P dog shooter made the following comment on the "shooting under pressure" thread. I decided to start a new discussion rather than ruin the other thread.

"The 40S&W has proved it self to be highly effective defensive rd. Loaded with good ammo not the frist poorly designed 180 grs for it. The best 135gr thru 165 gr is where the 40 shines.

The newer 180s are now making some good head way also."

I happen to like the 180 grain bullet in the 40. Not sure why though! So I would like to hear the pros and cons. I guess I like the 180 because it is the heavier bullet for that caliber.
Peter.

I believe the 180 would be considered standard weight for that caliber.

I prefer the 150-165 gr range for commercial pistols such as the SIG P229 and the CZ/TZ/Witness pistols.

For heavily built 1911 based pistols I prefer the 135 at speed for business use. I have hunted with that and at 1350 to 1400 fps the terminal effect is terrifying.

The frist 180' suffer from low vel poor bullet designs. Not enough slide impluse to make sure you have complete funtioning.

The newest 180 have a slight increase in vel and better bullet designs.

I personlly prefer bullets in the 145 to 165 range. At the highest vel one can safely push them.

I guess that is what I am asking though. I too think the 180 is the "standard" just based on the caliber, but, also, I was thinking that penetration might be better, especially through glass say. Has there been any research on this? I must confess that my testing has not been rigorous! I bought a variety of reloads from Georgia Arms (various bullet weights), tested them and the 180's seemed more accurate,so, I just bought 180 gr. bullets and did some load development with those.
Peter.

I believe the 180 is standard for the "caliber" but that caliber is .40, or more effectively 10MM. And that is where I feel the 180 bullets are at their best, in the 10MM round and not the 40 S&W. As p dog shooter states, in the 40S&W the 180 bullets suffer from lack of effective velocity to perform at their best.

It is my opinion that the 155-165 grain bullets are better suited to the 40S&W. But it is just my opinion.

Larry, interesting! I have a 10mm and my go to (and only) load is a 200 grain bullet either lead or JFP at 1200 fps. I have not chronographed my 40S&W loads recently. I will do do.
Peter.

I saw some testing on the lastet grestest 180 gr from federal. They do go through windsheild glass very well.

I carry 165 Rem GS's in mine. I also brought a case of Fiocci 145gr 1150fps years ago they don't make it any more.

In all the testing I did with it seem to be a great bullet When I use up my GS's I'll start to carry that But right now its in my just in case supply.

I saw a 350 car hit blk bear shot in the neck with 180gr federals HSs some years back the bear had to be finshed off with a 12 ga.

When the bear was skined we found the bullets 4 of them. The bullets had penatraed a whole 4 inchs with no expantion and didn't brake the spine/neck.

I was not impress with 180 gr federals at that time range was about 5 yards

If you are buying 40cal ammo make sure its is full vel and power loads. They do make mid vel loads and they are not as good.

I have some Georgia Arms reloads and some White Box. Other than those I just shoot my own reloads
Peter.

I like tougher medium weight bullets for the .40 S&W.

I tried a 155 grain Speer Gold Dot loaded to 1200 fps on a gallon plastic milk jug filled with water and placed a one inch thick phone book behind.

Shot the jug from about 21 feet and found the bullet in the back half of the book, flattened out, not very good penetration.

Well, I just picked up a Glock 22 so I will go back and try my supply of various Georgia Arms reloads. I should reiterate that my first criteria is accuracy. I always group at 25 yards. Once I find a bullet weight that the gun seems to like then I buy some bullets and reload.
Peter

quote:

Originally posted by N_Coran:
I like tougher medium weight bullets for the .40 S&W.

I tried a 155 grain Speer Gold Dot loaded to 1200 fps on a gallon plastic milk jug filled with water and placed a one inch thick phone book behind.

Shot the jug from about 21 feet and found the bullet in the back half of the book, flattened out, not very good penetration.

Not many loads will exit a 1" thick dry phone book after going through a gallon jug of water. A stack of thurghly wet news print or pone books of about 15" is a good test of expansion and if useing news print 5 to 10 shots can be shot into the same media without interfering with each other. This is a good way to test each load against each other in penetration and expansion and straight line penetration. I like to place 4 layers a denium in front of the wet pack

They do make "reduced recoil" ammo but these are not good performers. Most others work fine. I used to use 155 hydrashoks but now for carry I use Corbon DPX , 135gr all copper Barnes bullet.

Only thing I can say about the 40 S&W is that I get annoyed picking up the brass thinking it's 45 ACP.

40 S&W is a high pressure load, sensitive to seating depth. The longer OAL of a heavier bullet is going to make seating depth/pressure issues all the more critical.

Maybe I'm old school -- I opt for the heaviest bullet I can find in any caliber. We looked at 185 gr. JHP in +P loads for 45 ACP. They're impressive, but the 230 gr. JHP is the one that gets used.

Easy to get over-pressure on a 40 S&W with a bullet that's sunk deep seated into the case because of recoil or whatever. Heavier bullets are deep seated to begin with.

I really like the Double tap 165 grain 1200 FPS and the 155 at 1275 FPS. I have tried many different brands through my Glock 27, at least 10. The most accurate with my Crimsin Trace and hardest hitting was the Double tap.

Regards PAH.

Well my wife carries a .40cal and uses Cor-Bon in the 165 grain weight. She also keeps every 3rd shot a factory solid in the magazine too. This helps on any penetration.

Well, I may have to revise my thinking:

http://forums.accuratereloadin...7611043/m/7281068551

Peter.

If you want a 180 Gr. load. Look at the Ranger T.

For duty use, I never understood the logic behind using 165 gr. when you can use 147 Gr in 9MM, the penetration difference is less than an inch difference, you would need a ruler to measure, same goes for 230 gr .45. Use quality ammo, low in flash, heavy weight for caliber bullets.

CZ, I have a good 180 grain load. I was just surprised at the accuracy of the 155 gr. load that I tried. I have not chrono'ed it yet. Interesting comment on the 147 gr. 9mm load as that is one of the accuracy loads of my Glock 17L.
Peter.

The 180 is going to give the best penetration but may not shot as good accuracy wise as the 155 or 165, least wise not in our Glocks.

At typical gunfighting distances. The difference in accuracy would be insignificant. We are talking Combat Accuracy here, not Match accuracy. Would it make a difference, if your shot was not in the 10 ring, but instead the 9, or even 8 ring ? Dead perp either way.

I would be more concerned about flash signature for a duty load. Given the amount of training and practice the avg. LEO gets, I don't think a slightly more accurate load, would even be discernable.

If you are going to drop all the way down to a 155 Gr bullet, then why not stay with 9MM and use the 147 gr load, with significantly less recoil than a .40 and have only 8 gr. less of bullet weight. Penetration would be about the same as well, with quality Duty ammo.

quote:

Given the amount of training and practice the avg. LEO gets, I don't think a slightly more accurate load, would even be discernable.

I don't think Peter is the average LEO. He shoots his guns more then once a year, actually knows how to clean and oil them, and can kill a dog without spraying a neighborhood with 33 rounds hitting every house and SUV on the block.

Having said all that CZ, I have to agree with you that the 165 Looks really good in the .40.
Spear gold dots with AA7 and a 5" barrel: at 1233 fps it's producing over 550 fpe.

Cartridge : .40 S&W (SAAMI)
Bullet : .400, 165, Speer HP GD 4397
Useable Case Capaci: 11.190 grain H2O = 0.727 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 1.135 inch = 28.83 mm
Barrel Length : 5.0 inch = 127.0 mm
Powder : Accurate No.7

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 72 8.00 902 298 14486 3097 61.3 0.721
-18.0 74 8.20 926 314 15414 3232 62.7 0.702
-16.0 75 8.40 951 331 16401 3369 64.0 0.682
-14.0 77 8.60 975 349 17451 3507 65.3 0.664
-12.0 79 8.80 1000 367 18568 3646 66.6 0.645
-10.0 81 9.00 1025 385 19758 3786 67.9 0.627
-08.0 83 9.20 1050 404 21026 3927 69.2 0.608
-06.0 84 9.40 1076 424 22378 4068 70.5 0.591
-04.0 86 9.60 1102 445 23819 4209 71.8 0.574
-02.0 88 9.80 1127 466 25360 4350 73.0 0.558
+00.0 90 10.00 1153 487 27006 4491 74.2 0.542
+02.0 92 10.20 1180 510 28767 4632 75.5 0.527
+04.0 93 10.40 1206 533 30653 4772 76.7 0.512 ! Near Maximum !
+06.0 95 10.60 1233 557 32672 4910 77.8 0.497 ! Near Maximum !
+08.0 97 10.80 1260 582 34837 5048 79.0 0.484 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 99 11.00 1287 607 37173 5184 80.1 0.470 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

quote:

Originally posted by Antelope Sniper:

quote:

Given the amount of training and practice the avg. LEO gets, I don't think a slightly more accurate load, would even be discernable.

I don't think Peter is the average LEO. He shoots his guns more then once a year, actually knows how to clean and oil them, and can kill a dog without spraying a neighborhood with 33 rounds hitting every house and SUV on the block.

!

Disclaimer time. The above quote says, avg Law enforcement Officer and is no reflection upon, Peter, Adam, or anyone particular person for that matter.

I do think the generality does hold water.

quote:

I do think the generality does hold water.

No disagreement here.
Considering this is what alot of average big-city LEO shooting looks like:

http://www.policeone.com/offic...-95-rounds-into-SUV/

95 rounds fired
4 into the bad guy who lived.
1 into one of their own.
90 into the wild blue younder.

Something heaver in the 165-180gr range would of probably helped penetrate the vehicle. In the original video footage I seen to remember alot of these little 9mm bouncing off the windshield.

Hmmm, I have some AA#7 I will have to try it in the 40S&W. I have used it quite a bit in the 9mm.
Peter.

OK. I am glad no one is offended and that the folks here are Reality based.

I am not a big fan of the .40. I feel it is a compromise.

While I can see some Agencies that want to upgrade from 9 going to .45, but not to .40. .45 will have a softer recoil impulse for the lesser shooters and just as greater or slightly greater penetration than .40.

That being said, Ballistics tests show less than a 1" difference in pentration between

9MM 124 Gr +P, 147 Gr

.40 180 Gr or 165 Gr.

.45 230 Gr.

all the above penetrate over 12", not not more than 1-1 1/4" more than that.

Agencies can ponder which one of the above is right for them, at the end of the day, all will do the job, if proper shot placement is in effect.

Cold Zero, the .40 cal loaded with the 180 grain bullet is the only way the .40cal passed the FBI tests, just in case you don't know. I like the .45acp and the 10mm caliber!

Blue Dog the FBI tests were set up to solve the problem they had because of the 1986 shoot out.

Not to decide what was the best.

The trouble with setting a up a test is you start building for the test. The FBI buys millions of rounds a year they get what they want.

Some of the other big federal agencys went with lighter bullets instead. They also buy millions of rounds they get what they want.

Give me a hand gun that goes bang every time I pull the trigger in a decent cailiber 9mm or bigger for duty use with a well designed bullet that shoots around 4 inchs or under at 25 yards and I well carry it with out worry.

For duty use in the last 30 plus years I have carry 357 mags, 9mms, and 40's I haven't worried at all. But I'll also put the best ammo I could get in them. for them. For a lot of those years I could have carried any thing I wanted.

Personnaly I think if you can get the job done in 6 shots or under a mid sized 357 revolver is hard to beat.

In autos a perfer the smaller frame sizes and the higher mag cap. of the 9mm, 40cal autos.

I do own and shoot 45s and 44 mags.

quote:

Originally posted by Blue Dog:
Cold Zero, the .40 cal loaded with the 180 grain bullet is the only way the .40cal passed the FBI tests, just in case you don't know. I like the .4acp and the 10mm caliber!

165 Gr JHP .40 S. & W. @ 1,076 F.P.S., provides 12.5" inches of Penetration, or about 1/4" less than the 180 Gr JHP .40.

Now, do you know of anyone large enough that with 12.5" of penetration, from any angle, would not have their Hart and Lungs penetrated with that much penetration?


Personally, I am not a fan of the .40, but clearly the 165 Gr. will do the job. I am a fan however of heavy for caliber bullets though.

Cold Zero, I only know what I read in the papers!

Well, the wife shoots a .40 cal in the 165 with a Wolf barrel, tungston guide rod and heavier springs in her Glock model 27 sub-compact. All of our testing is in wet news print and no 165 grn bullet out of a .40 cal is going over 7.5 inches!!!

I myself don't shoot a .40cal, instead I carry 2 of those ugly plastic pistols called GLOCKS with after market springs, guide rod and trigger jobs at 3-lbs in the 10mm with 180 grn bullets and after market barrels too.