Just heard a boomer go on a rant about the effectiveness of the .40S&W and i wanna know what it really is capable of.
How effective is the .40S&W?
Xavier Thomas
Other urls found in this thread:
luckygunner.com
youtube.com
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
twitter.com
Landon Russell
The data's been there for years bro.
David Bennett
its effective at converting guns to .357 sig
Jeremiah Kelly
Much the same as the other popular pistol rounds. The differences between them are a drop in the ocean compared to all the other factors that matter here.
Camden Robinson
*ahem*
Logan Rodriguez
Works fine, armchair generals hate it.
Jordan Richardson
Landon Foster
It's a bigger hole, and there's more weight than a 9mm. None of that makes up for poor shot placement but regardless I don't see many walking away from effective shots in the t box or heart from a 9 or a 40. I carry a .40 because my local pd carries .40 and "the cops use it" seems like a good statement in court, a bigger hole is always a good thing too.
Xavier Peterson
>velocity: 1500fps
>from a 6" barrel
Yikes. Just another hole punch, and one that usually just hits 11" in jello to boot. Come back when you can actually join the venerable .357 sig in the land of rifle performance from a handgun.
Carson Nelson
it's not, though. I've personally taken out 100 rounds of the stuff and shot it, it hovers around 1550 fps from a 5.2" threaded barrel.
Dylan Hughes
luckygunner.com
Dont believe in cartridge voodoo, it's shot placement and being able to reach vitals. These heros did the work for you of testing nearly every common self defense load out there for penetration and expansion and put it on one page posting each gel block.
Remember:
>12" is the MINIMUM depth to reach vitals from all angles but going over that is preferred
>much past 18" might over penetrate out the other side
>the extra visually impressive tearing of the gel means nothing in an elastic human body. All you care about is penetration and expansion.
In my opinion, it's an okay cartridge but Id choose a 9mm.
Blake Collins
>xtp
>11" of penetration
>that much momentum
I havent seen the gel test but I doubt it. XTPs dont expand as dramatically as other jhp, fairly consistent 1.5x, and are often chosen for that reason to hunt animals with because of the penetration.
That being said, Id rather have the follow up shot potential of the 357sig and I almost believe in the phillips meme working.
Aaron Myers
> it hovers around 1550 fps from a 5.2" threaded barrel.
Still just a hole punch
>I havent seen the gel test but I doubt it.
>youtube.com
165s are about as low weight as id recommend going for expanding Underwood loads in 10mm, IIRC they reliably hover around that 12" mark with the GDs. Although i believe buffalo bore and double tap have some lighter for caliber barnes offerings that penetrate adequately.
>I almost believe in the phillips meme working.
There are videos of animal necropsies with them, they definitely work in gel and dead meat at handgun velocities, and definitely work on live animals at low rifle like velocities. Don't think either of those points are up for debate at this point given the evidence. Have yet to see any quality animal necropsies with the sub 2000fps variants though, ap2020s arent very well done and i simply don't trust the dude. That being said cavitating bullets of different designs have been shown to work at sub 2000fps in some studies.
Nicholas Peterson
Nice, I stand corrected on both accounts. I guess that was just to fast for the xtp. Ive never seen one double its diameter.
Benjamin Gutierrez
.40 works. pistol caliber is irrelevant. if you want more power use a rifle. we've debated this for hours on this board and that's what the data says. .40 can cause hydrostatic shock in the brain from a body shot due to the high pressure and energy at impact, but so can certain loads in other rounds.
It works. It's not as good as a rifle.
Jack Powell
Well the nice thing about .40 is that inside of 100m pretty much any round will penetrate an acceptable amount and any shitty jhp will reliably expand. The 180gr loads perform closer to .45ACP in that respect but are less potent than lighter loads due to case and pressure limitations. If you can tolerate the additional recoil then the added reliability of the round might be worth it to you. It isn't going to be 'more lethal' than a 9mm unless that ammo sucks and doesn't expand correctly. The physical quality of the round and the barrel length you fire it from are more important than the caliber.
There is no pistol round than causes hydrostatic shock unless you're using magnum ammo in a lever action and there is zero legitimate evidence to bear out those theories. It's purely conjecture on the part of ammo manufacturers like Federal. Rifle rounds can because they are exponentially more powerful. There is actual quantifiable test and anatomical data that demonstrates it.
Jason Robinson
Hydrostatic shock is fuddlore. Rifle rounds produce greater terminal effect within the same diameter projectile primarily due to their velocities exceeding the elasticity of human tissue.
Jaxon Brooks
/thread
Adam Lee
This thread, AGAIN? OP, look up the Paul Harrel video on YouTube... 9mm vs 40... then "you be the judge." He uses a chronograph, does the math on ft lbs energy and shoots "the meat target." A well done presentation. A short synopsis would be 40sw is more powerful than 9mm with only slightly more recoil and cartridge size.
Jaxson Reed
Is 40 S&W more powerful than 9mm? Yes. Significantly. Does that extra power translate into greater terminal effect? You be the judge.
Brayden Myers
It can be roughly in between 10mm and 9x19 depending on the load.