Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
6/1/2009 7:34:15 PM EDT
LOOKING AT BOTH NEW FOR $600 WHAT WOULD YOU GUY GET THE 40 OR 9?  ITS MY 1ST HAND GUN THE QUALITY LOOKS AND FEELS NICE ON THESE GUN WAS GOING TO GET A M&P SIGMA BUT NOW I DON'T KNOW.      THANKS
6/1/2009 8:56:58 PM EDT
[#1]
Unless you have a need for 40 I would always go with the 9mm. It also makes a lot of sense for a first gun being 9mm is cheaper
6/2/2009 9:27:21 PM EDT
[#2]
Love my FNP9!
6/4/2009 2:38:06 PM EDT
[#3]
I have an FNP-40.  It's been a very good hand gun.

But if I was doing it again, I'd get the FNP-9.
6/7/2009 5:30:32 AM EDT
[#4]
I chose and would recommend the FNP-9 over a -40. I'm not fond of the .40 S&W cartridge in general, after owning two (a S&W 4046 and Star Firestar) and shooting a couple more. In my experience accuracy was not very good compared to similar guns in 9mm or .45 ACP. Wound ballistics are not significantly better than many 9mm rounds, but you get fewer cartridges per magazine in .40. So in my opinion you're giving up something for nothing. The .40 may have made more sense in the 1980's when it was developed and bullet science wasn't as advanced then as it is today, but current 9mm loads just aren't at any disadvantage when measured by an objective standard. The only advantage I can see for the .40 is that presently it's easier to find ammo for it than 9mm in many locals. Nevertheless, thinking in the long run, I believe you should get the FNP-9.