Defensive Carry banner

The .40 story

3K views 36 replies 29 participants last post by  G-man* 
#1 ·
A very nice article on how the .40 came to be

One of the many quirks of history is the truth is often more complex and nuanced than the commonly-accepted version of events. If history is truly written by the victors, then there’s a strong possibility what you “know” as true may not be true at all — or only part of the full story.

https://americanhandgunner.com/discover/the-40-story/
 
#2 ·
Ah an ode to a fallen round. How fast the star goes into eclipse. Never jumped on the 40 bandwagon. Started withj 45ACP, switched to 9mm and never felt any inadequacy because some FBI agents couldn't accurately place their rounds on target.
 
#3 ·
Ah an ode to a fallen round. How fast the star goes into eclipse. Never jumped on the 40 bandwagon. Started withj 45ACP, switched to 9mm and never felt any inadequacy because some FBI agents couldn't accurately place their rounds on target.
:image041:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Western
#5 ·
I had read some of that in an article on how the 10mm was born. Of coarse that article was slanted that way. And only mentioned the 40 as a down load of the 10mm. I did know that part of the 40's quick rise was because the gun would fit in a holster the same size as its 9mm counter part, the mags would also fit in the same mag carriers. And came at a time when gun companys had flooded the markets with 9mm. there was nothing wrong with those 9mm guns, but the gun companys could advertise 45 "like " performance from a "New" gun the same size as the 9mm. And mag capasitiy near the 9mm. This gave them something "NEW" to sell. And New sells. It didn't hurt that the FBI had moved to the 40. DR
 
#6 ·
I have read that the .38-40 Winchester cartridge was popular with law enforcement in the late 1800s, derived from the .44-40 Winchester. The .38-40 was a bottleneck cartridge and hard to reload. The 10mm, .40 S&W, and other .40 wildcat cartridges were updates to the .38-40 Winchester.
 
#7 ·
Maybe I'm just odd...but I've witnessed the 40 S&W work on live targets several times. It functioned with great authority and ended the threat forthwith. Sure others could do the same thing, but when you've seen the effectiveness, it makes it easier to use the caliber to defend your home and family.

The 40 going away? Pfffft...all kinds of folks have proclaimed all kinds of rounds are "going away", as if their prognostications sounded the death knell. In my nearly 7 decades of shooting, I've seen all kinds of rounds rise from the "prognosticators' grave" and thrive. Take a good long look at one of those...the "soon to die" 38 Special.

Please allow one slight detour. The most useful model of Glock is the 23 - a 40 S&W. With two barrels to swap in, it can serve as a 9mm, a .40 S&W, or a .357 Sig. :biggrin2:

Can you do that with the exact same pistol chambered in 9mm? (the Glock 19?) Nope. Back to our regularly scheduled thread.
 
#8 ·
I've owned a 40 since 1992
Back in 1992 bullet diameter mattered.
The stupid AWB of 1994 with 10 round limits*, may as well have 10 bigger bullets. *(Unless you owned pre-ban mags or wanted to pay bigly for one)
Stupid AWB expires in 2004.
Subsequently "modern" 9mm was tweaked at the exclusion of other calibers. :rolleyes:
Current emphasis on putting as many shots on target in least time and cheapest ammo, fostered by 15-17 round 9mm mags plentiful & legal in most states.
Now "they all perform about the same" and "doctors can't tell a difference".
Still, the residual 1990's "bigger bullet is better" lingers in my brain, so I prefer my Glock 23 over the 19.
Eventually my wrist may become frail and I'll have to be content with the Glock 19, but that day has not yet arrived.
 
#15 ·
About 15 years ago I selected the Kahr P40 for a daily carry piece while working in a position with lots of public contact and no tolerance for firearms. I liked the Kahr, after experiencing the learning curve of the striker-fired pistols with long and slushy trigger pull, but the 16-oz. pistol produced an abrupt and sometimes painful recoil that prevented me from becoming intimately familiar via regular range use.

Last year I caught a deal on a Sig P229 .40 S&W. Compact version of the venerable P226, 12-round mag capacity, 29-oz. empty weight for comfortable use of the .40 S&W in serious practical applications. I have been very favorably impressed by the performance of the .40 S&W in a suitable handgun to make use of its full potential. As a life-long hand-loader I have found the .40 to be very easy to deal with on the loading bench, producing both cast lead and jacketed ammo to meet any requirement with no strains at all.

This comes from a Model 1911 pistol adherent with little tolerance for any of the new and improved plastic fantastic nonsense that rules the market today. I still carry a 1911-style pistol daily, but the Sig P229 (SA-DA Decocker model) is quickly becoming a pistol that I would not hesitate to rely upon for serious defensive use. The .40 S&W with 180-grain bullets at ~1000FPS is more than capable of delivering all the power necessary for such needs.

With millions of quality .40 S&W pistols in use I doubt that this caliber will go away any time in the foreseeable future. As a strong plus, the current market offers many quality options at very attractive prices, and both ammunition and components are readily available at competitive prices.

