Why does everybody hate 40 s&w

[bbooker]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[jdd2855]

Don't be hating on the Sigs.... send all the "old' ones my way. I'm sure they will still shoot in 20 years and hold there value. Plastic guns....not so much (unless sold on ODT w/extras).
Yes I own 3 sigs and one is a ..... 40

 

[gh1950]

If the advent of better ammo works for the 9mm wouldn't logic say it would also improve any other caliber it was manufactured in?

These threads are going to get real short if you insist on injecting logic into them.

 

[bbarie]

No hate here, just went with 9mm and 45's. Figure that about covers it when it comes to handguns.

 

[NWSharpshooter]

If the advent of better ammo works for the 9mm wouldn't logic say it would also improve any other caliber it was manufactured in?

Because handguns make piss poor man stoppers. With modern ammo they all perform about as good as a defensive round fired out of a handgun can. Without adding a bunch more velocity, or some new space age material to make them out of, 9mm, 40, and 45 have pretty muched peaked in performance.

 

[gh1950]

Because everybody, including myself, finally figured out that the .40s&w very slight power advantage over the 9mm isn't worth the extra recoil and capacity loss.

You do understand don't you, that the increase in recoil (or not)is directly proportional to the increase (or not) of the energy.

"Recoil:" is simply energy going in the opposite direction.

Well, that is true unless someone repealed Newton's 3rd law of motion.

 

[brad sweet]

If the advent of better ammo works for the 9mm wouldn't logic say it would also improve any other caliber it was manufactured in?

you would think..but goes to the lowest bidder, regulations, rules specs, and cost per unit, lobbyists, federal restrictions,knowing someone friends uncles brothers second removed idiot's mother..no reason at all....maybe..LOL!

 

[Ken Ford]

Because handguns make piss poor man stoppers. With modern ammo they all perform about as good as a defensive round fired out of a handgun can. Without adding a bunch more velocity, or some new space age material to make them out of, 9mm, 40, and 45 have pretty muched peaked in performance.

Agreed, so any small advantage would be desirable.
The argument is that "with modern ammo 9mm performs just as good as ___. So any performance gains would be across the board, and not just to the 9mm, so just as in the past the difference should be the same ratio.

A hand gun is best used to fight your way to your long gun. But since most of us don't have the option of having a long gun nearby I want what works best for me.
While the differences might be marginal I want every advantage I can get no matter how small.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

You do understand don't you, that the increase in recoil (or not)is directly proportional to the increase (or not) of the energy.

"Recoil:" is simply energy going in the opposite direction.

Well, that is true unless someone repealed Newton's 3rd law of motion.

That's all good for knocking over bowling pins but real world ballistics on soft tissue and countless autopsies show there's not much practical difference between an expanding 40 and an expanding 9.

Also recoil isn't necessarily directly proportionate to energy sent down range. A snub nose .357 is a good example of that. Lots of wasted energy as muzzle blast.

I'm all for more power, which is why I break out the 44mags when I need more power out of a handgun.

 

[JkEnder]

I've been looking into picking up a steyr m40a1 if I could find a good used price. With the low bore axis, the fact that it was designed around the 40 (like the M&P) rather than just a fortified 9mm. I only haves 9's and 45's now, and I probably won't stockpile 40S&W, but nice to have at least one pistol in case that's the only ammo I can find.