First pistol, three options

I appreciate the advice I received in these threads, and moving forward, I have changed my mind about 15 times.

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/....php?p=2060811

http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/....php?p=2431653

Now... I have decided that I would prefer to purchase a Smith & Wesson M&P pistol.

I'm trying to decide what would be best for me, and I am looking for some opinions.

I would ultimately like a .40... but since this is my first pistol, it will be an exclusively range pistol for several months, and I can't overlook the difference between .40 and 9mm ammo wise.

So my options are
1.) M&P .40 and eat the extra cost
2.) M&P 9mm and sacrifice caliber
3.) M&P .40 with a conversion barrel (leaning this way)

Thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinlifter

I appreciate the advice I received in this thread, and moving forward, I have changed my mind about 15 times.

Out of state, private party transfer

Now... I have decided that I would prefer to purchase a Smith & Wesson M&P pistol.

I'm trying to decide what would be best for me, and I am looking for some opinions.

I would ultimately like a .40... but since this is my first pistol, it will be an exclusively range pistol for several months, and I can't overlook the difference between .40 and 9mm ammo wise.

So my options are
1.) M&P .40 and eat the extra cost
2.) M&P 9mm and sacrifice caliber
3.) M&P .40 with a conversion barrel (leaning this way)

Thoughts?

---

Go with Option #1: Then you will not ever regret going with a lesser caliber.

I vote Option #2, because I don't think you are really sacrificing as much as you think and the ammo will be cheaper.

Not sure what you mean by 'sacrificing caliber', but I'll guess you mean the increased power level of the .40 over the 9mm.

Realistically, most people interested enough in handgunning to join a forum like this end up with more than one handgun, so my suggestion is to get a 9mm and get good with it. There really isn't a huge difference in the effectiveness of the 9mm vs the .40, but it clearly is a tad easier to shoot and the ammo is cheaper. As your skill with the 9mm improves, then you may want to step up to the .40 as your armory grows.

I have plenty of time to research since I'm waiting for my birth certificate from Iowa so I can switch my DL to Texas, plus finding time off work to get a new DOT physical for my CDL.

I'd really like to hear from someone who has used a conversion barrel. It would be nice to have .40 available at home, but be able to practice with 9mm part of the time.

I'm with the 9mm crowd. I don't care for 40... High pressure round leads to more recoil and more pistol wear. 9mm vs 40 vs 45 internal ballistics are getting ever closer.

Until you get into pistols with MUCH more power (44 mag maybe) They are all about the same so long as the round penetrates enough. The only damage is caused by crushing and cutting ( no gigantic wound cavity like with a rifle), so 6 out of 7 shot with a pistol survive, and the ones who didn't bleed out unless it brain trauma.

Moral of this story is go with a caliber that will penetrate AND expand in 380 or bigger, go with a handgun that meets your balance of size, capacity, shoot-ability and conceal-ability. I think your choice of an m&p is a good one but I would buy the 9mm.

Hope this all helps :smile:

You said it was going to be strictly a range pistol. If you are sure of that I would go with the 9mm.

If there is any chance at all you will carry this gun I would go with the .40. The difference in price of ammo really isn't that different. I think currently given the same brand .40 is about $2 a box more. As you said, you can always get a conversion barrel if you wanted to.

M&P is a great choice. I have the compact in .40.

I really like the 40 in certain guns and with a very small amount of range time, you'll overcome any increase in perceived recoil. Love my Sig P229 in 40 (with 9mm and 357 barrels) and my G23 (also a 40). Both fantastic weapons IMO. All that being said, I carry a 9mm G26 about 99% of the time. It really doesn't matter that much. Just practice.

Why a .40............when you can own a .45acp ...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davidw

You said it was going to be strictly a range pistol. If you are sure of that I would go with the 9mm.

---

For now...

This is my first pistol, and I refuse to carry it until I am satisfied that I am proficient with it.

I will eventually carry concealed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doodle

I'm with the 9mm crowd. I don't care for 40... High pressure round leads to more recoil and more pistol wear.

---

So you think 40 cal will cause pistol wear? In guns that were designed and made to shoot 40 cal, not buying that one. I'll give you recoil, but not wear, not anymore than the others.

To the OP. I was recently in this place myself when picking which glock to get. I ended up getting the G23 40 cal, I have on the way the 9mm conversion barrel and mags to shoot 9mm.

It really comes down to what you want, both are proven fine and widely exepted for defensive calibers and both are quite shootable and affordable, but there are differences. A little more cost, little more recoil and little bigger hole with the 40.

In my opinion, if I were you, just starting out with my first gun, I would deff go 9mm. Cheaper and probably easier to practice with. You can always go to 40 later on, perferably after you got some trigger time with it to see if it's for you or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xXxplosive

Why a .40............when you can own a .45acp ...?

---

cool. this debate again.

Another vote for getting the .40.

If you would like to have a .40 then get it. I have spent lots of money buying "another" gun because I didn't get what I wanted the first time. Life is too short to compromise.

M&P 9mm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinlifter

I appreciate the advice I received in these threads, and moving forward, I have changed my mind about 15 times.

Need ammo... For a debate with the wife!

Out of state, private party transfer

Now... I have decided that I would prefer to purchase a Smith & Wesson M&P pistol.

I'm trying to decide what would be best for me, and I am looking for some opinions.

I would ultimately like a .40... but since this is my first pistol, it will be an exclusively range pistol for several months, and I can't overlook the difference between .40 and 9mm ammo wise.

So my options are
1.) M&P .40 and eat the extra cost
2.) M&P 9mm and sacrifice caliber
3.) M&P .40 with a conversion barrel (leaning this way)

Thoughts?

---

I would go with option 3 since you get both barrels. I have a friend who has a sig P229 in both the 40 and the 9mm calibers. He practices with the 9mm barrel at the range. IMHO the 9mm caliber is good enough for sd as long as you are good at shot placement....and that is what range practice is all about.