9mm vs. .40 S&W?

This is a discussion on 9mm vs. .40 S&W? within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by CombatEffective To answer the question, it's basically a personal preference. Personally, I vastly prefer 9mm to the .40SW. I just don't see ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 31 of 31

Thread: 9mm vs. .40 S&W?

  1. #31
    Member Array Gary Brommeland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by CombatEffective View Post
    To answer the question, it's basically a personal preference. Personally, I vastly prefer 9mm to the .40SW. I just don't see where the .40SW offers enough performance over the 9mm to overcome the areas in which it is inferior to the 9mm. Typically, a 9mm has more ammo capacity, has less perceived recoil and muzzle flip, cost less, and less feeding issues.

    If for some reason I thought I just had to have something more than a 9mm, I would go with a .357 Sig or a .45GAP/.45ACP.
    +1! I fail to see where a POSSIBLE slight increase in stopping power offsets what I consider to be major drawbacks to the .40. For example, they have a LOT more recoil, blast and flash, which means much longer recovery time and slower multiple hits on target. All handguns are miserable stoppers - shot placement and multiple hits are the only way to use one effectively. I can place much faster, more accurate multiple rounds on target with a 9 (or even a .45) than I can with a .40.

    .40's also have somewhat of a reputation for blowing up guns due to pressure spikes, and in my experience, .40's are really rough on a gun as far as longevity goes. IMHO, a .40 does not have anything to offer over a .45 or a 9mm.

    What it all boils down to is good tactics, shot placement, and the lack of hesitation. These are the things that can help you survive a criminal attack. Having some mythical super whizbang instant manstopper round is a bunch of crap. My advice is to book a class with a guy like John Farnam, Randy Cain, Louis Awerbach, Chuck Taylor, Clint Smith or Gunsite and learn how to gunfight. THAT will do more to improve your survival odds than carrying an MP5 and a flamethrower.

    I've been on a range various times in my life with Dave Spaulding, Ken Hackathorn, Rob Haught, and Paul Baumener (as well as some lesser known, but nonetheless capable folks). I've spoken face to face with Dave Blinder and Evan Marshall (and got a LOT of one on one teaching from the latter). These men are all top notch instructors and highly trained "gunfighters" for lack of a better term. I would MUCH rather have to deal with the average street creep (or gunshop commando, for that matter) armed with an Uzi, than any of these guys packin' a .32 KelTec. It ain't what you got - it's how you use it. Learn to use it! (And, getting back on topic, a 9mm is easier to learn with, and much cheaper to train with.)

  2. Remove Ads

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

.40 s&w vs 9mm ballistics
,
.40 vs 9mm ballistics
,
40 s&w vs 9mm
,

40 s&w vs 9mm ballistics

,
40 vs 9mm ballistics
,

9mm vs .40 ballistics

,
9mm vs .40 for concealed carry
,
9mm vs .40 s&w ballistics
,
9mm vs 40 ballistics
,

9mm vs 40 s&w

,

9mm vs 40 s&w ballistics

,
9mm vs 40 sw
Click on a term to search for related topics.