Magnum or no ... ???

[BulletFactory]

I've heard it said that the .40 S&W is a magnum cartridge.

A friend got a 9mm and so I started poking around the load data charts. I thought that the pressures in psi would be higher in the .40 (magnum ?) than in the 9mm, but the numbers tell me that pressures are higher than the 9mm.

How far in left field am I ?

[Maximumbob54]

I would say no since there is a 10mm magnum.

[Scharfschuetze]

The 40 S&W is a shortened 10mm, which is on the heels of the 41 Remington Magnum performance wise. The FBI originally wanted the 10mm as the standard handgun for its agents, but the S&W semi-auto used proved to be too large and heavy for many agents and its magnum level recoil and muzzle blast was more than many could handle.

Enter the 40 S&W as a shortened version that was usable on smaller 9mm frames with less muzzle blast and of course less, but usable performance. Think of the 10mm v. 40 S&W as a corollary to the 38 Special v. 357 Magnum.

[AggieEE]

Has anybody, besides me, have noticed that the loading data for the 40 has gotten hotter as time has gone on? I seem to remember that at the outset a 180gr was running 850-900 fps, as a factory load, now it seems that 1K is about the norm.

[OuchHot!]

Aggie, I am going to have to look into that....I had thought it was going the other way; that the 40SnW (short n weak) was getting more weenified with time. I do think that the last 20yrs has produced more effective 9mm ammo and that a lot of development has gone that way. I just now bought my first 10mm and much of the ammo that I have been able to purchase is not greatly hotter than the .40SnW. There is some hot tamale 10mm ammo out there but much of the run of the mill is way milder than the original Jeff Cooper, et. al, effort.

[BulletFactory]

I've noticed the .40 can be a pain to load for. It took a while for me and a couple people here to figure out the leading problem in an XD .There were a couple good threads on it. One called Chamber Shearing http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?108693-Chamber-Shearing/page4 went into great detail on the round.

[Grump]

It was the opposite of the usual cartridge development, and in .38 shorts and longs being essentially supplanted by the "Special" and then supplemented by the .357 Magnum (which was surpassed with some related costs of performance by the .357 Maximum), and the old .44 getting one-upped by the .44 Magnum.

10mm started out as Jeff Cooper's and a few other peoples' brainchild to put .41 Mag level performance into a semiauto. Cursed by the delays of Doorknob & D***head's failure to secure enough magazines for the Bren 10 (a CZ-75 derivative), the 10mm languished for a few years and still never took off when Colt introduced the Delta Elite on the 1911 platform.

Then sociopaths M**** and P***** (they deserve NO memory) shot up a bunch of under-prepared FBI agents in the fabled "FBI shootout" in Miami and the FBI decided that 115-gr Winchester Silvertips in 9mm were just not enough. ONE shot failed to penetrate all the way to the heart after passing through one killer's upper arm in a sideways shot. SO the Feds quickly adopted the 10mm in, IIRC, two different S&Ws and had their problems that led to the "10mm lite" with a 180-gr JHP at about 950 fps.

Wow, right back to pretty close to the old .38-40 blackpowder cartridge.

So it was near-Magnum first then forward and backwards to a standard-velocity level cartridge with the .40 S&W. Glock tooled up rather quickly and actually beat S&W to market with their Model 22 before they got theirs on the shelves.

I noted with some amusement years ago that the Glock Annual pseudo-magazines touted for each and every model the same mantra reliability and accuracy, complete with photos of targets shot with so and so ammunition. Well, everything was shot at 25 yards and there were groups from 2 to 3 inches, no better and no worse, for everything.

Except every .40 S&W model was shot for groups at 15 yards!

AFAIK, the 10mm has not been so hard to get to shoot with better accuracy.

Peak chamber pressures no longer make a cartridge a "Magnum". We still hold to the tradition linguistically that it be bigger than something else with the same bore diameter, generally in power level. Shorten a case and keep the same peak chamber pressure, and the vast majority of the time velocity will be slower. That's why loading 9mm to IPSC "major" almost always requires long-loading the cartridges in addition to using one of a few slow-burning powders that work for that job.

[Digital Dan]

The horse's mouth, so to speak.

http://www.saami.org/specifications_and_information/specifications/Velocity_Pressure_CfPR.pdf

[44man]

The term "Magnum" is tossed around too much. It only meant the case was larger to hold more powder. Larger bottle of Champagne. Then all said a Magnum needed magnum primers.
Nothing to do with pressures since the nine is very high.
The term has a use so you do not load .44 mags in a .44 special, etc. It just says the brass is longer.

