Apparently Im very lucky. 9mm is about 3 dollars a box cheaper than 40 at my LGS but 40 and 45 are within 10 cents of each other per box in either ball or Hp in any brand of ammo.
Go figure
:confused:
Printable View
Apparently Im very lucky. 9mm is about 3 dollars a box cheaper than 40 at my LGS but 40 and 45 are within 10 cents of each other per box in either ball or Hp in any brand of ammo.
Go figure
:confused:
im thinking about getting a 9mm barrel for my g23 so i can get cheaper ammo to practice with b.c i am on a somewhat tight budget. also am looking to get a new glock 17 or glock 21 in about a month or so. but if i get a drop in 40-9 barrel and get a glock 21 i can have 3 differently varieties so am considering it but still thinking
I bought the bill of goods on the 40 and I'm still buying. I'll concede that the 40 is probably only slightly better than the 9mm (I will not concede to there being no difference as the 9mm people say- even though I used to carry a 9). I will even go so far as to say that the marginally better performance does not justify the lower round count may be valid. But at the end of the day I decided I prefer the 40. Do I shoot it better than a 9? Nope- but I don't shoot it worse either. And I feel more comfortable in the performance of a 40 should the round fail to expand, which happens from time to time. For me, that's where the decision was made. I may be wrong, I may be right. Doesn't matter one bit. In the end we make choices based up what we believe. Hopefully we did some research before coming to that decision.
Anyway, on to my real point for this thread. The OP says he recommends everyone have 500-1000 rounds available. So are you suggesting I sell all the extra? There may be 1000 in the couch cushions.
ya or u can give the rest to me. k ill resay, i recommend u have 500 to 1000 plus for the guys who like everyone to know they have more than 1k of ammo my fault for throwing a low ball number!
Certainly don't want to fuel the caliber war as that isn't the point of the OP. I too am glad my carry piece is a Glock 27 because when I go ammo shopping I can find 40 S&W, even in these crazy times.
As to 9mm vs .40cal and which is better? I look at it this way, most popular 9mm rounds are 147gr and 124gr. The 147gr gold dot travels around 990fps from a 4 inch barrel, the 124gr about 1150fps.
A 40.cal in 165 gr will average 1150fps (ranger t/gold dot) and a 180gr (gold dot)averages around 1025fps.
Take caliber out of the equation for a second. Would you rather have a lighter bullet moving slower or a heavier bullet moving faster? And if you carry a 124gr or 147gr +P load, then you are close to .40 cal recoil anyways. The reason I think people say 9mm isn't any less potent than the .40 S&W is likely because there just isn't enough real world comparison. But pure physics would tell you the heavier bullet going faster is more lethal.
Food for thought, shoot what you like, just throwing out some ideas.
I like how some are saying "why would you carry a .40 because it holds less rounds?" just so you know most .40's only hold one to two less rounds then a 9mm... And I will agree that bullet design has come along way and I will carry a 9mm from time to time. Bullet design has closed the gap on ballistics of "the big three" 9mm .40S&W and .45ACP.
With the logic of less rounds in the .40 then the 9mm, no one should be carrying a .45ACP because they hold less the the .40... (in the same model/size gun):blink:
It is all personal choice. and I'm glad I have the .40 because I also have the option of shooting 9mm.
Personally I like the .40 S&W because it closes the gap between the velocity of the 9mm and the size of the .45 ACP. The average expansion of a .40 Federal HST is .94 to .96 inches at 1000fps compared to the 9mm .89-.92 inches expansion at 1000fps and the .45 ACP .97-.99 expansion at 800fps. IMO, its a good medium of speed and size.