Is .40 S&W the best multi-purpose? - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Is .40 S&W the best multi-purpose? (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 2/3/2012 2:16:57 AM EDT

[#1]

9mm, Seeing as how we will have plenty to scavange after Nato occupies our financial districts. That and a tinfoil hat will see me through

Posted: 2/3/2012 3:00:35 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Quoted:
9mm: Felt recoil, magazine capacity, cheap.
.40 S&W: Bridges the gap between 9mm and .45, is the “day walker” of CCW.
.45 ACP: ACP stops PCP every time, minimal over-penetration for home defense.

So, is .40 the best multi-purpose round out there for competition and carry/defense?

Since neither .45 or .40 is superior to 9mm in any way, why would you ask if .40 is better?

Posted: 2/3/2012 6:03:34 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
19K, we talked about this a bit the other day, but im going to go ahead and repost this blurb i posted up roughly a year ago. It pretty much sums up caliber selection on ARFCOM. Here is something to consider, however. The FBI standard for ballistic testing is the Ultimate standard by which all calibers are judged here. Popular ARFCOM opinion is the 9mm is the king of the heap. Funny thing is, the people who established the standards by which calibers are judged,the FBI, concluded that 9mm wasn't going to cut it for them, and bypassed it in favor of the .40. Thats right man, the source of the statistics and atributes that everyone recites in support of the 9mm,The FBI, who devised the tests, implemented the standards, and performed the testing, concluded from that same testing that the 9mm is insufficient for their needs. This will surely piss some people off, but hey, the truth is the truth, so oh well. ANd lastly, this is what I posted about a year ago regarding ARFCOM caliber selection. Its as true now as it was then..

Well now I have an entire new point of view on 9mm. It's not that I didn't trust it, or somehow saw it as inferior to other calibers, I just somehow put too much stock into those fables I’d get from the relic tankers who would relive the glory days of carrying the 1911 and how bitter they were for the Army’s decision to make it’s infamous switch. Shot placement is always of upmost importance, so there was never any disputing that. My question was more so aimed at us unlucky ones that are too poor to have two separate pistols for carry and comp. I wanted the .45 for carry, and 9mm for comp, but thought that since most all LEO’s carry .40 that there must be something to that. I’ve always been taught that the slower moving/larger projectile is going to hit MUCH harder than the faster moving/clean penetrating round that you are glad to have 15-17 of because you’ll need every round you can get. That’s from the mouths of guys putting that theory to the test overseas that I had the luxury of serving with(M9 vs USP45). I’m sure that there must be some grounds to this, but can’t back it up with personal experience. Many stories of hodgies on opium that keep coming when engaged with 9mm. So with that said, I know that recent hollow point technology has vastly improved 9mm lethality, but for argument's sake, I thought it would prove interesting to get a poll done on everyone else's opinion, and I do appreciate your advice the other day. But now I think I'm even more stumped after getting your input on the M&P platform. .45 ACP being my preference, but not at the expense it will cost me on the range. All the reloaders scurry like mice for bread crumbs every time a .45'er shot their run definitely made an impression on me. If I just stick with the lower round count per competition of IDPA as compared to USPSA, then maybe getting a .45 is easier to justify. I don't foresee shooting more than a couple times per month, but on the flip side of that coin, I still have to be budget minded. It's my hard earned money, and in the end, I just want to make sure that I'm making that right choice. Thanks for everyone's humble opinion's, and I hope to meet more quality AR15 members such as Coy_Greer out on the range.

Posted: 2/3/2012 7:23:51 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

Well now I have an entire new point of view on 9mm. It's not that I didn't trust it, or somehow saw it as inferior to other calibers, I just somehow put too much stock into those fables I’d get from the relic tankers who would relive the glory days of carrying the 1911 and how bitter they were for the Army’s decision to make it’s infamous switch.

As a 19A, old Kilos would be the last guys I'd want pistol advice from.

Trust 'em to the ends of the earth to put a 120 where it needs to go, but otherwise it's like asking a movie projectionist about iPhone screens.

C'mon now, 7.62 is our *small* caliber.

