Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Survival Prep (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=141)
- - sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=113955)

SilverSatan | 02-26-2007 08:30 PM
sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 having no experience and owning no guns, what is better, 9mm or .40? stocking up on ammo is a priority.

ForeverInDebt | 02-26-2007 08:37 PM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 Why not get one of each? :smile:

mtnman | 02-26-2007 10:26 PM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 For my liking .45. For a more practical person 9mm, It's universal. I had a pistol in .40 for about two days. The first time I shot it, the rounds were bouncing off some Maple firewood. Traded that pistol the next day.

eat_beef | 02-26-2007 10:30 PM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 I'm with MM, if I had to choose between a 40 and a 9mm, I'd take a 45.:aetsch: 9mm: 45 ACP set on 'stun'. 9mm might expand, but 45 DON'T contract.:emotions16:

Big_Rob | 02-26-2007 10:37 PM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 .357 mag is a fine cartridge as well. Give me a .357 mag wheelgun and you're not getting up. I don't like the 9mm, It just doesn't have the knockdown power of a .45 or a .357 mag

Horn | 02-26-2007 10:45 PM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 9mm Cheap and easy on the ears. Practice ammo by the box full. Unless you are a bulletproof giant, fighting other bulletproof giants - outside - everyday.

electric-amish | 02-26-2007 11:31 PM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 I've shot the .40 Cal Sub-2000 and I think its fun. The It makes a mess out of cinder blocks. My freind bought it and had to send it back for tweeking but got it back back quickly and it was perfect. I would say the 9mm is cheaper and more abundant. But the 40 is bigger and has more stopping power. So I like the 40 for defense and the 9mm for plinking. I would probebly go with the 9mm as I don't have the need for defense as much as plinking.. E-A

SAUM | 02-26-2007 11:36 PM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 From personal experience, the .40s are overpressured and therefore have a tendency to blow the guts out of pistols. I have one and it is my CC piece for now but I am wary of it's ability to self destruct. The links below might seem to highlight Glock and that isn't my intention as my KaBoom happened in a Tarus which upon further inspection had a sloppier chamber design than the Glocks http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/kb-notes.html Case failure reports The .40 S&W has been noted in a number of cartridge case failures, particularly in Glock pistols due to the relatively weak case of the .40 S&W compared to its high working pressure, and lack of full chamber support�the feed ramp on the Glock .40 S&W pistols are larger than normal, and leaves the rear bottom of the case unsupported, and it is in this unsupported area that the cases fail. Most, but not all, of the failures have occurred with reloaded or remanufactured ammunition. Cartridges loaded to or above the SAAMI pressure, or slightly oversized cases which fire slightly out of battery are often considered to be the cause of these failures. These failures are referred to by many as "kaBooms" or "kB!" for short. While these case failures do not often injure the person holding the pistol, the venting of high pressure gas tends to eject the magazine out of the magazine well in a spectacular fashion, and usually destroys the pistol. In some cases, the barrel will also fail, blowing the top of the chamber off. While the .40 S&W is far from the only cartridge to suffer from case failures, it is uniquely susceptible for a number of reasons. The .45 ACP is often subject to case failures, especially in the M1911, as ambitious gunsmiths enlarge the feed ramp to improve reliability and leave the case unsupported. This, combined with maximum or greater than maximum pressure loads, is a sure route to a case failure. However, due to the low operating pressure of the .45 ACP (21,000psi with +P ammunition), a small amount of unsupported case is not usually a cause for concern. The .40 S&W, on the other hand, works at significantly higher pressures (35,000psi) than the .45 ACP. Since the .40 S&W is a very wide cartridge for its length (it was designed to fit in existing 9 mm frames) feed ramps are often steep, and reducing the angle to improve reliability leaves more unsupported case than with a smaller diameter 9 mm or a longer length .45 ACP cartridge. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.40_S&W http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/i...p/t-86558.html

ForeverInDebt | 02-27-2007 01:20 AM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 I have two pistols in .40, and neither one has kaboomed. I also have 3 pistols in 9mm, with no failures either. Put that in yer book!

thorgrim | 02-27-2007 02:35 AM
Re: sub-2000 whats better? 9mm or .40 If I was to get a sub-2000, I would go with 9mm and get one that takes glock magizines. 9mm is cheaper and easier to find if you are stocking up. Also get a glock to go with your sub-2000 and hopefully you can get your hands on some of those 33 round mags. This way both your ammunition and mags will be interchangeable between guns. :bear_w00t:

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:17 AM. |

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM