Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 11/13/2005 10:15:24 AM EDT
Since the 40 is a new round, what advantages does it hold over the 9mm simply from being more modern?

From what I can see:

Higher pressure
Has a longer case (designed for hollow point and not for ball)
The extraction rim is deeper (is this an advantage or just a difference?)

Link Posted: 11/13/2005 10:32:30 AM EDT
The 40 S&W is not new it is 15 +/- years old. The .40 is a trade off between bullet weight and capacity. The 45acp, even in the Glock 21 it only gives you 13 rounds or 10 rounds in the 30. The G-22 has 15 rounds and G-23 has 13. The 1911 only can get 8 rounds in the mag and not stick out the bottom of the grip. The 9mm has higher capacity, but with ball has a less than optimum 1 shot stop percentage.

Now you throw new high quality HP rounds into the equation and they are all about equal again and it will just come down to which gun fits you best.
Link Posted: 11/13/2005 10:39:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:
The 40 S&W is not new it is 15 +/- years old. The .40 is a trade off between bullet weight and capacity. The 45acp, even in the Glock 21 it only gives you 13 rounds or 10 rounds in the 30. The G-22 has 15 rounds and G-23 has 13. The 1911 only can get 8 rounds in the mag and not stick out the bottom of the grip. The 9mm has higher capacity, but with ball has a less than optimum 1 shot stop percentage.

Now you throw new high quality HP rounds into the equation and they are all about equal again and it will just come down to which gun fits you best.



Its new compared to 9mm or 45acp. For future posters I am not talking about the bullet weight etc. but more of the design imporvements it benefits from by being so much newer than the 9mm.
Link Posted: 11/13/2005 10:56:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FredM:

Originally Posted By NoHarmNoFAL-01:
The 40 S&W is not new it is 15 +/- years old. The .40 is a trade off between bullet weight and capacity. The 45acp, even in the Glock 21 it only gives you 13 rounds or 10 rounds in the 30. The G-22 has 15 rounds and G-23 has 13. The 1911 only can get 8 rounds in the mag and not stick out the bottom of the grip. The 9mm has higher capacity, but with ball has a less than optimum 1 shot stop percentage.

Now you throw new high quality HP rounds into the equation and they are all about equal again and it will just come down to which gun fits you best.



Its new compared to 9mm or 45acp. For future posters I am not talking about the bullet weight etc. but more of the design imporvements it benefits from by being so much newer than the 9mm.



OK first off changing your avtar really screwed me up, it is not fair to change them between posts like that.


I understand what you are asking and that is what I was getting at with the capacity thing. The improvement that the 40 S&W brings to the table are more powerful round in the same frame as a 9mm pistol and a higher capacity than the large frame 45acp pistols, i.e. 1911 etc. The deeper extractor groove actually caused more problems than it solved. It caused a weak case head web and caused some failures in early rounds. After the web was thickened there was very few issues with the cartridge. The 40 S&W is also a straight wall cartridge unlike the 9mm which is slightly tapered. The straight wall was necessary because the bullet diameter to case length ratio is sort of low and this can and has caused extraction problems in some guns. The other issue with 40 S&W is that it runs at such high pressures that there is little to no room for +P rounds but that is not really an issue either. I shoot and reload for the 40 S&W (which some do not recommend) but I have found it to be one of the most versatile and accurate cartridges available today.
Link Posted: 11/13/2005 12:51:16 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/13/2005 12:59:55 PM EDT
my first pistol was a 9mm Sig, to me the 9mm just left something to be desired I didn't like the idea of 7+1 rounds of .45acp so the next best thing was the fo-dee in glock23 because of capacity I am very pleased with the .40 and its accuracy, recoil from the glock is tame, I hope the fourty becomes more popular I would hate to see a "best of both worlds" round go to waste.
Link Posted: 11/13/2005 1:29:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/13/2005 1:34:25 PM EDT by 556Cliff]
Troy, are you sure that Federal had anything to do with the .40S&W? Both the Nosler and Speer reloading manuals that I have in front of me right now, says that the .40S&W cartridge was developed jointly by S&W and Winchester. Are the reloading manuals wrong?
Link Posted: 11/14/2005 8:59:01 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 6:21:49 AM EDT


My biggest problem with it is the overly-high pressures the .40 generates; "duty" and defensive loads are loaded to max pressures. It only takes a slight bit of bullet set-back to cause chamber pressure to exceed safe levels, and as could be easily predicted, this has caused a lot of guns to blow up.

On the plus side, .40 S&W gives you larger-diameter bullets, capable of crushing more tissue, in the same small 9mm frame, and with only a small reduction in ammo capacity.

-Troy


Troy, isn't this more known in the 180gr loads? If so, could'nt a person fair just as well with a good (Gold Dot?) 165gr and not have to worry about the whole kb factor?
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 6:33:40 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 8:43:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2005 8:47:19 AM EDT by 556Cliff]

Originally Posted By Troy:

Originally Posted By 556Cliff:
Troy, are you sure that Federal had anything to do with the .40S&W? Both the Nosler and Speer reloading manuals that I have in front of me right now, says that the .40S&W cartridge was developed jointly by S&W and Winchester. Are the reloading manuals wrong?



Positive. It was absolutely S&W and Federal. Winchester (Olin) was NOT involved, and in fact, didn't have .40S&W ammo out in quantity for almost a year after its introduction.

-Troy



How could two reloading books confuse Federal with Winchester?

Where did you get your info? Do you have a link or something to somewhere I can get the correct history of the .40S&W cartridge?
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 1:16:52 PM EDT
I always heard it was Winchester, too.

I've also always read the 165 gr ammos tend to be better due ot higher velocities. Where can I read up more on the superiority of the 180 gr?
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 1:39:10 PM EDT
Personally I like how flat-shooting the .40 is. I aim at the bottom of 6" steel plates out to about 40 yards and more. As to whether I'd rather be shot with it or my .45, I honestly couldn't say.
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 2:14:56 PM EDT
What load would you all suggest for the G27? I have used some loads with 180gr bullets and found the muzzle flip to be rather diifcult for quick recovery. I realize that the 180's might be good for the larger handguns, but what about the compact models?
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 2:37:12 PM EDT
My neighbor, an FBI Agent has been to several autopsies there the perp became room temp via the 40S&W. It worked "very well, indeed". He carries the Glock in 40. But he says, "the bigger the hole, the harder they squirt". He wants a 45. If you have to deliver a round to a BG, deliver the biggest thing you can. You can always carry more mags!
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 4:50:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By sniper1az:
My neighbor, an FBI Agent has been to several autopsies there the perp became room temp via the 40S&W. It worked "very well, indeed". He carries the Glock in 40. But he says, "the bigger the hole, the harder they squirt". He wants a 45. If you have to deliver a round to a BG, deliver the biggest thing you can. You can always carry more mags!



Then with that idea, he should love to carry the S&W 500 magnum.
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 6:57:10 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/15/2005 7:15:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2005 7:27:45 PM EDT by Jeff_1]
My first auo pistol was a ruger 944d 40sw. I have been very found of the 40 ever since do to stated reasons in the above post. But my true love is the 357sig. Nothing like having a 125 grain 9mm round that is as fast and powerful as 357 mag loads and being on a 40/9mm platform . I can tell a huge difference between the 40 and the 357sig in the same gun. The 40 is now more of a plinker for me

the only down sides of the 357sig is price, availability, and options of ammo.
Link Posted: 11/16/2005 1:16:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jeff_1:
My first auo pistol was a ruger 944d 40sw. I have been very found of the 40 ever since do to stated reasons in the above post. But my true love is the 357sig. Nothing like having a 125 grain 9mm round that is as fast and powerful as 357 mag loads and being on a 40/9mm platform . I can tell a huge difference between the 40 and the 357sig in the same gun. The 40 is now more of a plinker for me

the only down sides of the 357sig is price, availability, and options of ammo.



A .355 Sig is nowhere near a 357 mag with any bullet weight.
Link Posted: 11/16/2005 5:51:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/16/2005 5:56:00 AM EDT by MrMorden]
I feel the .40S&W is an answer in search of a question.

It fits between the 9mm and the .45 power-wise, but historically people have been happy with one or the other of those two, so I don't really see the point.

