Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Is .40 S&W Dead??
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mitch Rapp" data-source="post: 2848908" data-attributes="member: 332"><p>I just bought a .40 cal barrel for my G32 357 sig so I can practice a bit cheaper and not worry about picking up brass. I reload 357 sig so the cheaper isn't a big deal, but at times I honestly just don't want to mess with collecting brass. </p><p></p><p>I love my 357 sig, but would feel just as well armed carrying a 9mm, and 9mm is what I recommend to people looking for a carry gun. 9mm is slightly more controllable than 40 or 357 sig. </p><p></p><p>Is the .40 dead? I would say no just based on the number of guns out there plus its use in competitions and the amount of departments that still use it. </p><p></p><p>However technology is reducing the performance gap between defensive ammo selections to the point that there is almost not a tangible difference. That being said there are some things that cannot be seen in ballistics gel. If a 9mm 124 and a 357 sig 124 grain bullet both penetrate 14 inches in gel, but one was going nearly 20% faster on impact, there has to a difference even if its not seen in the gel right? At the same time, if a larger diameter bullet that also weighs more also goes 14 inches in the gel, that doesn't mean its exactly the same as a 9mm does it?</p><p></p><p>The difference may be slight, maybe VERY slight, but some people carry a 9mm because it gives them an extra two rounds over a .40. I would say that is no different than carrying a .40 for the slight edge it may give in performance. What are the chances that 13 rounds won't be enough, but 15 will be? About the same as the chance that the .40 might not deflect when a 9 would, or penetrate slightly more or be just enough wider to clip an artery that a 9 would miss... </p><p></p><p>Bottom line is if you are counting on your favorite caliber to be the thing that wins a gunfight, and not your training, then you may be sorely disappointed. </p><p></p><p>P.S.... 357 sig rocks, man up already. Speed kills.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mitch Rapp, post: 2848908, member: 332"] I just bought a .40 cal barrel for my G32 357 sig so I can practice a bit cheaper and not worry about picking up brass. I reload 357 sig so the cheaper isn't a big deal, but at times I honestly just don't want to mess with collecting brass. I love my 357 sig, but would feel just as well armed carrying a 9mm, and 9mm is what I recommend to people looking for a carry gun. 9mm is slightly more controllable than 40 or 357 sig. Is the .40 dead? I would say no just based on the number of guns out there plus its use in competitions and the amount of departments that still use it. However technology is reducing the performance gap between defensive ammo selections to the point that there is almost not a tangible difference. That being said there are some things that cannot be seen in ballistics gel. If a 9mm 124 and a 357 sig 124 grain bullet both penetrate 14 inches in gel, but one was going nearly 20% faster on impact, there has to a difference even if its not seen in the gel right? At the same time, if a larger diameter bullet that also weighs more also goes 14 inches in the gel, that doesn't mean its exactly the same as a 9mm does it? The difference may be slight, maybe VERY slight, but some people carry a 9mm because it gives them an extra two rounds over a .40. I would say that is no different than carrying a .40 for the slight edge it may give in performance. What are the chances that 13 rounds won't be enough, but 15 will be? About the same as the chance that the .40 might not deflect when a 9 would, or penetrate slightly more or be just enough wider to clip an artery that a 9 would miss... Bottom line is if you are counting on your favorite caliber to be the thing that wins a gunfight, and not your training, then you may be sorely disappointed. P.S.... 357 sig rocks, man up already. Speed kills. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Handgun Discussion
Is .40 S&W Dead??
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom