Are 40's worth it?

Looking at ammo prices and they're about double the cost of 9mm.
I've rented some and I'm just as good with it as my 9's.
Pros and cons?

Attached: 1564004436560m.jpg (1024x1024, 204K)

Other urls found in this thread:

ballistics101.com/10mm.php
ballistics101.com/40_caliber_sw.php
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Pros
>Makes 9mm and 10mm cucks mad
>Preforms better than 9 and almost as good as 10mm but in a smaller frame
>It shoots things dead
Cons
>Niggers like 40
>ammo is a bit more expensive
>Some pistols were made in 40 as an afterthought and might glocknade if loaded to 10mm levels
I like it but most fags on here don't because they think it's supposed to be exactly like 10mm in a shorter case or something.

The thing is pistol calibers are all shitty and weak with their only advantage being low recoil. Buy whatever you want but remember that the difference between common pistol cartridges is minimal.

Better ballistics on paper to 9mm and .45 but you won’t notice too much in practice
Also I’ve been witness to seeing a deer dropped from a .40 out of a Springfield XD if it means anything

I have my carry gun in a 9 but I was looking for a full sized night stand gun. Thinking PPQ 5" in a 40 but it's also available in 9mm as M1 and M2

No.

.40 was a decent idea in the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, but its time has gone, as evidenced by 9x19 performing exactly the same (by design) with the only difference being a marginal increase in expansion.

Back before Bullet Design improved, it was the way to go, but now? Nah you are just beating your wrists and elbows up and your gun. Everyone is dumping .40 as quick as they can and there are good deals to be had, but thats about all its got going for it.

Soon .40 will be like .41 AE and .357 SIG.

>J-just as good as 10mm
Cope

If you’re using defense rounds I’d personally go for the 9mm

I didn't fucking say that and you know it you cuck.

>Everyone is dumping .40 as quick as they can and there are good deals to be had, but thats about all its got going for it.

I heard law enforcement is considering switching to 9mm and that will drive the price of 40 ammo down because of excess supply

You can get .40 guns are cheap on the surplus market, but otherwise there isn't too much reason to go with .40 over 9mm nowadays. You'll have slightly less capacity, usually one less in single stack and one less in double stack, and a bit more recoil. It will still do better than 9mm when comparing similar ammo, but the difference is rather negligible. And, of course, ammo is expensive. I'd say go with a 9mm unless you really just need a cheap gun quick.

t. guy who's carried a Glock 23 since I inherited it from my dad

that already happened user, go to any gun store that has a lot of used guns (say, Cabela's gun library) and you will find a pile of .40s. .40 USPs, .40 Sigs, .40 glocks, for days.

10mm is best mm.

9 is superior to 40. With modern bullets its terminal peformance is just as good, it costs less, and it generally has a higher magazine capacity in the same gun.

If you're going to step up in diameter from 9mm (thereby losing some capacity) you'd be stupid to chose 40 over 10mm. 10mm lets you choose ligher loads equivalent to .40, or much heavier ones if you require it.

>and that will drive the price of 40 ammo down because of excess supply

In the short term. In the long term, manufacturers will note the decreasing demand and manufacture less of it, bringing the price back up.

.40 is worth to turn into a .357sig gun

>Almost as good as 10mm

Attached: f7nMAJA.png (1000x1006, 755K)

This.

Attached: the future is here.png (818x280, 134K)

.40 is what you buy if you want a little better performance than 9mm but also don't want to look like a limpwristed faggot like 9fags. 9fags will always hate 40chads for this.

Attached: beretta-8000i.gif (320x240, 18K)

That stuff is sweet. I shoot it in a Glock 31 with an arm brace and a trijicon rmr.

Anyways, I picked up a USP 40 fairly cheap and love the hell out of it. You can also look at the Beretta px4 and the Sig 226 or 229.

A glock 23 was my first handgun. I still have it and between 500-1000 .40 S&W's for it, but I also have a conversion barrel that makes it basically a glock 19.

>shitty and weak

No. They’re really not. Only if you’re shooting 9mm

Buy one and make the switch. I have both and I like my .40 better all in all. It’s better than 9mm in every aspect but capacity and just barely.

There's no honest point to get a .40 unless it's work related. I only ever bought a Glock 22 because my company required I carry one but insisted I couldn't use the issued 22 for practice. Didn't like feeding it until after a year of training with an LEA that used it that I accumulated a fuckton of ammunition to practice.

I've CC'd a Glock 22 for 8 years.
I own multiple other handguns in 9mm, 10mm, and .380.
The .40 is a fine gun, its not the end all be all of handgun calibers.
Anyone who tells you its bad or the best has an agenda and is truly a faggot.

