.40s&w vs 9mm

[zcam630]

First off does any one remember seeing a discussion about this already. I tried a search but nothing came up, but that does not always mean anything.

If not, I'm trying to decide if I want to stay with the .40s&w platform or switch to 9mm.

Reasons being considered

• 9mm more accessible than .40
• 9mm cheaper to shoot, therefore more money for ammo
• 9mm less recoil, wife will be more comfortable
• 9mm cheaper to reload
• .40 better defense round
• ?
• ?

What do you all think?

Before anyone says it. I will be shooting a G19 this weekend to see what I think. So that is still a large determining factor.

 

[rimfire_crazed]

In recent months I've had a much easier time finding .40s&W at reasonable prices. You can always find 9mm for $20 a box a Gander Mountain but finding cheap 9mm has been a task up until the last month or so.

 

[redneckpastor]

There is a lot out there on this subject, look harder And i carry a G23 .40 but if i could do it all over again i might not go the .40 route even though i still lean that way. The most important thing is bullet placement and the amount of rounds you can hold in your mag. There are a few post on here about it, hang out i ll go get the link.

 

[redneckpastor]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/carry_issues_and_self_defense/59341-issues_in_caliber_gabe_suarez_must_read.html

little long but it talks about different calibers and this and that i think you will find it helpful.

AND if you are like me and have already stocked up on some .40 ammo then thats kind of an investment. Then again there is a lot of people that would buy a few thousand .40 rounds at the right price.

I love my .40 and i just dont think i could give here up

 

[zcam630]

Thanks RNP. That was a good read and following onversation.

 

[zcam630]

AND if you are like me and have already stocked up on some .40 ammo then thats kind of an investment. Then again there is a lot of people that would buy a few thousand .40 rounds at the right price.

I love my .40 and i just dont think i could give here up

I don't have a lot of .40 stocked up, so that is not a real concern.

 

[GlockRock]

I personally like the 40 over the 9. I dont doubt that a 9 would be sufficient if had to use it, i just perfer the 40.

 

[HICKMAN]

I've been down this road.

But big into the .40's for a long time, because I love the best of both worlds. High capacity and plenty of bullet.

Then I starting thinking along the same lines as you are. 9mm is cheaper, more available, higher capacity and so forth, so I sold all of my .40's and got 9's.

After carrying and shooting 9mm for a year, I came right back to .40.

Can't really say why, other than the fact I just trust it more.

My MAIN reason for switching back is I can shoot both 9mm and .40 from my Glock, with a simple barrel/mag change. Can't do that with a 9mm.

 

[WOLFEMAN]

9MM vs. 40SW

sure the 40SW is a popular round, but with many variations
of loads and bullets in 9MM, I can't be swayed away from my
9MM pistols.

 

[kingnereli]

Stick with the .40 cal. It's enough bullet and, from what I've been seeing lately, the price difference between that and 9mm has been quite small. Don't sell yourself short with a marginal round for a few dollars a box.

 

[zcam630]

I've been down this road.

But big into the .40's for a long time, because I love the best of both worlds. High capacity and plenty of bullet.

Then I starting thinking along the same lines as you are. 9mm is cheaper, more available, higher capacity and so forth, so I sold all of my .40's and got 9's.

After carrying and shooting 9mm for a year, I came right back to .40.

Can't really say why, other than the fact I just trust it more.

My MAIN reason for switching back is I can shoot both 9mm and .40 from my Glock, with a simple barrel/mag change. Can't do that with a 9mm.

Good points. Funny to see that there is somebodu else out there that has gone threw this already.

 

[GhostofWinter]

Stick with the .40 cal. It's enough bullet and, from what I've been seeing lately, the price difference between that and 9mm has been quite small. Don't sell yourself short with a marginal round for a few dollars a box.

I wouldn't call 9mm a marginal round. I mean after all it was good enough for the german army in WWII. Also it has been around since WWII and still going strong. Kinda says something about the round and it's capabilities if it's used in so many applications from pistols to submachine guns. Als if I am not mistaken there is very little difference in balistics between the 9mm and the .40S&W when fired into ballistic gel.

Greg

 

[kingnereli]

I wouldn't call 9mm a marginal round...
Greg

I would.

 

[zcam630]

My gut tells me to stick with what I know and what I like to shoot.

The whole idea of switching came after a conversation with some friends. They made so valid points to why the 9mm, specifically the G19 would be a great SHTF platform. Cheaper to reload, Ammo is cheaper and easier to find. That made me wonder that if something bad really went down, that the likely hood of me running into some 9mm ammo that I could acquire was better than the chances of finding .40. Not to say that my plan is to not prepare now and just go looting if SHTF. My thought was that the 9mm would be more abundant. May not be a solid train of though.

