G
Guest
·Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
The .40 S&W cartridge seems, to me, to have been birthed under somewhat dubious circumstances. The nipped-off little 10 mil is a direct result of recoil sensitivity on the part of the FBI's Agents, at the time of the original 10mm auto cartridge's adoption into that agency's service.
Many people believe that because of the peculiar way that the shortening and charge reduction affected the cartridge's geometry, operating pressures, and velocities, the bullet simply does not stabilize as well, resulting in a round that is somewhat less accurate than its other service-grade counterparts, such as the 9mm, .45 ACP, and 357 SIG.
I'm personally tempted to agree with them, having seen many more accuracy problems with .40s than with any other caliber I am aware of, and having never seen a group turned out by a .40 which I found genuinely impressive. This is not to say that the .40 is incapable of generating the level of accuracy necessary for good combat shooting, but more to say that it is less than ideal as a bullseye gun, and more likely to noticeably exaggerate any accuracy problem already present in a given example of any service-grade automatic. I hate to think that the most popular caliber in U.S. law enforcement might be deficient, in some way, but I've just never seen enough to give me any reason to believe anything else to be the case.
One or two examples is not enough, I really need the .40 owners to come out of the woodwork, and show me a lot of 25 yard, sub-2.5" groups, before this nagging doubt of mine can really be put to bed.
I'm not even voting in the poll, either. The jury's still out on this one, with me.
Thanks!
Many people believe that because of the peculiar way that the shortening and charge reduction affected the cartridge's geometry, operating pressures, and velocities, the bullet simply does not stabilize as well, resulting in a round that is somewhat less accurate than its other service-grade counterparts, such as the 9mm, .45 ACP, and 357 SIG.
I'm personally tempted to agree with them, having seen many more accuracy problems with .40s than with any other caliber I am aware of, and having never seen a group turned out by a .40 which I found genuinely impressive. This is not to say that the .40 is incapable of generating the level of accuracy necessary for good combat shooting, but more to say that it is less than ideal as a bullseye gun, and more likely to noticeably exaggerate any accuracy problem already present in a given example of any service-grade automatic. I hate to think that the most popular caliber in U.S. law enforcement might be deficient, in some way, but I've just never seen enough to give me any reason to believe anything else to be the case.
One or two examples is not enough, I really need the .40 owners to come out of the woodwork, and show me a lot of 25 yard, sub-2.5" groups, before this nagging doubt of mine can really be put to bed.
I'm not even voting in the poll, either. The jury's still out on this one, with me.
Thanks!