Thanks for a very interesting post!
 
#18 ·
I've never owned anything chambered in .40S&W but I don't understand the animosity towards the caliber. It seems like a good round, at least as good as 9mm except it makes bigger holes. Bigger holes are better holes, I've got no problem with that.

I've also noticed that some of those who malign the .40S&W as having too much recoil and being too hard on firearms will then turn around and tout the greatness of the 10mm. Go figure. :confused:
 
#19 ·
Well, I could still find .32 ACP all over the place if I needed it, so I'm not too worried about .40 S&W dying off.

I think one reason it's thought of unfavorably is that there aren't really any iconic firearms chambered for it, as it was sort of meant to be fired in guns identical to 9mm. The .45 Auto has the 1911, 9mm has the Luger pistol, M9, CZ75, Glock 17. I can't think of any firearms for which the .40 version is the "real thing," it's just kind of an option.
 
#22 ·
In my view the .40 S&W is the better cartridge. A little more diameter and bullet weight and less depending on trick expanding bullets and internet claims of "less is more" trying to make the 9mm the full equal to .40 and .45 in effectiveness. The .40 S&W is the cartridge that appears to be a reasonable alternative to the .45 ACP. If "lots a' bullets" is supremely important and highest capacity is a must have then OK, 9mm.
 
#24 ·
Since I've owned 9mm and 45acp long before the 40s&w came along, I never felt the urge to add it to my accumulation. I'm sure it's a decent and effective caliber. But designed to address a problem that really didn't exist. It'd be a good choice for someone starting out with handguns who wanted an in-between round.

A few years back, I was under the impression that 40s&w was adopted by a considerable number of LE agencies.

Have they since abandoned it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldChap
#29 ·
Funny how some things change and some remain the same. When I was in the Sheriff's dept. our Sheriff insisted on 45 acp. We carried S&W 4506's with 2 spare mags for a total of 25 rounds. The Sheriff was a guy who also wanted solid training so we could hit what we shot at. His thing was "If you have to shoot someone hit them hard and put them down". After he retired Glock made the bean counters an offer they could not refuse and G17's took over. The funny part is even most of the small females made the grade with a full size 45 and those that did not made it with the slightly smaller 4516. The gun fit better but, still a 45. We actually had more fail to make it with the Glock due to the blocky grip vs the single stack 45. What I ask did they gain? They saved money on ammo and gun parts which Glock practically gives away to LE. The idea that the FBI or anyone else had an epiphany about 9mm effectiveness is ludicrous.
 
#31 ·
Interesting read for sure, I didn't know about the .40 B&S. I started out with the .40 S&W (G23) 17 years ago and while I've had a bit of everything since then, to this day the .40 is my favorite of the bunch. It's unfortunate that it gets a lot of negative attention these days because the .40 S&W really is a very versatile cartridge that works quite well on the range, loaded up for self defense, or even in the woods. Loaded lightly for competition use the .40 recoils very mildly, we all know it has great options for self defense loads and I can load my Glock 35 to shoot a 180gr bullet at around 1300 fps, which is 10mm territory. The .40 S&W offers a lot, too bad many don't see it that way.
 
#32 ·
When I started with my dept. back in 1996, they were just switching to the .40 S&W round. It wasn't known whether we would be the last class issued 9mm or the first class to receive the .40s (we got the .40 version). The dept. was issuing the S&W 4043 DAO pistols. We had lots of trouble with those weapons, with frames cracking to lots of jams. The loads we were using also seemed to change every year. This year it might be Win Ranger 180gr. and the year after it was Fed Hydro-Shok 165gr. In 2001, the dept. finally did extensive testing of both available pistols and rounds. We settled on the DAO version of the Sig P229 and the Speer GD in 180gr. flavor. We now issue the Sig P229R DAK version of pistol but we still issue the same Gold Dots. My dept. has roughly about 2,000 sworn officers and the city is routinely written about as being in the top 5 most dangerous cities in America. In all the years since adoption, neither the Sigs nor the Gold Dots have made us question whether we made the right choices. As for caliber, I'm sure that at some time, the bean counters will partner with the powers that be in the dept. who are enamored of everything the Feds do and we'll switch back to the 9mm. The arguments they'll use will be the same ones being used by the Feds and everyone else switching (it's cheaper per round, less wear & tear on the pistols, easier for officers to qualify with). In other words, it'll all come back to money instead of it being more effective. Do I think the 9mm is ineffective? Absolutely not. Loaded with good SD ammo, it can get the job done. However, all else being equal, the best it can do is equal the effectiveness of the .40 S&W but it will not better it.
 
#33 ·
If it wasn't for the sufficient 9x19, and .40 S&W, I would never have adopted the more than sufficient .357 SIG for PD.

So, thank you .40 for guiding me to the holy grail of pistol calibers. :image035:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top