Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Page Handguns » H&K
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 12/14/2005 11:44:30 PM EDT

Hey guys I am looking for a handgun to complement my ARs. Anyways, I was in the gunshop and saw a pair of near new USPs. One in 9MM and the other in 40 S&W. I'm having atough time choosing. I understand the 9 is a little cheaper to shoot but the 40 does have more stopping power. Does the 40 have more recoil? I have noticed a lot of police forces went to the 40 over the 9, was their adiifrence in kill or effectivity.

Pros and cons, I would be interested.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 12:40:48 AM EDT
both are HK. either one is fine. as for caliber, do what I do, buy all of them, 9, 40, and 45.
Link Posted: 12/15/2005 11:01:40 AM EDT
Your so hung up on witch one to get, you should just get both! Or if you wait to long you’ll have to get the one that’s left!
IMO I am in the market for a USP full size and compact in 9mm, I have a compact in .357sig but would like one in 9mm.
Link Posted: 12/16/2005 9:03:00 AM EDT
the 40 does have more recoil, but it's not something you can't overcome with practice.

the best way I can describe it would be "snappy"


I like it due to the round's greater frontal area and the gun's ability to fire a heavier slug at higher velocities than the 9mm.

with the .40 USP you can buy and install a .357 sig barrel and you now have 1 pistol with the ability to fire two different calibers. Same slide, same mag...

And if I'm not mistaken the USP series of pistols was built from the ground up for the .40- just FYI

For departments to change chosen pistol calibers there must be evidence of increased stopping power and improved performance. How would you justify the high cost of outfitting every LEO in the dept. with a new pistol otherwise?


cons:
.40 rounds are going to be more expensive than 9mm, but not prohibitively so.

reduced capacity by a couple rounds compared to the 9mm. (not sure exactly, somebody can provide exact figures).

as I said earlier, recoil is increased (not unmanageable)

I'm a little biased, I own both, but prefer the .40 to the 9mm. JMO
Link Posted: 12/16/2005 10:01:43 AM EDT
I also went with the .40. Basically, I went with the most powerful defensive round I could in the same frame. I'm also not a big fan of .357Sig (very loud and very flashy for night use). I also use the .40 in a P2000SK carry piece.

Eventually there will be a .45, but not right now.

But then, I'm no expert.
Link Posted: 12/16/2005 10:04:34 AM EDT
Stopping power is a widely used term that really means nothing. Placement is key, a .22 to the chest is going to be more effective than a .45 that misses the target.

I shoot a 9mm because the rounds are cheaper so I can practice more, it has very little recoil, a higher capacity, and lastly with good hollowpoints the ballistics tests are so similar between the 3 main calibers that I can't justify going with a round that will give me less capacity and a harsher recoil.

that's just me though, pick whatever you shoot best
Link Posted: 12/16/2005 1:38:09 PM EDT
Buy the 9mm version. Ammo is a lot cheaper, allowing you to practice a lot more. 9mm is also more accurate, all things being equal.

My .o2
Link Posted: 12/16/2005 9:49:38 PM EDT
Is the recoil of 165 grain diffirent than 180 in .40 S & W? The gunshop owner says both USPs have a lifetime warranty, Is that true. If so, does it include parts and labor?
Link Posted: 12/17/2005 2:50:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By skylark:
Is the recoil of 165 grain diffirent than 180 in .40 S & W? The gunshop owner says both USPs have a lifetime warranty, Is that true. If so, does it include parts and labor?



A) No.

B) Yes.

C) Yes, as long as H&K does the work it is true.

Link Posted: 12/18/2005 12:55:02 AM EDT
About the recoil. I've shot 155 grain and 180 grain (I've got some 95 grain just for S&Gs).

Other than the extra noise and lack of accuracy of the 155 grain (may have been that particular ammo), I noticed no difference between the two.

So, I usually shoot the heavier stuff. The higher velocity some like to theorize gives a better chance for the hollow-point to open up.

Whatever, I'll hit them with as much energy as I can.
Link Posted: 12/29/2005 4:29:02 AM EDT
As has been said..placement is more important than size. 9mm is cheaper. Follow-up shots are are quicker and more accurate with 9mm. In a full size, 40 is fine[and yes] snappy. In the compact...9mm!!!! The 40 is way too "snappy". 2cents I have them all.
Link Posted: 12/29/2005 10:54:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mmissile:
As has been said..placement is more important than size. 9mm is cheaper. Follow-up shots are are quicker and more accurate with 9mm. In a full size, 40 is fine[and yes] snappy. In the compact...9mm!!!! The 40 is way too "snappy". 2cents I have them all.



I actually shoot my P2000SK (sub compact) better than my USP full size. Both are in .40.

Go fig.
Link Posted: 12/29/2005 9:16:02 PM EDT
they say that the HK series .40sw are some of the best (less snappy) recoiling .40sw out there....

i prefer the .45acp myself

if you have the cash, get the .40; if not, get the 9mm
Page Handguns » H&K
Top Top