9 or 40???

[*Klutch*]

I have a Glock 19 as my EDC, I've for no reason started becoming interested in the 40s&w. I've had a few 40's before but never really gave it a real chance but now it's peaked my interest. I've reloaded it before but would not be doing so for a while if I got one but I'm still considering it. What would be the advantage to it? Obviously the bullet weight is higher so I would think it would impact a bit harder as well as recoil I know is sharper but not unmanagable by any means.
What do you guys think about the round? not just how god it is, if you're not a fan please tell me why. I don't buy into the extra round with the 9mm crap cause I'm not a gun fighter or an LEO so if I carried a 40 with 9 or 12 in it I don't think I'm at any disadvantage vs. a 10 or 15 round 9mm.
I guess I'm looking for some info. Just for info I would go with a Glock 23/27...

[keystoneman 85]

My choice was 9MM over 40, because I shot the 9mm Glocks better. I've since moved to 45ACP because I shoot better with it, then I did my 9mm's. I wanted to also stay in a single caliber which prompted my moving around.

For me it was which single caliber I could shoot the best, across multiple platforms.

[PSUWaz00]

I agree. Shoot what you feel most comfortable with/are best with. Plenty of gun/size choices in both. Don't fall for the power debate...as in everyday life if a 9mm won't handle it, you should already be running.

[GunDog]

I agree with the many voices (not just the ones in my head) that say that its more important to be comfortable with the weapon than the actual caliber of the round. Well place rounds are far more important than so called "knock-down" power. Always remember that a gun is useless if you can't hit the broad side of a barn. Practice as though you are in an actual life threatening situation and never pass up a chance to learn something new.

[Bang]

So many trade-offs. I'd say try to find out the percentages of each carried by police departments. As for that, I'm picking up on departments going back to the good old .45 ACP. The US Army insisted on replacing the "out-dated" 1911 with the Beretta M-9. The special forces have ditched it for .45s. The high-capacity argument often gets the question "what ever happened to the goal of hitting the target?. Good question.

40 S&W:
Hornady 155 TAP 479 ft/lbs
Remington 155 express 499 ft/lbs
Remington 165 Golden Saber 485 ft/lbs

45 ACP
Hornady 200 +p XTP 494 ft/lbs
Remington 185 Golden Saber 534 ft/lbs

9mm...295 to 401 ft-lbs:

http://www.ballistics101.com/9mm.php

401 ft-lbs from a 9mm with higher round count and presumably faster target re-acquisition vs 485-499 ft-lbs .40 S&W leaves me thinking it isn't worth the trade.

To each his own...

[ItchyTick]

In slow fire I shoot the 9, .40, and .45 the same.

Double taps and rapid fire I keep the 9 mm on target the best. I can unload 5-6 rd into a 4 inch pattern without difficulty, which includes the small in the hand xds-9.

I've actually gotten rid of my .40 and .45 and consolidated to 9mm.

[Palerider]

I can shoot multi-string shots faster and more accurately with a 9 than the 40. I therefore sold the 40 and standardized to 9 and 45. And I keep the 45 since every shooter needs a 1911.

[Mity2]

I think Hilton Yam said it the best

I would still say that buying any handgun in .40 is a wasted effort. With the advances in 9mm JHP cartridges, the 9 gives up an inconsequential amount over the .40 in terms of performance. For just plain shooting, you will be hard pressed to find .40 FMJ for as low a price as 9mm FMJ. Add the additional recoil and wear on the gun, and the .40 is left as a rather distant second to the 9mm.

I loved my Gen4 G22. And was intended to keep it after I got Gen4 G17.

I quickly change my mind, and ditched G22...

[BimmerJon]

9mm

Don't look back

[Delkal]

If your carrying a full sized pistol the best manstopper rounds begin with a 4.

Yes you can spray a lot more 9's but you only need ONE with a .40, .41, .44 or a .45. (Or maybe less than one with a .454 or a .460)