~Augee

Posted: 2/3/2012 11:32:07 AM EDT

[#5]

You have alot of good valid points there for your particular needs. Honestly, considering what you just said, RE budget minded, competition use and carry, I think 9mm, with premium HP ammo when carried, would be the best answer for you. You will get more "bang" for your dollar in ammo purchases. ALso, I didnt mention this the other day, but if your not dead set on the M&P, give the Ruger SR9 a look. It is currently the slimmest double stack 9mm on the market, is made from forged steel and is really well built. GT has them for $369 with your credentials. I have fired the 9mm version, and I really liked it alot. I will be picking up the .40 caliber version within the next month or two. Also, Targetmaster has a pretty exstensive rental selection, and the rental price is pretty reasonable. You could try out some of the various weapons that you may have been considering before you make a solid decision. I have used their rental program a good bit myself. When I get an interest in a particular model, I will rent from them and decide if it really is a gun that I want. That has kept me from buying a new model pistol , realizing I hate it, and then dumping it for a loss on what I paid.

Quoted:

Quoted:

19K, we talked about this a bit the other day, but im going to go ahead and repost this blurb i posted up roughly a year ago. It pretty much sums up caliber selection on ARFCOM. Here is something to consider, however. The FBI standard for ballistic testing is the Ultimate standard by which all calibers are judged here. Popular ARFCOM opinion is the 9mm is the king of the heap. Funny thing is, the people who established the standards by which calibers are judged,the FBI, concluded that 9mm wasn't going to cut it for them, and bypassed it in favor of the .40. Thats right man, the source of the statistics and atributes that everyone recites in support of the 9mm,The FBI, who devised the tests, implemented the standards, and performed the testing, concluded from that same testing that the 9mm is insufficient for their needs. This will surely piss some people off, but hey, the truth is the truth, so oh well. ANd lastly, this is what I posted about a year ago regarding ARFCOM caliber selection. Its as true now as it was then..

Well now I have an entire new point of view on 9mm. It's not that I didn't trust it, or somehow saw it as inferior to other calibers, I just somehow put too much stock into those fables I’d get from the relic tankers who would relive the glory days of carrying the 1911 and how bitter they were for the Army’s decision to make it’s infamous switch. Shot placement is always of upmost importance, so there was never any disputing that. My question was more so aimed at us unlucky ones that are too poor to have two separate pistols for carry and comp. I wanted the .45 for carry, and 9mm for comp, but thought that since most all LEO’s carry .40 that there must be something to that. I’ve always been taught that the slower moving/larger projectile is going to hit MUCH harder than the faster moving/clean penetrating round that you are glad to have 15-17 of because you’ll need every round you can get. That’s from the mouths of guys putting that theory to the test overseas that I had the luxury of serving with(M9 vs USP45). I’m sure that there must be some grounds to this, but can’t back it up with personal experience. Many stories of hodgies on opium that keep coming when engaged with 9mm. So with that said, I know that recent hollow point technology has vastly improved 9mm lethality, but for argument's sake, I thought it would prove interesting to get a poll done on everyone else's opinion, and I do appreciate your advice the other day. But now I think I'm even more stumped after getting your input on the M&P platform. .45 ACP being my preference, but not at the expense it will cost me on the range. All the reloaders scurry like mice for bread crumbs every time a .45'er shot their run definitely made an impression on me. If I just stick with the lower round count per competition of IDPA as compared to USPSA, then maybe getting a .45 is easier to justify. I don't foresee shooting more than a couple times per month, but on the flip side of that coin, I still have to be budget minded. It's my hard earned money, and in the end, I just want to make sure that I'm making that right choice. Thanks for everyone's humble opinion's, and I hope to meet more quality AR15 members such as Coy_Greer out on the range.

Posted: 2/3/2012 12:05:52 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:
".45 ACP: ACP stops PCP every time, minimal over-penetration for home defense."

Every time?

Swing a 12 lbs sledge into someone's chest and they're going down no matter what they're on. Dude from Green Mile on PCP, well, now you might have a problem. Ok, so let's say almost most every time.

.45 ACP isn't a 12 lbs sledge, it's a 0.033 lbs bullet roughly the size of a finger tip, which pokes holes of according size through people. You're obviously a victim of the "knock down" myth.

Read these:
http://www.theshootist.net/2009/01/one-man-got-involved-perry_12.html
http://www.lawofficer.com/article/training/officer-down-warriors-sacrific

@topic: 10 mm hands down. If price and availability are also factors 9mm would be the wisest choice, but I reload both anyway.

