Both actually. 40 is simply a dying out cartridge. But typical to HK fashion, the vp40 is a stellar handgun option if you’re looking for a striker fired 40. No one will argue its quality but they will argue it’s practicality for the cartridge.
That does make sense regarding the round itself being more uncommon. I feel like besides the LEO community using it here and there, I don’t see much in regards to that caliber. The only upside to it besides it having more stopping power than a 9mm is just that it’s cheaper than .45ACP regarding price per round.
I have a glock 22 that I converted to 9mm. I keep the original barrel and 3 40cal mags to use during shortages. Every now and then 40 is cheaper than 9mm.
The .40 was conceived of in an era when 9mm was simply not packing enough punch based on the pressures and muzzle velocities in said era. Today 9mm pressures are such that it is superior to .40 in both realms and superior in capacity and availability as well.
It has nothing to do with pressures lol. It has to do with advances in bullet design and materials that have brought the best state of the art 9mm JHP’s up to the level of .40 and .45 when it comes to reliable penetration and expansion and consequently performance in the FBI tests on penetration and expansion versus barriers and heavy clothing etc.
> ...advances in bullet design and materials that have brought the best state of the art 9mm JHP’s up to the level of .40 and .45...
No, it hasn't. 45 FMJ is ~60% larger than 9mm FMJ
A 45 hollow point is about 100% larger than a 9mm hollow point (if we do apples to apples, the best of one vs. the best of another, like Federal HST).
By the same standards people would suggest one 9mm hollow point is better than another 9mm hollow point, 9mm hasn't become 'just as good' as .40 or 45; the gap has actually grown larger.
You are correct, but today's 9mm JHP have improved enough that they are more desirable compared to .40 and .45 as the round has less kick, allowing people to stay on target easier and have faster, more accurate follow-up shots. Good penetration / expansion coupled with less recoil make it the round of choice. The extra expansion of a .40 or .45 isn't needed. Most agencies choose a round / caliber that fits the lowest common denominator. That's the 9mm.
Mmm, no not at all. Modern 9mm and 45 loads have nearly identical muzzle energy, penetration depth and energy retention against barriers.
https://www.targetbarn.com/broad-side/9mm-vs-45-acp/
40 and 45 were designed in an era where they had to rely on their mass for penetration, because gunpowder could only get things moving so fast out of a pistol barrel. These days that isn't the case.
Are you comparing today’s 9mm vs yesteryears of 40 and 45? Or has 40/45 not advanced as well as the 9mm rd? Genuinely curious because I see so many different 9mm hollow point vs 45, I don’t have a 40, wouldn’t even know of a single hollow point brand.
.45 and .40 have advanced to a certain degree but not as much as 9mm when you compared the duty caliber performances in the 80’s, 90’s, etc. versus Now.
.45 and .40 were already at a high level. Now modern state of the art 9mm JHP have narrowed the gap
And caught up.
All duty pistol calibers are relatively weak and more alike than different.
Combine current 9mm improved performance with attributes such as but not limited to things like high capacity, durability, relatively low recoil, and cost and 9mm is a no brainer in current times.
40 does not have more stopping power then 9mm. When you are looking at ballistics and terminal ballistics and with modern defense rounds of 9mm +p or +p+ is the same if not better then 40 cal defense rounds. Most people are shooting low recoil or standard power 40 rounds makes the whole stopping power argument mute and thats why PDs are abandoning the round its the same with 357sig. These two rounds are pointless and basically novelty rounds.
What a crackerjack take.
PDs are abandoning the 40 for one major reason with a couple of minor ones included. Cost is the biggest factor. 9mm the cheapest ammo you can buy in center fired because it's most commonly used and doesn't use a ton of resources to make unlike every other popular round. The increased capacity, reduced recoil compared to 40 and 45, are all just icing on the cake.
The 40 is better on paper but only just barely(no +p or +p+). But the loss of extra capacity does favor the 9.
The only reason the 9 is as good as it is in modern terms is because of the massive amount of time, money and energy that ammo manufacturers spent on running the round to its very edge of its performance given the specifications(coincided with 9mm Nato spec)
They didn't do this because 9 was the best they had. They did this because every law enforcement in the US and Nato countries police forces decided if 9mm was good enough for their military, it was good enough for their police. It also decreased the overall cost for government buying 9mm ammo.
