9mm or 40 cal
 

I'm about to order a couple of handguns. My wife wants a S&W Shield 9mm and I like the Ruger SR9c or the SR40c. Which caliber are you partial to, the (9mm or the 40cal?

Both will work just fine. The 9 is easier to shoot well for most women and is less expensive to shoot as well. The 40 might be a better defensive round but not if you do not shoot it well. I trained police and practice is an important factor, caliber not so much.

I have the S&W Shield in 9MM. Nice gun, easy enough to carry,nice trigger.My buddy has the same gun in 40 cal. Recoil in noticeably more.

In pistols, I have 45's and 9mm's, plus one 40 for myself, and my wife has 45's and 40's. Variety is the spice of life in our safe.

Don't mess with the SR9C, go buy the SR9S. The trigger on the striker fired model is 10 times better. I compared both and I bought the SR9S. Ruger will probably discontinue the C model in time and only make the S.

Also, pick the model that fits your hand and especially consider the size of the gun. If its to big you won't carry it.

My carry pistol is a S&W M&P40. I had both the full size and the compact and ended up selling the compact as there was no noticable difference to me for concealed carry. Plus the full size had the extra couple of ounces forward that made the gun more controllable. But IMO you should find a handgun that fits you. If you're accurate with it the target on the other end won't know if it was hit by a 9mm or a 40.

+1

..............and the one you can shoot the most accurate with !!! :lolabove:

I gonna assume he already picked a pistol that feels good in his hands. He listed 3 pistols that hes considering,so they must feel right to him.......I would think.

You've confused yourself here. You are talking about the LC9 vs. the LC9s, which is NOT a related action to the SR9c.

1. There is no SR9s, and never has been
   
   
2. The SR9c, like ALL SR9 and SR40 series pistols, are striker fired, and ALWAYS have been
   
   
3. The trigger on all SR series pistols are the same
   
   
4. You've confused the SR9c with the LC9 - the LC9 was a DAO recoil assisted hammer-fired pistol, and has now been replaced by the LC9s, a striker fired weapon.

I carry pistols chambered in both cartridges mentioned. I am tempted to get rid of my 40 and stick to 9mm just to keep one type of ammunition for this type of pistol.

My wife shoots a 9mm and has no interest in a 40 so the decision will be an easy one when the time comes.

Thanks for all of the input folks. I'm thinking that I will order the Smith & Wesson Shield in 9mm for my wife and a Ruger SR9c for myself.

Ruger makes a good quality product that is made in the USA something that is rare in to today's world.

I don't think you can go wrong with either one, the ruger weighs a bit more if that matters.

Looks like you've figured out the pistols you're getting. I've carried the 9mm and .40 both on duty and off. 40's shoot a little hotter but are still pretty manageable if you practice. Ballistically, you get a little more with a .40 but shot placement is still where it counts. Something else to consider is if your wife is already getting a 9mm, you getting a 9mm also means ammo commonality and maybe one less set of reloading dies, etc. Either way, you won't go wrong. Just make sure you both practice for optimum results. :D

Prisons are full of thugs with 9mm holes in them. The thugs with .45 holes in them are in graveyards!

Here's a link on caliber stopping power.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_power_chart.htm

9mm for me. Shells are cheaper also.

Bought a 9mm Shield two weeks ago, much better on the recoil from the 40. I have yet to get carry permit/CCW. But I was more comfortable with it than a wide variety of options. Taking the class and test before March.

I respectfully disagree. I believe that ALL handguns are underpowered (at least all handguns that are normally carried and used - i.e. the .454 casul is not underpowered). Something like 80% of people shot with handguns survive the event, across the board, regardless of caliber.

I work in a large trauma hospital in Chicago, and have treated many, many gunshot victims. The vast majority of them were shot with handguns, and the vast majority of them survived, regardless of caliber - I've seen people shot with .22's, .38 special, 9mm, .40, .45 and others. I distinctly remember one gangbanger that was shot in the face at point blank range with a .45 and survived - the bullet did not penetrate the brain.

The majority of them that did not survive were shot through the brain, although occasionally death was due to a bullet hitting the heart or a major artery.

The point of a handgun for self-defense is to incapacitate the bad guy, or make him hurt badly enough that he stops trying to hurt you. When you look at it this way, a larger caliber is generally better than a smaller one - greater chance to inflict damage. But the difference in damage between say a 9mm and a .45 is not all that big.

