Why "Not" 40 Caliber?

[Charlie]

Can someone explain why the .40 caliber lost it's popularity? Searching the internet I can find no valid reason why the .40 has become so "unpopular", compared to the 9mm. Although I own none now, I've shot 9 mm and .40 cal. handguns and honestly couldn't tell a lot of difference in them. Seems like a .40 cal. can be bought cheaper than an equivalent 9 mm. Just wondering....

 

[DyeF9]

Personally I have no qualms with .40. I can shoot it as quickly and accurately as 9. It is more expensive to shoot though. Really most of the major players in the pistol market are pretty comparable on capabilities. It's splitting hairs. I think most of it is people just have blind biases towards something because it's what they're used to.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that bullet improvements have equalized the calibers.
If one caliber was better before bullet improvements, wouldn't it still be better?
I mean, all the calibers should have improved equally, no?

 

[rotor]

From what I have read the female LEO were having problems with .40 and therefore they moved to 9 mm. Lots of prior law enforcement .40s for sale cheap.

 

[oldag]

I still can't wrap my head around the fact that bullet improvements have equalized the calibers.
If one caliber was better before bullet improvements, wouldn't it still be better?
I mean, all the calibers should have improved equally, no?

There you go again. Using logic and science...

 

[oldag]

.40 gives you a heavier slug at roughly the same velocity.

9 mm's claim to fame seems largely to be cheap ammo.

 

[Charlie]

Thanks folks! The above is what I've been hearing also. I've had a few plastic guns (none now), and if an opportunity comes up for an inexpensive .40 I certainly wouldn't pay more for a 9mm. The 45ACP has become my favorite caliber for now!

 

[DyeF9]

A pistol round itself is inherently inadequate relatively speaking. Low velocity, not that much energy behind it, etc. With modern gun powders and bullet design, they're all within a relatively similar range of capability.

 

[Charlie]

I handload so velocity can be whatever the manuals allow. Even off the shelf, I've found the differences in those two calibers can be very close or very far away. And probably make very little difference compared to the shooter, the target, the particular load for each caliber, etc.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

The limp wristers think it’s too snappy.
Yet they all want a 10mm.

 

[Charlie]

They would then have to get downloaded 10mms!

 

[m5215]

I think the level of unpopularity is overstated and not nearly as large as some make it out to be. There are plenty of .40 S&W pistols in current production. I am just pissed off that it's getting harder to find new all metal DA+SA autoloader pistols over the plastic striker fire ones.

It seems that most federal and state law enforcement switched from .40 S&W to 9mm due to logistical reasons as 9mm is cheaper to shoot and is less wear and tear on pistols.

Also 9mm is less recoil so this means better accuracy and less difficulty for people who are uncomfortable to the higher recoil of the .40 S&W.

Personally I perfer .40 S&W over the 9mm for my primary self defense pistol as its superior to the 9mm in my opinion.

 

[Charlie]

I've never been able to tell much, if any, difference between a "hot" 9mm and a "hot" .40 cal. Most of my handgun shooting is in .45ACP so that may explain some of the non-issue with the 9s and the 40s. I really think I'd prefer a .40 cal. over the 9mm, especially if there's a bargain to be taken advantage of.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

They would then have to get downloaded 10mms!

As I've stated before, I've bought 10mm off the shelf, and fired it through a chronograph.
It was actually slower (couple FPS) than WWB .40 I tested at the same time.

 

[Charlie]

Heard of that happening! That's one reason I buy off the shelf, to get some spent cases to hand load.

 

[Sam7sf]

9mm does a lot. Cheap, high capacity, powerful enough. It might not be your cup of tea but it does a lot.

Like m5215 says it has less wear on guns. I wouldn’t say it’s more accurate. My sig 229 in 40 shoots better than most of my 9mm’s. I shot a g27 that was accurate. Depends on the gun.

Imo 40 was that compromise from 45 to 9.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Heard of that happening! That's one reason I buy off the shelf, to get some spent cases to hand load.

I used "off the shelf" to separate them from the boutique loads purchased online.
They are what I consider full power 10mm.

 

[Charlie]

9mm does a lot. Cheap, high capacity, powerful enough. It might not be your cup of tea but it does a lot.

Like m5215 says it has less wear on guns. I wouldn’t say it’s more accurate. My sig 229 in 40 shoots better than most of my 9mm’s. I shot a g27 that was accurate. Depends on the gun.

Imo 40 was that compromise from 45 to 9.

I can't disagree with that!

 

[jeepinbanditrider]

Most handgun calibers perform to a similar level if the real world "numbers" are to be believed. All going to .40 or .45 nets you at this point is less capacity.

But the good thing is we all have the option to carry whatever we want

I think the big move in LE from .40 to 9mm (go to GT and check out all the .40 police trade ins they have for cheap) was because of the FBIs move from 40 to 9mm combined with cheaper ammo.

 

[m5215]

Imo 40 was that compromise from 45 to 9.

It certainly was for me. After getting several 9mm pistols I wanted a round that had heavier bullet options. I tried .45 ACP and it turned out to not be quite what I was looking for but .40 S&W with a 180 gr. bullet was just the right caliber and weight I was wanting.