Problems with .40 cal.

[The Annoyed Man]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015 ... all-apart/

When I hear about a problem with a Glock, I know its going to be a Glock chambered in .40 S&W. The Bardstown, KY POlice Department are replacing their Glock 23 pistols after the guns started falling apart from hairline cracks they developed. Officers who cannot bring their own gun to work, or use one of the departments spare sidearms, are having to make do without a pistol.

I used to own a .40 cal HK USPc, and I loved the pistol but didn't like the caliber just because I didn't shoot it that well. But I realize that a lot of people like the caliber and depend on it, so, whatever floats your boat. I ran across this post at the firearm blog, and it occurred to me after reading it that virtually every picture I've ever seen of a Glock Kaboom involved a .40 cal pistol. Now, we tend to write most of those off to things like bullet setback or over-pressure hand loads, but in this case, these are police guns using department issued ammo.......and it is tearing up pistols which otherwise have a well-earned reputation for ruggedness and reliability.

I know that there are a lot of members here who carry .40 cal Glocks, and I am NOT suggesting you get rid of them and carry something else. I'm just posting this as a "public service announcement" to you .40 cal Glock guys to be sure and not take your gun's reliability for granted, and to make sure that it is well maintained and regularly inspected for cracks in the slide and such.

For that matter, these are probably wise words for any brand of pistol chambered in .40 S&W.

[Jumping Frog]

One of the issues with some .40 S&W handguns is a design issue. There are some manufacturers who originally started with a 9mm design. They then extended the same design into a .40 S&W package, which basically means enlarging the bore while keeping the same barrel O.D. in the same size frame. I've "heard" the .40 S&W model is thus less robust than the same gun in a 9mm model.

As the .40 S&W caliber reached critical mass in the market, apparently some manufacturers changed their design process to first size the handgun to have a robust safety margin for .40 S&W, and then downsized the .40 S&W design to make the 9mm version. Although the 9mm version is still more robust than .40 S&W dies due to the barrel size, at least the design baseline is provides a robust safety factor for the .40 S&W.

As far as .40 Glock Ka-BOOMs specifically, that is directly related to the unsupported chamber. It is such a well-known issue that there are products now sold by reloading equipment manufacturers to directly address removing the case bulge from .40 S&W Glock-fired cases.

[C-dub]

Another friend of mine says it has something to do with not being a fully supported chamber. He had problems with one he had a few years back even with factory ammo.

I also had two Glocks in .40 caliber for about 10 years, but didn't have any trouble with them.

[ShootDontTalk]

A lot, I think most, of the Glock problems with the 40 came about because of the so-called unsupported chamber which was believed to be necessary to insure proper feeding of certain bullet designs. Bullet design moved on and Glock redesigned the chamber to better support the case. There was no change in the Gen nomenclature, they just started building with the new chamber. Curiously, others copied the unsupported chamber design that gave some problems. Not surprisingly, they had problems also.

I've owned and shot a G23 and G27 for many years and check every fired cartridge for the "Glock bulge." I've never seen one. I've not ever seen a department with a certified armorer have any issues. Many small departments don't have the budget for an armorer and so they rely on the officers to be their own armorers - usually with predictable results.

The other issue which is not as easy to address is bullet setback caused by chambering and re chambering the same round. In duty loads the 40 powder load is a near compressed load. Push the bullet back in the loaded round and you get large variations in pressure. Quality factory loads and savvy reloaders comprehend this and crimp more aggressively. You still see some smaller houses whose loads will set back easily.

[The Annoyed Man]

I've owned and shot a G23 and G27 for many years and check every fired cartridge for the "Glock bulge." I've never seen one.

And as I recall, my USPc had an unsupported chamber too, and I never saw a bulge on spent brass either.

[CC Italian]

Never had problem with my 27 but i did buy it before my glock 20. I only carry it once in a while now that i have a 9mm shield.

Will i ever buy another 40? Probably not. I will eventually sell this 40 and get a glock 29 .

[CC Italian]

I would assume 95 percent of all 40 kaboom is bullet setback. Also, most of them i have seen have been with 180 grain loads. like Andy said, a tiny bit of setback in some 40 loads causes huge spikes in pressure. That and the unsupported chamber can and have led to boom.

[jmra]

I've never had an issue with any of the Glock .40s I've owned. Still have a gen 3 and gen 4 G23. Moving to 9mm and would sell the G23s if it wasn't for the 4000 rounds of .40 ammo sitting in the safe.

[CC Italian]

Same here but not that many rounds anymore. I am down to 300 . I had the 27 all but sold last year But then the buyer backed out.

Local dealers offered 350 and my guess is i will sell it and move on one day.

[C-dub]

I've never had an issue with any of the Glock .40s I've owned. Still have a gen 3 and gen 4 G23. Moving to 9mm and would sell the G23s if it wasn't for the 4000 rounds of .40 ammo sitting in the safe.

I switched to .45 before I knew about any of the issues with the .40. I probably only had around 2000 rounds and at least a dozen mags and a few holsters. I sold all the ammo and most of the mags. I still have a few G22 and one or two G27 mags that I've been unable to find new homes for. Still have most of the holsters too.

[jmra]

Same here but not that many rounds anymore. I am down to 300 . I had the 27 all but sold last year But then the buyer backed out.

Local dealers offered 350 and my guess is i will sell it and move on one day.

If I were to find some used wolf conversion barrels I'll probably just convert them to 9mm and keep them.

[ShootDontTalk]

I went the other way with my 23 and 27 rather than selling. For a "9mm" I just bought a stock barrel for a G32. That barrel works in both the 23 and 27 and gives the velocity of the 32 in the little 27. I use Underwood .357 Sig loads here:

http://www.underwoodammo.com/357-sig-12 ... low-point/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

125gr Gold Dot at 1475fps. Very close to .357 Mag performance with none of the drawbacks. I'll probably add a conversion barrel for the 27 to turn it into a 26 when I want to shoot cheap 9mm practice rounds. I'm looking at threaded barrels for that.

BTW I have a G31 to 9mm Lone Wolf conversion barrel which has never been opened, if anyone is interested PM me.

[Deltaboy]

I been running a Sigma 40 've for the past 4 years and I been well pleased with it.

[HadEmAll]

Beretta PX4 .40
Beretta PX4SC .40
Browning HP .40
Glock 27 .40
S&W M&P .40
S&W M&PC .40
S&W Shield .40
Sig P250SC .40

Love the .40. I got interested in it during the time the then Border Patrol was having great success with it.

Like the Border Patrol then, I carry 155 grain JHPs by Federal, Speer, Remington, or Winchester. They only used the Remington and Federal loads, and there was always plenty available at gun shows for some reason.

I never had any interest in the 180 grain loads. The 155s chrono from +/- 1200 fps in my longer barreled pstols to +/- 1100 in the shorter ones.

Great combination of power and capacity.

I don't reload the .40, so am shooting new cases each shot.

No concerns here, even with my Gen 3 G27.