It shoots well in full size guns.
its ammo is always available anywhere you go because caliber war faggots can't imagine owning and firing more than one caliber, so they just stick with 9mm or .45

anything its better at or worse than than 9mm or .45 is marginal at best. it all comes down on what you want to own and what you're comfortable with.

How much bulk shooting are you doing a month and/or how much of a Luddite are you that you can’t buy bulk ammo online? Most .40 SW is about 7-9 cents more per round. You can’t afford that more per round? It’s not like double....

>anything its better at or worse than than 9mm or .45 is marginal at best. it all comes down on what you want to own and what you're comfortable with.

.40 S&W can generate 550 ft lbs energy with 135 grain bullets. Something 9mm can’t do and only .45 auto +p can do. That’s not marginal. retards like you who can’t just admit a round made almost 90 years after the other you mentioned would be next generation and improved

but it is almost as good. 10mm is just hot loaded .40. .40 and 10mm have practically identical soft body damage, and 10mm has better penetration characteristics against soft body armour.

>Muzzle Energy: 636 ft lbs

Attached: golly.jpg (640x427, 26K)

>t. buttblasted copefag
with modern ammunition you can do virtually the same amount of shit with 9mm, .40, and .45
it doesn't matter if you have to buy +P or +P+ ammo if its still readily available, you can obtain those numbers out of almost any modern handgun.

caliber arguments had merit 30 years ago, now its all just preference.

I thought about doing that but I've heard you need a different ejector for the 19 conversion. Add that on top of all tbe new mags and ammo I'd have to buy and I'll probably end up just going with a new gun, especially since mine is a Gen 2 with no rail and very little texturing on the grip.

Basically this.

Short term, you will see big availability and price drops to move product (we're at the tail end of this I think) and production will slow, less runs will be made and price will steadily increase and availability will decrease.

This exact situation happened on a much shorter scale with .45 GAP, for a while distributors were basically giving them away and ammo was cheap, now the ammo doesn't exist.

Not that I'm suggesting it will happen anywhere near as rapidly as in that example, but .40 is on the fast track to the same place, and is following in .357 SIG's footsteps.

The conversion barrel makes it so you don't have to. Literally just use 9mm magazines and it runs fine. You might need to change the ejector if you're running a 19 barrel on a 23, but the conversion barrel is all you need

Surp and LE trade-in pistols chambered in .40 S&W sell for cheap for a very good reason: nobody wants them except for fools who want a cheap handgun but don't intend to shoot it often--if ever at all. When the FBI adopted the .40 S&W in 1997 its popularity skyrocketed, when the Feebs dumped the .40 to go back to 9mm, the .40 became that strange pocket pool playing distant relative that was no longer invited to Thanksgiving dinner.

he didnt say that, autismo

found your pic.

Attached: 1559392187719.jpg (1125x972, 561K)

pros
different than the others

cons
more expensive

>almost as good as 10mm

Attached: 1557435565718.png (304x366, 231K)

We all know 9x25 Dillon is a meme. But what if we necked down a 10mm case to 8mm instead? Push an 88 grain projectile to ~2200 fps and you have a 950 ft-lb semi-auto that isn't a meme like 460 Rowland.

Attached: thinkingmen.gif (500x375, 225K)

I own a 40 and not 9.

ballistics101.com/10mm.php
>Average 650ish foot-pounds
ballistics101.com/40_caliber_sw.php
>Average 475ish foot-pounds
Nigga that's almost 40% more power.
Epstein yourself

cost of 40 is going to keep going up as more and more feds and cops drop it, will prb reach or exceed 45aarp levels in a decade

You will get more energy out of it than a 9; JHP technology advancements apply to all calibers and don't magically stop at smaller ones.

I think they're most worth it for the PD trade in Glock 22s that are scraping $300 and in some cases even below that; for that price I'd buy one just to stash in a cache with a few hundred rounds of .40.

That said for everyday use I'd still prefer my 9mm Glock 19 and 17s; lower recoil, more rounds in the magazine, cheaper and more widely available ammunition, and less wear/tear on the firearm. I actually dislike shooting .40 way more than .45; something about the pressure spike of the .40 is very abrupt and unpleasant compared to either the 9mm or .45.

Anyway .40 should not be double the cost of 9mm; at most it's like 5 cents more per round for FMJ if you buy bulk online - which you should be; fuck paying $13 for a box of 50 rounds from an LGS. $50 or so per case of 1000 rounds isn't *that* big a deal, but depending on how much you shoot it may be.