The .40 S&W Is a Better Defensive Caliber Than 9mm
Noted firearms author Wiley Clapp is bucking the trend. In this article from the October 6, 2016 issue of American Rifleman, he stirs the pot and calls out the massive movement towards the 9mm as a carry caliber. While seemingly long on opinion and short of data to back up the claims, the article certainly nails the reason behind the development of the .40 S&W, and why it still is a defensive round worth of respect – for a handgun.
Personally, I historically slide towards calibers starting with a “.4” when choosing a defensive pistol. A Glock 27, then a S&W M&P Compact in .40 both did long-time EDC duty on my hip, and I loved both guns dearly. (Read my review of the M&P40C here). However, I have recently jumped on board the 9mm train as ammo costs skyrocket, and I start handloading my own practice ammo – you see, I get a lot more bang for the buck when I handload 9mm over the bigger calibers. A smaller bullet, combined with less powder used means I get more range time per dollar, and that matters most to me right now.
As a carry caliber, the 9mm with good modern ammo (such as the Sig Sauer Elite V-Crown 124-grain JHPs I carry in my Sig P320 Compact) gives me confidence that my handgun will, if needed, perform as well as a handgun can in a defensive situation. But I have the same feeling with a .357 Magnum, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP as well. In my mind, the two factors of: A) Having the gun with you, and B) proper shot placement override what the caliber of the gun is – as long as it’s at least a 9mm….and I’d be willing to bet I’m not alone in having that thought.
However, Mr. Clapp’s article should be read for a little enlightenment on the existence of the .40 S&W – maybe it will sway your opinion.