.40 out dated?

[jcabin]

I've been looking around, and from what I've found so far, both the 9mm and the 45ACP are able to out perform the .40 time and time again with good loads.

So whats the necessity of a .40?

[max384]

I don't find it any surprise that the .45 ACP outperforms the .40 S&W. The 45 is a big, slow, heavy-hitting round that is great for defense. The advantage of the .40 is magazine capacity and reduced recoil. I've never heard of the 9mm outperforming the 40 though. Magazine capacity and recoil is better in 9mm than .40, but with comparable loads, I'd be very surprised to see that the 9mm outperformed the .40. What variables are you judging them by? Do you have any links to where you got your data?

[roberts257ai]

Boston's gun bible has a good discussion on the .40. He states a lot of valid reasons on why this is the ideal handgun cart. Outdated? I would say no.

Personally I prefer the 9mm. The only reason is it is a military round and will always be in production as long as military contracts renew.

[dc dalton]

Outdated? Nah.

For many it's the perfect round when 9mm doesn't have the stopping power" and "45 is too heavy (both recoil and weapon size) and expensive"

While I am about to move from 40 to 45 I still love my 40 and Tootie will be carrying it for the same reasons.

[pyld]

Outdated?

It's arguably the second or third youngest "major" pistol caliber.

I believe the biggest threat to the .40 is .357 SIG. The .45 GAP is still too physically large. If the feds and the police community in general follows the small trend into .357 SIG, the .40 might be in some trouble (relatively speaking, of course).

I don't shoot .40. I find that if I want a warp-speed and snappy recoiled round with tons of muzzle blast that fast (+p or +p+) 9mm foots the bill (and in FMJ, is cheaper to shoot). If I want something with more "oomph," .45 is better suited and recoil is more controllable (IMHO).

[jcabin]

While I am about to move from 40 to 45 I still love my 40 and Tootie will be carrying it for the same reasons.

What are your reasons for moving up fom 40 to 45?

Originally I wanted to go with a 45, but its twice as expensive as 9mm, and 9mm offered double the capcity, so I opted with 9mm.


My reason for saying .40 is because I dont know about 20 years ago when the round was officially released, but today, you can get the characteristics you're looking for in a 9mm or 45 that will make the 40 obsolete.
The .40 was a dumbed down version of the 10mm, I'd rather carry the 10mm than a .40 personally. Recoil and snappy characteristics don't bother me, and I feel confident I could master any handgun/caliber with due time, as I'm a strong healthy man.

[Tomcat088]

Outdated?

It's arguably the second or third youngest "major" pistol caliber.

I believe the biggest threat to the .40 is .357 SIG. The .45 GAP is still too physically large. If the feds and the police community in general follows the small trend into .457 SIG, the .40 might be in some trouble (relatively speaking, of course).

I don't shoot .40. I find that if I want a warp-speed and snappy recoiled round with tons of muzzle blast that fast (+p or +p+) 9mm foots the bill (and in FMJ, is cheaper to shoot). If I want something with more "oomph," .45 is better suited and recoil is more controllable (IMHO).

I completely agree with this post, rep sent. I agree that it's a very young caliber, and it's main threat is the .357 sig (which is just a necked down .40 S&W). I don't quite see how the OP is comparing the performance of the 9mm and .45 ACP as "better".

As others have said, you can get high capacity from a small framed pistol with the .40 S&W and still have the punch of, or close to a .45 ACP, in a smaller package with more rounds. For a lot of people, this is a very attractive option. I personally prefer the recoil of the .45 ACP to the .40 S&W. I think that .40 is a bit more snappy, and I don't mind the extra size of a larger framed pistol. Oh well, preferences preferences; good thing we have lots of options.

[WVBob]

I shoot 4 of that group, 9MM, .38 Super, .40 S&W, and .45ACP. None of which will ALWAYS give a one shot kill. If I had to pick one to carry where I may need a lot of rounds, it would be the .40. It's bigger than the 9MM, so many LEO's carry it that ammo is not hard to get, can carry almost as much ammo as the 9MM, and hits almost as good as the .45. The .38 Super with the right round has a good punch but it's hard to get ammo for and most guns for it don't CC well for most people. The .45 has a lot of knock down power but is heavy and does not carry as many rounds and it does not CC well. Some times you have to pick your trade-off.

I think the .40 S&W is here to stay. It's not the best for everyone, but it will work for everyone.

My nickle.

[jcabin]

Personally I'd rather just carry a 45 if I could find one that can fit 19+1 like my XDm-9.

[ungawa]

I prefer to shoot .45 but want higher capacity. .40 and 9mm shoot the same for me. 9mm is cheaper.