40 SW VS. 45 ACP

**Shawn.L** · July 8th, 2008, 07:28 PM

Been a while since I have seen the classic 9 VS 45 thread, figured I would give this one a little twist and see what comes out.

So, which one and why ?

Charts. graphs, and links to dense technical material is always a plus. Please no wiki links about how the 45 was developed to shoot down the moon but was too effective.

**str8shooter** · July 8th, 2008, 07:32 PM

I like pie.

**Lycanthrope** · July 8th, 2008, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by str8shooter

I like pie.

Indeed.

And I like all kinds of pie.....sometimes I need to split hairs to get to pie....but that's another story.....

On topic.....debating .40 vs. .45 is splitting hairs.

People tend to say the .40 is "snappier" but I shoot the .40 faster......so.....whatever floats da boat.......

Lycan6toonehalfdozentotheotherthrope

P.S. .40 and 9mm tend to feed better in a doublestack. .45 better in a single stack magazine.

**knighthawk06699** · July 8th, 2008, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by Lycanthrope

Indeed.

And I like all kinds of pie.....sometimes I need to split hairs to get to pie....but that's another story.....

On topic.....debating .40 vs. .45 is splitting hairs.

People tend to say the .40 is "snappier" but I shoot the .40 faster......so.....whatever floats da boat.......

Lycan6toonehalfdozentotheotherthrope

P.S. .40 and 9mm tend to feed better in a doublestack. .45 better in a single stack magazine.

It is all in what work for you. I prefer to shoot a 23o grain .45 auto. I think it is a smoother recoil and I get back on target a lot faster. It all comes down to personal preference. Can we please not let this one turn into another flame war??

**4XLT** · July 9th, 2008, 02:22 AM

i have a .40 and a .45 both great shooters

the .40 has a bit more recoil to it than the .45 but both are very managable.

i like them both and will always have both

**Montell C. Williams** · July 9th, 2008, 08:54 AM

Slight edge to .45acp but those graphics showing temporary wound channels don't mean much with pistols cause velocity is to low for it to actually destroy tissue not actually touched by the bullet. Expanded diameter and penetration is what matters in a handgun. CF rifles are another compleatly differant matter they destroy tissue all out of perportion to their diameter.

**normanvin** · July 9th, 2008, 09:05 AM

I am glad I am not the only one that thinks the .40cal has a snappier recoil. I have a kahr mk40. I thought the snap was the way the gun was built So I bought a glock 22. It gives the same snap.

**Tomcat088** · July 10th, 2008, 02:06 AM

I think the .40 has snappier recoil. I really don't care which caliber, I wouldn't want to get shot with either one and know that a well place shot from either would get the job done. I personally like the slower impulse of the .45, but I do like the slightly smaller frame that most of the .40 pistols come in. Either way, I don't care, I know they both will get'r done.

**daschnoz** · July 10th, 2008, 07:26 AM

I'm throwing this one out there...

I don't own anything in either caliber, but could the recoil difference have more to do with the construction and weight of the guns than the specific calibers?
Most of the 45's I have seen are quite beefy. Most of the 40's i have seen are plastic framed.

I wonder how a 1911 chambered in 40 would feel to the shooter? That may be an interesting test.

**WVBob** · July 10th, 2008, 07:45 AM

I have both and would not like to be shot by either of them. That said, I like the .45 much more. The .45 has a lot of knock down power and that's a main point when you need it. What puts the critter on the ground will keep them on the ground. The hot .40 will go through someone and not stop them, sometimes. The old big and slow .45 goes in and stays.