9mm Vs. .40

[DLT 1,646]

7.62 x 25 Tokarev is the only pistol caliber anybody needs.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

okay, maybe not.

[thebuns1 4,323]

Well, Ive been shot before and can honestly say that I dont want to get shot again by any of them.

[rs51085 136]

I know that the 45 guys want the cartridge to be in the same league as 10mm but it isn't, it is still an effective manstopper and has been for a long long time. Show me a brand of 230 gr. +p that will do >1000 fps all the time. The hottest I have found is ranger t series 230gr. +p @ 995 fps.

 

i am not really a .45 cal guy but i will say this, the 10mm on the chart is a 180 gr and there are several 185 gr . loads of 45 loads that go 1200+ fps. there really isn't enough evidence to suggest that the 10 mm isn't in the same league as the 45 acp.

 

furthermore most of the 230 gr. 10 mm ammo is around 1000-1050 fps, most 230 gr. 45 acp +P ammo is around 950-1000 fps when you factor in the size of the hole that the bullet is actually making i think they are very comparable. the biggest difference between the two is the price you pay for ammo. the .45 is cheaper. so just how much is 50-75 fps worth, you decide.

 

So in the famous words of forest gump that is all i have to say about that.

[Zombiehunter762 376]

Thanks for all the great information.

[20nickels 21]

Two issues coming up here;

9 vs 40, They are so close it's not worth arguing. A modern 9mm hp expands to the size of a .40 even through cover and penetrates the same w/ more shots per mag, less recoil. Premium ammo favors the nine in defensive situations. With non expanding ammo meplat diameter will always win.

 

Glocks in Forty. If you purchase a firearm built around the 9 and then converted to the .40 eventually you will have troubles. Modern forties have more steel in the right places.

[GeorgiaPD 408]

I could honestly care less about what the experts say/don't say about the .40 caliber rounds out of any type of gun. It brought me home from work one night when others may not have (Winchester Ranger 180 SXT). It's not something that I'm proud of, but it worked for me and that is all that mattered. Others may have worked, I don't know, I didn't have any with me at the time to find out. But, I do know that even if I was carrying a bazooka at the time, I wanted something even bigger. I put my trust in the round that day and will continue to do so in the future. Anyway,the ammo debate is a mute point in my mind. I've seen way more people get way more dead from .22's and .25's than any of the other mentioned rounds combined.

Edited October 17, 2012 by GeorgiaPD

[22_Shooter 1,560]

The only advantage .40 holds over 9mm with modern SD ammo, is that supposedly bonded .40 ammo deflects less than 9mm of the same, when shooting through glass. That's what I read, anyway.

 

 

Hmmm, the biggest argument that I personally hear against the glock 40, is that it is a 9mm glock which has been made to accept a larger caliber. To make the 40 as reliable as the 9, I hear that they had to make the feed ramp larger or something, which makes the 40 glock have an unsupported chamber. Due to this, it is supposedly a sure way to make a glock 40 explode by shooting nothing by lead bullets in it.

 

I think the unsupported chamber thing was an issue with older Glocks, and is not an issue anymore. At least with the .45 Glocks. I recently saw pics posted of an older G21 barrel and a new one. The new one was as supported as any other big-name manufacturer, with comparison pics to back it up. I'm not 100% sure this rolled over to .40, though.

 

.........and the "don't shoot lead through Glocks" thing is due to the polygonal rifling, not the chamber support.

[Arik 565]

It doesnt really matter what that chart shows about the 10mm, its fake! The 10mm part is photoshoped. However it is a great round when properly loaded but it still doesnt touch anything in magnum.

[dashowdy 141]

I know that the 45 guys want the cartridge to be in the same league as 10mm but it isn't, it is still an effective manstopper and has been for a long long time. Show me a brand of 230 gr. +p that will do >1000 fps all the time. The hottest I have found is ranger t series 230gr. +p @ 995 fps.

 

i am not really a .45 cal guy but i will say this, the 10mm on the chart is a 180 gr and there are several 185 gr . loads of 45 loads that go 1200+ fps. there really isn't enough evidence to suggest that the 10 mm isn't in the same league as the 45 acp.

 

furthermore most of the 230 gr. 10 mm ammo is around 1000-1050 fps, most 230 gr. 45 acp +P ammo is around 950-1000 fps when you factor in the size of the hole that the bullet is actually making i think they are very comparable. the biggest difference between the two is the price you pay for ammo. the .45 is cheaper. so just how much is 50-75 fps worth, you decide.

 

So in the famous words of forest gump that is all i have to say about that.

 

Once again the fastest 185 gr. +P ammo I Can find is 1150 fps so equivalent 10mm rounds at proper norma spec are 1300 fps @ 180 gr easy and that is out of a 4.6 in. Barrel where as the 45 is all tested in 5 in. Usually. So i fail to see your logic when comparing the two especially when 45 super and 10mm are almost the same as far as energy, bullet weight, velocity, one is a 45 caliber and the other is 40. So 45 super/ 10mm is greater than 45 acp, thats all I got to say about that.

[thebuns1 4,323]

The only advantage .40 holds over 9mm with modern SD ammo, is that supposedly bonded .40 ammo deflects less than 9mm of the same, when shooting through glass. That's what I read, anyway.

 

 

Hmmm, the biggest argument that I personally hear against the glock 40, is that it is a 9mm glock which has been made to accept a larger caliber. To make the 40 as reliable as the 9, I hear that they had to make the feed ramp larger or something, which makes the 40 glock have an unsupported chamber. Due to this, it is supposedly a sure way to make a glock 40 explode by shooting nothing by lead bullets in it.

 

I think the unsupported chamber thing was an issue with older Glocks, and is not an issue anymore. At least with the .45 Glocks. I recently saw pics posted of an older G21 barrel and a new one. The new one was as supported as any other big-name manufacturer, with comparison pics to back it up. I'm not 100% sure this rolled over to .40, though.

 

.........and the "don't shoot lead through Glocks" thing is due to the polygonal rifling, not the chamber support.

 

Shooter, I believe the Glock .40's have the unsupported chambers to aid in feeding the gun more reliably. On the .40 I had, I never had a problem with the chamber being unsupported. More of a problem for those that reload.

[Arik 565]

I dont think the unsupported chamber of the Glock has anything to do with those problems. Most of it is when people fuck up on their reloads and use a double charge. Besided that most of the people that complain about it tend to be the older shooter who are used to hunting rifles and generally guns from the 50s. These same people see a problem with AK loose tolorances, the play between the upper and lower of an AR, the lack of safeties on any modern striker fired semi auto gun, polymer framed guns, MIM and so on. These guys are used to older guns that were all steel and wood with deap blue finish, hand fited and had plenty of safeties. Some are open minded enough to try new stuff and buy it if they like it, some will try it but nothing will ever convince them that most newer stuff is better and the rest wont dare touch a "plastic" gun, its just not manly. I've quit going to a bunch of forums because its frustrating to hear that if JMB didnt think of it it should never have been made. Old curmudgeonly bastards!

[thebuns1 4,323]

I dont think the unsupported chamber of the Glock has anything to do with those problems. Most of it is when people fuck up on their reloads and use a double charge. Besided that most of the people that complain about it tend to be the older shooter who are used to hunting rifles and generally guns from the 50s. These same people see a problem with AK loose tolorances, the play between the upper and lower of an AR, the lack of safeties on any modern striker fired semi auto gun, polymer framed guns, MIM and so on. These guys are used to older guns that were all steel and wood with deap blue finish, hand fited and had plenty of safeties. Some are open minded enough to try new stuff and buy it if they like it, some will try it but nothing will ever convince them that most newer stuff is better and the rest wont dare touch a "plastic" gun, its just not manly. I've quit going to a bunch of forums because its frustrating to hear that if JMB didnt think of it it should never have been made. Old curmudgeonly bastards!

 

People that think that way are too narrowminded. And theres a lot of them out there.

[rs51085 136]

Posted Today, 07:12 AM

 

rogers, on 16 October 2012 - 06:51 PM, said:

 

 

Quote

 

I know that the 45 guys want the cartridge to be in the same league as 10mm but it isn't, it is still an effective manstopper and has been for a long long time. Show me a brand of 230 gr. +p that will do >1000 fps all the time. The hottest I have found is ranger t series 230gr. +p @ 995 fps.

i am not really a .45 cal guy but i will say this, the 10mm on the chart is a 180 gr and there are several 185 gr . loads of 45 loads that go 1200+ fps. there /really isn't enough evidence to suggest that the 10 mm isn't in the same league as the 45 acp.

 

furthermore most of the 230 gr. 10 mm ammo is around 1000-1050 fps, most 230 gr. 45 acp +P ammo is around 950-1000 fps when you factor in the size of the hole that the bullet is actually making i think they are very comparable. the biggest difference between the two is the price you pay for ammo. the .45 is cheaper. so just how much is 50-75 fps worth, you decide.

 

So in the famous words of forest gump that is all i have to say about that.

 

 

dashowdy said:

 

Once again the fastest 185 gr. +P ammo I Can find is 1150 fps so equivalent 10mm rounds at proper norma spec are 1300 fps @ 180 gr easy and that is out of a 4.6 in. Barrel where as the 45 is all tested in 5 in. Usually. So i fail to see your logic when comparing the two especially when 45 super and 10mm are almost the same as far as energy, bullet weight, velocity, one is a 45 caliber and the other is 40. So 45 super/ 10mm is greater than 45 acp, thats all I got to say about that.

 

 

 

not arguing with you but here is a load i found in 2 min surfing the net that is a 185 gr 45acp at 1225 fps. it is pricey but still cheaper than 10 mm. it is within 75 fps of the mythical 1300 fps of the 10 mm. so if that insignificant amount is important to you by all means spend the money and get it.

 

 

 

 

Item Number: DT45A185N Unit Price: $39.50 Out of Stock Quantity

Bookmark This Page

Refer this page to a friend Detailed Description

The fastest 185gr loading on the market! All in a package that is just shy of a +p rating!

Caliber : .45ACP

Bullet : 185gr. Nosler JHP

Ballistics : 1225fps - 616 ft./lbs. - 5" 1911

Box of 50rds.

 

 

Personally i can't afford either right now. I like to shoot a lot, and just about every week with my carry guns so .45 or 10 mm is not an option for me. As others have already said my philosophy is if you are going to carry it, and bet your life on it, whatever gun it is you should be very proficient with it. sorry to the OP for getting off topic from 9 vs 40.

Edited October 17, 2012 by rogers

[2manysaigas 14]

Buy a 9 mm and practice by the thousand. A well placed shot is worth more than stopping power. In a bad situation you may only get a few rounds off.. if that. The ability to hit the boiler room with a 9 mm will bring your adversary to room temp just as fast as a 40 S&W.

[VR762Shooter 838]

When talkin in none-HP terms, the 40 does have the advantage of having a flat face. It may not make much of a difference, I wouldn't know if anyone has ever done a test of similarly styled 9mm rounds. I like to feel comfortable in thinking that my 40 may have more effect with the flat face than the 9mm in ball. Plus, I can know that if by chance I'm down to just my target practice rounds, they may have more hydrostatic effect than ball 9mm as well.

Edited October 18, 2012 by VR6Shooter

[Syndicate 812]

so in closing, you should all buy 500S&W

[timy 1,185]

so in closing, you should all buy 500S&W

 

Actually, I'm glad this thread was started. We've finally resolved once and for all which caliber is better. You wouldn't believe how many threads on this subject are out there on different forums (this one too) and we are the first to resolve the issue. We can all be proud.

 

Here's hoping the next caliber issue up for debate is 22 Magnum vs 380 auto. I don't think there's a final answer on that one yet.

[Zombiehunter762 376]

How about 7.62 vs. .308

[Alaskapopo 20]

What's the big difference than the obvious.

People say I hate a Glock .40 and love the 9mm.

I hate everything about the .40

WHY?

That's all I have ever shot, pistol wise other than a .45 ACP

 

I don't hate the .40 but it has some draw backs.

It is generally harder on guns than the 9mm and tends to be less reliable in the same platform compared to the 9mm. This is especially true with Glocks at least until the Gen 4 came out.

The 40 has sharper recoil in a lighter gun and its harder to shoot well this is especially true in smaller pistols like the Glock 23 and 27.

The .40 only offers slightly better terminal performance and it gives up magazine capacity and it has a slower rate of fire due to the increased recoil and muzzle flip. As a general observation full power 40 ammo in most typical 40's feel worse than the 45 ACP in a typical 45 acp pistol. The 9mm is my preferred self defense round overall after having carried the following, 10mm, 45 acp, .357 sig, .and .40 sw.

 

A lot of departments have started issuing the 9mm again and have noticed an increase in stopping power because their officers are able to have better shot placement in real gun fights.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Alaskapopo

[VR762Shooter 838]

How about 7.62 vs. .308

308 every day of the week. Heavier bullets at higher speed. Add SP to the equation, and it is just devastating in comparison

[timy 1,185]

How about 7.62 vs. .308

308 every day of the week. Heavier bullets at higher speed. Add SP to the equation, and it is just devastating in comparison

 

But, but.... what if he meant 7.62x54R?

 

30 06 anyone?

[Marc 147]

Personally, I am sick of the 600 N.E. vs. 700 N.E. for HD debate and it is one I would like to see answered once and for all. I say 600 N.E. for the lower recoil and faster follow-up shots, others say anything less then 700 N.E. might as well be a BB gun. What says the forum?

 

How about 7.62 vs. .308

308 every day of the week. Heavier bullets at higher speed. Add SP to the equation, and it is just devastating in comparison

 

But, but.... what if he meant 7.62x54R?

 

30 06 anyone?

 

There is only one true 7.62 and that is the 300 Pegasus, anything less might as well be a 22 CB Short.

[timy 1,185]

Personally, I am sick of the 600 N.E. vs. 700 N.E. for HD debate and it is one I would like to see answered once and for all. I say 600 N.E. for the lower recoil and faster follow-up shots, others say anything less then 700 N.E. might as well be a BB gun. What says the forum?

 

I think you have given the definitive answer.

 

After all, I did ask "30 06, anyone?" And you are indeed 30 06.

[VR762Shooter 838]

How about 7.62 vs. .308

308 every day of the week. Heavier bullets at higher speed. Add SP to the equation, and it is just devastating in comparison

 

But, but.... what if he meant 7.62x54R?

 

30 06 anyone?

 

Or....if he meant 7.62x51!? Consider mind BLOWN! In all seriousness, I could go on with ballistics debates all day. One of my favorite debate issues in the hobby of firearms. If anyone in my area sold x54R in SP the VEPR would be the next on my list after my upcoming S-12

[thebuns1 4,323]

I love these kind of discussions, so long as the calibers in question are somewhat relative to one another in terms of power/performance.

[rs51085 136]

just thought i would spice this thread up with some pics. so here is some dealing with the issue of unsupported chambers in glock 40 cals. In the first pic you can see the bulge from the unsupported chamber of a brand new 4th gen glock 23. it is hard to see in the pic but it is so bad that the metal has very tiny little cracks in it on the bulge. again it is doing this to every round fired out of it. in the second pic you can see it compared to a 9mm case fired from a 3rd gen g 17. it has virtually no bulge at all. i don't do a lot pistol reloading yet but i would not feel comfortable reloading these 40 cases even for target ammo. again i don't have a lot of reloading experience but comparing the two i would not hesitate to reload the 9mm as opposed to the 40.

Edited October 18, 2012 by rogers

[theorangeplanet 968]

Those bulges are from factory ammo fired from a G23, or reloads?

[timy 1,185]

Those bulges are from factory ammo fired from a G23, or reloads?

 

Probably either/or. I've got some 'Glocked" cases that I haven't reloaded yet. From what I understand, these cases can be reloaded without problems but they aren't supposed to be run through Glocks again. Of course, as usual some people do it anyway.

[rs51085 136]

Yes it will do this to everything put in it. That paticular case was a factory loaded remington.

[theorangeplanet 968]

Are the afternmarket lone wolf barrels also as unsupported in the rear of the chamber?