Because when you put the .40 is a frame that's built for the 9mm, with the .40s higher recoil impulse, then you put "torture test" volumes of rounds through it, it wears out a bit faster that the 9mm, you give up a couple of rounds of capacity compared to the 9mm, and you don't gain anything in so-called "stopping power".
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
9mm vs. .40 cal
- Thread starter 1milehigher
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
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!
Member Benefits:
1milehigher
Shooter
No harm, no foul. Wasn't dissing you, either. I appreciate the comments and info, too.
After doing a bit of research (small bit), I am thinking it may be more of a capacity issue than I was originally thinking. If you compare 9mm +P to .40 SW, they really are about the same in terms of performance, with the 9mm sometimes having both greater penetration as well as expansion. I don't think you will see any less wear and tear on a handgun if it digested a steady diet of +P when compared to a .40 SW. +P pressures are higher and the energy is very close to .40 SW. Per the Hornady website, the 135g Critical Duty is only 27 ft/lbs lower than the 175g Critical Duty in .40 at the muzzle, but it's 100fps higher in velocity. Standard 9mm comes up well short though.
I'd guess that the cost is not too different between 9mm +P and .40 SW. They would be about the same to shoot from my experience and both will beat a gun up over the long haul. The only real advantage I see is the higher capacity and maybe the ability to reduce costs through training with standard 9mm over the +P.
All just conjecture on my part though.
I'd guess that the cost is not too different between 9mm +P and .40 SW. They would be about the same to shoot from my experience and both will beat a gun up over the long haul. The only real advantage I see is the higher capacity and maybe the ability to reduce costs through training with standard 9mm over the +P.
All just conjecture on my part though.
1milehigher
Shooter
I'd imagine, but just guessing, that the locals don't use the high dollar 9mm for training. Probably use standard 9mm 115gr FMJ on the range for qualifying since it is significantly cheaper that Hornady duty ammo.
Last edited:
1milehigher
Shooter
BehindBlueI's
Grandmaster
- Oct 3, 2012
- 26,608
- 113
ISP just went to .45. IMPD has stuck with .40.
1milehigher
Shooter
Really? Is ISP using 1911's too, or what make/model?
IMPD leaders never have been real smart.
Probably Glock 21. Just a guess though.
I was waiting for this... Kinda surprised it too until #31, actually.
BehindBlueI's
Grandmaster
- Oct 3, 2012
- 26,608
- 113
Seems like ISP changes gun manufacturers a lot. I can recall Beretta, Glock, now Sig. Of course that has been over the course of a couple decades, so that really isn't bad I guess. I think they have covered the range of calibers too.
LOL!! First time I have seen that one, and I really am LOLing! Nice work!
Here are a few thoughts from my perspective:
I put more faith in shot placement than caliber.
Bullet selection is important and both calibers have impressive performers.
Capacity should not be ignored, handgun calibers are not reliable at stopping men and placing rounds where you want them on a moving target is more difficult with a handgun.
Many officers are not gun enthusiasts and there is tremendous value in the repetitions and confidence they have on board with a particular caliber/pistol/holster combination, i.e., switching platforms is not something to be taken lightly.
There is a lot of competition in the LE handgun market. Administrators have a responsibility to their officers as well as to taxpayers to provide quality equipment without breaking the budget. Jumping on the low bidder is ignoring one and demanding custom 1911's for every officer is ignoring the other. Somewhere in the middle is the right choice. Life expectancy, wear parts and difficulty of maintenance are all considerations as they will affect the value long term.
I put more faith in shot placement than caliber.
Bullet selection is important and both calibers have impressive performers.
Capacity should not be ignored, handgun calibers are not reliable at stopping men and placing rounds where you want them on a moving target is more difficult with a handgun.
Many officers are not gun enthusiasts and there is tremendous value in the repetitions and confidence they have on board with a particular caliber/pistol/holster combination, i.e., switching platforms is not something to be taken lightly.
There is a lot of competition in the LE handgun market. Administrators have a responsibility to their officers as well as to taxpayers to provide quality equipment without breaking the budget. Jumping on the low bidder is ignoring one and demanding custom 1911's for every officer is ignoring the other. Somewhere in the middle is the right choice. Life expectancy, wear parts and difficulty of maintenance are all considerations as they will affect the value long term.
Site Supporter
Members online
- snapping turtle
- snorko
- jocro
- racr28
- radar8756
- Devilpig
- HoosierHunter07
- morve80
- jsn_mooney
- Benjamin
- indyblue
- swamptick
- ComeJesuscome
- Creedmoor
- tmschuller
- 2tonic
- thunderchicken
- miguel
- SEIndSAM
- JimH
- bowhunter_1978
- BackFromDC
- gcfireman
- BR8818
- cbhausen
- ZachJ03
- Midwestjimbo
- Lumpy76
- FredMcIntire
- jtmiller951
- mike8170
- torque_and_recoil
- tv1217
- ftbstrd
- Aggar
- tca1352