Yes yes, capacity v. power. But honestly, I carried a M1911 for many years, and never felt like I did not have enough ammo in the gun. And certainly not so with the 10+1 rounds in the Glock 30 I've taken to lately. And the 9mm is a credible round in power, especially when loaded with modern hollowpoints and/or to +p pressures.

The average gunfight involves 2-3 rounds fired BY ALL PARTIES. Do we really need 12+ rounds? Probably not. If you do, you should be seeking cover where reloads are not a huge liability anyway.

Some people like the .40, and that's fine. Some folks like .41 Magnum, too. I don't think any perceived advantages outweigh the added expense and lesser availability of the round, especially if you are talking about a handgun for SHTF purposes.
Link Posted: 11/16/2005 7:23:18 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/16/2005 7:36:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Troy:

Originally Posted By MrMorden:
The average gunfight involves 2-3 rounds fired BY ALL PARTIES. Do we really need 12+ rounds? Probably not.



This hasn't been true in 20 years. Things have changed dramatically since the 60s and 70s, which is the time period that most of those gun rag articles' research is based on.

Also: re 357 SIG

This round performs nearly identically to the 125gr JHP 357 Mag round, which is what it was designed to do. Of course, both of those perform nearly identically to a good 9mm JHP. Yes, yes, the 357's have more velocity, but in TISSUE, that extra velocity provides NO advantage. The only advantages you get from it are a flatter trajectory and slightly improved barrier penetration in some types of barriers. This is not NEARLY enough to justify the increased flash, blast, recoil, ammo cost, and reduced mag capacity compared to a 9mm.

And, no, the .357 Mag is *NOT* the "best manstopper of all time." Again, it was the best of the common *police* loads used in the 60s and 70s, especially since it was the only round that was commonly loaded with a hollowpoint back then, but things have changed.

-Troy



troy the fastest .355 sig loading i have seen is 1450 fps. 357 mags can go beyond 1800.
Link Posted: 11/16/2005 4:34:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/16/2005 4:38:20 PM EDT by Jeff_1]

Originally Posted By FredM:

Originally Posted By Jeff_1:
My first auo pistol was a ruger 944d 40sw. I have been very found of the 40 ever since do to stated reasons in the above post. But my true love is the 357sig. Nothing like having a 125 grain 9mm round that is as fast and powerful as 357 mag loads and being on a 40/9mm platform . I can tell a huge difference between the 40 and the 357sig in the same gun. The 40 is now more of a plinker for me

the only down sides of the 357sig is price, availability, and options of ammo.



A .355 Sig is nowhere near a 357 mag with any bullet weight.



I was talking about factory loads. Then they get pretty close.

also most stats I have seen for the 357sig are out of a 4" barrel while many 357mag stats are out of a 6" barrel
Link Posted: 11/16/2005 4:44:55 PM EDT
<------------.40S&S fan here. For carry ammo I use Speer Gold dots. I have several hundred rounds of Golden Sabers as for SHTF. All in the 180 weight. For hollow points the 180 is the best load for large-medium size handguns. The light weight bullets, while more energy on paper, lack the ability to penetrate. A couple years ago I bought some Speer Lawman 165 gr FMJ that had some terrible bark to it. That stuff was loaded really hot. Wish I had shot that load less and bought it more.
Link Posted: 11/16/2005 5:01:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/16/2005 6:00:27 PM EDT by DrMark]

Originally Posted By FredM:

Originally Posted By Troy:

Originally Posted By MrMorden:
The average gunfight involves 2-3 rounds fired BY ALL PARTIES. Do we really need 12+ rounds? Probably not.



This hasn't been true in 20 years. Things have changed dramatically since the 60s and 70s, which is the time period that most of those gun rag articles' research is based on.

Also: re 357 SIG

This round performs nearly identically to the 125gr JHP 357 Mag round, which is what it was designed to do. Of course, both of those perform nearly identically to a good 9mm JHP. Yes, yes, the 357's have more velocity, but in TISSUE, that extra velocity provides NO advantage. The only advantages you get from it are a flatter trajectory and slightly improved barrier penetration in some types of barriers. This is not NEARLY enough to justify the increased flash, blast, recoil, ammo cost, and reduced mag capacity compared to a 9mm.

