9mm vs. .40, is my logic sound?

[DarkRose]

Ok, not looking to start an arguement over which is better ballistically or stopping power, etc. Just laying out my decision and reasons and getting input as to whether my reasons sound sensible...
I'm leaning towards 9mm, in a EAA Witness Elite Match (hope to maybe find one at the 1500 next weekend, if not, I'll have to order one)

1. I don't shoot handgun much, so I need lots of practice to get my fundamentals down
2. 9mm I've always read has softer recoil, therefore making more practice easier on me, as well as consistancy.
3. Cost, 9mm is cheaper, and between me and my father, already have reloading dies and components on-hand, he sold his Ruger .40 and reloading dies a couple years back...
4. This probably won't be a carry gun often, so stopping power isn't an issue, accuracy is, and more importantly, accuracy in MY hands...

The only thing that tears me is the cheapest place I've found them online is backordered 6-8 weeks on the 9mm, the second cheapest place is also... both have the .40 and .45 in stock... Almost considering the .45, so when my 1911 gets finished I'll have some practice in, and can get barrel and slide conversions for the Witness in 9mm down the road...

Here's where I'm looking:
Hyatt Gun Store :: New Firearms :: EAA Witness Elite Match Pistol in 9mm, Two-Tone Finish, Polymer Grips, 4.75" Barrel, Adjustable Sites

Anyone see any flaws in my logic on #1-4? The bit about the .45 is just an afterthought mainly... We also have dies for .45 I think... Not positive at the moment...

 

[barrelmaker_2002]

Your logic is very sound.

And the stopping power debate is pointless if you miss....so practice, practice, practice. Good luck.

 

[Cru]

I can tell you why my wife and I both carry a 9mm... and our reasons are much like yours...

My wife just got her first handgun and I want her to shoot a LOT for practice, and since 9mm is less expensive, that's why. I have her put at LEAST 50 rounds down range each week, usually more, but one box of 9mm per trip is the min.

I personally am just more accurate with 9mm. Having more "stopping power" doesn't do you any good if you can't hit what you are aiming at. I shot 9mm, .40, AND .45 and I am just much more consistent with 9mm so I stick with that.

So the short version, yes, your logic makes perfect sense.

 

[pudly]

Your reasoning is fine. Shot placement is king. And if you don't do so well there, you will have three more rounds than the .40. The argument of 9mm vs. 40 vs 45 will go on forever, but it looks like you've found a great selection.

 

[paddling_man]

The ammo for your gun must be accessible and something you can shoot well. The arguments over stopping power of the 9x19, .40S&W and .45ACP are esoteric. Try all calibers and handguns available from friends and the rental range then pick your poison.

I shoot 9x19 and .45 acp better than .40 S&W... not in terms of initial accuracy but relative to being able to get back on target for followup shots more rapidly. Like religion, it is a personal decision though there are cathedrals and devout minions of all faiths.

 

[Amishman44]

Growing up being a .357 mag fan, I found it hard to consider the 9mm as having true 'stopping power' vs. many of the 'heavier hitter's' out there for quite a long time. But that was 25 years ago after the ATF shootout in Miami, FL. Now-a-days, the bullets are better, the powders are better, etc. pulling the 9mm round up to being decent stopper with proper shot placement. That, and the fact that my wife is comfortable with the round, although she's still not comfortable with the CorBon's. For me, the CorBon round makes the 9mm 'pop' like I like a gun to feel when I shoot it and I've read up quite a bit on the ballistics for that manufacturer and I'm now fairly comfortable with that bullet / round for myself. When you consider the concept of carrying the same caliber, it makes a big difference to know that I can carry the (somewhat) harder-hitting Corbon round while she feels comfortable with a Federal Hydra-Shok. I still prefer the .357 mag / sig rounds...but will carry the 9mm to be matched up with what the wife is comfortable with. Teamwork!

 

[down3green]

I shoot as well with the 40 and 45 but carry 9mm single stacks exclusively.

 

[E5RANGER375]

i think most shooters need to first worry about hitting the target before worrying about what bullet to use. none of them work if you miss.

i'm a devout 9mm man. use to be a .40 guy, love the .357 sig but its too expenssive to shoot. .45 are fun until you have to carry them all day or run with them with a couple spare mags.

9mm is lighter so i can carry more. its a easily availible round because its used by military and police around the world more than any other round. It has great penetration and expansion and the round delivers a good punch. once i shoot a bad guy in the head, he will have no complaints i assure you.

 

[shooter521]

But that was 25 years ago after the ATF shootout in Miami, FL.

That was the FBI...

i think most shooters need to first worry about hitting the target before worrying about what bullet to use. none of them work if you miss.

QFT. Add onto this the fact that ALL handgun calibers suck, and the skyrocketing price of ammo (especially in larger calibers), and it's led a lot of knowledgeable folks back to the 9mm in recent years.

 

[cosermann]

...4. This probably won't be a carry gun often, so stopping power isn't an issue ...

Even if it were a carry gun, modern HP designs make the so-called "stopping power" of the 9mm a non-issue. If I were restricted for some reason to FMJ ammunition I'd simply switch to a .45 (because there's no commonly available 50 cal handgun ammunition around ). Which is why one might settle on a stable of 9's and 45's with no 40's.