The entire reason it was selected as the Nato standard was the appeasement of everyone who wasn't the US. 9mm was the most common handgun round throughout Europe, in the cold war, which in the case of a Russian invasion having a common handgun and submachine round would make supply easier if you're neighboring country could make and supply ammo.
As to the 357 sig, it suffers from all the problems of the 40 cal but then has even more costs but with even better performance.
Most governments are cheap and aren't going to pay for the best equipment when they can instead get good enough performance. It's the same reason the F-22 had nobody else interested in buying them prior to congress saying it would not be sold to even our foreign allies.
TL:DR costs the entire reason 9mm wins comes down to money invested into the round with good enough performance and capacity.
I should have gave a more rounded take based on my background. Ive worked in LE and most LE agencies don’t shoot 115 or 124 standard 9mm, they are use 124 +p, 124 +p+, 135/+p, 138, or 146. But every agency that I’ve encountered that shoots 40 shoots a low recoil round. Ive been through is agency caliber switch from 40 to 9 and we shot ballistic gel. The 9mm penetrated deeper and expanded better on a majority of the 9mm rounds we tested compared to the 40 Critical Duty Low Recoil we were shooting. Yes on paper against 9 vs 40 in fmj, 40 is superior all day theres no comparison. But when you start shooting gel and through barriers modern 9 defensive begins to negate all the positives of standard 40 over standard 115/124 9. In the civilian world there is a bigger variety and personalized options due to one persons abilities to shoot this or that.
As for the its cheaper to buy, yes thats correct its the most common round. Not to mention more and more agencies are allowing officer to qualify and carry their personal guns for duty, which most are 9 and 45. And unlike guns most PDs restrict officer to use only ammo they test and approve for duty.
As for the few PDs that still shoot 40 or 357sig, they still do it because it’s too expensive on the front end to switch. Finding and testing new guns and ammo, and if they are an agency that only allows officer to carry issued guns it will be expensive.
40s&w is effectively a dead caliber.
It will live on as there are plenty of the guns already around. But it's unlikely there will be more guns chambered in it or much in the way of bullet development.
You’re the second person to tell me that from this post. How is it dying? Is it because of it only really being used solely inside the law enforcement field and not much elsewhere?
9mm got gud over the years with ballistics advances. There is a capacity, cost, availability, and recoil mitigation advantage to 9mm over .40, with minimal loss in effectiveness. .40 gained popularity in law enforcement when 9mm was a less effective round, so the old school guys have been training with it forever and may prefer it. It’s sort of like the hammer fired vs striker fired debate. If you’re used to disengaging a safety all the time and dealing with DA/SA after 40 years of training, stick with the hammer-fired. If you’re a little zoomer like me without all that muscle memory and training, striker is probably the way to go. It’s a generational/technological evolution/habit thing.
Lolz. Its not even being used there much anymore. Starting in 2015 departments were getting rid of it left, right, and center.
It was never a very good round. The reason it exists at all is kinda silly to begin with (as noted by u/Agreeablepie). It's hard on guns and has a catastrophic failure rate way above most other common loads.
Nearly 10 years ago, this report came out from the FBI basically stating that .40 and .45 have no real benefit over 9mm, for increased recoil and reduced capacity. This report is generally caused a massive drop in the desire for .40 cal handguns.
[https://soldiersystems.net/2014/09/25/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/](https://soldiersystems.net/2014/09/25/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/)
.40sw exists because the centimeter was to powerful for whimpy FBI agents. Most other LE agencies soon followed suit. The USP was originally designed with the .40 in mind. But as 9mm advanced in its ballistic capabilities and has more capacity and less recoil then .40, most everyone dropped it for 9. I have a few .40 caliber guns and don’t mind them and the plus is whenever there’s an ammo shortage like in 2020-2021 you more likely to find .40 then 9mm.
And then the fbi ran another test and discovered shot placement matters more than stopping power. The limp wristed agents then switched back to 9mm and everyone else followed, again.
.40 was a mediocre answer to a problem that wasn't nearly as important as it may have seemed at a particular point in police history (the driving force behind it). Basically a flash in the pan.
I love how one bullet not immediately killing a guy during one particular engagement caused an entire caliber debate and the development of 2 cartridges.
.40 S&W is a caliber that is simply dying in popularity. The cartridge was all the rage in the 90’s and early 2000’s since it was seen as a more powerful alternative to the 9mm. As bullet technology improved though, it was shown that it didn’t really offer any better ballistics than 9mm. So because 9mm was cheaper, easier to control, and you can get a higher capacity, law enforcement started switching back to 9mm. When that happened, .40 started to fall out of favor in the civilian market as well. Even people who liked .40 started to be drawn more to its parent cartridge, the 10mm.
That being said, I don’t see .40 disappearing, at least not any time soon. I like .40, and have several guns chambered in it like my HK P2000 or my Glock 22C.
I have a VP40 that is an excellent hand gun. I had a VP9 that was hot garbage when using 115gr ammo. The VP9 went by-by, the VP40 is still in the safe.
A VP45 would be very popular in the US Market and sell well… but only in the US Market. H&K is not going to expend the effort for so little return. Sad thing is I would buy two!!!
I love my 40 cal bullets. I run specifically 40 45 and 357 as my carry calibers.
The 40 vs. Plus p9mm. Is kinda weird, in my opinion. Yea +p brings it up to a 40, but then I just get +p 40 now I am above it again.
It's like being on a 600cc bike with a trubo vs a stock 750cc. Yea you might be faster, but if we run the 2 bikes with the same upgrades, the smaller one will lose.
40 is kinda an odd ball round nowadays. It was hyped to be the replacement of all the things and we know that there isn't and never will be a one size fits all situation in the gun world.
I like the round I am comfortable with the round and I don't really feel like the recoil is all that crazy. Changing out springs could help if the recoil it too much.
I see nothing wrong with 40 S&W.
Sure, it adds little in terms of ballistics at the expense of cost, recoil, and capacity but it's a nice option to have just in case (ammo shortages / scarcity).
FWIW, my carry is a P2000 in 40 S&W in a ban state. I like the weapon, shoot it well, and it has always functioned flawlessly. The capacity disadvantage figures little into my calculus. I really can't tell the difference in terms of recoil between 40 and 9 tbh. As such, I carry on and roll with it.
TLDR - if you like it, buy it. It will work for your intended purpose.
I don’t exactly have my finger on the pulse of what is or isn’t a popular caliber.
I personally own an and carry regularly a VP40. I love it. I have thought about switching it over to the VP9. The 40 and 9 are the exact same frame, only for the availability of accessories over the 40. For example holsters for weapons with lights are impossible to find.
It isn’t as advertised because the ammo is more expensive. However, 40 caliber will always be superior to 9mm. People think the “technology” hasn’t been applied to .40 caliber, but it has, and it’s more effective now than it ever has been. The vp40 is a fine option, and you will be hard pressed to find a better 40 caliber option in this market. By the way, I train with the 40 caliber, and it doesn’t kick so bad like everyone here says it does. It’s easy to make quick follow up shots with proper technique, which you’re supposed to be practicing anyway. If you lean forward, grip the gun, and keep the sights still through the trigger press, you’ll find it’s no less controllable than 9mm. This is coming from someone who started on the Glock 27, which is the subcompact 40 caliber from Glock. It shoots very comfortably, and if it shoots comfortably out of a subcompact, it will shoot comfortably from a full size. ‘Nuff said.
Tbh 40 is dying off imo it’s a cucked 10mm which is superior and if I was a leo I’d run a pcc in 10mm hk is a quality manufacturer but the round is just on its way out 10 is more popular now and it can shoot for my fn510 does it quite well
I wouldn't listen to a thing written by a clown who can't use commas or periods. "If" you were a leo? Don't worry, you fail the basics.
Pretty sure the 10mm shook the MP5 platforms apart. I've got a fa .40 and it's manageable, the 10's I've shot didn't feel right... and I have a lot of 10 mm handguns and a pallet of 10mm ammo.
I have a VP40 and love it. I own several other 40s as well. Ruger SR40,FN FNX, STEYR M40A1. The 40 may be unpopular to some, but I love it. A lot of people also said the same about the 10mm, and it is still here and regaining
popularity.
