If you do some ballistics research you will find that all of these are adequate for personal defense. It's the old Ford, no Chevy, hell no It's Dodge argument. If you like the gun your looking at, and it's 40 cal. that's fine.
Printable View
If you do some ballistics research you will find that all of these are adequate for personal defense. It's the old Ford, no Chevy, hell no It's Dodge argument. If you like the gun your looking at, and it's 40 cal. that's fine.
I carry a .40 S&W pistol, which is strange, considering I've been a .45 ACP user for over 35 years.
The .40 S&W round throws a wider, heavier bullet at about the same velocity as a lighter, narrower bullet in 9mm. The arms themselves are the same size as an equivalent 9mm pistol. Okay, the recoil is a bit snappier than 9x19, but not so much as to be objectionable - at least to me.
I carry an H&K USP(c)40. I can make head shots at 25 yards and stay on a silhouette at 50 yards.
I'm happy with the .40 S&W round and handgun. What more could one want?
To be fair, I have several other pistols that fit the same criteria. Several Government Models, a couple of K frame S&W revolvers and two N frame revolvers. The downside is they are all larger and heavier pistols; good for shooting but not so good for carrying.
Well we know what James Yeager has to say about .40 s&w.
Here is one video I watched before deciding on my Glock 23, I also shoot a 35 in competition.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyX6KCBLbsY
Yep, they suck. People are entitled to their opinions. And we are entitled to disagree. Life moves on. Funny thing is, it is more likely for me to be hit by lightning than actually have to use my CC in an actual shooting, so does it really matter? I would be comfortable carrying 9mm, .45, or .357 mag. I would not want to carry anything in the .38 or .380 caliber though. As was just evidenced by the lady who shot the dude 5 times in her home and he drove away. Doubt he would have absorbed 5 shots from a .45 or .40 S&W or even 9mm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cold Shot
Got to love Hickock45 videos. I think he was the reason that I became interested in Glocks. The first one I bought was the Glock 23 then the Glock 27. It also was a factor that when I rented several different guns I got the best grouping with the Glocks. I wish they made a single stack 9mm or .40, but that is how I ended up with the Beretta Nano, ( which I now like very much).Quote:
Originally Posted by NiceAsh
Dang.. been reading that HUGE article for over an hour and it's some great info.Quote:
Originally Posted by smolck
Why do I carry a .45? Because they don't make a .46!
My first two guns were .40's a Walther PPS and Springfield XDm. For some reason I could never shoot them as well as I should have. When I fired my first 9mm there was a major difference in how well I shot compared to the .40. I traded the XDm for a glock 19 a while ago and I got rid of the PPS due to issues with the gun. For me the .40 just didn't work out, but I have never seen any evidence to suggest that the .40 is bad as a personal defense caliber.
I never understood why people get so caught up in comparing 9mm, .40, and .45, As my philosophy is to find what I shoot best and stick with that.
Matter of choice. I carry a G27 and its a tremendous piece of equipment.
.02
1. Local LEO's carry .40. Some would like to have .45 and I think there might be a movement in that direction,
2. Capacity ? My Bersa has 13 rd mags + 1. If I need more than that I'd be in a heap of trouble.
Attachment 67560
Talk about bite, that Airweight 642 had to go !
