.40 or 9mm

[vaughn]

what are the +/- of each I have a 9mm, didnt like my 45 much ,.40 seems to be the best of both right, checking because im new to this and want to make the best decision on my next purchase another 9 or 40?

 

[aaron580]

Like I said in another thread, right now I would go with a 40. 40 is plentiful and about the same price as 9mm right now. Why not get the extra power for the same price? Im still really considering switching from 9 to 40 to consolidate calibers but Im keeping it on hand because Im going to start reloading 10mm.

 

[VERT]

9mm - cheaper to shoot, slightly more capacity, generally more plentiful/popular, less recoil/easier to shoot, good performance as a defensive cartridge

40 - more power/more recoil, easier to find locally right now, some guns can be converted to 9mm by switching the barrel, meets major for USPSA, many good choices for defensive ammo.

Overall I like the 40, carry a 40 and have more guns chambered for 40. But 9mm is easier to shoot.

 

[PGRChaplain]

What .45 did you not like? Otherwise my Vote is for .40. Ammo is about the same price and more available right now. More stopping power, .40.

 

[eldirector]

I settled on .40 S&W a while back. Seems like a good balance of capacity and energy, especially if you are looking at the compact and sub-compact handguns.

If you are recoil-sensitive, then .40 in a small handgun may be a lot to deal with. 9mm can become a lot more attractive.

 

[Steve B]

S&W M&P 40C with a 9mm barrel as well. I can shoot either that way. I carry it in 40 S&W mode.

 

[Firefighter56]

Buy a 9mm, I don't want more people wanting the .40 ammo I'm buying.

 

[throttletony]

This is a good question and the internet is full of advice (some good, some bad) about the 40 vs 9mm debate.
What the previous posts show is true (capacity, recoil, etc.)
For me, I found that a .40 in a subcompact frame (any given brand) is a bit snappy - not hallacious, but just snappy. I'm not really recoil sensitive, but I like the controlability of a 9mm. In any medium or full size frame, I'll take either without any problem.
** I don't know where you guys are getting your ammo, but the .40 is costing me 20%-25% more than the 9mm in cheap/plinking FMJ ammo. In self-defense rounds, prices are similar and you could expect to pay .80-$1 per shot.

 

[Whitsettd8]

I switched from the Glock 23/27 .40 platform to the 19/26 9mm why?
Cheaper ammo .40 was almost the cost of .45
Recoil in the 27 was rough and too much for my wife
Capacity and knock down power are irrelevant to me personally, accuracy and shot placement is far more critical. The 9mm I can shoot more accurately more often.
Primary switch was to accommodate my wife can't say 100% I would had otherwise.

 

[HoughMade]

Either which way, with premium defense ammo, you won't find a statistically significant "stopping power" difference.

While right now, in the midst of widespread....nonsensical, panic, .40 S&W is easier to find, the 9mm is by far the more common weapon out there- for long term ammo availability and price, I go with 9mm.

 

[Hohn]

This is a good question and the internet is full of advice (some good, some bad) about the 40 vs 9mm debate.
What the previous posts show is true (capacity, recoil, etc.)
For me, I found that a .40 in a subcompact frame (any given brand) is a bit snappy - not hallacious, but just snappy. I'm not really recoil sensitive, but I like the controlability of a 9mm. In any medium or full size frame, I'll take either without any problem.
** I don't know where you guys are getting your ammo, but the .40 is costing me 20%-25% more than the 9mm in cheap/plinking FMJ ammo. In self-defense rounds, prices are similar and you could expect to pay .80-$1 per shot.

A .40 can be snappy, but what a lot of people don't realize is that factory loads are all over the place for recoil.

I would recommend a .40, but start with a softer load like the Speer Short Barrel loads. They are only loaded to 950fps w/180gr. They should recoil less than a 230gr .45 moving at 890fps.

Then, you can move up to the faster .40 loads that push a 180gr up closer to 1100 fps. Those loads get MUCH snappier. you'd be surprised at the difference just 100fps can make in perceived recoil.

JH

 

[Signal23]

My wife carries a .40, I have .40, and we have .40's in the house, all glock, (also have a 9mm Shield) but our reason was, glock mags, fit other glocks, so .40 is around and mags are around, if something happens we can keep rolling.

 

[mike45]

Hey if you allready have a nine and don't like the .45, then it is only logical to buy the .40. I have .22 380 9 40 and 45. You are not married to your pistol and it will not get jealous if you have more than one.

variety is the spice of life.

 

[NHT3]

9MM is my choice... Agreeing with all that was said above
[FONT=&quot]NRA Life member [/FONT][FONT=&quot]GSSF member[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
Gunsite graduate Certified Glock armorer[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1911 Mechanic[/FONT]

 

[rgoodin]

9mm more economical over the 40

40 packs a much better punch.

 

[Hjarnett]

40 hands down

 

[vaughn]

I just didnt like the way the 45 I had shot, the 9mm shoots great but its going to my wife , i want something to plink and carry, considering a glock, but right now the prices are all over the place for everything,never had a 40 , ive got fairly large hands so i need something that fits, im gonna do some more looking, thanks for all the advice thats why i joined ingo, people that know and will give thier perspective without looking at yoy like your a dumba**

 

[whispers76]

Either is good in the hands of a skilled shooter. My only add here is.. walmart in my town has 40 in stock, only handgun ammo left.

 

[whispers76]

Bluffton, since I'm sure someone will ask. Lol

 

[IXC]

I back what many have said. 40 is plentiful right now but its a high pressure round and has a lot more felt recoil. I prefer 9.