Texas SOT

Why .40?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    TexasRedneck

    1911 Nut
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Jan 23, 2009
    14,560
    96
    New Braunfels, TX
    Yep! More IS better! That's why I want MORE bullets! When the terminal (kinetic) energy is comparable or greater, and I can carry nearly twice the rounds in a similar weapon, I'm opting for the .40S&W.

    Somebody check my math:

    Try this math.....

    A .45 upside yer pumpkin haid = terminal ballistics that'll stop any further thought processes.

    Some of us need the ability to miss....others figger it's wasteful. Ah fall into the ones wantin' ta avoid wasteful ....
    Texas SOT
     

    DoubleActionCHL

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 23, 2008
    1,572
    21
    Spring, Texas
    Try this math.....

    A .45 upside yer pumpkin haid = terminal ballistics that'll stop any further thought processes.

    Some of us need the ability to miss....others figger it's wasteful. Ah fall into the ones wantin' ta avoid wasteful ....

    Wasteful is one thing. Realizing that I'm not going to operate at full capacity and will probably be less accurate when bullets are flying in my direction suggests that a little insurance might go a long way.
     

    TexasRedneck

    1911 Nut
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Jan 23, 2009
    14,560
    96
    New Braunfels, TX
    Wasteful is one thing. Realizing that I'm not going to operate at full capacity and will probably be less accurate when bullets are flying in my direction suggests that a little insurance might go a long way.

    Havin' had the "privelege" of "been there, done that", I'll tell you right now that training will do more for you than extra rounds. If you drill and practice to make the first shot count, and send a second one simply to show you care, you'll likely never need more than that. If there's more'n one perp you might - but accurate shot placement will do better than lots of rounds. The one non-military SHTF encounter I had was 3 rounds to center mass with a .357. I can tell you that to this day, all I remember was aim/fire/fire/fire, suspect down with no further movement. Fanning rounds all around him would've gotten me hammered by a 30-30 - so yeah, put 'em where they belong the FIRST time.

    I've heard the "more rounds" theory for years, usually by theorists that've never heard a shot fired in anger. When I shoot something, I want 'em DOWN - period. That means maximum results from what I'm shooting, which means (in my mind) .357/40/45. I know the studies show the .22 to have killed more - but not in combat/high adrenaline situations. The army learned that the 38 was NOT capable of stopping someone, and found the 45 did the job against the same enemy. I have no doubt that much the same results would have been gleaned with the 40 an 357 had they been around at the time.
     

    DoubleActionCHL

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 23, 2008
    1,572
    21
    Spring, Texas
    Ya can't - pick one....dare ya. THEN tell me how a lighter round is better.... ;)

    So, my choices are training and a .45, or no training and a .40? Nah...

    As I said, I'll take both, training AND more rounds. Again, the 'lighter' round strikes with the same energy (actually more) than the .45ACP. Obviously, the performance of any caliber is situational, depending on many parameters. And again, I'm going to opt for more rounds when the energy expended by each round in question is comparable.

    The fact that I want more rounds available to me doesn't necessarily mean I'll be firing them. In fact, your comment "fanning rounds all around him" is a bit insulting, suggesting that I'd fire recklessly knowing I have lots of ammo. You seem to believe that a person who wants more rounds hasn't trained, and if he did, he'd be more likely to agree with you and opt for the .45 and fewer rounds. Not so. We simply disagree. I've trained, continue to train, and still opt for the added security of more rounds. I also carry two spare mags. You can never have too much ammo.

    And no, I haven't fired a shot at another human being. I hope I never have to. And I've never been fond of the "in anger" term, but that's another story.
     

    Texas1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 29, 2017
    10,596
    46
    Austin, TX
    The army learned that the 38 was NOT capable of stopping someone, and found the 45 did the job against the same enemy.

    Those results are WORTHLESS as they completely ignore the wounding effect of a JHP bullet. A 9mm JHP has significantly more lethal force than a .45 FMJ round, yet you say that it's not capable of stopping someone?

    The army also learned that .30-06 was wasteful in a rifle, it produced alot of recoil, less capacitance per given weight, and wasn't any more effective than smaller calibers. What is the army using now? 5.56 NATO. The Russians even went to the 5.45x39. In fact, .30 caliber service rifles are rare and deployed in specialist roles.

