To. 40 or to. 45... that is the question.

Discussion in 'Semi-Auto Handguns' started by BeyondTheBox, Nov 12, 2011.

  1. BeyondTheBox

    BeyondTheBox New Member

    2,630
    0
    0
    So I've been doing a lot of exhausting reading on the subject of the 40 caliber, and am still left with the same question as when I started.

    I am entertaining the thought of adding a higher cal pistol to my collection, but, being a small guy, I take more things into account than some more experienced and larger folk might. Things like size, weight, and recoil.

    Any suggestions on which way I should go from those whom have experienced both in varying pieces?

    Currently looking at the Taurus MilPro Duo. 40

    Thanks all.
     
  2. clr8ter

    clr8ter New Member

    4,015
    0
    0
    I shoot 40, and if I had to do it again, I might go with 9mm. Just the cost of the ammo alone would be a big draw. The 40 is also a pretty snappy round, I shoot it out of a Beretta96A1, big gun. IMHO
     

  3. Gatoragn

    Gatoragn New Member

    3,935
    0
    0
    I vote for the .45. I can find .45 ammo cheaper and more variety for it vs.
    .40.

    I had a .40, but traded it on a .45 to simplify ammo needs.

    I also like the 9mm.

    Now my pistol ammo is only .38/.357m, 9mm & .45, oh and .22lr.
     
  4. danf_fl

    danf_fl Retired

    12,363
    0
    0
    I have more .45's in my inventory than .40's
     
  5. Lindenwood

    Lindenwood New Member

    659
    0
    0
    .40 is the wanna-be solution to a problem that no longer exists... They made the 10mm (which is the only worthwhile auto caliber over 9mm, IMO) to overcome bullet deficiencies of the 80s, then weakened it down to the point that you get the same wounding as modern 9mm but with somewhat snappier recoil and reduced capacity.
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2011
  6. AIKIJUTSU

    AIKIJUTSU New Member

    2,883
    0
    0
    How 'bout getting both? Play with them for awhile to see what they're like. Then keep both of 'em. Each has its pro's and con's. The .40 spits out a medium weight (for defensive semiauto) bullet at a pretty high velocity, therefore a flatter trajectory for distance shots, hollow point expands well. The .45 fires a little heavier, wider bullet at a lower velocity (unless using a +P+ variety of ammo). The.40 penetrates well due to velocity, the .45 penetrates well due to momentum. One potential advantage the .45 has is added intimidation capability - the BG may think twice about continuing his attack if he's staring down a barrel with a hole big enough he could stick his little bitty head in it and still have enough room to wiggle his ears.
     
  7. Overkill0084

    Overkill0084 New Member

    4,910
    0
    0
    In a small pistol, I find .40 noticeably more unpleasant than .45. It's still manageable though. YMMV.
     
  8. BeyondTheBox

    BeyondTheBox New Member

    2,630
    0
    0
    Okay, but please do elucidate. How is the. 40 less pleasant?
     
  9. GlockStar

    GlockStar New Member

    50
    0
    0
    My G22 "snaps". I actually prefer it though as I feel its a powerful indicator.
     
  10. Overkill0084

    Overkill0084 New Member

    4,910
    0
    0
    The .40 runs at much higher pressures than the .45 acp. I don't remember the specific numbers, but it is significant. Suffice it to say the .40 is a more "intense" cartridge, for lack of a better term. I'd be willing to bet that any number of members could explain it better than me. The recoil is best described as sharp and of course "snappy." To be honest I really thought it was much ado about nothing. Then I received a small alloy frame .45 and I was absolutely amazed at how much more pleasant to shoot than my .40, even with SD loads.
    Practice with my XD40SC wasn't horrible, but not what I would call a joy either. The fact that I have a touch of arthritis in my wrists typically limited my practice to 50 or 60 rounds on a bad day. And to be fair, the XD40SC is a very good gun & I actually shoot it fairly well. But it it can become work rather than fun quickly.
    On the other hand, my DW CCO is a bit sharper than a steel frame full sized .45, but still noticeably less harsh than the XD. I expected much worse in the recoil dept. I can easy put 100 rds through it in a range session and enjoy it.

    I'm quite certain that I'm not the only one with a similar experience. I probably didn't explain my self very well. Truthfully, it's probably something you need to experience for yourself.
     
  11. BeyondTheBox

    BeyondTheBox New Member

    2,630
    0
    0
    I know, but it doesn't hurt to have some user experience to expand my understanding of what I'm looking at and what to expect.

    Knowledge, even when based on others' experiences, is still knowledge.

    Thanks for taking the time to do that.
     
  12. Alpha1Victor

    Alpha1Victor New Member

    782
    0
    0
    I own both .40 and .45. I shoot the .45 more accurately. The .40 seems like an over powered 9mm.

    Signing out, Alpha1victor.
     
  13. BeyondTheBox

    BeyondTheBox New Member

    2,630
    0
    0
    I think I'm going to go with a. 45. Still have much to think about in terms of more specifics, such as barrel length, overall weight, clip capacity, handle angle, and, of course (most importantly), cost. But, I'm definitely leaning toward the Taurus MilPro DUO. It's, unfortunately, a very short barrel, but few buy a 45 cal pistol with plans on distance shooting, or any handgun for that matter. I've handled it in stores and it feels good, even imagining the added weight of fully loaded clip. Plus, it's very aesthetically appealing! Hahahaha, I sound like a chick now.

    My purpose for this question was to find a piece for home security. I have my 9mm for the car and plan on a LCP .380 for personal carry amd protection.

    Thanks a ton for all the info and help fellas.
     
  14. Quentin

    Quentin New Member

    7,553
    0
    0
    I'm a fan of both the 45ACP and 40S&W (and the 9mm) and there are excellent pistol and ammo choices in all three calibers. I carried a Colt 45ACP as my sidearm for 35 years but have recently converted to a Glock 23 in 40S&W.

    I'm average sized with average hands and am 63 years old but have no problem at all firing the 40SW. It is a little more "snappy" (for want of a better term) than the 45 but not a problem at all for anyone, say 5'9" and of average strength. Maybe it would be too much for someone smaller or with a physical issue. The recoil of the 45 is more of a shove instead of the small kick of the 40 but neither is really unpleasant. Maybe I'm not that sensitive to recoil but to me the report of most firearms is more of a factor than recoil, so use adequate hearing protection and of course eye protection and I doubt you'll care whether you're firing 40 or 45. (I do notice a hot .357 or .44 Magnum recoil, now that is snappy! But fun. For a while :p)

    Of course a big factor is firepower and you get a lot more rounds into the 40's magazine which is the main reason I now carry the Glock 23. The same argument can be used for the 9mm but you definitely must use top quality JHPs for self defense to bring it up to the effectiveness of the 45ACP.

    ETA:
    I can't speak for Taurus in larger calibers but have had good luck with my Taurus MilPro PT111 DAO in 9mm. I do know many people haven't had good luck with Taurus.
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2011
  15. Jpyle

    Jpyle New Member

    4,844
    0
    0
    I have seen this discussion play out numerous times with each caliber having its fans and its detractors, invariably the topic of "stopping power" will enter the conversation. Truth is all three rounds that you have mentioned are equally capable of putting down a bad guy, the important part being shot placement. Few people survive a well placed double-tap to the chest. This brings us to the concept of "well placed" center mass shots. Different calibers, barrel lengths, bullet weights and gun weights will produce different recoils, some can control the snappier recoils...some cannot. Point is the best caliber is a subjective decision that depends on what you are most comfortable and confident staking your life on. Best advice I can offer is to try them out. Try to shoot the different calibers in a similar gun and see which one you shoot best, 2nd and 3rd shots in quick succession as well. You may quickly find one round you prefer over the others.
     
  16. JTJ

    JTJ Active Member

    9,447
    0
    36
    Before you jump on the Taurus, look at the Glock G36 and the Springfield XD45 compact or XDm45 compact. The G36 is a single stack with a smaller grip than the other Glocks, carries 6+1 and weighs about 28 oz loaded. I would rather shoot it than a g23 in 40. The XD45 compact carries 10+1 and weighs about 35 oz loaded. A tiny bit bigger than the G36 but easier to control because of the extra weight and better ergonomics. The XDm is new and I have not seen one yet.
     
  17. gollygee

    gollygee New Member

    1,019
    0
    0
    Tests I've seen show the wound channel for the .40 only sightly smaller than the .45 so I figure either is a good SD round. My first pistol was .40 S&W & I had no problem with the recoil, but when I bought my first .45, discovered that it was more enjoyable to shoot as it is not as 'snappy' as the .40.
     
  18. jimbobpissypants

    jimbobpissypants New Member

    221
    0
    0
    I feel the ONLY advantage the 40 has is capacity. Mine are far less pleasant to shoot than my 45s. In fact, I have gotten rid of all my 40s, except my 229. The 45 is just less work to shoot.
     
  19. BeyondTheBox

    BeyondTheBox New Member

    2,630
    0
    0
    The problem with is cost, that's why I'm going with Taurus. My cousin has one and we went out shooting it a few years back and it was awesome. Issue free, narry a missfire or jam. I think I'll give them a try and decide for myself.