When to Carry a .40 S&W over a 9mm? - Page 9

When to Carry a .40 S&W over a 9mm?

This is a discussion on When to Carry a .40 S&W over a 9mm? within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Gman is right on the money with the 165 gr .40SW. This is a brutal round to be on the receiving end....

Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 203
Like Tree417Likes

Thread: When to Carry a .40 S&W over a 9mm?

  1. #121
    VIP Member Array zonker1986's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    5,728
    Gman is right on the money with the 165 gr .40SW. This is a brutal round to be on the receiving end.

    Bad Bob and G-man* like this.
    Give to them according to their deeds and according to the wickedness of their endeavors; give to them according to the work of their hands; render to them their deserts. Psalm 28:4

  2. #122
    VIP Member Array CDW4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Guncentric
    Posts
    4,051
    Quote Originally Posted by BBMW View Post
    Yes but look what it did to the bullet. That's not good performance.
    It wasn't about how the bullet looked; the videos were examples of why the overpenetration generalization was wrong.

    "Not good performance"
    Another look at 180 gr. @ 1,300 fps - No its not just "good" its impressive.
    Bad Bob and CavemanBob like this.
    I'm not inclined to disarm for a concert, game, (entertainment) and I ain't going on a plane or cruise.
    "Wouldn't want to or Nobody volunteer to" get shot by _____ is not indicative of quickly incapacitating.

  3. #123
    VIP Member Array CDW4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Guncentric
    Posts
    4,051
    Back to 40 S&W ...
    Glock 23 is my most carried pistol.
    I also have a Glock 19, but prefer the idea of potentially making larger holes in whatever trying to kill me.
    I was carrying 180 HST, but got some Winchester Ranger Bonded 165 contract overrun, its not labeled as "low recoil" but my chrono average velocity is indicative that it is and subjectively it is "low recoil", imperceptible difference in recoil from that 165 40 S&W and a 147 +P from a Glock 19.
    Importantly, 180 gr. POI was (is) a bit high for my POA, the 165 Bonded hits where I aim.
    I tested the bullet through 4 layer denim into water filled gallon jugs, was very pleased with the result.
    Whether the reduced recoil or not, either 165 Ranger bonded performs well in different test media:
    http://winchesterle.com/SiteCollecti...tocol_2016.pdf


    9mm Ranger Bonded loads perform acceptably; 380 in those tests (or otherwise), its not what I'll bet my life on.
    Bad Bob likes this.
    I'm not inclined to disarm for a concert, game, (entertainment) and I ain't going on a plane or cruise.
    "Wouldn't want to or Nobody volunteer to" get shot by _____ is not indicative of quickly incapacitating.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #124
    VIP Member Array Bad Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The BAD lands
    Posts
    11,985
    Quote Originally Posted by CDW4ME View Post
    Back to 40 S&W ...
    Glock 23 is my most carried pistol.
    I also have a Glock 19, but prefer the idea of potentially making larger holes in whatever trying to kill me.
    I was carrying 180 HST, but got some Winchester Ranger Bonded 165 contract overrun, its not labeled as "low recoil" but my chrono average velocity is indicative that it is and subjectively it is "low recoil", imperceptible difference in recoil from that 165 40 S&W and a 147 +P from a Glock 19.
    Importantly, 180 gr. POI was (is) a bit high for my POA, the 165 Bonded hits where I aim.
    I tested the bullet through 4 layer denim into water filled gallon jugs, was very pleased with the result.
    Whether the reduced recoil or not, either 165 Ranger bonded performs well in different test media:
    http://winchesterle.com/SiteCollecti...tocol_2016.pdf


    9mm Ranger Bonded loads perform acceptably; 380 in those tests (or otherwise), its not what I'll bet my life on.
    It is really hard to find a bad HP in 40 S&W. At best they behave like a 357 magnum, at worst a 45 ACP.
    G-man*, Mike1956, OD* and 4 others like this.
    A man has got to know his limitations.

    In a world of snowflakes, be a torch.

  6. #125
    VIP Member Array Bad Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The BAD lands
    Posts
    11,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Struckat View Post
    No, itís just like you carrying your G26, no? But I guess I agree as my 45 Shield fits the bill too.
    Did I mention that the 45 is better than all of them?
    That depends on which bullet you use. The lighter faster 40"s mimic the 357 magnum for energy, which absolutely surpasses the 45 ACP. The 180 grain 40's act like a 185 grain 45 ACP in actual shootings.
    Struckat, Mike1956, OD* and 3 others like this.
    A man has got to know his limitations.

    In a world of snowflakes, be a torch.

  7. #126
    VIP Member Array Bad Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The BAD lands
    Posts
    11,985
    Quote Originally Posted by BBMW View Post
    Yes but look what it did to the bullet. That's not good performance.
    That was smoking performance. With the 10 mm you are picking up 300 fps velocity. That is significant.
    Struckat, OD*, G-man* and 1 others like this.
    A man has got to know his limitations.

