Let’s get the show on the road. For the sake of brevity, I’m not going to explain every term I use nor go into great depth historically. I’ll be happy to answer any questions you may have concerning my opinions and parlance or anything else I write. Additionally, what I state below is the way I saw things at the time, in my world, and the way I’m recalling them now. I may not be 100% correct, yet I am certain you will, at least, get the gist of it.
Likewise, I should add that in writing this, I am considering the topic in general and more from the professional’s viewpoint than the armed citizen’s. Consider that the professional is supposed to be highly trained and likely to encounter threats, from both two-legged and four-legged creatures, that are usually far worse than anything a typical armed citizen would ever have to deal with. Lest we forget the inanimate objects that the professional must address. Barricades of various types, structures, vehicles, and so forth. Based on my assessment, the average policeman simply needs a more powerful sidearm than does the ordinary armed citizen.
One more caveat. I am not taking specific ammunition, handguns, or marksmanship, into consideration. It’s unjust and serves no purpose to compare a hot loaded, high performance JHP, fired from a service size pistol, from one caliber, to a moderately loaded FMJ, fired from a pocket sized pistol, in a different caliber, then claim the former caliber superior. The same holds true for shot placement (THE most important aspect of pistolcraft). A weak LRN bullet, fired straight through the heart, spine, or brain, is going to take the fight out of any heinous villain much faster than a hot, heavy, JHP would with a shoulder shot. As I previously stated, I'm addressing this topic in general terms.
The 9 mm Parabellum chambered pistol was around, yet not hugely popular. Some were good pistols, some not so good, most single stacks, a few hi-caps. For the most part, the pistols weren’t the problem surrounding the 9 mm, it was the ammunition. Specifically the bullet itself, that was the actual problem. The FMJ bullet, for which most of the pistols were designed to handle, had a tendency to sail through soft tissue, disrupting little, and simply put 9 mm sized holes through the target (not that they can’t kill you). This is a problem with most FMJ or LRN bullets, though it’s exacerbated by the 9’s slightly pointier bullets and higher velocities. JHPs were rather in their infancy and mostly required higher velocities than the 9 mm Parabellum produced to reliably expand (think magnum velocities). Extreme hot-loading the 9 mm, to hopefully gain JHP performance, became a not uncommon practice.
The .40 S&W wasn’t even thought of yet, therefore the .45 ACP was THE auto-pistol round par excellence as far as many of us were concerned. There were JHP bullets available back then. Some 1911s would feed them, others, like my Series 70, would not do so reliably. Because of this, and questionable expansion, most people simply defaulted to the 230 gr FMJ. IMO, that was the king of the FMJ rounds and had a pretty damned good track record. Later, after doing some minor work on my pistol, it would feed anything to include empty cases, but I digress. Most, if not all, of the pistols were 1911 variants. These were usually full-sized, 7+1 “single stack”, service pistols. There were some compact models, notably the Star PD and Detonics Combat Master. Some, both experienced and casual shooters, felt the .45 was a bit much for self-defense and/or police work. They felt the same way about the .357 Magnum as well, yet at least that was a revolver cartridge. You have to realize that, back then, the revolver, in general, and the .38 Special revolver, in particular, was well ensconced in both the police and armed citizen worlds and for several good reasons (which I am not going to get into now).
That’s about where things stood in the olden days. The 9 mm had two strikes against it, three really. 1) Bullet performance or lack thereof, 2) it was chambered in automatics (yes, they were called that back then and rightfully so), which were perceived as unreliable (and were in many cases), and 3) it was a foreign caliber chambered in predominately foreign pistols. The latter was a bigger deal to some than you might think. That if you were going to carry an automatic, carry “a .45”, and that most people are better off with a .38 Special revolver (or .357 if you’re a serious shooter). I should mention that, to the best of my recollection, there wasn’t much between the 9 mm and .45 back then except the .38 Super, which was usually chambered in 1911 pistols.
Fast forward to the ’90s:
I’m skipping the ’80s and therefore infamous FBI shootout, the birth of the 10 mm Automatic, which I am not discussing here, and it’s offspring the .40 S&W. This post is getting to be long enough without adding in all that history. If you’re interested in those topics, and I feel you should be, I very highly recommend the following threads, which include videos: 1986 FBI Miami Gunfight - Firefight & Personal Reflections and Police Pistols: 9 mm vs. .40 S&W. You may note that in post #12 of this thread I seem to be a bit on the negative side regarding the .40 S&W. At the time of that writing, my consideration was more from the armed citizen, casual shooter, perspective. In other words, the stereotypical homeowner who simply wants a “nightstand gun”, has little to no training, and shoots once a year or less. Hopefully, in my conclusions below I will clarify my viewpoint.
Moving on. The .40 is now here because the FBI made the 9 mm it’s scapegoat due to a failure to stop the shooter in the above linked Miami shootout (read those threads for the details). As usual, some welcomed it and others viewed it as unnecessary. “If the 9x19 mm isn’t enough, why screw around, go up to the .45 ACP and be done with it” was what many, including my (young and ignorant) self, were saying. As a blanket statement that is true. Nevertheless, there’s a lot more to it that just that, which I’ll get to shortly.
At the time, JHP performance was progressing nicely across the board. We’re down to about 1000 fps for mostly reliable expansion and adequate penetration using quality ammunition. The 9 mm, due to several factors, replaced the .45 ACP in our military, it is rapidly replacing the .38 (and .357) as America’s police arm/caliber. It’s also made huge inroads into the armed citizen market. Really, what’s not to love when you think about it. The .45 ACP is still heavily followed and with good reason. Nonetheless, the .40 is coming on strong, also with good reason(s).
If one considers the 9 mm Parabellum cartridge as being the .38 Special of the 21st Century, I’d say that is a just consideration. It has moderate recoil, greater velocity, more power, and now better projectile performance/terminal effect, higher capacities, far easier and faster to reload, readily available and reasonably priced ammunition, and so forth. The .38 Special (revolver) is no less of a caliber/firearm than it’s always been. Perhaps it’s even better than is was due to bullet technology. Be that as it may, looking at it strictly from a practical perspective, the modern, 9x19 mm, (semi) automatic, high capacity pistol, is simply the better choice in most cases. Certainly so for police and the military applications. But...
Back to the .40 (finally). So, if the above mentioned 9 mm pistols are so good, why switch to the .40 S&W? Simply put, “MORE POWER” as Tim “The Tool Man” Taylor would say. It’s simple physics and common sense. Power wise, the 9x19 mm is pretty good, the .40 S&W is better, the .45 ACP better still with a big caveat. The caveat is the .45, due to it’s larger diameter, necessitates a much larger pistol/grip frame (especially for a hi-cap pistol). The .40 is the biggest diameter cartridge that can fit into a 9 mm size frame. Ergo, most people can easily handle a 9 mm/.40 cal. hi-cap pistol yet find the size of a .45 hi-cap prohibitive.
From the top, Glock 22, G23, and G27, all .40 S&W caliber pistols
- First and foremost, there is nothing necessarily wrong with any of these three calibers as a general purpose self-defense cartridge.
- In my opinion…the .40 S&W is the near perfect police round. It’s a good balance between the 9x19 and the .45 ACP. I’ve heard it referred to, by some professionals, as a “Goldilocks” round because it’s “just right”. I would have to agree.
- All other things being equal, the .40 is a good 15% to 20% more powerful than 9x19 mm, and not very far behind the .45 ACP, if at all (choose your ammunition in any caliber wisely).
- Ordinarily, both the 9 mm and .40 are chambered in the same frame size pistols. So, no problem there. If the officers/agents/deputies are readily handling a G17, as an example, there should be no real problem moving up to a G22.
- Admittedly, the .40 S&W can have a somewhat greater felt recoil than the 9 mm. Certainly so when 180 gr bullets are used. Having owned one, I can say that the recoil begins to reduce with 165 gr or lighter bullets. To the best of my knowledge, most departments issue 165 or 155 gr JHP ammo. Personally, I did not perceive much difference in recoil between these and 9 mm 124 gr +P ammo, which based on my understanding is currently a common departmental issue round in that caliber. No properly trained officer (or reasonably healthy armed citizen) should have a problem shooting a service pistol chambered in .40 S&W.
- Fact: recoil management, in a normal healthy adult, is a mental, not a physical, problem. It can be readily overcome, usually hastily, with concise rudimentary training.
- To use the argument that, due to modern bullet technology, the 9x19 mm is now the equal of the .40 S&W and .45 ACP is simply absurd.* Usually, a technological advancement is spread across the entire product line, not simply limited to one specific model. Bullet technology is no different. Ergo, all the major calibers have become reasonably more effective. Need I elaborate further?
- Using the above argument to rationalize a department switching back to the 9 mm, from the more powerful .40, which it's already been trained on and is currently using, is not only absurd, it’s ludicrous.
- Another irrational assertion it the 9 mm’s greater magazine capacity in like pistols. While technically correct, I hardly think a debate over the importance of one or two rounds of ammo is germane when we’re speaking of magazine capacities of 15-rounds or more. Especially when one considers the second or two that a rapid reload takes.
- Taking all of this into account, I feel the real reason for the FBI (and Kool-Aid drinking departments and agencies) shifting back to the 9 mm is nothing but politics. This boils down to two political aspects, 1) money and 2) PC bureau/agency/department candidates. Let’s face it, 9x19 is just cheaper than .40 S&W. Consider also, not all bureau/agency/department candidates are gun people (I’ve personally known more than one anti-gun cop). If you take a tiny person, who doesn’t like guns in the first place, simply getting and keeping them qualified with the 9 mm will be hard enough to do at a reasonable cost (it’s all about the money, money that could best be spent on votes). Now factor into that the additional cost of .40 caliber ammunition and training time** and you can see why the .40 got pooh-poohed.
- All are fine, effective, calibers, nevertheless they simply are not equal.
- Law enforcement officers' situations are oftentimes different from armed citizens and may be very severe in nature. I am of the opinion they need all the power they can get (and handle) in a firearm.
- Contrary to what the FBI or anyone else says for that matter, there is no magic bullet, caliber, or firearm.
- If you are mandated a specific gun/caliber, you’ll have to deal with it. If not, choose the most powerful one you can handle and, most importantly, shoot well. That means with both reasonable accuracy and rapidity.
- High-tech weapons and high performance ammunition only benefit the accurate marksman. You cannot buy competency.
- For armed citizen or off-duty use, you may want to consider who else may have to use the firearm. Simply because you can handle a .44 Magnum doesn’t mean your spouse can.
Frankly, I would say to anyone contemplating firearms ownership for protection, assuming they fit your lifestyle, do not overlook the Glock .40 caliber pistols. Most certainly do not overlook any .40 S&W pistol solely based upon any negatives you may have seen floating around the internet. Perhaps, if possible, rent one and see for yourself. Rent a 9 mm and compare the two side by side while you’re at it. The G23 (or G22, though it’s a bigger gun to conceal) would make an excellent concealed carry or house gun. Good deals can be had on departmental trade-in pistols and magazines. There’s also the caliber conversions to consider.
In conclusion, if you are presently well ensconced in another major caliber, so be it. Sticking with what you currently own and are comfortable with is probably your best bet. That’s what I did. However, if I were starting out all over again, knowing what I know now, I would have standardized my handguns, for the most part, in caliber .40 S&W. For a multitude of reasons it’s too late for me, however maybe not for you. Think about it.
Beretta Cougar 8040F I had one just like it, but a very close
friend needed a pistol. It was an excellent handgun.
** As stated above, there’s only a marginal difference in shootability between the 9 mm and .40 caliber pistol. This is particularly true for someone with professional marksmanship training. Nonetheless, when a person dislikes guns and/or really doesn’t want to learn to shoot in the first place, the little things begin to mean a lot. And the politicians need all those PC candidates to qualify and do it cheaply.
For your further enlightenment:
From Mixup98
Trick Shooting My Glock Model 23 - Why I Carry One For Defense
FYI, I watch this man quite a bit. To my knowledge, he is a retired guard from a Nuke plant and they have to meet stringent NRC training standards. He’s also a former LEO, a deputy sheriff, I believe, and has been a competitive shooter in several disciplines. The man knows what he’s about. He states ”Watch as I use over 40 years of security and law enforcement training along with over 50 years of shooting experience to test-fire and review a wide assortment of firearms.” I highly recommend his channel.
Here’s another one from Mixup98. Do either of these gentlemen seem to be fighting excessive recoil? Note how the one fellow shoots 180 gr JHPs from the compact model with no problems at all.
From the late Paul Harrell
Concealed Carry: .40 S/W vs. .45 ACP. - this and his video in this thread, Police Pistols: 9 mm vs. .40 S&W, really explain and demonstrate the .40 S&W very nicely.
----------------------------------
Take care and stay safe,
Joe Doakes aka Kilogulf59Integrated Close Combat Forum
--------------------------------------------
Please note: prior to commenting or passing judgment, either in a positive or negative manner, I suggest you read About Joe Doakes’ Place and the Disclaimer
assuming you haven't already. Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment