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.
As for recoil complaints let’s not forget sub compacts. My father in law has an xds in 45. I don’t enjoy shooting it. My xds in 9mm is perfect.
I agree. A 9mm little single stack hides well, too.Sam7sf,
Personally, I see LITTLE reason for a "subcompact" in a caliber heavier than 9x19mm.
(Thus my preference for "compact" or "full-size" pistols.)
yours, satx
Unless that pistol caliber begins with a “4” and ends with “magnum” or “Casull”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.
Little... I see what ya did there...Sam7sf,
Personally, I see LITTLE reason for a "subcompact" in a caliber heavier than 9x19mm.
(Thus my preference for "compact" or "full-size" pistols.)
yours, satx
Little... I see what ya did there...
Even those are somewhat anemic relatively, but yes they are considerably more powerful. I also wouldn't consider those to be part of the general carry group for most people. Even people who do, they're not considered easy rounds to shoot for the masses, and there's not a huge group of people who can make any significantly decent follow up split times with them.Unless that pistol caliber begins with a “4” and ends with “magnum” or “Casull”
I opted for a SIG P229 (non railed) in 40. It was a police trade in from AIM Surplus. OTD and FFL was less than $400. Nice thing to remember with the SIG P-series 40's, it is a simple barrel drop-in to shot 357 SIG. (I am unsure what needs to be done to a Glock for that change.) Another data point to consider.
Facetiousness is lost on you.Even those are somewhat anemic relatively, but yes they are considerably more powerful. I also wouldn't consider those to be part of the general carry group for most people. Even people who do, they're not considered easy rounds to shoot for the masses, and there's not a huge group of people who can make any significantly decent follow up split times with them.
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....
So you think a .45ACP doesn't have substantial enough "knockdown power" over a 9mm? With all due respect, that is not correct.More than likely, a lot of small reasons.
I don't feel that the 40 S&W is unpopular. I think it is definitely losing some popularity, but I'd think you'd be hard pressed to find a manufacturer of defensive pistols that doesn't offer 40 S&W in at least some if not most of their models.
- 9mms can be made smaller and lighter than a 40 S&W.
- 9mms are less snappy than a 40 S&W in a gun of comparable size and weight
- 9mm ammo is cheaper than 40 S&W ammo
- 9mms generally have higher capacities than 40 S&W handguns
- 9mm has been around longer, and have always had a higher level of popularity than the 40 S&W. This can influence people to buy 9mm over 40 S&W
Ballistically, I don't feel that the 40 S&W or the 45 ACP offer a substantial enough increase in what most would call "knockdown power" over the 9mm to warrant the amount of debate that has occurred. If you can shoot a gun accurately and comfortable with a sufficient level of speed, then I feel that caliber choice becomes irrelevant to a certain point.
So you think a .45ACP doesn't have substantial enough "knockdown power" over a 9mm? With all due respect, that is not correct.