Fair enough. Thanks.
For what it's worth, I currently carry the 9 (CZ 75 D PCR compact 9) where and when I legally can (work at "a Federal space agency near you", so it's at home in the safe right now). Now that Christmas is nearly over (our senior pastor reminded us yesterday that the Christmas season lasts until Epiphany, which is tomorrow), I plan to order a Comp-Tac holster for the Kimber. Then the CZ and the Kimber will share the duty.
Search found 2 matches
- Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:29 pm
- Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
- Topic: 9 mm. vs 40 cal
- Replies: 40
- Views: 4716
- Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:18 pm
- Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
- Topic: 9 mm. vs 40 cal
- Replies: 40
- Views: 4716
Re: 9 mm. vs 40 cal
I'd be interested in some detail on why the 40 is "easiest" for you. I shot all three at the range yesterday (admittedly my 9 and 45 (plus my wife's 45), someone else's 40) and thought the 40's recoil was about the same as (if not greater than) either my 45 or my wife's (her's is RIA full-size, mine is Kimber Pro Carry). The 40 is a S&W model, I believe. Definitely preferred the grips on my guns to his.Purplehood wrote:Personal preference all the way. The actual ballistic differences are not significant.
I carried the .45 ACP, 9mm and now the .40 S&W (carried, and shot all of these on a regular basis). I have found that shooting the .40 S&W is the "easiest" experience. So I stick to what works for me.