You "OBVIOUSLY" dont know anything about ballistics. If you really think a .45 round only produces a "finger tip size hole", then there is really no point trying to tell you otherwise

My index finger tip is .70" wide, that's not untypical for .45 hollow point expansion through clothing. So what are you going to tell me, that the holes are actually a bit larger than finger-sized? Swollen finger sized? One thing is sure: It doesn't knock people to the ground with the force of a sledgehammer (except that 12 lbs seldge is moving at a whopping 2.35 fps), it doesn't blow fist-sized holes in people and it isn't a death ray.

So, you saying that all hollow points don't expand in clothing? which ones? all?
I don't think I would want to be hit by a 12lbs seldge at 2.35FPS, would you? I think that would knock you down.
If a death ray can kill and destroy, I would say the .45acp can do the same thing

In what crazy parallel universe is going from .45 to .70 not expanding?
12 lbs at 2.35 has enough momentum to accelerate me (190 pounds) to a whopping 0.15 fps or 0.1 mph (approx. same momentum as 230 grains at 855 fps) . I'm pretty sure that won't knock me down, at least when I'm not asleep.
So can a .22 short.

I'm not quite sure what your point is, but it seems like you're successfully trying to make a fool of yourself.

Easy, be nice, life sucks without a little humor.
45acp with 185gr. with 616ft. or 835J ( don't even bring up the 45 super) delivered to the human body ie, knee's, feet, groin would in fact knock down a threat, how can anyone say other wise? With that energy, it would be like being hit with a baseball bat.
Even if the 45 doesn't expand its going to do more damage the the 9mm simply from the size.

In an inelastic collision momentum is conserved, kinetic energy is not.That 185 gr .45 at 1,225 ft/s (Wikipedia, what a surpr a ccelerate me to a little less than 0.12 mph, and enough energy to heat a glass of water by 1 Kelvin, if all that energy were completely converted to heat. Don't argue physics if you don't understand it.ise) still only has enough to momentum to accelerate me to a little less than 0.12 mph, and enough energy to heat a glass of water by 1 Kelvin, if all that energy were completely converted to heat. Don't argue physics if you don't understand it.
Standing upright after being shot through the knee is a challenge because of pain, and because knees work best when no parts of it are destroyed, not because the momentum of a handgun bullet is nearly enough to physically "knock over" a grown man. If you don't believe the physics, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaS_2l8nGdg#t=5m35s
That's many times the energy and not quite double the momentum of that 185 gr/1225 fps load you referred to at work. Knock-down = Hollywood.

No shit about knock down power, its how the body reacts.
One creates grater wounds with the 45 then the 9mm due to more larger permanent cavity.
no sense of humor, man!

I think you over analyze this, I think the term "knock down" or "Stopping power" is more use as slang, one would say that the .44mag has more stopping power then a 22lr merely to illustrate the ability to kill better or better at stopping a threat with "knock down power" with the 44mag then the .22lr not really related to physics.
If one is to say; "wow, that car flies!", I hope you don't think that the car is in the air.

When it comes to physics, I understand that if you were accelerate with a 185 gr .45 bullet at 1,225 ft/s (Wikipedia,surprise surprise!) to a little less than 0.12 mph, and enough energy to heat a glass of water by 1 Kelvin, if all that energy were completely converted to heat.
you wouldn't get back up once you were knocked down.

Perhaps, with the help of physics, you could tell me that there is no real difference between the .44 mag and 22lr?

Posted: 2/3/2012 3:20:06 PM EDT

[#7]

Having owned all calibers at one time or another, I would choose either the 9MM or 45 ACP. I don't like the 40 S&W because of the recoil and the very loud report. It is very annoying. What is most important is whether the gun is accurate and reliable. I prefer the 45 overall, except there aren't any guns that are small enough for concealabilty. That leaves the 9MM. I like my S&W 9c because it holds 12 + 1 rounds. If you need something really small, then the Ruger LC9 is the way to go.

Posted: 2/3/2012 3:50:10 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Having owned all calibers at one time or another, I would choose either the 9MM or 45 ACP. I don't like the 40 S&W because of the recoil and the very loud report. It is very annoying. What is most important is whether the gun is accurate and reliable. I prefer the 45 overall, except there aren't any guns that are small enough for concealabilty. That leaves the 9MM. I like my S&W 9c because it holds 12 + 1 rounds. If you need something really small, then the Ruger LC9 is the way to go.

HK compact line of .45's are the size of a G19, perfect size for concealment

Posted: 2/3/2012 9:41:13 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Having owned all calibers at one time or another, I would choose either the 9MM or 45 ACP. I don't like the 40 S&W because of the recoil and the very loud report. It is very annoying. What is most important is whether the gun is accurate and reliable. I prefer the 45 overall, except there aren't any guns that are small enough for concealabilty. That leaves the 9MM. I like my S&W 9c because it holds 12 + 1 rounds. If you need something really small, then the Ruger LC9 is the way to go.

Glock 36, Kahr and other 45's are small enough for concealment.

ETA: To stay on topic, when comparing the 9, 40, 45 flip a coin... find a handgun(s) that works for you and practice, don't get too hung up on the caliber.

Posted: 2/4/2012 6:56:17 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Well now I have an entire new point of view on 9mm. It's not that I didn't trust it, or somehow saw it as inferior to other calibers, I just somehow put too much stock into those fables I’d get from the relic tankers who would relive the glory days of carrying the 1911 and how bitter they were for the Army’s decision to make it’s infamous switch.

C'mon now, 7.62 is our *small* caliber.

~Augee

Couldn't agree with you more bro.

Posted: 2/5/2012 4:47:10 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Whatever the fuck goes BANG. Learn to run and gun, a corpse won't be anymore impressed or dead when shot to death with any of those calibers. Pick your favorite, learn to use the damn thing.

And this 10mm is king bullshit, save that for the bards to sing about. If you're gunnin' with a 10 and the bad guy is gunnin' with a 38 and he gets the drop on you, your 10mm isn't going to mean dick, hot flying lead is hot flying lead. ANY of those calibers will do the job as a "general all around defense round".

As I read about some snot nosed kid blowing away a neighbor with a .22....

This

Posted: 2/5/2012 4:47:37 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Lets say it early in the thread and often...

Pistols are horse shit man stoppers. When comparing pistol ballistics of modern bullets in various calibers it becomes academic.

Shot placement is #1. Caliber is a DISTANT second.

How many stories of MULTIPLE hits from handguns fail to stop a BG? Then how many stories of single or two rifle caliber shots stop the BG?

Pistols are only good to carry all day concealed. Otherwise, rifle or shotgun.

Its a fun discussion, but is isn't really worth the time...despite the fact I am here now spending time!

this, too

Posted: 2/5/2012 6:20:07 AM EDT

[#13]

The best mulitrole pistol caliber is 44 magnum period.

Posted: 2/16/2012 4:04:51 AM EDT

[#14]

Every time a thread like this starts you eventually get to "yeah it took a second burst of 50 cal. BMG to put him down". Shoot whatever you shoot well and practice, practice, practice.

Posted: 2/17/2012 6:39:02 AM EDT

[#15]

If you want both high capacity and 180 grain bullets .40 S&W has something to offer that 9mm doesn't.

If you want high capacity in a reasonably sized pistol .40 S&W has something to offer that .45 ACP doesn't.

If you want to be able to find ammo during times when ammo is scarce; .40 S&W offers something that neither .45 ACP nor 9mm do.

If you want the best round for shooting calibrated ballistic gelatin any one of the three will do basically the same thing.

Posted: 2/17/2012 7:42:53 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

If you want both high capacity and 180 grain bullets .40 S&W has something to offer that 9mm doesn't.

If you want high capacity in a reasonably sized pistol .40 S&W has something to offer that .45 ACP doesn't.

If you want to be able to find ammo during times when ammo is scarce; .40 S&W offers something that neither .45 ACP nor 9mm do.

If you want the best round for shooting calibrated ballistic gelatin any one of the three will do basically the same thing.

That and better barrier penetration/fun factor when shooting are why I like .40

I can ALWAYS find .40 at walmart, 9 is almost always sold out and .45 is expensive and they only have a few boxes if they have any

Posted: 2/17/2012 12:04:31 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
If you want both high capacity and 180 grain bullets .40 S&W has something to offer that 9mm doesn't.

If you want high capacity in a reasonably sized pistol .40 S&W has something to offer that .45 ACP doesn't.

If you want to be able to find ammo during times when ammo is scarce; .40 S&W offers something that neither .45 ACP nor 9mm do.

If you want the best round for shooting calibrated ballistic gelatin any one of the three will do basically the same thing.

Very good post.

Posted: 2/17/2012 2:55:43 PM EDT

[#18]

Best multipurpose round: 155mm
BOOM ARTILLERY!

Posted: 2/18/2012 7:31:52 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Best multipurpose round: 155mm
BOOM ARTILLERY!

"splash, over."

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Is .40 S&W the best multi-purpose? (Page 2 of 2)

Handguns » Handgun Discussions

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us