    The LEO community thought .45 and 10mm Auto were the end of the line in man slaughtering calibers after the .38 / .357 Magnum era. The vast majority of them have switched to .40 S&W for the capacity and good performance. The only reason why many of them choose a .40 S&W over the 9mm is because of the .40's increase in inertia. This gives it slightly better performance through barriers like car doors, auto glass, thick clothing, etc. This is why the FBI also released it's report supporting the usage of 5.56 M4 rifles for house clearing. Because the light weight 5.56 round shed more of it's lethality than the 9mm sub-guns like the MP5, and other alternatives like shotguns, when it met sheetrock.
     

    Texas1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 29, 2017
    10,596
    46
    Austin, TX
    Ya can't - pick one....dare ya. THEN tell me how a lighter round is better.... ;)

    If you want a heavy round then why are you even worrying about .45 Auto when you can carry a 300+ grain .45 Colt? Do you only hunt with a 500+ grain .45-70?

    A .204 Ruger will paint the room with your skull fragments and contents with a 32 grain bullet. It blows apart small animals and will blow the skull cap off of a near 300 lb. hog. It's more destructive than any .308 load we've ever put into animals. I wouldn't be quick to discredit speed.
     

    Texas1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 29, 2017
    10,596
    46
    Austin, TX
    One other thing, you'll notice that throughout the evolution of the gun there has been an ever decreasing caliber and ever increasing speed. Compare a "modern" .308 Win to what was used 100 years before in the 1850s. You had some muzzle loaders that were nearly .80 caliber firing huge grain weight slugs, yet the lethality of the rounds was significantly less than a standard .308 Win.
     

    TexasRedneck

    1911 Nut
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Jan 23, 2009
    14,560
    96
    New Braunfels, TX
    Sorry - but the 5.56 round is a political round. The arguement is that it creates a wounded enemy, causing them to expend more manpower to care for the wounded, thereby reducing the available manpower for the battle lines. Sorry - they forgot to take into account that many armies consider the wounded to be expendable, and a waste of resources to recover/treat/heal, and will simply leave 'em behind. A wounded enemy can still pull a trigger...
    As to the 9mm issue....guess we'll agree to disagree. The law enforcement community saw way to many issues with the ability of the 9mm, and moved on from it. I do NOT see the .45 as the "only" weapon - but I do choose to carry 357, 40, and 45's as primary weapons. I will carry a .38/380 as a backup. I don't have issue w/a 9mm as a b/u gun, but will not carry it as a primary. Those that wish to can certainly do so, and it's fine with me - they neither want nor need my endorsement.
    As to JHP rounds....they do fine until they encounter heavy outer garments and plug....which many northern departments have discovered.
     

    TexasRedneck

    1911 Nut
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Jan 23, 2009
    14,560
    96
    New Braunfels, TX
    If you look around, you'll find most hog hunters use the old, lumberin', large rounds rather than the lighter high-speed ones. Why? Deflection. Hit a limb/branch with a fast round, and it's likely gonna deflect. That slow, lumberin' .35 cal round is just gonna keep on its' way....
     

    Texas1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 29, 2017
    10,596
    46
    Austin, TX
    Hence why they are getting into insured expansion rounds like Hornady's XTP.

    I think it's funny that you'll carry a .357 Magnum, as it's a light bullet. It doesn't seem to adhere to any of your criteria for a carry weapon.

    Would you carry a .357 Sig?
     

    Texas1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 29, 2017
    10,596
    46
    Austin, TX
    If you look around, you'll find most hog hunters use the old, lumberin', large rounds rather than the lighter high-speed ones. Why? Deflection. Hit a limb/branch with a fast round, and it's likely gonna deflect. That slow, lumberin' .35 cal round is just gonna keep on its' way....

    I don't know a single hog hunter that uses anything bigger than a .30-caliber round. In fact, most use .25 - .27 caliber rounds.
     

    Okierifleman

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2009
    831
    21
    Houston
    I don't know a single hog hunter that uses anything bigger than a .30-caliber round. In fact, most use .25 - .27 caliber rounds.

    You know me from here, if I am going into the woods where I might run into a piggie, I am taking my .444, without any hesitation whatsoever!
     

    Texas42

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 21, 2008
    4,752
    66
    Texas



    I think the 5.56 was chosen, in most part because of cost, weight, magazine capacity, and that it worked (pretty well). Is there something better? yep. Are they going to switch? no. I would like to see the 6.8 take hold, simply because I'd like to get one and I want ammo to be cheaper.


    The arguments against more ammo capacity in handguns are simply silly. Sure some people prefer the slender handguns. That is your choice. That falls into the, "personal preference" part. But anything that starts off with, "you don't need it. . . ." or "doublestack are for pancakes. . ." is silly.

    In the end, to each his own. Carry what you want. I won't bother you if you carry a .380 or a .454 casull (ok, maybe for the casull : ) ). Bullet designs are a ton better now than twenty years ago.
     

    DirtyD

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 20, 2008
    1,627
    31
    Spring
    the 5.56 was chosen, in most part because of cost, weight, magazine capacity, and that it worked (pretty well)

    Exactley, that whole "wounding" theory is ridiculous, if that were the case we would be training to shoot em in the leg! (Not to pick on you big guy, you are not the first that I have heard say this) The change was due to being able to pack more ammo, increase magazine capacity, and reduce recoil for sustained rates of fire.
     

    Texas1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 29, 2017
    10,596
    46
    Austin, TX
    Exactley, that whole "wounding" theory is ridiculous, if that were the case we would be training to shoot em in the leg! (Not to pick on you big guy, you are not the first that I have heard say this) The change was due to being able to pack more ammo, increase magazine capacity, and reduce recoil for sustained rates of fire.

    Exactly, the 5.56 allowed each soldier to carry 3 times the ammo for the same weight over 7.62 NATO. Not only that but the 5.56 guns are lighter and faster, especially when you consider an M14 platform.

    The 5.56 round needs to retain it's speed to act as advertised. With the adaptation of short barrel M4s it's lost some speed, and when you consider 300 - 400 yard engagements in the mountains it quickly becomes less effective. We'd probably gain an advantage in Afghanistan with a greater deployment of 7.62 NATO rifles, simply because we have alot of luxuries versus a full scale state-on-state war. That's my assumption at least. I haven't been there, so it's hard to say one way or another.
     

    Buck Nekkid

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 30, 2009
    147
    11
    San Antonio
    Another strong point is the variety of firearms chambered in the round. I have 4 completely different CZ's in .40 S&W: CZ 40P; CZ 75; CZ 2075 RAMI and my newest, a CZ 40B. And that's not all the CZ's chambered in the caliber.

    Each manufacturer has introduced so many because the competition is hot, the caliber works, and it offers them tremendous flexibility to build a gun around it. We are the beneficiary of shooting the 40 in any platform that we please and we know that it is gonna work.

    So find a pistol that fits, may I suggest you Czech out the CZ 75 or the CZ RAMI, and go for it!
     

    brickboy240

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 19, 2008
    238
    1
    Houston, TX, USA
    With many 40s, you get performance that is better than a 9mm with mag capacity that is better than most 45s and almost as good as most 9s but in a pistol the same size as a 9mm.

    My Glock 22 holds 15 rounds but is no bigger than the 9mm G17 and is still smaller/thinner than many full-sized 9mms. Best of both worlds if you ask me.

    - brickboy240
     

    texas_teacher

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 14, 2009
    2,114
    21
    South Korea
    With many 40s, you get performance that is better than a 9mm with mag capacity that is better than most 45s and almost as good as most 9s but in a pistol the same size as a 9mm.

    My Glock 22 holds 15 rounds but is no bigger than the 9mm G17 and is still smaller/thinner than many full-sized 9mms. Best of both worlds if you ask me.

    - brickboy240

    The other nice feature about some firearms chambered in .40 s&w is that the barrel can easily be swapped out for a 357 sig and some of them even go as far as to be swapped out for a 9mm making target practice suddenly cheaper...
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Every Day Man
    Tyrant

    Support

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    116,119
    Messages
    2,953,345
    Members
    34,941
    Latest member
    Irowland1994
    Top Bottom