Considering an STI Tactical 4.0 as a carry gun....40 or .45, your thou

[DHart]

I'm thinking about switching to an STI Tactical 4.0 as my carry gun and could use some feedback regarding this gun for that purpose.

I already have a variety of .40 and .45 handguns, so I'm comfortable with either caliber. I do prefer the feel of shooting .45, but .40 gives better capacity, which is why I want to carry a double stack in the first place. So I'm a bit torn between the two calibers, due to competing benefits.

If the Tactical 4.0 is known to be more reliable, generally, in one or the other of these calibers, I would go with the caliber with the better track record of reliability.

I should mention that I have had an Edge in .40 for a number of years, but its been so long since I've fired it that I am out of touch with its performance. I remember well, however, that shooting .40 with the Edge is quite surprisingly very comfortable, given the snap of .40. Certainly the length and weight of the Edge softens the .40 considerably. I have a lot of mags for the Edge in .40. For this reason, getting a Tactical 4.0 in .40 might make a lot of sense, but I would very happily go with .45, if it might be better from a reliability standpoint.

What are your thoughts on this? Is the STI Tactical 4.0 generally considered to be defense reliable? (I know well, of course, that every individual gun needs to be fully vetted for reliability.) Would you feel that the gun is more reliable with one caliber over another?

Any other thoughts regarding the decision to go with the Tactical 4.0 for carry/defense?

[bountyhunter]

The Tac has a steel frame and overall weight of 34 ounces so I think it would not be that far from a Edge in felt recoil and control. As for reliability, STI's are top notch and if there are any problems they will fix them.

As far as .40 vs .45, defense rounds performance are pretty close IMHO (based on data I have seen) so I agree the extra round capacity of the .40 makes it a better choice for defense but the .45 is good too.

[redwoods]

I have an STI Tactical 4" with aluminum frame that I use as a duty handgun as a police officer.

The 40 is supposed to be more reliable in the double stack STI guns than 45.

I have a recoil master in there since it came with the gun and it Is reliable.

I carry it with a 126mm mag and SV wedge base pad, the extra mags are 140mm.

As long as you have reliable mags (tuned), it is a reliable gun.

Make sure you shoot your self defense rounds out of it to make sure they feed with the gun.

I am using Federal Hydrashok 180gr. right now, but we are moving to 180gr Winchester ranger rounds.

The alum frame gun is around 28oz I think. That is why I went alum, cause I wanted to save on weight. About the weight of a glock.

It does shoot more snappy than my limited STI full length dust cover gun, but that is to be expected.

The grip is familiar as well as the controls, but it does flip a little more.

It would be a good carry gun if you make sure it is reliable.

Mine also had a reliability tuning by dawson, but not sure all that was done since I bought it slightly used (from another officer).

Randy

[cheers623]

The first limited gun I bought 10 years ago was a Tactical .40 tuned by Dave Dawson. It served well for years pulling double duty as my competition/night stand gun. Extremely reliable for 10s of 1000s of rounds. It's now a dedicated home defense/self defense pistol and I feel 100% confident in its track record. At the time I bought it, I asked Dave the same thing because I prefer the recoil impulse of .45. He told me that the weak link in the hi-cap .45 design is the magazine and drag created by the double-column .45 bullet stack on the sides of the mag tube. It made sense and I never questioned it.

Well, fast forward to this year. I've purchased a number of hi-cap .45 pistols based on the 1911/2011 design. Dave's wisdom and observations have proven to be spot-on. While I've had success in getting some of these guns to work reliably, the real weak link and trouble spot I've encountered is the magazines. You have to chose followers, springs, tune mag lips, etc very diligently to get them up and 100%. If I were to do it over, I'd only ever get hi-cap 1911/2011 pistols in .40 or 9mm. They are just so much more forgiving than the .45 in the same platform. I'm not saying its not possible, just that my experience mirrors Dave Dawson's, who's worked on more guns than probably anyone in the country.

If .45 is your cartridge of choice, get a single-stack and enjoy. I've had fantastic reliability from mine and numerous instructors and armorers agree that the .45 is best served in that platform.

My .02$ for what it's worth. Hope it helps,

Cheers623

DVC

[DHart]

Great comments, guys. Thank you. The mag reliability associated with .40 (vs. .45) confirms my choice to go with .40.

For a carry gun, the last thing I want to have to fuss with is reliability problems.

