Posted: 3/7/2007 6:11:30 PM EDT
|
The P-40 is a decidedly unpleasant weapon to shoot for most people. Too many went back to the factory under warranty for "problems", when there was nothing wrong with the pistol except the guy shooting it. It became too much of an expense to function test pistol after pistol in perfect working order, then pay return shipping to a customer who was just likely to be pissed off by the test results. At least that is the story I have heard. I think most (but not all) people are better served by the P-11 and its milder recoil. I carry a P-40 and use my P-11 for the bulk of my practice work. |
| I think you are probably right.It is not neccesarily pleasant to shoot but I dont have a problem with it.But It is nice to have that much firepower in that size package with you.I carry 135 grain hydrashocks but have run all sorts of ammo through it.It is partial to 135-165 grain ammo.It will fail to feed 180 grain stuff on occasion.I also have a Ruger P-94 in .40 cal.That has not failed in any way with any ammo in 10 years or so since I have bought it new.My goal was to find good ammo suitable for both guns.So I settled on the hydrashocks.I practice with Blazer brass 165 grain in both guns with no problems.I just cant beleive that there is not enough market for the P-40 to justify selling it.hinking.gif |
|
I don't use 180gr in mine. I don't use 180gr in any of my .40S&W due to the potential for big problems - do a search and you will doubtless get more info/opinons than you will ever want to read. The Hydrashocks are fairly mild in most calibers, as is the Blazer Brass, so you might find it a bit more stout with something like Ranger T or CorBon. I would love to see the P-40 brought back in a limited edition, if Kel-Tec could figure out a way to pre-qualify the people who could buy them to rule out those with tender hands and mushy wrists.  |