    In a world of snowflakes, be a torch.

  8. #127
    VIP Member Array tns0038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,361
    I've never been a 40 fan. 9mm Glock 17, 19, and 26 has always been my choice for work. Off duty, is when I stray to 380, 45, and different 9mm pistols, but never a 40 cal.

  9. #128
    VIP Member Array Struckat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Lurking
    Posts
    3,643
    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Bob View Post
    That depends on which bullet you use. The lighter faster 40"s mimic the 357 magnum for energy, which absolutely surpasses the 45 ACP. The 180 grain 40's act like a 185 grain 45 ACP in actual shootings.
    I was just being a wisenheimer with the 45 comment.
    Thatís why I donít run the heavies in my 40, I have 45s for that. 155 XTP running 1250 or so is very .357ish.
    The big hunk of steel CZ 40 is the nightstand gun.
    Bad Bob and G-man* like this.
    Read our government's plan to destroy the Constitution.
    https://sustainabledevelopment.un.or...ormingourworld

  10. #129
    New Member Array dump1567's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    26
    One of the things all these Gel test never show is where that extra energy might help. If we look at the .357 Sig Gel test with 125 gr HST and compare it to 9mm 124 gr +P HST, the .357 Sig round is travelling around 200 fps. faster. But the penetration & expansion is about the same in Gel. Now add in bone, cartilage, any item being carried or worn by a person, or some other barrier that might get in the way. Does that extra velocity give you a benefit over the slower moving 9mm? Or a larger, heavier round that might hit something a smaller round didn't?
    I would think so.

    If you're feeling all that energy (blast & recoil) on your end, I would assume it would benefit you on the other end.
    Bad Bob, Struckat and CDW4ME like this.

  11. #130
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    9,824
    Quote Originally Posted by dump1567 View Post
    One of the things all these Gel test never show is where that extra energy might help. If we look at the .357 Sig Gel test with 125 gr HST and compare it to 9mm 124 gr +P HST, the .357 Sig round is travelling around 200 fps. faster. But the penetration & expansion is about the same in Gel. Now add in bone, cartilage, any item being carried or worn by a person, or some other barrier that might get in the way. Does that extra velocity give you a benefit over the slower moving 9mm? Or a larger, heavier round that might hit something a smaller round didn't?
    I would think so.

    If you're feeling all that energy (blast & recoil) on your end, I would assume it would benefit you on the other end.
    Makes sense to me. Comparing 9mm to .40 with proportional bullet weights (147gr 9mm vs 180gr .40, etc), basically you're getting the same velocity, with about 20% more momentum, energy, and cross-sectional area. It's obviously an improvement.

    The downside is 20% more recoil, and whether it's worth it is an individual choice. Personally, I believe the most likely use of a defensive pistol for me is against a BG within a few yards of me, in which circumstance that difference in recoil seems completely irrelevant.
    "Lots of ways to help people. Sometimes heal patients; sometimes shoot dangerous people. Either way helps."
    - Dr. Mordin Solus

  12. #131
    VIP Member Array MMinSC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    charleston,sc
    Posts
    3,376
    So which is better between those two?
    It takes a Viking to raze a village.

  13. #132
    New Member Array dump1567's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by MMinSC View Post
    So which is better between those two?
    Shot placement.
    Bad Bob, SFury and Nix like this.

  14. #133
    Distinguished Member Array CavemanBob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Kalirado
    Posts
    1,544
    500 S&W - shock & awe, shock & awe
    Bad Bob and LimaCharlie like this.
    The best citizenry is an informed citizenry

    NRA Patron member

  15. #134
    VIP Member Array Bad Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The BAD lands
    Posts
    11,985
    Quote Originally Posted by maxwell97 View Post
    Makes sense to me. Comparing 9mm to .40 with proportional bullet weights (147gr 9mm vs 180gr .40, etc), basically you're getting the same velocity, with about 20% more momentum, energy, and cross-sectional area. It's obviously an improvement.

    The downside is 20% more recoil, and whether it's worth it is an individual choice. Personally, I believe the most likely use of a defensive pistol for me is against a BG within a few yards of me, in which circumstance that difference in recoil seems completely irrelevant.
    Try 147 grn 9mm vs 135 grn or 155grn 40 much closer comparison than a 180 grn 40.
    G-man* likes this.
    A man has got to know his limitations.

    In a world of snowflakes, be a torch.

  16. #135
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    9,824
    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Bob View Post
    Try 147 grn 9mm vs 135 grn or 155grn 40 much closer comparison than a 180 grn 40.
    Sorry, I meant comparing light for caliber to light for caliber, etc. So 115 gr vs 135gr, 147gr vs 180gr, etc. But the result is the same, .40 has more.
    Bad Bob and G-man* like this.
    "Lots of ways to help people. Sometimes heal patients; sometimes shoot dangerous people. Either way helps."
    - Dr. Mordin Solus

Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •