40 cal

[Hakaman]

I don't own a 40s&w caliber hg, is this common? or should I be chastised ?
Hakaman

[bgreenea3]

I think its ok.... I like the 40s&w its ballistics are great and you can put more rounds in a mag than a 45acp. Recoil is snappier than a 9mm . If you don't own a 40 its ok I own three and am issued one so I am taking up your slack!

[ruger22]

I don't own a 40s&w caliber hg, is this common? or should I be chastised ?
Hakaman

I never have owned a .40, these days only have .22s. If you get chastised, I'm in for a five minute beating!........

From what I see on various forums, .40 fans tend to be dissatisfied with 9mm, and like .357 and larger revolvers. The folks with larger "collections" often have every caliber, though. It must be nice to have enough funds for that.

[Medicine Hat]

I've had a .40 S&W for about 3 years. I like it. I don't find the recoil to be much more than my .38spcl with +P loads. Overall, its a keeper and has been pretty much my 'go-to' carry gun. I also have .45 Colt, and a bunch of .22s. They all get used. Basically, it the .40 floats your boat, go for it.

[Bullseye]

40S&W is a little snappier than most rounds but not the same as the felt recoil in .357 rounds to me. I have a baby Glock in that caliber and I like it just fine.

R,
Bullseye

[blue68f100]

The 40 is a snappy caliber due to being a high pressure round. I skipped the 40 and went to 45acp.

[Hakaman]

I tried to get average loads in both calibers. The 45acp is definitely less pressuer and a little less speed.

165 GR. SIE JHP Winchester 231 946-1001 f/s 28,100-32,500 PSI

200 GR. SPR JHP Winchester 231 794-906 f/s 12,700 CUP-16,700 CUP

I think I would tend to go with a 45acp for carry. In a pocket gun, which I prefer, there may be 1 round difference in capacity. Although, right now, it's a nine I carry???
Haka

[radio]

I've never owned a 40 and don't feel outclassed or undergunned in any way. My 9, .223 and .22 caliber stuff is just as fun (if not more) and as we say here in the deep South, "Way Yonder" cheaper to shoot. The only thing snappier than the recoil of the 40 is the price of the ammo

I do still own several other calibers, but don't shoot them near as much. If I were in law enforcement, however, I would consider the 40, but modern 9mm ammo is so far improved over the stuff from just 10 years ago I just can't see giving up the extra rounds per mag.

Noted self-defense expert Rob Pincus is now touting the 9. He was a BIG proponent of the 40 for years. IIRC, muzzle flip, capacity, etc. were his chief reasons.

http://www.imakenews.com/valhalla/e_art ... S,bbSbHJ7K

[charlesb]

I have owned several 40 caliber pistols. - It's the "lite" version of the 10mm cartridge that will work in standard sized guns designed for 9mm.

I guess my favorite 40 cal so far was a Star Firestar, a compact auto with a steel frame. It was accurate and dependable.

Now my only 40 cal is an Astra A-100 automatic that is absolutely dependable and so has ended up being one of the primary defense guns here, despite being an obsolete model that is no longer manufactured. I have ten and thirteen round magazines for the Astra.





The Astra A-100 is steel frame, single or double action with a de-cocker. Great ergonomics, controls are naturally placed, easy to use.

I like the 40 cal. cartridge just fine, though I normally lean toward more powerful cartridges like the 10mm.

If I had to give up a 45 auto for a 40 cal, or give up a 40 cal for a 45 auto, I would not feel disadvantaged, either way. The muzzle energy is similar, if not the same from what I understand.

[bgreenea3]

that astra is very Sig -like....