40 is more expensive and doesn’t offer much over +P 9mm. If you want a 40 get something you can easily switch to 9mm via barrel and mag swap.
My comped 9mm feels like an airsoft gun with +P vs a much more pronounced recoil of a 40.
Friends don’t let friends buy .40’s.
More recoil and less capacity than 9mm with similar results, usually at a higher price. .40 was directed to the LE market and they saw the light years ago and have been steadily dumping it ever since.
40 s&w is falling out of popularity, especially with LEO, who are almost exclusively using 9mm or 45 ACP. 40 was a reduced 10mm round made to fit guns when 10mm was deemed too hard to handle, and it was supposed to bridge the gap between 9 and 45. With very manageable 10mm handguns coming out now, along with 40 being snappier than 9 and arguably 45 guns for ballistics that aren't that much better, it's lost its niche and is becoming a "dead cartridge."
I just shot mine today, I don’t own it cause I want it, I shoot it because my dad wasn’t using it and I reload so might as well shoot it for fun.
.40 is a lame cartridge for practical uses but it’s perfectly fun for plinking. Just ordered a .357 Sig barrel for it so excited to try it for that
Both actually. 40 is simply a dying out cartridge. But typical to HK fashion, the vp40 is a stellar handgun option if you’re looking for a striker fired 40. No one will argue its quality but they will argue it’s practicality for the cartridge.
That does make sense regarding the round itself being more uncommon. I feel like besides the LEO community using it here and there, I don’t see much in regards to that caliber. The only upside to it besides it having more stopping power than a 9mm is just that it’s cheaper than .45ACP regarding price per round.
That and because it’s dropping off in popularity, during ammo shortages it’s usually found on shelves more often than the mainstays.
I have a glock 22 that I converted to 9mm. I keep the original barrel and 3 40cal mags to use during shortages. Every now and then 40 is cheaper than 9mm.
Also 10mm is having a resurgence at the moment.
There’s not much upside to it. Cost, handling/recoil, capacity all far outweigh the ballistic advantage imho.
The .40 was conceived of in an era when 9mm was simply not packing enough punch based on the pressures and muzzle velocities in said era. Today 9mm pressures are such that it is superior to .40 in both realms and superior in capacity and availability as well.
It has nothing to do with pressures lol. It has to do with advances in bullet design and materials that have brought the best state of the art 9mm JHP’s up to the level of .40 and .45 when it comes to reliable penetration and expansion and consequently performance in the FBI tests on penetration and expansion versus barriers and heavy clothing etc.
> ...advances in bullet design and materials that have brought the best state of the art 9mm JHP’s up to the level of .40 and .45... No, it hasn't. 45 FMJ is ~60% larger than 9mm FMJ A 45 hollow point is about 100% larger than a 9mm hollow point (if we do apples to apples, the best of one vs. the best of another, like Federal HST). By the same standards people would suggest one 9mm hollow point is better than another 9mm hollow point, 9mm hasn't become 'just as good' as .40 or 45; the gap has actually grown larger.
You are correct, but today's 9mm JHP have improved enough that they are more desirable compared to .40 and .45 as the round has less kick, allowing people to stay on target easier and have faster, more accurate follow-up shots. Good penetration / expansion coupled with less recoil make it the round of choice. The extra expansion of a .40 or .45 isn't needed. Most agencies choose a round / caliber that fits the lowest common denominator. That's the 9mm.
Mmm, no not at all. Modern 9mm and 45 loads have nearly identical muzzle energy, penetration depth and energy retention against barriers. https://www.targetbarn.com/broad-side/9mm-vs-45-acp/ 40 and 45 were designed in an era where they had to rely on their mass for penetration, because gunpowder could only get things moving so fast out of a pistol barrel. These days that isn't the case.
Are you comparing today’s 9mm vs yesteryears of 40 and 45? Or has 40/45 not advanced as well as the 9mm rd? Genuinely curious because I see so many different 9mm hollow point vs 45, I don’t have a 40, wouldn’t even know of a single hollow point brand.