And, no, the .357 Mag is *NOT* the "best manstopper of all time." Again, it was the best of the common *police* loads used in the 60s and 70s, especially since it was the only round that was commonly loaded with a hollowpoint back then, but things have changed.

-Troy



troy the fastest .355 sig loading i have seen is 1450 fps. 357 mags can go beyond 1800.



Good points, Troy. Think marketing folks. The 357 Sig has "357" in the name so people will consider it a replacement for the 357 mag. Ballistic similarity was indeed a design goal.

Funny, I remember the 40 S&W being a S&W/Winchester collaboration. In fact, I remember the cover of Guns & Ammo announcing the new caliber. I think it had a S&W 4006 and a box of Winchester ammo.



ETA some links citing Winchester's role in development:
www.sixguns.com/tests/tt40sw.htm
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_9_51/ai_n14816182
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3623/is_199804/ai_n8798867

Link Posted: 11/16/2005 5:26:38 PM EDT

180gr. Golden Sabers here.

The shootings my department has been involved in recently have involved 10+ rounds. And no it is not because we need more practice. Capacity is a valid concern for me. Don't tell that to the 1911 die-hards though.

Link Posted: 11/17/2005 12:03:44 AM EDT
165gr Winchester Ranger
Muzzle velocity: 1140 FPS
Muzzle Energy: 476 foot pounds

180gr Winchester Ranger
Muzzle velocity: 990 FPS
Muzzle Energy: 392 foot pounds

I have both, but I prefer the 165gr load.
I am using a Springfield XD 4" Service Model.

The ammo comes from NorthWest Loading Supply
Link Posted: 11/17/2005 2:03:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jeff_1:

Originally Posted By FredM:

Originally Posted By Jeff_1:
My first auo pistol was a ruger 944d 40sw. I have been very found of the 40 ever since do to stated reasons in the above post. But my true love is the 357sig. Nothing like having a 125 grain 9mm round that is as fast and powerful as 357 mag loads and being on a 40/9mm platform . I can tell a huge difference between the 40 and the 357sig in the same gun. The 40 is now more of a plinker for me

the only down sides of the 357sig is price, availability, and options of ammo.



A .355 Sig is nowhere near a 357 mag with any bullet weight.



I was talking about factory loads. Then they get pretty close.

also most stats I have seen for the 357sig are out of a 4" barrel while many 357mag stats are out of a 6" barrel



Well if we are talking about factory loads then you can drop .355 sig down to 1350 fps as 1450 is from Double Tap.
Link Posted: 11/27/2005 5:15:42 AM EDT
What are your thoughts on this product used in a Glock G-23 Gen 2. ?

Black Hills Ammunition 40 S&W 165 Grain EXP (Extra Power) Jacketed Hollow Point Box of 50

Black Hills produces factory new ammunition equal to some of the best handloads. It is used by competitive shooters, hunters and the United States military. This ammunition is new production, non-corrosive, in boxer primed, reloadable brass cases.

Note: Ammunition is not returnable to MidwayUSA. If defective, please contact the manufacturer.
Muzzle Velocity: 1150 fps
Muzzle Energy: 483 ft lbs


I have always used Blackhills 180 grain hollow points but having recently shot up most all of my carry ammo I'd figure I'd see if something better was out there for the G-23.

Regards,
Gary
Link Posted: 11/27/2005 12:38:51 PM EDT
I think there is some confusion in some of the post here. The 40 S&W was developed by Winchester based on a shortened 10mm Norma round. It was the 357 Sig that was developed by Federal.

There was limited 40 S&W Winchester ammo the 1st year it was out. This was due to the fact that Winchester had to develop a new powder known as WAP when it was released due to problems with Glocks not getting along with the original Winchester powder used. The problem did not show up in the S&W autos when Winchester developed the original 180 grain load. The Glocks did not like the powder granules left behind from the original Winchester load.

I was not able to get a hold of Federal 40 S&W ammo till the 40 S&W was out nearly a year and a half later. But was able to get Winchester Ammo within a few months of the new round being released. Federal loads also had some problems with the 40 S&W loads in the Glocks. Federal quietly increased the case wall thickness on the 40 S&W near the base around 1994.

Current SAMMI specification for maximum pressure are as follows. Most factory loads are loaded 1500 PSI to 2500 PSI under Maxi mun SAMMI pressure. Keeping them on the conservative side for hot weather conditions. Generally the 40 S&W ends up being around 33,000 PSI in factory loads. Personally me like the smaller grip frames pistols on 40 S&W based on the modified 9mm platforms over the 45 autos. Bottom line is the 40 S&W strikes a good balance between size and power. I like the feel of 1911s a bunch but I'm not comfortable carrying one coked and locked for an every day carry weapon like I'm with DA/SA autos. I just don't think a 35,000 PSI pistol is a problem for a quality defensive pistol..... In fact I don't not even see why it is an issue with some people... as some posts suggest. My 229S 357 Sig runs flawless on factory loads. The same can't be said about a Colt Gold Cup I bought new many years ago.

9mm Luger....... 35,000 PSI
357 Sig.............40,000 PSI
357 Magnum....35,000 PSI
40 S&W.............35,000 PSI
10MM Norma... 37,500 PSI
44 Rem Mag.... 36,000 PSI
45 Auto ............21,000 PSI
Link Posted: 11/27/2005 1:04:54 PM EDT
The slight advantages the .40 has over the 9mm are offset by the fact that 9mm is available everywhere in the world for a significantly cheaper price. Unless you're a hunter, I personally don't see a need for anything but 9mm, .45acp, or .38/.357, and maybe .32ACP if you have a need for a deep-cover gun. (I'm talking about handguns only, of course)

Everything else should be banned!
Link Posted: 11/27/2005 10:27:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/27/2005 10:28:42 PM EDT by DevL]
The advantages the .40 has over the 9mm are offset by the fact the advatages in barier penetration and terminal efffects dont add up to a hill of beans. If the I needed to hit a vital that was .02" away from the 9mm I guess I was not meant to live anyway.
Link Posted: 11/27/2005 11:24:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/27/2005 11:27:02 PM EDT by DocGKR]
As previously posted:

When comparing well designed duty handgun ammunition, there are minimal differences in penetration depths and temporary cavity effects, as noted below in the gel shots by Doug Carr:



As you increase bullet size and mass from 9 mm/357 Sig, to .40 S&W, to .45 ACP, more tissue is crushed, resulting in a larger permanent cavity. In addition, the larger bullets often offer better performance through intermediate barriers. For some, the incremental advantages of the larger calibers are offset by weapon platform characteristics. As is quite obvious from the photo above, NONE of the common service pistol calibers generate temporary cavities of sufficient magnitude to cause significant tissue damage. Anyone interested in this topic should read and periodically re-read, “Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness” by Urey Patrick of the FBI FTU, as this remains the single best discussion of the wound ballistic requirements of handguns used for self-defense -- it is available at: http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm .



Keeping in mind that handguns generally offer poor incapacitation potential, bullets with effective terminal performance are available in all of the most commonly used duty pistol calibers—pick the one that you shoot most accurately, that is most reliable in the type of pistol you choose, and best suits you likely engagement scenarios.

The following loads all demonstrate outstanding terminal performance and can be considered acceptable for duty/self-defense use:

9 mm:
Barnes XPB 105 & 115 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal Tactical 124 gr JHP (LE9T1)
Speer Gold Dot 124 gr +P JHP (53617)
Winchester Ranger-T 124 gr +P JHP (RA9124TP)
Winchester Partition Gold 124 gr JHP (RA91P)
Winchester Ranger-T 127 gr +P+ JHP (RA9TA)
Federal Tactical 135 gr +P JHP (LE9T5)
Federal HST 147 gr JHP (P9HST2)
Remington Golden Saber 147 gr JHP (GS9MMC)
Speer Gold Dot 147 gr JHP (53619)
Winchester Ranger-T 147 gr JHP (RA9T)

