Owned a Glock 22 and a 23 when they first came out. The caliber did nothing for me. I find 45 ACP much easier to shoot and control. The .40 had too much recoil for too little a projectile in my opinion.

 

.40 gives you more power than 9mm or a .45 ACP on average, but fits in 9mm length grip and also gives you more capacity than a .45 ACP. That's not exactly a mystery - it's pretty much the reason .40 became popular.

 

Capacity plus power combined with firearm size efficiency pretty much sums it up. A 13 shot Glock 21 is great, but look at the size compared to a 13 shot Glock 23.

A lot of people consider the power level of 9mm/40/45 to be a linear curve upward, when in truth due to the 45’s much lower pressure than the previous two rounds, the 40 is much closer to the 45 (even exceeding it in some loads and measurements). To me it’s a bigger caliber and mass, combined with enough velocity to easily take advantage of more modern bullet designs, regardless of current theories of everything being exactly equal regardless of physics.

 

Looking up some ballistics, the .45 ACP and .40 average pretty close to even in the rounds people actually carry. Sure, there's a 90 gr. .45 ACP with over 800 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy, but I've never seen one and wouldn't carry it if I did.

40 Caliber Smith & Wesson Ballistics Chart | Ballistics 101

45 ACP Ballistics Chart | Ballistics 101

Average all of the loads from Remington, for example, in each caliber, the .45 ACP averages 396.2 ft. lbs., but the .40 S&W averages 435.125.

 

I am a huge .40 fan.

 

you’re not alone, I became a fan when it first came out. My first .40 was a S&W 4006 I bought in 92 right out of college. All of my pistols are in .40 except a couple of old duty guns that I bought back when they were being traded in for new models.

 

Grip size and capacity.

 

my .40 M&P, 9mm M&P share same holster

40 can become a 9mm with conversion barrel and mags

.45acp ammo generally costs more than .40 or 9mm

.40 S&W is a modern caliber







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I've got 'em both.. and ammo to spare... I don't need no reason... Kimber 1911 .45 and SIG 239! And CCW gear for both.

No worry about ammo shortages.

 

.40 is absolutely the modern take on .45 ACP. It's a fantastic cartridge with a lot of advantages.

That said, I still prefer .45 ACP.

 

For absolutely no caliber related reason. I switched because my Glock unperfected itself.

My house gun was a G30S w/ 13 round mag. My M&P40 2.0 Compact was a backup.

After several years of perfect function, the Glock started choking & acting up. I replaced various parts to no avail. I sent it to Smyrna but, while better, it still wasn't its old self. So, I sold my .45 and promoted my always functional M&P40 to the task. Smith and Wesson Perfection.

Both pistols are 13+1 and I trust both calibers to perform serviceably.

I do have a Shield .45, but the capacity is too low for a primary home defense pistol.

 

More capacity, can shoot 9mm and 357 Sig, used, trade in, and NIB prices are generally much cheaper, more powerful than 9mm.

 

They are both pretty easy to rhyme in a good gansta' rap song, but the "foe-tay" usually sounds betta'.

 

Simple really. Glock 23 vs Commander 1911.

I was able to draw and shoot the 23 much quicker and easier. It's lighter, and carries more ammo. The 1911 cost $2500. The Glock was $650+75 sights+100 thin carry magwell+35 Glock35 trigger.

If there's a better CCW than a mildly tuned G23.4, I'm willing to buy it. Up to $3000. But there just isn't.

 

Simple really. Glock 23 vs Commander 1911.

I was able to draw and shoot the 23 much quicker and easier. It's lighter, and carries more ammo. The 1911 cost $2500. The Glock was $650+75 sights+100 thin carry magwell+35 Glock35 trigger.

If there's a better CCW than a mildly tuned G23.4, I'm willing to buy it. Up to $3000. But there just isn't.

Plenty of quality 1911 for under $1500. Agree though, hard to beat a g19/23/32 for edc. Easy to keep running & if it goes to evidence, it isnt killing you when you get it back all hacked up.

 

I'm not a 1911 guy, but this thread makes me wonder why you don't see them in .40, when they ARE made in 9mm?

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk

 

Probably the perception of lack of demand. There is the 10mm option, which I would certainly get into if the right purchase scenario arose

 

There are 40S&W 1911's, both single stack and wide bodies, but just not as common as 9mm. USPSA Limited Division is mostly 40S&W, where as USPSA Open Division is mostly Major 9x19. 1911's also come in 38SuperComp, 38 Super and 9x21.

 

.40 is my go to, in most any make/model.

 

I have mostly prefred a 40sw since '90 or '91 but I always had a 1911 in 45 too sooooo. Heck I even have a 9mm for when I get older and weaker !

 

My 16 + 1 USP .40 is my go to nightstand pistol, haven't seen my G21 in years, hope it's buried in the back of my safe.....

 

In 2004, I bought my first firearm. It was a GLOCK G23. Since it was chambered in .40 S&W, that’s what I bought. Why a G23? I was 18 years old and could only legally buy from a friend, family member, or some guy who had a newspaper ad. We met at a grocery store parking lot. It looked new and he had the receipt, from when he bought it. I also bought the rest of the box of ammo he had.

In 2008, I was issued my first assigned sidearm, a Sig P226R, in .40 S&W. Later that year, I was assigned a G22, in place of the Sig. Shortly after, I bought my first non-.40 S&W, a P3AT. Then, I bought a G27. It didn’t make sense to buy a different caliber, when the G27 could use my G22 mags, which weren’t optional.

I got my S&W 442, summer 2012. It’s been carried a lot.

Other pistols were bought and sold, but my first .45 ACP was actually two Dan Wesson 1911’s, just after the November 2012 factory fire. I sold one, shortly after and still have the other, still unfired.

I got a Desert Eagle 1911G, in 2014, to be my shooter, but it was a lemon.

My first 9mm was in 2017 - traded a .40 S&W GLOCK, for it. Got rid of it rather quickly. Went a couple of years without a 9mm.

In spring of 2019, I bought two shooter 1911’s, in .45 ACP. First, a SACS Professional with light rail. Then, an Ed Brown bobtail commander. I enjoy shooting them, but all my training and practice has been with a GLOCK and I’m just better with it. I now have GLOCKs in 9mm, but still just use the .40 S&W. I like the extra diameter and believe the small terminal benefits outweigh the slight internal ballistic drawbacks.

 

I like .40 enough that I’m embarking on a project to convert my Commander sized Para into a .40 as an option. I like .40 and I prefer a Commander size for carry. So why not combine the two?

 

For me, only reason would be smaller gun with a couple more rounds.

 

I carried .40 because it offered more power than .45’s and highr capacities.

Underwood & FNX changed that.

Now I carry .357 SIG.

 

I believe the correct answer is 10mm Auto.

 

I like my Glock 22 and 21SF, currently carrying the 22.
I live in a good excellent area, rarely out at night, avoid stupid people & places (excepting walmart).
Thankfully, I've never "needed" a single round in nearly 30 years of concealed carry.
But, ya never know when those 2 extra rounds might be handy (well, 4 with the spare mag). 😁

🤔

Perhaps I should carry my 20SF, 10mm > 40 and same capacity, ya just never know. 😇

 

Capacity, compactness and power. It hits harder than a 9mm and carries more than a 1911 in 45 and the compactness makes EDC easy. The recoil never bothered me. I have all three calibers in different platforms and for a variety of reasons, but my EDC is 40.

 

Clearly the caliber I prefer is far superior to all of the others. My caliber can shoot through schools and drop an elephant due to the shock wave alone. And don't get me talking about stopping power ...

 

And don't get me talking about stopping power ...

None of ‘em can one-shot-stop a caliber “debate” on Glocktalk, though. Like a fat kid on cake, we’ve got stamina, staying power. You know, inured to pain in the manner of a $2.00 man ho. Perhaps only a CNS hit can stop us. Then again, perhaps not even that…