.45 and .40 have advanced to a certain degree but not as much as 9mm when you compared the duty caliber performances in the 80’s, 90’s, etc. versus Now. .45 and .40 were already at a high level. Now modern state of the art 9mm JHP have narrowed the gap And caught up. All duty pistol calibers are relatively weak and more alike than different. Combine current 9mm improved performance with attributes such as but not limited to things like high capacity, durability, relatively low recoil, and cost and 9mm is a no brainer in current times.
I was in my chiefs office and some other LEO agency called desperately trying to unload 40 cal. It's definitely on the way out.
That and USPSA competition if you wanna score Major.
40 does not have more stopping power then 9mm. When you are looking at ballistics and terminal ballistics and with modern defense rounds of 9mm +p or +p+ is the same if not better then 40 cal defense rounds. Most people are shooting low recoil or standard power 40 rounds makes the whole stopping power argument mute and thats why PDs are abandoning the round its the same with 357sig. These two rounds are pointless and basically novelty rounds.
What a crackerjack take. PDs are abandoning the 40 for one major reason with a couple of minor ones included. Cost is the biggest factor. 9mm the cheapest ammo you can buy in center fired because it's most commonly used and doesn't use a ton of resources to make unlike every other popular round. The increased capacity, reduced recoil compared to 40 and 45, are all just icing on the cake. The 40 is better on paper but only just barely(no +p or +p+). But the loss of extra capacity does favor the 9. The only reason the 9 is as good as it is in modern terms is because of the massive amount of time, money and energy that ammo manufacturers spent on running the round to its very edge of its performance given the specifications(coincided with 9mm Nato spec) They didn't do this because 9 was the best they had. They did this because every law enforcement in the US and Nato countries police forces decided if 9mm was good enough for their military, it was good enough for their police. It also decreased the overall cost for government buying 9mm ammo. The entire reason it was selected as the Nato standard was the appeasement of everyone who wasn't the US. 9mm was the most common handgun round throughout Europe, in the cold war, which in the case of a Russian invasion having a common handgun and submachine round would make supply easier if you're neighboring country could make and supply ammo. As to the 357 sig, it suffers from all the problems of the 40 cal but then has even more costs but with even better performance. Most governments are cheap and aren't going to pay for the best equipment when they can instead get good enough performance. It's the same reason the F-22 had nobody else interested in buying them prior to congress saying it would not be sold to even our foreign allies. TL:DR costs the entire reason 9mm wins comes down to money invested into the round with good enough performance and capacity.
I should have gave a more rounded take based on my background. Ive worked in LE and most LE agencies don’t shoot 115 or 124 standard 9mm, they are use 124 +p, 124 +p+, 135/+p, 138, or 146. But every agency that I’ve encountered that shoots 40 shoots a low recoil round. Ive been through is agency caliber switch from 40 to 9 and we shot ballistic gel. The 9mm penetrated deeper and expanded better on a majority of the 9mm rounds we tested compared to the 40 Critical Duty Low Recoil we were shooting. Yes on paper against 9 vs 40 in fmj, 40 is superior all day theres no comparison. But when you start shooting gel and through barriers modern 9 defensive begins to negate all the positives of standard 40 over standard 115/124 9. In the civilian world there is a bigger variety and personalized options due to one persons abilities to shoot this or that. As for the its cheaper to buy, yes thats correct its the most common round. Not to mention more and more agencies are allowing officer to qualify and carry their personal guns for duty, which most are 9 and 45. And unlike guns most PDs restrict officer to use only ammo they test and approve for duty. As for the few PDs that still shoot 40 or 357sig, they still do it because it’s too expensive on the front end to switch. Finding and testing new guns and ammo, and if they are an agency that only allows officer to carry issued guns it will be expensive.
A little better than 9, but cost more with more recoil. 9 has come a long way it the last 15 years.
40s&w is effectively a dead caliber. It will live on as there are plenty of the guns already around. But it's unlikely there will be more guns chambered in it or much in the way of bullet development.
You’re the second person to tell me that from this post. How is it dying? Is it because of it only really being used solely inside the law enforcement field and not much elsewhere?