.40 S&W:
Barnes XPB 140 & 155 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Speer Gold Dot 155 gr JHP (53961)
Federal Tactical 165 gr JHP (LE40T3)
Winchester Ranger-T 165 gr JHP (RA40TA)
Winchester Partition Gold 165 gr JHP (RA401P)
Federal HST 180 gr JHP (P40HST1)
Federal Tactical 180 gr JHP (LE40T1)
Remington Golden Saber 180 gr JHP (GS40SWB)
Speer Gold Dot 180 gr JHP (53966)
Winchester Ranger-T 180 gr JHP (RA40T)

.45 ACP:
Barnes XPB 185 gr JHP (copper bullet)
Federal HST 230 gr +P JHP (P45HST1)
Federal Tactical 230 gr JHP (LE45T1)
Speer Gold Dot 230 gr JHP (23966)
Winchester Ranger-T 230 gr JHP (RA45T)
Winchester Ranger-T 230 gr +P JHP (RA45TP)

Notes:
-- Obviously, clone loads using the same bullet at the same velocity work equally well (ie. Black Hills ammo using Gold Dot bullets, etc…)


----------------------------------------

Whatever load you choose, make sure you fire at least 500 and preferrably 1000 failure free shots through your pistol prior to using it for duty. If your pistol cannot fire at least 1000 consecutive shots without a malfunction, something is wrong and it is not suitable for duty/self-defense use.

------------------------------------------

The keys are:

-- Cultivate a warrior mindset
-- Invest in competent, thorough initial training and then maintain skills with regular ongoing practice
-- Acquire a reliable and durable weapon system
-- Purchase a consistent, robust performing duty/self-defense load in sufficient quantities (at least 1000 rounds) then STOP worrying about the nuances of handgun ammunition terminal performance.
Link Posted: 11/27/2005 11:42:16 PM EDT
Lots of good info there, thanks DocGKR
Link Posted: 11/28/2005 3:29:35 AM EDT
Ohhh man that .45 bullet looks awsome.
Link Posted: 11/28/2005 6:00:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Ohhh man that .45 bullet looks awsome.



It sure does! It's just plain EEEEEEvil!
Link Posted: 11/28/2005 1:09:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Jelly:

There was limited 40 S&W Winchester ammo the 1st year it was out. This was due to the fact that Winchester had to develop a new powder known as WAP when it was released due to problems with Glocks not getting along with the original Winchester powder used. The problem did not show up in the S&W autos when Winchester developed the original 180 grain load. The Glocks did not like the powder granules left behind from the original Winchester load.

I was not able to get a hold of Federal 40 S&W ammo till the 40 S&W was out nearly a year and a half later. But was able to get Winchester Ammo within a few months of the new round being released.



That's the way I remember it, I remember paying $$$ for 20 round boxes of Winchester for my S&W4006 hoping someone else would release ammo to cut the cost. I also remember cleaning out my local gun range when they would get the ammo in.
Link Posted: 12/2/2005 6:48:32 AM EDT
Can't believe the Cor-Bon loads were not on the lists.
Link Posted: 12/2/2005 7:18:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/2/2005 8:06:01 AM EDT
Tag for the Docs' post.
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 11:32:46 AM EDT
unclez,

Corbon makes several loads using the Barnes XPB bullet, which as noted above, offers acceptable performance.
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 5:30:41 PM EDT
"The FBI famously adopted the round, along with a couple of (typically terrible) S&W auto pistols"

Ok, Maybe because I spend a lot of time on 10mm boards I only hear one side...But everything I hear about the 10 series pistols is how great and strong they are. Only detractors are they are heavy. I was not into 10mm when th eFBI adopted them so I wasn't following the smiths. What was terrible about the pistols?

Sorry to be OT.
Link Posted: 1/2/2006 6:38:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By KD5TXX:
"The FBI famously adopted the round, along with a couple of (typically terrible) S&W auto pistols"

Ok, Maybe because I spend a lot of time on 10mm boards I only hear one side...But everything I hear about the 10 series pistols is how great and strong they are. Only detractors are they are heavy. I was not into 10mm when th eFBI adopted them so I wasn't following the smiths. What was terrible about the pistols?

Sorry to be OT.



Smith autos are heavy, bulky, have poor ergonomics and triggers, and a dingus.
Top Top