Why the FBI Created the .40SW

[Barry in IN]

I remember reading the test reports back then using the .45 ACP/185 as a comparison standard, and wondering why not use the .45ACP/185 if that was the goal?

I know a lot of people at the time thought the 10mm was initially chosen because within the FBI's Firearms Training Unit there were two sides: 9mm/15+ rounds, and .45/7+ rounds, and the 10mm was a compromise they all could live with for a while.

The 10mm recoil story never made a lot of sense to me. For one thing, the FBI guns prior to the mid 80s were .357 Magnum K-frames. If that wasn't too much, the 10mm couldn't be. I'd rather shoot a 10mm any day.

However....
I've read that the FBI had a big hiring of females around this time. The S&W 1076 grip might be a handful to the average female hand. If they had to go to a 9mm-sized frame for this reason, it made sense to get the most from that frame size. This probably helped lead to the .40, otherwise, they could have continued using the "10mm Lite" loading.
Yes, I realize the story always includes the fact that downloading the 10mm to 180@950 was a bit inefficient and the .40 was created to match those downloaded 10mm ballistics, but I think that was S&W seeing an opening. I doubt the FBI called up S&W and Winchester and asked them to create a gun/cartridge combo to save brass. To get a more compact grip frame- yeah, that I can see.

What I don't remember seeing on paper anywhere back then was:
When the FBI adopted the S&W 1076 10mm, what ammunition did the FBI start with?
I'm talking about before they had their 180@950 load created. That loading didn't come for a while. Even this linked paper about the tests doesn't specify what the tested, saying "factory-loaded 10mm ammunition was acquired" for the tests. Which ammunition?

Everybody automatically thinks of the "hot" Norma load (200 at 1200 fps, and 170 at 1300) but I don't think the FBI ever issued that. Really, I don't think the Norma load was still being made by this time. The Norma 10mm ammo came out in 1983, but I don't remember it being around that long before they stopped making it due to high/erratic pressures. I think it was off the market within maybe two years, but it could have been longer. I am pretty sure it didn't last the six years until the FBI adopted the 10mm.
I have heard the ammo used in those tests for the Wound Ballistic Workshop was the Norma 170 JHP (Power Cavity per Norma), but that it was only around 40-50 rounds total. I doubt they issued it when the 1076 was adopted. For one thing, US ammo companies would have raised a fuss we would have heard in the gun world. For another, Norma 10mm was expensive stuff.

Colt has redone the Delta Elite over several times throughout the year trying to handle this stout round, I wonder how those guns handle now.

I hadn't heard that before. What has been changed? The one I bought three years ago seems just like the one I had in 1989, right down to the springs.

 

[Ted]

I can't access the link, but I do remember what happened.

1986 FBI Miami shootout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, and http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

 

[shooter521]

A CQB platform based on a full power 10mm round would be quite interesting.

While a full-auto would likely be uncontrollable, I suspect a 3-5 round burst mode could be both amazingly capable and controllable.

HK did a 10mm MP5 back in the day. Now whether these were optimized for "full power" 10mm or just the FBI "10mm lite" I don't know.

HK MP5/10

 

[Barry in IN]

The MP-5/10s were changeable between full power and lite, but I think it took swapping out rollers and bolt noses. In other words, not a simple throw of a lever between swapping mags of ammo types, but not more than a couple of minutes trouble either.

 

[Armed]

I certainly enjoy my .40 and want to get a carbine soon! Seems like fun!

 

[Rhino12]

Never knew the history...love reading these types of things.

Thanks for the share!

 

[cosermann]

Came across an interesting quote today:

"[FONT=Times New Roman,Times,serif]The FBI had begun a systematic analysis of law-enforcement handgun ammunition effectiveness in the aftermath of a Miami shootout in 1986 which left two agents dead. The full-power commercial 10mm Auto cartridge won the FTU's review hands down. But the test crew also concluded that its recoil was excessive in terms of training for average agent/police officer competency of use and qualification. So one of the FTU experts went to a local gunshop, bought a box of Sierra 180-grain JHP 10mm bullets (the only type that happened to be on that dealer's shelf), and worked up a set of reduced-power 10mm handloads that would still edge out the previous second-place cartridge in the FTU's review (the commercial Remington 185-grain JHP+P) when run through the same series of performance/penetration tests, but was moderate in recoil and "trainable" by FBI standards."

However, the source for this quote is NOT an FBI source, but rather a November 1995 article by Dick Metcalf in the Shooting Times titled, "The Rise & Fall of the 10mm". This begs the question, from where did Metcalf get this? Did he make it up? Did he misunderstand something? [/FONT]

Has anyone seen anything similar in any FBI publication?

The only related note I can find regarding the 10mm is, "Commercial offerings too high pressure, too high velocity."[1]

Since the test protocol only specified a minimum penetration, and the same document expresses a lack of concern about over penetration, then why cote commercial loads as too in high pressure and velocity.

Just scratching my head here trying to get a better grasp on the history better.

[1] - http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi_10mm_notes.pdf

 

[Hohn]

cosermann--

I think Metcalf's article is poorly sourced. The FBI had unofficially been messing with the 10mm (at full power and various powers) before the Miami shootout.

But in the official testing, the full power 10mm was never considered. Full power 10mm was never issued.

The simple fact is that the FBI criteria closely modeled the performance of the existing 157gr .38 spl round they had used for decades. They felt that round was the gold standard. The testing was to find a caliber that was at least as good as that load in a caliber that could be used in an autoloader.

Is it possible that FTU "trained to the test" in that they made the 10mm win by downloading it to where it was barely edging the .45? Possibly! It wouldn't be the first time someone "taught to the test."

You are right that they seem not to care about overpenetration. If you read that attached article, they explain why.

They also explain that faster rounds penetrate less. Thus, speeding up the 10mm was a step backwards for their criteria-- they wanted more penetration and less recoil, but full pressure 10mm give them neither.

This is largely, I suspect, because existing bullets designed for the 10mm speed range didn't exist.

The still don't, really. The clip above of the oversped Gold Dot shows that it really is a bullet designed for .40sw speeds, not 10mm speeds that are 200fps faster or so.

Now if you could get a controlled-expansion round like a Critical Duty bullet loaded in to full pressure 10mm, you'd have epic penetration because the bullet can handle the speed.

As it is now, the HST and Rangers and such would not penetrate well when sped up to 10mm levels. They would likely do worse.


One thing about the 10mm saga that gets me thinking: is there really additional lethality from added energy dump? I'm not seeing any data that says necessarily that there is. It seems to me that you pretty easily get to where a huge increase in recoil gives almost nothing in return (in terms of incapacitation).

H

 

[Barry in IN]

Dick Metcalf? The Dick Metcalf who tested the Colt AA2000, estimated the trigger pull weight because his scale stopped at something like 18 pounds, shot some groups in feet rather than inches, and had malfunctions sprinkled in along the way, then pronounced it the "Handgun of the 21st Century"?

 

[cosermann]

cosermann--

I think Metcalf's article is poorly sourced.

Yeah, could be. I wish people who write things for publication would be more attentive to details like this.

...One thing about the 10mm saga that gets me thinking: is there really additional lethality from added energy dump? I'm not seeing any data that says necessarily that there is. It seems to me that you pretty easily get to where a huge increase in recoil gives almost nothing in return (in terms of incapacitation).

Right, still nowhere near rifle velocities. I can see the value for some handgun hunters however, who use a solid bullet and are just looking for a bit more penetration. Within caliber, using solid bullets, all you can do is increase sectional density (with heavier bullets) and/or velocity. In the end though, all we've done is duplicate .357 mag ballistics in a semi-auto (roughly speaking). Not insignificant, but not the hammer of Thor either.

 

[Hohn]

Dick Metcalf? The Dick Metcalf who tested the Colt AA2000, estimated the trigger pull weight because his scale stopped at something like 18 pounds, shot some groups in feet rather than inches, and had malfunctions sprinkled in along the way, then pronounced it the "Handgun of the 21st Century"?

I don't know Metcalf from Adam, but just when I think I've too cyncical about journalists, someone comes along and validates me assuming the worst about them.

I wouldn't be surprised if that happened, and if he just regurgitated urban legend on the 10mm.

 

[Hohn]

cosermann: "Hammer of Thor"?? HAHAHA.

Compared to a rifle, even powerful pistols are the "peashooters of thumbelina."

 

[downzero]

You know, busting myths like this is one of the main reasons I posted the OP. The reduced velocity had NOTHING TO DUE WITH BEING ABLE TO HANDLE IT.

It had to do with the tradeoff between recoil, muzzle flash, and terminal ballistics. The FBI testing showing that speeds over 950fps don't really do much for you in terms of ballistics. All they do is add recoil and muzzle flash- at least using the combinations of powders and such that they tested.

There never was a full-power 10mm fielded by the FBI. Period. Dot. End of Story. The FBI had a large volume of test data the showed 950fps to be roughly "optimal" for what they wanted-- not coincidentally very similar to the .38spl 157 gr loads that had been the FBI standard for decades.

Your typical FBI agent actually has no problem handling the recoil of a standard 10mm round, as they put a lot more rounds down range than the typical civilian does.

So please-- stop slandering the FBI by perpetuating the myth that they weren't as manly as those real studs that carry full-power 10mm. They simply ran the tests and followed the data, which suggested that more speed was past the point of diminishing returns.

I find that very hard to believe. Even the best handgun shooters will become recoil sensitive with enough shooting, and even Rob Leatham can shoot a 9mm faster than a .45, even if the difference is marginal once proper technique becomes the norm.

It has nothing to do with being a "stud" and everything to do with the fact that recoil gets in the way of executing the fundamentals, no matter how bad ass you are. A magnum handgun load has no real use for law enforcement.

 

[6mm Shoot]

It was my understanding that after the shooting in Florida the FBI said enough is enough. We need a hand gun that will shoot a cartridge equal to a 357 125gr load, that would hold at least 10 rounds and be as easy to train on as a 38. Sig offered the 357 Sig, Smith & Wesson offered the 40 S&W and Colt offered a 10mm in a 1911 package. They went with the 40 S&W. It was in all the gun mags at the time. It has also been a big hit with the public. A cartridge that has stopping power and is easy to control, what is not to like.

Me, I like the 45 ACP. The only problem with it is they are so heavy. I like to shoot my Glock 21 but I don't like carrying it all day. My 36 is great to carry but it only has 7 rounds. The Glock 30 is close to being just what one needs but it is so wide, it's a beast to hide. I think it would be good to go in a shoulder rig. I just can't find any one that makes one that don't cost $200.

So I must admit that of late I am thinking about trying out a 40 S&W for carry. If I do go this rout it is going to be hard to get rid of my 45s.

 

[Hohn]

.357 Sig didn't exist until long after the .40 was already out. It seems likely that SIG wouldn't have submitted the .357 Sig 4 years too late.

 

[snowwalker]

I had read a long time ago that the 40 S&W came into being because women had trouble handleing the 10mm round. True? I don't know, but it is what I read.

 

[rugertoter]

Yeah, the 10x25mm was just a bit too much bang for the buck. They decided the 10x22mm (aka .40 S&W) was a better compromise.

 

[Hohn]

I had read a long time ago that the 40 S&W came into being because women had trouble handleing the 10mm round. True? I don't know, but it is what I read.

Utterly false.


Unfortunately, the "gun media" tends to be a bunch of enthusiasts shooters who know guns but not journalism.

 

[6mm Shoot]

I went back to the FBI site and got some dates. The FBI shoot out was in 1986. After the shoot out they went with the 10mm then used a reduced load for it. The complaint about it was it was to big and was to heavy for there normal carry. The 357 Sig came out in 1994. The 40S&W came out in 1990. The FBI picked the Glock 40S&W as there carry weapon in 1997. So what I read was right. I just had the gun that the FBI picked wrong. The S& W pistol didn't come out till two weeks after they picked the Glock.

 

[lvh7153]

Awesome