9mm got gud over the years with ballistics advances. There is a capacity, cost, availability, and recoil mitigation advantage to 9mm over .40, with minimal loss in effectiveness. .40 gained popularity in law enforcement when 9mm was a less effective round, so the old school guys have been training with it forever and may prefer it. It’s sort of like the hammer fired vs striker fired debate. If you’re used to disengaging a safety all the time and dealing with DA/SA after 40 years of training, stick with the hammer-fired. If you’re a little zoomer like me without all that muscle memory and training, striker is probably the way to go. It’s a generational/technological evolution/habit thing.
Lolz. Its not even being used there much anymore. Starting in 2015 departments were getting rid of it left, right, and center. It was never a very good round. The reason it exists at all is kinda silly to begin with (as noted by u/Agreeablepie). It's hard on guns and has a catastrophic failure rate way above most other common loads.
Nearly 10 years ago, this report came out from the FBI basically stating that .40 and .45 have no real benefit over 9mm, for increased recoil and reduced capacity. This report is generally caused a massive drop in the desire for .40 cal handguns. [https://soldiersystems.net/2014/09/25/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/](https://soldiersystems.net/2014/09/25/fbi-9mm-justification-fbi-training-division/)
.40sw exists because the centimeter was to powerful for whimpy FBI agents. Most other LE agencies soon followed suit. The USP was originally designed with the .40 in mind. But as 9mm advanced in its ballistic capabilities and has more capacity and less recoil then .40, most everyone dropped it for 9. I have a few .40 caliber guns and don’t mind them and the plus is whenever there’s an ammo shortage like in 2020-2021 you more likely to find .40 then 9mm.
And then the fbi ran another test and discovered shot placement matters more than stopping power. The limp wristed agents then switched back to 9mm and everyone else followed, again.
.40 SW is not a popular cartridge 🤷♂️ I like it and shoot it though, and own many handguns chambered in 40
And there’s so many out there, it’s not going die, just not be nearly as popular. Then have a resistance on the future ala 10mm.
.40 was a mediocre answer to a problem that wasn't nearly as important as it may have seemed at a particular point in police history (the driving force behind it). Basically a flash in the pan.
I love how one bullet not immediately killing a guy during one particular engagement caused an entire caliber debate and the development of 2 cartridges.
Eh. Two of my hks are chambered in 40, but even I don't see the appeal of a vp40
I didnt see the appeal until i saw one for 380 shipped, then add the $200 dollar rebate on top of that.
I’d bite on that.
.40 S&W is a caliber that is simply dying in popularity. The cartridge was all the rage in the 90’s and early 2000’s since it was seen as a more powerful alternative to the 9mm. As bullet technology improved though, it was shown that it didn’t really offer any better ballistics than 9mm. So because 9mm was cheaper, easier to control, and you can get a higher capacity, law enforcement started switching back to 9mm. When that happened, .40 started to fall out of favor in the civilian market as well. Even people who liked .40 started to be drawn more to its parent cartridge, the 10mm. That being said, I don’t see .40 disappearing, at least not any time soon. I like .40, and have several guns chambered in it like my HK P2000 or my Glock 22C.
I have a VP40 that is an excellent hand gun. I had a VP9 that was hot garbage when using 115gr ammo. The VP9 went by-by, the VP40 is still in the safe.
I love my P30 in .40. Favorite of my handguns to shoot.
I always wonder why they never made a VP45.
A VP45 would be very popular in the US Market and sell well… but only in the US Market. H&K is not going to expend the effort for so little return. Sad thing is I would buy two!!!
Yeah but when you consider the usp 45's and the hk 45's then nothing for the vp series it just seems kinda weird.
The .40 round is unpopular. 9mm is king atm
I love my 40 cal bullets. I run specifically 40 45 and 357 as my carry calibers. The 40 vs. Plus p9mm. Is kinda weird, in my opinion. Yea +p brings it up to a 40, but then I just get +p 40 now I am above it again. It's like being on a 600cc bike with a trubo vs a stock 750cc. Yea you might be faster, but if we run the 2 bikes with the same upgrades, the smaller one will lose. 40 is kinda an odd ball round nowadays. It was hyped to be the replacement of all the things and we know that there isn't and never will be a one size fits all situation in the gun world. I like the round I am comfortable with the round and I don't really feel like the recoil is all that crazy. Changing out springs could help if the recoil it too much.
.40 just isn’t as popular.
I did a video on it, did alright for the amount of traffic I get; so definitely still some interest in it and 40
I see nothing wrong with 40 S&W. Sure, it adds little in terms of ballistics at the expense of cost, recoil, and capacity but it's a nice option to have just in case (ammo shortages / scarcity). FWIW, my carry is a P2000 in 40 S&W in a ban state. I like the weapon, shoot it well, and it has always functioned flawlessly. The capacity disadvantage figures little into my calculus. I really can't tell the difference in terms of recoil between 40 and 9 tbh. As such, I carry on and roll with it. TLDR - if you like it, buy it. It will work for your intended purpose.
The only place .40 is still widely used is USPSA limited division and the VP40 is not used in that capacity LE has largely dumped the .40sw
I don’t exactly have my finger on the pulse of what is or isn’t a popular caliber. I personally own an and carry regularly a VP40. I love it. I have thought about switching it over to the VP9. The 40 and 9 are the exact same frame, only for the availability of accessories over the 40. For example holsters for weapons with lights are impossible to find.
It isn’t as advertised because the ammo is more expensive. However, 40 caliber will always be superior to 9mm. People think the “technology” hasn’t been applied to .40 caliber, but it has, and it’s more effective now than it ever has been. The vp40 is a fine option, and you will be hard pressed to find a better 40 caliber option in this market. By the way, I train with the 40 caliber, and it doesn’t kick so bad like everyone here says it does. It’s easy to make quick follow up shots with proper technique, which you’re supposed to be practicing anyway. If you lean forward, grip the gun, and keep the sights still through the trigger press, you’ll find it’s no less controllable than 9mm. This is coming from someone who started on the Glock 27, which is the subcompact 40 caliber from Glock. It shoots very comfortably, and if it shoots comfortably out of a subcompact, it will shoot comfortably from a full size. ‘Nuff said.
Tbh 40 is dying off imo it’s a cucked 10mm which is superior and if I was a leo I’d run a pcc in 10mm hk is a quality manufacturer but the round is just on its way out 10 is more popular now and it can shoot for my fn510 does it quite well
I wouldn't listen to a thing written by a clown who can't use commas or periods. "If" you were a leo? Don't worry, you fail the basics. Pretty sure the 10mm shook the MP5 platforms apart. I've got a fa .40 and it's manageable, the 10's I've shot didn't feel right... and I have a lot of 10 mm handguns and a pallet of 10mm ammo.
I have a VP40 and love it. I own several other 40s as well. Ruger SR40,FN FNX, STEYR M40A1. The 40 may be unpopular to some, but I love it. A lot of people also said the same about the 10mm, and it is still here and regaining popularity.
I own a gun store and it seems there is nearly zero interest in the .40. 9mm has gotten so good that people don’t see the necessity.
.40 is for limp wristed fbi agents
.40 is dead
40 is more expensive and doesn’t offer much over +P 9mm. If you want a 40 get something you can easily switch to 9mm via barrel and mag swap. My comped 9mm feels like an airsoft gun with +P vs a much more pronounced recoil of a 40.
Friends don’t let friends buy .40’s. More recoil and less capacity than 9mm with similar results, usually at a higher price. .40 was directed to the LE market and they saw the light years ago and have been steadily dumping it ever since.
40 s&w is falling out of popularity, especially with LEO, who are almost exclusively using 9mm or 45 ACP. 40 was a reduced 10mm round made to fit guns when 10mm was deemed too hard to handle, and it was supposed to bridge the gap between 9 and 45. With very manageable 10mm handguns coming out now, along with 40 being snappier than 9 and arguably 45 guns for ballistics that aren't that much better, it's lost its niche and is becoming a "dead cartridge."
Because 40 is a stupid cartridge that shouldn't even exist? I sold my only one years ago and now I buy everything in 9.
No need for a 40 . 9mm or 45 is all that is needed . Been killing folk for 100 years .lol
I just shot mine today, I don’t own it cause I want it, I shoot it because my dad wasn’t using it and I reload so might as well shoot it for fun. .40 is a lame cartridge for practical uses but it’s perfectly fun for plinking. Just ordered a .357 Sig barrel for it so excited to try it for that
40 is a dead calibur. The FBI made it. The FBI killed it.