While I prefer the feel of shooting .45, shooting .40 from a relatively heavy pistol isn't bad. Add to that the fact that I already have over a half-dozen new mags (that I bought for my Edge in .40) seals the caliber choice.

[DHart]

Cheers623... please tell me about your .40 cal mags that have proved so reliable over the years with your Tactical.

What length(s) are your mags?

Are the springs and followers stock?

Do you change them out regularly or leave some loaded for longer periods of time?

Any recommendations?

[HHPD56]

I've been carrying a Tactical 5.0 for a few years now. It also serves double duty, as my Limited gun. Dawson relayed the same thing, as far as the .40 reliability over the .45, which made the decision easy. I carry tuned 140mm mags (@ 20+1), with Dawson springs & followers, that stay loaded. I replace my mag springs roughly every 6 mos and haven't experienced any reliability issues.

[cheers623]

For the 126mm magazines, of which I have 10, the Factory STI followers, Grams, or Dawson all work well. It just depends on if you want the slide to lock back on an empty mag. Assuming you DO want it to lock back, then get the STI followers. However, springs are another matter. You can use the STI springs for a few months, but they eventually go soft so keep an eye on them. I prefer either Grams or ISMI springs. Both have lasted me for years between service cycles and I've never had them fail or get so soft that they don't function.

If you're looking for 140mm magazines, of which I've got 20-25, either Dawson or Grams. My new preference for maximum capacity is Grams and I grind off the slide stop lip of the followers to keep the slide from locking back on an empty mag. If you're going to use Grams followers, you need to use Grams springs. If you're going to use Dawson followers, use ISMI springs. It has to do with how each follower attaches to the spring. This assumes that you're using the mags for maximum capacity and in competition. If you wanted to use the 140mm mags for HD or training classes, I'd use the STI factory follower and ISMI springs. They'll lock the slide back, run reliably, but lose maybe 1-2 rounds of capacity over the Grams or Dawson followers.

Taran Tactical makes good stuff too, but it's more focused on the competition aspect. It's great stuff but a little higher maintenance and requires more attention.

Hope that helps,

Cheers623

DVC

[DHart]

Are the same length springs used in both the 126mm and the 140mm mags?

Edited December 1, 2014 by DHart

[cheers623]

I've only seen springs listed by the number of coils. I forget how many coils coincide with tube length but, as I recall, I've used the same coil count for both 126 and 140 mm mag tubes.

Cheers623

DVC

[redwoods]

The 11 coil springs are for the 126-140mm mags, the 13 coil springs are for the 170mm mags.

I have some mags that were tuned by a gunsmith and are 126mm with less coils than 11.

You can cut them down for capacity and/or reliability, but I think it is more for capacity.

Randy

[cheers623]

Yep, sounds right. I use 11 coils in both 126 and 140. The 11 coil springs in the 126 mags do make em stiff to load. But, they've never gone soft and always run for me.

[DHart]

Great. Thanks for the info, guys.

[DHart]

Here I am again, two years later, and still thinking about getting a Tactical 4.0 DS in .45auto for carry/defense. The pistol would not be used for competition, so maximum capacity requirements don't apply.

I have plenty of great .40S&W pistols (M&P40, M&P40C, P320 40 Full, P320 40 Carry, P320 40 Compact, STI Edge 40), so that's why I'm so interested in having an STI double stack in .45auto, my other favorite defense pistol caliber.  I don't prefer using my 1911s for defense/carry, as I consider higher-capacity to be potentially very important and I also prefer the feel in the hand of the larger 2011 grip frame - thus my interest in a 2011 chambered in .45auto.

I have no qualms at all about tuning mags, regularly replacing springs, followers, etc. to achieve reliability.  And would consider using 185 gr defense loads, if need be, to lighten the "weight lifting load" of the mag springs.

Any more current thoughts on the likelihood of achieving a defense-reliable running Tactical DS in .45?

[eff10mm]

I have all a 9mm Lite DS Tac4.0, a .40 S&W DS Tac4.0 and .45 5" DS custom. I never had much luck getting my 45 to run properly until I started buying MBX magazines. MBX gave me the capacity the gun should have had from STI in the first place. The 40 never ran real well with factory length loads. It only really shined when the bullets were seated out. This presents a problem when you want to run factory defensive ammunition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DHart]

1 hour ago, eff10mm said:

I have all a 9mm Lite DS Tac4.0, a .40 S&W DS Tac4.0 and .45 5" DS custom. I never had much luck getting my 45 to run properly until I started buying MBX magazines. MBX gave me the capacity the gun should have had from STI in the first place. The 40 never ran real well with factory length loads. It only really shined when the bullets were seated out. This presents a problem when you want to run factory defensive ammunition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That surprises me about your .40, as my Edge in .40 just runs like a hose, no matter what I feed it.

