How much of the felt recoil is a function of the platform vs. the round itself. So if guns designed for the .40S&W are not properly designed around the round, then maybe the felt recoil difference compared to a .45 for example, is a deficiency in the platform. So maybe a .45 in a gun not designed around that round may have even worse felt recoil. Just asking. I have no experience in these matters. I do know that my P229 Sig with a .40 barrel is pretty manageable.gigag04 wrote:Which is exactly why issues like felt recoil and ammo cost weigh heavily in this discussion.lkd wrote:SWAT and HRT are SMG/Rifle-response type teams. What sidearm they carry is far less important than their main weapon. Field officers, however, only have one weapon on their body.stash wrote:I wonder if the standard issue for the FBI is still the Glock in .40, I think the 23 and 27? I think their SWAT and HRT guys have some type of 1911.
I think these "caliber wars" never play out well. The 40S&W has a LONG record now of being an effective defensive caliber. So does the 9mm and the 45ACP. You don't have to like any or all of them, but if you want to say one is statistically less effective than the other, you better be willing to drag up a LOT of empirical evidence. Agencies all over the US use a variety of calibers, from the 5.7mm to the 45ACP. It's true the .40S&W is popular, and economies of scale will certainly have an effect on caliber selection with a lot of agencies. Ballistics-wise though, the difference isn't very much between it and the 9mm or 45ACP in defensive loads.
Search found 1 match
Return to “My hatred of the .40 S&W, by request”
- Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:23 pm
- Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
- Topic: My hatred of the .40 S&W, by request
- Replies: 51
- Views: 8492