, it is the result of wimpifying the 10mm. On the other, it most commonly replaces 9x19s with something bigger, rather than replacing 45s with something smaller.
Click to expand...

Well said! I'll stick with the 9mm and no it's not because NES hates 40 and I'm jumping on the bandwagon. I have disliked 40 long before I joined last year and I think it's hyped up. The 9mm has enough of stopping power and has better capacity. But if you shoot the 40 better, which would surprise me, then keep shooting and carrying it. Try not to generalize all the members who don't like the 40 by just saying we are hating it to be cool. I noticed that the 40 had more snap than a subcompact 45acp. Really strange.


Sent from my carbon covered iPhone
 
william_munny said:
I have one .40, and I'm a big fan - HK USP. It's reliable, accurate, and a whole lot of fun to shoot.
Click to expand...

+1

I have a USP 40c and it is not snappy at all. I have tried other guns in .40 which were snappy.


I was going to buy the USP 45c until I found a screaming deal that was too good to pass up on the 40c.
 
Speedway said:
+1

I have a USP 40c and it is not snappy at all. I have tried other guns in .40 which were snappy.
Click to expand...

The .40c and the .40 F are two different animals. The .40 full has very little felt recoil. The .40C is an effing hand stinger in comparison. (I've owned both). The high bore axis doesn't help. I carried my .40C for a long time though, it was still a great gun regardless.

-Mike
 
ColdDayInHell said:
I noticed that the 40 had more snap than a subcompact 45acp. Really strange.
Click to expand...

ding ding ding ding . . . we have a winner.
Definitely strange when reloads designed to make major can be pretty soft for their power.

- - - Updated - - -

drgrant said:
The .40c and the .40 F are two different animals. The .40 full has very little felt recoil. The .40C is an effing hand stinger in comparison. (I've owned both). The high bore axis doesn't help. I carried my .40C for a long time though, it was still a great gun regardless.

-Mike
Click to expand...

Very strange. My experience is exactly the opposite. The day I shot a USP 40 full sized, I also shot a hi-point .40 and a Kahr CW45. I felt the USP 40 was the hardest recoiling of all 3. This was an older gun. I believe early 90s. I wanted to love it. I really did. I got it on trade and stole it. I had previously shot a USP 45 tactical and enjoyed that. Strange.
 
Last edited:
dcmdon said:
Very strange. My experience is exactly the opposite. The day I shot a USP 40 full sized, I also shot a hi-point .40 and a Kahr CW45. I felt the USP 40 was the hardest recoiling of all 3. This was an older gun. I believe early 90s. I wanted to love it. I really did. I got it on trade and stole it. I had previously shot a USP 45 tactical and enjoyed that. Strange.
Click to expand...

I should have been a little more clear, all things are relative...

Did it have the dual recoil spring in it? As far as I know they all did, and the one I had was a pussycat to shoot, because it felt more like a .45 because of that system. It was more of a "lumpy" recoil impulse than a snappy one because those springs slowed it all down a bit. It still was muzzle flippy, as pretty much every USP is, but it didn't sting my hand the way the USPc did.

-Mike
 
I was shooting a G29 last night and I didn't find it as bad as people say it is. I think there is just a lot of girly wrists on NES
Click to expand...

+1. I have never understood what the fuss is about either.
 
Johnny D said:
I was shooting a G29 last night and I didn't find it as bad as people say it is. I think there is just a lot of girly wrists on NES
Click to expand...

The G29 I had was fun but it beat the shit out of the 2nd knuckle of my right thumb. I could probably go through 2-3 boxes or so before it rubbed it raw. That effing gun was fun to shoot, though. I bet the G29SF would fit my hand better and wouldn't do that... because down the road when I got a G30SF, I never had that problem, really.

-Mike
 
I kinda got suckered into liking 40. When to buy a g26 and all they had was g27s and instead of waiting I obviously bought the 27. Started shooting it and found I actually enjoyed shooting it more than my 9s. I dont shoot it as much as my 9's because im cheap. but I occasionally throw the 9mm barrel in the 40 cal. I figured with a 40 you have options. a 9 your stuck with a 9. Not saying a 9 wont do the job if you do your part. Finding +p+ for deep penetration is pretty had thing these days for 9mm. A 40 cal will go deeper than a 9 generally speaking.
 
I didn't even know or care about the 40 debate until EC's post. (Damn you!)

I guess I still really don't care. I just like shooting guns in a variety of calibers.

Someday I will meet EC at a range and shoot his .500, and on that day all other calibers will seem girly. I'm looking forward to that.
 
I went to .40 when the g-27 was introduced sometime in the 90s.
Fun to shoot,small and good capacity compared to the 1911s that were my EDC back then.
All in all to the original posters question yes I like the .40.
 
Just got back from putting 150 rounds of 40 through the the Sig 229. 229 and 40 go together like peanut butter and jelly. Ooooooohhh... so good!
 
If all things are equal in terms of weight, concealibility, ergonomics, capacity, and build quality, it just makes sense to go with the higher caliber weapon.

If there is a trade-off you're willing to make to get into the higher caliber, make it. If not, don't. It's pretty much just that simple.

Oh, and yes I went with the PPS forty, and will eventually get the Kahr PM40, too, because the trade-offs (smaller capacity, a bit more recoil) are worth it to me to be able to carry the higher caliber concealed.
 
Last edited:
Mike(drgrant) I didn't start this thread to be a gay 40 fapfest [flame] It's just every thread where someone mentions a 40 it turns into a hater's convention, so I wanted to see who had one and liked them :p
 

Similar threads

ATF Redefines All Private Sales & Who Has To Have A FFL
Replies
18
Views
530
CrackPot
CrackPot
Trigger job on a S&W Bodyguard 380?
2 3
Replies
63
Views
803
drgrant
drgrant
Local Dealers who Sell on Consignment Through GunBroker?
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
alan226
alan226
newly produced m1 carbines: who makes the best
Replies
24
Views
671
PappyM3
PappyM3
Witnesses describe 'enormous courage' of hero cop who stopped Australia stabbing spree: 6 dead, 8 injured
2
Replies
30
Views
539
MaverickNH
MaverickNH
Back
Top Bottom