If you want to stop someone in their tracks/drop them dead with a handgun, you generally need to hit the brain, heart or spinal cord. Otherwise, use a shotgun or rifle - either one is much more devastating than a handgun, regardless of the caliber.

Because of the lack of power in a handgun, shot placement is very important, so choosing a handgun/caliber that you can shoot well with is more important IMO than just getting the biggest caliber possible. Personally, I would choose the largest caliber that you can shoot accurately and handle well, but that also allows for the largest magazine capacity possible so you can increase your chances of hitting/incapacitating the bad guy.

Another reason why a lot of thugs with gunshot wounds survive, is that for some reason gangbangers use FMJ bullets the vast majority of the time IME. I'm not sure why - maybe cheaper and easier to get? FMJ bullets tend to zip through the target with less tissue damage than a hollowpoint.

I prefer the 9mm. I do not believe that a .40 offers enough advantage over the 9mm to make it worth the added recoil and muzzleflash. My duty weapon is a Glock 17 in 9mm. I carry 17+1 and can fire multiple rounds, on target, quickly. The difference shooting at night is also noticeable. Not that the 9mm doesn't have any muzzleflash, but the .40 will about blind ya if you shoot it at night. Now you might say I'm a wimp and can't handle the .40.... Sure, I'll buy into that I suppose. But nobody can argue with multiple rounds, accurately and quickly on target. The .40 is very "snappy" and I don't notice much at all on my 9mm.
Another side of it, and I have no data whatsoever to support this. But .40s are a higher pressure round. That means more wear and tear on your pistol. That's probably not enough to be noticeable, but there it is anyway. 9mm is cheaper to shoot, typically easier to find, and just about any gun store carries multiple brands.
I'm just a fan of the 9mm. Also love my .45.. not a big fan of the .40. But that's just me, I don't want hit with any of them.
Find a gun that fits you well and that you shoot well. Practice, train, practice, train, practice, train. That's what really matters.
-Jake

Buddys got a S&W Shield in 40 I got one in a 9. Notable increased in recoil in the 40 and I'm not recoil sensitive

I have to disagree. After the bad guy gets out of the hospital, he is going to sue your ass.

If you go to the link below, it shows pictures of muzzle flash for various calibers with various size bullets. It is by no means an exhaustive reference but it does show enough information to make one question statements about which caliber produces the most muzzle flash. The only definitive way for anybody to say that one caliber/pistol has less muzzle flash than another caliber/pistol combo is for a person to shoot both under equally dark circumstances.

Choosing which CCW pistol/caliber is right for you involves a lot of differing factors and as always, should normally come down to which one you feel most confident with and can perform best with. There are exceptions, such as when you have to carry a sub-compact size (probably a .22, .25 or .380 due to pure small size requirements) but in general, your choice should be dictated by what you feel most confident with and what you shoot best.

If I was in a shootout at longer distances (50 yards plus), a 1911 style pistol in .45 would be my 1st choice, followed by a Glock 22 in .40 (I used to shoot it at 100 yards fairly well). A Glock 35 might be a consideration also but I have never shot one.

If I was in a gunfight at shorter distances (under 50 yards), I'd probably choose a Glock 22 in .40 as I've already survived one gunfight with this exact pistol.

If I carry CCW in a gun-bag or in a belt holster covered by a shirt, I currently use a Glock 30SF in .45. If I'm dressed ins slacks with no belt holster opportunity, I stick a Walther PPK/S .380 in my front pocket. Not my preferred gun to shoot (although it's quite accurate at 15 yards or less) but the trigger is a little stiff.

My point is that different situations call for different guns/calibers. As you experience more situations, your opinion(s) will change and there will be occasions when your preference simply isn't the best option.

I'm not denigrating a 9mm as I've carried one (Glock 17) on and off-duty for a few years before switching to a 45, then a .40 and back to a 45. In the future, I may add a 9mm. Who knows?

My point for the OP is to make YOUR best choice and re-evaluate from time to time. Don't lock yourself into a single caliber, make or model. Practice with everything you have and think your way through what YOUR requirements are for each CCW situation as your requirements/situation may vary from mine or the next persons.


http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/muzzle-flash/