 

[Bendrx]

My next hand gun purchase will be a 9mm (I think). I carry a .45, but the cost of ammo and capacity makes the 9mm worth while to me (I'm itching for the 17+1 SR9c). I don't see the need for .40 either. Not knocking it, but if I wanted a .40 bullet I'd get a 10mm. As many have said before, "Who wants to stand in front of my .22lr and get shot?" Not many takers on that. I say the 9mm is a good choice for both cheaper practice and defense - depending on your size you might not be able to conceal a larger caliber pistol well.

 

[x10]

From the way I read it your goal is to build handgun skills and that you don't currently have a handgun,

There is no better way to build skills than with a 22 rimfire pistol, if ammo cost is a factor you will shoot 5times as many 22's as 9's,

I do not condone anyone's first handgun being anything but a rimfire, As a gun owner the disease of always wanting another gun never goes away. So no matter what handgun you buy you will want another one, Why not buy the essential rimfire and work on those skills and then when you go for a centerfire you can transition those skills and the 9/40 debate will be completly mute, because you will be able to hit your target,

I say this with as much conviction as possible your first handgun must be a rimfire, The only way to build skills is repitition

if you want to build handgun "fighting" skills CZ offers a Cadet version of the pistol you mention that is rimfire

 

[Eulogy32]

I'll tell you what, I wouldn't want to be the medium for any of those rounds above.

 

[GregD]

X10 has it right, for practice and building skills there is nothing better than a good 22.
But to answer your question your logic is sound.

 

[starcrack]

My first gun was a 9mm, but now I'm thinking about buying a .22.

If the decision is between 9mm and .40, I would definitely go with the 9mm. 9mm for me represents the perfect compromise between economy and... fun. Because a .22 is plain no fun to shoot.

 

[Delmar]

From the way I read it your goal is to build handgun skills and that you don't currently have a handgun,

There is no better way to build skills than with a 22 rimfire pistol, if ammo cost is a factor you will shoot 5times as many 22's as 9's,

I do not condone anyone's first handgun being anything but a rimfire, As a gun owner the disease of always wanting another gun never goes away. So no matter what handgun you buy you will want another one, Why not buy the essential rimfire and work on those skills and then when you go for a centerfire you can transition those skills and the 9/40 debate will be completly mute, because you will be able to hit your target,

I say this with as much conviction as possible your first handgun must be a rimfire, The only way to build skills is repitition

if you want to build handgun "fighting" skills CZ offers a Cadet version of the pistol you mention that is rimfire

I don't own a .22 pistol and I am not going to buy one any time soon, but your point is not lost on me. The truth is I practice way more with my airsoft pistol than I do with my .45. Not only because shooting airsoft is only a fraction of the cost of even .22, but I can also shoot my airsoft pistol without ever leaving my house. It also helps that I happen to have a room in my house that is 40' long.

 

[Dogman]

If it works for you then your logic is sound. People can trash talk the 9mm, but it must be doing something right to have been around for over a hundred years.
Now you just need a Glock!

 

[Delmar]

Ok, not looking to start an arguement over which is better ballistically or stopping power, etc. Just laying out my decision and reasons and getting input as to whether my reasons sound sensible...
I'm leaning towards 9mm, in a EAA Witness Elite Match (hope to maybe find one at the 1500 next weekend, if not, I'll have to order one)

1. I don't shoot handgun much, so I need lots of practice to get my fundamentals down
2. 9mm I've always read has softer recoil, therefore making more practice easier on me, as well as consistancy.
3. Cost, 9mm is cheaper, and between me and my father, already have reloading dies and components on-hand, he sold his Ruger .40 and reloading dies a couple years back...
4. This probably won't be a carry gun often, so stopping power isn't an issue, accuracy is, and more importantly, accuracy in MY hands...

The only thing that tears me is the cheapest place I've found them online is backordered 6-8 weeks on the 9mm, the second cheapest place is also... both have the .40 and .45 in stock... Almost considering the .45, so when my 1911 gets finished I'll have some practice in, and can get barrel and slide conversions for the Witness in 9mm down the road...

Here's where I'm looking:
Hyatt Gun Store :: New Firearms :: EAA Witness Elite Match Pistol in 9mm, Two-Tone Finish, Polymer Grips, 4.75" Barrel, Adjustable Sites

Anyone see any flaws in my logic on #1-4? The bit about the .45 is just an afterthought mainly... We also have dies for .45 I think... Not positive at the moment...

I agree that your logic is fine, but if you can't find the 9mm you want in stock and you just can't wait, I don't see a problem with opting for the .40, since the cost of reloading .40 or .45 is not that much worse than 9mm, once you have plenty of brass.

 

[U.S. Patriot]

That's why I carry a 9mm, and own two pistols chambered in 9mm. I also do own a .40, and like the caliber. Chinamart sells Federal Champion for under $10 a box. They have kept a good stock of it, so I buy a box every week. They are lighter in recoil, and weight. Plus with modern ammo technology, they are just as affective as .40 or .45. It's about where you place your shots, not the caliber. Yes a shotgun, or high powered rifle is a much more affective SD weapon. However who is going to strap one to their hip and carry it all day? So your logic is very sound.

 

[U.S. Patriot]

My first gun was a 9mm, but now I'm thinking about buying a .22.

If the decision is between 9mm and .40, I would definitely go with the 9mm. 9mm for me represents the perfect compromise between economy and... fun. Because a .22 is plain no fun to shoot.

What? 22's are a blast to shoot, not to mention with cheap ammo you can shoot all day, without emptying your wallet.