9mm VS .40 S&W

What Do You Prefer? 9mm or .40 S&W?

  • I prefer a 9mm handgun

    Votes: 92 24.5%
  • I prefer a .40 S&W handgun

    Votes: 175 46.7%
  • I prefer a different caliber

    Votes: 64 17.1%
  • Well, it depends.

    Votes: 44 11.7%

  • Total voters


New member
Glock 27 loaded with Cor-Bon .40 S&W 135 GR. JHP 1325 FPS/526 FTLBS. No worries at all.

Put that round in a Sig P229 and you have Accurate Stopper!
That Cor Bon round is a hot one that is a documented stopper.


Thank God I'm alive!
I subscribe to the Gabe Saurez school of thought that the higher capacity of most nines compared to a 40 or 45 trumps the bigger size of them.

Higher capacity shouldn't matter if you're able to hit what you're shooting at. Anyway this surprises me coming from you, HK4U.


New member
9mm XD Sub-Compact

I like the 9mm. I use the Speer Gold Dot, 124 gr. JHP. That is for my everyday carry. For the range, 100 rounds of the Wal-Mart Winchester at 20 bucks. I put all the rounds through a 9mm pistol gage. You have to be careful with this ammo as I have found a few, but not too many, that where oversized and would have jammed.


New member
Honestly I say you are best off with what you feel more comfortable with. Yes the .40 is more of a man stopper, but if they are more comfortable with the 9mm then I say go with the 9mm. If they are a quicker shot with the 9mm because they are more comfortable with it, those extra seconds may save their life. Some of you say that it is better to have more of a man stopper, however I would much rather be shooting with something I know I am comfortable with. Some one on this site (can't remember who), has in their signature, "It is better to have well placed shots with a .22 than misses with a .44 magnum". I think this statement fits this question well.

In my opinion, two well placed shots to the chest with a 9mm can do just as much damage and stop a threat as a .40

I heard a quote one time by someone in the military. They were asked what they thought about the military switching to the 9mm round instead of the .45. The person who asked said it was stupid because the .45 was much more of a man stopper. The military person's response was "If I put two in your heart and one in your head...are you gonna know the difference?"

If you are comfortable with the .40, go with the .40. All I am saying is go with what you are comfortable with.

Capo i found that clip you are talking about. The part when he says that happens around 130.

YouTube - navy seals - mp5 and pistol


New member
9mm for me because I'm a cheapskate at the range. The effectiveness vs. $ seems good enough with quality ammunition in a quality gun. I've shot a .40 a while ago and liked shooting 9 better.

9mm holes in the BG are better than .40 holes in the walls around him :)


Thank God I'm alive!
What about the 10mm? I hear that it's basically a .45 on steroids, but that the recoil is also a beast on them.


New member
I prefer 9mm

First of all to be proficient marksman you need to practice. I practice at least once a month at the range with my XD9 (16 shot mag)...I tend to practice with either 2 or 3 shot burst.
Unless you are independently wealthy you may go broke going the range with a .40 glock...A 9mm glock you can get a box of 100-9mm FMJ for $20-$25...
ANd for the people that say they need the stopping power of a .40 to me is a bit of bull...I bet you will stop if you get caped by a 3 shot burst of a 9mm...if not I have 13 more in the mag.


New member
Higher capacity shouldn't matter if you're able to hit what you're shooting at. Anyway this surprises me coming from you, HK4U.

Don't know why it would suprise you? Anyway higher capacity matters a lot if you are dealing with multiply targets.


Obama is a mack daddy!
What about the 10mm? I hear that it's basically a .45 on steroids, but that the recoil is also a beast on them.
The 10mm is like a .40 s&w on steroids. Same bullet size, longer case.
The 10mm is basically a "magnum" .40 S&W. The only difference is that the 10mm came before the .40 S&W. Historically with your special/magnum rounds, the special round is first then the magnum round is engineered later. In the case of the .38/.357 and .44 the late Elmer Keith along with Remington and S&W engineered the magnum rounds. There is talk of a .500 S&W special. The .500 S&W magnum came first engineered by Cor-Bon and S&W.

I own three 10mm pistols and looking to add a fourth; a steel frame Para P-16.40 which can easily be converted to 10mm. It should just require a barrel replacement. With a heavier recoil spring the 10mm shouldn't be too bad.

I can comment that not only is the recoil a beast but the ammo is pretty expensive because it is no longer a mainstream caliber. The recoil and wear and tear on pistols is why the FBI dropped it in favor of the .40 S&W. It is popular enough that the ammo isn't difficult to obtain. It's also a very good round to reload.


I don't think that muzzle velocity is that important at close range (and I plan to do any defensive shooting at very close range), and aside form the accuracy (anything going into the heart or the head is a stopper), I would think that what the bullet does inside the body is important, thus jacketed hollow-points in my .40.


NRA Member
The Buffalo Bore (BB) 40 S&W +P are the best 40 cal rounds that you can get. However BB posts a warning that these may not be safe in some pistols that don't fully support the case head. This is directed primarily at Glocks which don't fully support the case head. In any event, if you can use them, their 155 gr +p will produce almost 600 foot pounds (ft-lbs) of energy in a 5-inch barrel and and over 500 ft-lbs in the 3.75-inch barrel of the little Sig 229. These are close to .357 mag energies and way better potential stoppers than any 9mm load.

1. Item 23A/20: 155gr. Speer Uni Core

a. Custom made 1911 with Nowlin (5inch barrel) = 1318 fps
b. Taurus PT 100 (4.9 inch barrel) = 1249 fps
c. Sig 229 (3.75 inch barrel) = 1221

Anyway, just my opinion and opinions are kind of what makes this forum so much fun!
Last edited:


9mm vs. .40 S&W

Personally, I carry a .357 Magnum snubby most of the time because it is more concealable than any of my three 9mm's. To me it matters less that I only have five shots instead of 15 or 17 because I know I can place them where I need to and an accurate triple-tap with a .357 is just as good as a Howitzer because the end result is the same - one dead dirtbag! I can put 15 shots into 2" in rapid fire with my P89 and can put all five in the same area rapid fire with the .357, so either way it adds up to a bad guy leaving in a body bag. I am getting a .45 though, but just because I want to have it while I still have the chance to get it. Bottom line is, as someone said earlier, a well-placed shot with a .22 is just as good as one with a .50 cal. Go for whatever you can handle the best and is most accurate for you.


New member
I like the 9mm. i never have an issue finding ammo its cheep and most of all i am comfortable shooting the 9mm. the discussion of what is better will last forever. but when talking about stopping power i do have this to say. I work as an EMT in a busy metro city and I have seen more GSW's than I care to remember. but, i have never seen a bullet that did not win when it was shot in self defense. be it a 22 a 357, 380 a 40 or a 9mm ect. when i show up on those calls, all my patients are either dead, about to die or injured to the point that they no longer present a threat.

I truly believe that your training with a hand gun is more important and effective than what caliber you carry/shoot.


New member
It depends what, how and when.

Concealment, 9mm or even .380.
Stopping power 45 (night stand)
Car/truck console 357/40
Backup hunting 357/44

If a person doesn't stop and think after 3-4 9mm JHP, not sure a 40 will make much of a difference.

Maybe I need to carry my 7.62x25 Tokarev, it's slim, just need more practice...

85 gr FMJ 1,650 ft/s 511 ft lbs
85 gr JHP 1,700 ft/s 527 ft lbs

7.62x25mm Tokarev - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


New member
Between the 2, I prefer the .40 for its slight advantage in power, if I were choosing a weapon for personal defense. If I were choosing a range gun, I'd go with the 9mm, for the more readily available (and somewhat cheaper) ammunition. The 9 would would also be my choice for "If TSHTF" for the same reason listed above.

That being said, my defensive weapons aren't either caliber - they're .45 ACP and .357 mag, for those 2 calibers' better "knockdown power" than the 2 in the poll.

However, I cast my vote for the .40.

old salt

New member
I'm sure there will be quite a bit of opinions on thins including other calibers. But I wanted to start a thread about this since I just got an email from a user with the following question:

I'll give my own opinion about them. Mainly, I think you need to shoot both and figure out what you like best. My favorite caliber is .40 S&W. At first all of my carry guns were .40. I think its a bigger round so I would hope it would stop the threat quicker than a 9mm. But you also may have less rounds when going with a .40.

Recently I decided to go with the 9mm Glock 27 as my carry gun. I haven't been getting to the range as much and I can just control the 9mm better in the subcompact. I also kind of just wanted a different caliber other than a .40. Now if I was practicing more like I should be I would probably have stuck with a .40 Glock 26.

Another thing is that it should be cheaper too shoot but I don't think the difference was that much so it was not really a deciding factor for me.

But, the gun I keep in my car and on my nightstand are .40. I am not concerned about concealing those so the larger guns.

My full time used to be a 9mm G26 but now I've moved to the 40. A new G27 is my full time carry. I now like 40 so much I picked up a G23 to shoot IDPA. Love that 40.

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Latest member