[Thumbcocker]

I have never figured out what the .40 has over a .45 acp with 185grn or 200 grn projectiles.

[Artful]

I have never figured out what the .40 has over a .45 acp with 185grn or 200 grn projectiles.

Two things - able to be fit in smaller framed pistols originally designed for the 9mm and more rounds in a magazine of the same size compared to 45 acp. So when you were limited to 10 rounds in a magazine you could have a smaller gun in 40 S&W compared to 45 ACP and if you have small hands the gun will have a smaller grip dimension.

[dragon813gt]

40 Short & Weak, you form your own opinion from there ;)

[MT Gianni]

I bought a police trade in Smith and Walther that was a piece of cake to find good accuracy with. The Kahr that followed it required sizing it to .401 to get acceptable accuracy though it outshoots the smith @ 15 yards with j words.

Magnum as originally referring to a bottle of Champagne, meant larger as in wider and taller. In no way does the 40 fit that, it remains just a fun cartridge to shoot with many of the advantages of both the 9 and 45.

[Jupiter7]

I have never figured out what the .40 has over a .45 acp with 185grn or 200 grn projectiles.

also better sectional density, provides better penetration. You'll find quite often that .40 produces more FPE than .45 loads. Personally I like .40 loaded with heavy bullets in the 800-850 range.

Its only short and and weak compared to its parent cartridge.

[mdi]

The term "Magnum" is tossed around too much. It only meant the case was larger to hold more powder. Larger bottle of Champagne. Then all said a Magnum needed magnum primers.
Nothing to do with pressures since the nine is very high.

Yep...The 40 S&W is not a "Magnum".

[BulletFactory]

Ok. Then it's fair to ask...What is a Magnum?

ETA Best avatar ever.

[JohnH]

Ok. Then it's fair to ask...What is a Magnum?

ETA Best avatar ever.

That's a really good question actually. Generally, (though not neccisarily always) the term "magnum" was applied to a cartridge to signify that it's velocity performance was greater than that of other cartridges of the same caliber. Interesting. The 30-06, when compared to other 30 caliber cartridges of the time could be described as a magnum, if velocity performance is the primary characteristic of a magnum. Yet we wouldn't consider it a magnum today (it wasn't then) and the Lazzaroni cartridges which can be 300-500 fps faster than other cartridges in the class don't have the magnum moniker attached. Meanwhile, Winchester and Remington both assaulted us with a whole class of magnum cartridges, several of which did nothing that existing cartridges didn't do and as a result, the whole "short magnum" concept has pretty much died. I agree with 44man, the term is over used and these days is more of an advertising gimmick than anything else. The real fact here is that we are dealing with a mature science, and until a new science comes along which pushes bullets without either a chemical combustion, or there is a revolution in the science (think of smokeless powder replacing black powder) the ad men are going to continue to assault our senses trying to sell us something old, repackaged as something new.

As a foot note, the terms "express" and "nitro express" were in use in cartridge names prior to the use of "magnum" as a way of pointing up a given cartridges greater power.

[Michael J. Spangler]

I'll just leave this here.

http://vintagepistols.com/40isbad.html

[M-Tecs]

Ok. Then it's fair to ask...What is a Magnum?



http://hunting.about.com/od/ammo/g/glossary_magnum.htm

[winelover]

Read the article in the August issue of G&A by Patrick Sweeny...."He's Dead Jim". The 40 S&W is dead in the FBI's, eyes. It doesn't deliver what was promised......the performance of a 45 with the capacity of a 9mm. The round has to loaded up to 45 recoil levels, in order to preform better than the 9mm! The 40 S&W is hard on guns that were designed for 9 mm, resulting in shorter service life.:violin:




I for one didn't get bitten by the 40 S&W craze. I'll hang on to my nines and if I need more power, I'll just grab a 357 Magnum!:popcorn:


Winelover

[BulletFactory]

Service life? I've got 20, to 25,000 rounds on my EDC.

I like the recoil of a 9, but that little bullet...Same reason I got a .308 instead of a .223.

[dudel]

Read the article in the August issue of G&A by Patrick Sweeny...."He's Dead Jim". The 40 S&W is dead in the FBI's, eyes. It doesn't deliver what was promised......the performance of a 45 with the capacity of a 9mm. The round has to loaded up to 45 recoil levels, in order to preform better than the 9mm! The 40 S&W is hard on guns that were designed for 9 mm, resulting in shorter service life.


Winelover

That's why I like 45 GAP.

[Petrol & Powder]

Lots of good comments above. I would not apply the term "Magnum" to the 40 S&W for the reasons already stated.
And the development of the 40 S&W was somewhat backwards when compared to other cartridges.