Interestingly I just got back from Wally World in Noblesville and they don't have any 9mm. They had several 50 round boxes of Federal .40 for $13.?? and a few 100 round boxes of WWB.40 for $26.??. I remember paying $17.?? for a box of WWB .40 just a year ago.

I hate to say it but I think a big deciding factor may come from my wife. If she really likes the G19 that may be it. Of course all that she has shot in the .40 is my G27, Taurus PT140 and a S&W Sigma series. She really liked the Sigma, so I had her handle the G19 this morning. She really like the way it felt in her hand. At least I know that if I stay with .40 I can get a G23 and she will be happy as well. By the way I realize that comparing the G19 to the .40's I mentioned above is not the best comparison, but it is all I got. I'm actually excited to see how much difference I notice.

Thanks for everyone's input. Hopefully I will have a decision by this weekend.

 

[jsharmon7]

Given the design and research that has gone into modern JHPs, I wouldn't think that a .40 is going to be much different than a 9mm if you have to use it in a self defense situation. You can look at gelatin blocks and windshields and ballistics charts and whatever else, but either one will stop the bad guy when it comes down to it. The 9mm has the advantages of a higher capacity but the .40 seems to be more available right now. I think the fact that so many police forces carry .40 is the main reason you can go to most Walmarts and find it on the shelves. Not true for 9mm, so far as I've seen anyway. I carry a .40, but I'd trust a 9mm.

 

[HmmOhhIC]

Im a fan of 9mm

 

[IUGradStudent]

In terms of US availability I do not think you will have trouble finding either 9mm or .40S&W for a very long time. So many PDs use .40 that there are billions of rounds of it being made. There will be enough ammo out there. If you want to practice a ton and the 30% cost difference in ammo is worth it to you, then switch.

I carry 9mm and think it is plenty powerful. No question that .40 is more powerful, though.

 

[Walter Zoomie]

I own and carry handguns of most all the popular calibers...9mm, .38, .40, .45, because I like variety.

In my neck of the woods, .40 ammo seems to be the most plentiful, so that's what I currently carry and plink with, but they will all do the job in my opinion.

I wouldn't care to get shot with any of them.

 

[jforrest]

Here is something to think about, the majority of the damage from a bullet isn't done by the hole it created its done by the temporary cavity created by the transfer of energy into a body. It is easy to see this after you field dress a deer after its been shot by a shotgun, the bullet doesn't touch most of the tissue that has been destroyed. So I feel the best way to compare bullets is with by using the energy it transfers. A 147 grain 9mm bullet has 317 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle. A 180 grain .40 has 420 ft/lbs of energy at its muzzle.

Sure thats a 103 ft/lbs difference, but both are inadequate when you really look at the numbers. Compared to a .223 (1282 ft/lbs) even the .40 is 3 times less powerful and the 9mm is 4 times less. Like all guns shot placement is key, but a bullet that is .045 inches wider isn't going to hit anything the 9mm can't. I only carry a pistol because its not really possible for me to carry a rifle around with me everywhere.

So in the end I say pick what you like the best and can shoot the best, as well as what your budget allows you. Shot placement is absolutely the most important, so whichever you can shoot the tightest group and shoot the fastest while still placing accurate aimed shots is the round to buy. I mean sure you can buy a 500 S&W but if you can't hit anything what good is it.

Ballistic numbers from
Speer Speer Ammo - Ballistics Tables

Remington Remington.com - Products - Ammunition - Ballistics

 

[mk2ja]

In my mind, .40SW wins, but you don't have to take my word for it.

We've had similar debates in my family. My brother and his wife kinda ended up with 9mm just because she liked hers and he wanted to get a gun that would let them share ammo, though he admits he prefers the .40SW round.

My dad went with a 9mm for his first carry weapon because it is a common, standard, low-cost, "easy to find" round, although for a while earlier this year the Fort Wayne Gander Mountain was limiting customers to 2 boxes per day. My brother and uncle both served in the Indiana National Guard and both learned to dislike 9mm ball ammo, but agreed that as long as a person carried JHPs, the 9mm is fine for personal defense.

I went with the .40 for my first carry weapon because I determined the cost difference was negligible, though I understand that in the long run it would add up. Capacity is comparable: 12+1 rounds in my XD .40 versus 15+1 in my brother's G19 or 9+1 in my Dad's G26. While I can't cite sources, I would expect that, in the absence of JHPs, the .40 round would still have more stopping power than the 9mm. (Consider SHTF and JHPs just got really scarce; your FMJs are still viable.) Also, I have been able to find .40 very easily this year, and even more so lately.

If you really compare apples to apples, it seems to me the rounds are very closely matched. I believe it is safe to say "9mm v .40SW" is a matter of personal preference. I don't mind the slightly higher price, so in my mind, the .40SW wins. It is a good balance of stopping power, manageable recoil, common availability, and affordability.

Caleb