Drifting slightly here:
I will say that I've never seen much need for the cartridge. While some like to say that it fills the gap between the 9mm and the 45ACP; I don't see that perceived gap and being big enough to fill with another cartridge. Some like to claim the 40 S&W is heavier than a 9mm and faster than a 45; I see it as lighter than a 45 and slower than a 9mm !

I also think that the velocity & weight window in which the cartridge achieves its best accuracy is a very small window.

What it does offer is a projectile that is heavier than a 9mm at the cost of some magazine capacity. That extra weight may allow greater penetration although with the corresponding increase in frontal area of the projectile, that extra penetration may not be as significant as one would hope for.
If your goal is to stop a human being, shot placement trumps terminal ballistics every time. Given good shot placement the only demand left for the projectile is that it must possess enough energy to reach something critical. As animals go, Humans aren't that tough.
The 9mm and the 45 ACP have long records of stopping people (often resulting in death as well). Those two cartridges accomplish that goal by different mechanisms. The 9mm relies on speed and small frontal area to achieve consistent penetration. The 45 relies on mass and because it starts with more frontal area, bullet expansion isn't as critical to success.


We could fill pages talking about the development of the 40 S&W but it's all been said before.

[mdi]

Ok. Then it's fair to ask...What is a Magnum?

ETA Best avatar ever.

The term "Magnum" is tossed around too much. It only meant the case was larger to hold more powder. Larger bottle of Champagne. Then all said a Magnum needed magnum primers.


Best answer so far. There is no ballistic definition for a Magnum that I know of, ie.; PSI level, powder charge, velocity...

[BulletFactory]

No definition for an assault rifle, no definition for a magnum cartridge, and we can't get magazine vs clip straight, sigh...

A 9mm 1911 is better than a Glock .357...There, I said it. Just carry it concealed, or you're a target.

[winelover]

Service life? I've got 20, to 25,000 rounds on my EDC.

I like the recoil of a 9, but that little bullet...Same reason I got a .308 instead of a .223.

Well, I guess you never heard the term......speed kills! That little bullet is approaching the velocities of the 357 Magnum, 125 JHP a noted stopper. It's all comes down to bullet selection in pistol calibers.

FWIW....I selected the 308W in the AR configuration. However, even in carbine length.....I wouldn't want to tote that thing around all day long.

Winelover

[Lead Fred]

go to ewe tube and see the films of police killing dogs with 40s. It take 10 rounds to kill a dog.

Id carry nothing less than a 45ACP, Mrs Pard carries a 357 mag, and I think its too small

[BulletFactory]

No shortage of those videos...

CCW holders don't have that reputation.

[BulletFactory]

I wanted an AR, until a couple weeks ago. Ok, I still want one... Anyways, I have the M1A scout Squad, 18.5" It'[s in a laminated Birch stock, bedded. I wanted to see how much heavier the M-14 was than the AR, I was quite suprised to find out that the AR was only about 1.5 lb lighter. His had 2 full mags, and mine was empty. The M-14 was heavier, but not enough to go down to a .22 at a cost of $1500+.

[44man]

Notice prices today? I read gun writers that say you NEED a $4000 scope on your savage deer rifle. Notice what we taxpayers pay for the red dots the military uses. Not to mention the Mattel gun it is put on.
Then it is easy to spend $1000 to build a better 1911 when you can buy one cheaper. Best I ever shot was a DW 1911.
I just read a bow test and fell off the porcelain convenience with over $1000 each. Then over $100 for arrows.
The most accurate .22 pistol was the old standard Mark I for $37.50 and I will not part with my Mark II's, more expensive but they were still cheap at the time.
Just watch me sell a BFR!
Look at prices to build an AR, just a trigger costs as much as a rifle a few years ago.
Why issue troops a .223 that can't shoot through anything and takes thousands of rounds to kill one enemy. The MI would shoot through 2' of green oak and kill. Then they issue nines for sidearms.
The answer is always "more shots." The day of the rifleman is gone. The best of the best is the sniper, spend money there. Not a billion dollars for a magazine full of chuck rounds. I would want an M!, M14 and a .45 1911. Why would you face AK's with a toy? The cost is crazy, you could buy 50 AK's. Best stinking rifle ever built.

[BulletFactory]

If SHTF, I'm bringing 3 guns. An M-14 in composite, because it's not going to be bothered by getting wet, and I'm not going to be bothered by scratches. A 1911, and my XD sub, and that, because I've got so much time on it. Not to mention that I know it will work.

^ wut he sed