What was it about your .45 mags that weren't getting it?  What about the MBX magazines was different?  Might Grams followers and springs have turned the corner with the STI mags?

Edited November 22, 2016 by DHart

[davsco]

suggest you check around for carry holsters.  not saying there are none, but choices appear to be pretty limited.

[Bruce]

7 hours ago, DHart said:

Here I am again, two years later, and still thinking about getting a Tactical 4.0 DS in .45auto for carry/defense. The pistol would not be used for competition, so maximum capacity requirements don't apply.

I have plenty of great .40S&W pistols (M&P40, M&P40C, P320 40 Full, P320 40 Carry, P320 40 Compact, STI Edge 40), so that's why I'm so interested in having an STI double stack in .45auto, my other favorite defense pistol caliber.  I don't prefer using my 1911s for defense/carry, as I consider higher-capacity to be potentially very important and I also prefer the feel in the hand of the larger 2011 grip frame - thus my interest in a 2011 chambered in .45auto.

I have no qualms at all about tuning mags, regularly replacing springs, followers, etc. to achieve reliability.  And would consider using 185 gr defense loads, if need be, to lighten the "weight lifting load" of the mag springs.

Any more current thoughts on the likelihood of achieving a defense-reliable running Tactical DS in .45?

If I was in your situation I would buy one, send to a top smith and have them polish all internals and do a reliability job.  I have had Matt McLearn do this on my carry 1911/2011's, and the results have been great and turn-around fast.

Then, I would call your holster maker and get a rig built for it...kydex or leather whichever you prefer to carry.

Go get one!:)

 

 

[DHart]

1 hour ago, davsco said:

suggest you check around for carry holsters.  not saying there are none, but choices appear to be pretty limited.

davsco.... thanks, I have a couple of High Noon Bare Asset holsters which will do the job perfectly.  Thank you.

[DHart]

1 hour ago, Bruce said:

If I was in your situation I would buy one, send to a top smith and have them polish all internals and do a reliability job.  I have had Matt McLearn do this on my carry 1911/2011's, and the results have been great and turn-around fast.

Then, I would call your holster maker and get a rig built for it...kydex or leather whichever you prefer to carry.

Go get one!:)

 

 

Bruce... thanks.  I'm gravitating ever closer to ordering one up and making it work.  Either I (or STI) will do what is needed to ensure reliable functioning.  I'm fine with tweaking mag lips, upgrading follower and mag spring, etc. as needed.  If it's beyond my ability, I will let STI take over.

I love my 1911s, but I prefer the fit in the hand, flat/soft shooting, AND the capacity of the double stack 2011's even more.  And I'm sure that one way or another, the 2011 .45autos  can be made to run with defense reliability.  As for the holster, I've got that dialed already.  High Noon Bare Asset holster that works for my SIG P320 and Glock 21SF will work just fine.

Edited November 22, 2016 by DHart

[Dr Mitch]

A 2011 in .45ACP is still a sort of low capacity gun.  .45ACP is lame and boring.  The legions of professional defenders abandoned it long ago in favor of capacity.  People who actually defend.   I hope to see it's total obsolescence before I reincarnate.

 

[DHart]

Thank you, Dr., for weighing in.

There certainly is a sensible balance between capacity and performance that makes good sense. Generally, for me, that balance has been found in .40S&W 180 gr HST.

After years of shooting and carrying .45auto, .40S&W, and 9mm pistols, I've landed on .40S&W for the most part, given the great blend of power AND capacity that it offers.

That said, if I can carry a soft-shooting, stone-reliable, hand-friendly .45auto with 12+1=13 or 13+1=14 capacity (STI Tactical 4.0 2011 DS), I'll be ok with such a low-cap option!

My G21SF is just a slight bit larger than I would prefer. I think a Tactical 4.0 would be a reasonable choice.

 

In the meantime, my choice of SIG P320 40 Full Size or Carry Size (14+1=15 rounds) or, an M&P40 Full Size (15+1=16 rounds) are absolutely wonderful choices to have.  180 gr HST all the way!

For some reason, I haven't been able to resist the allure of the Tactical 4.0 in .45auto for two years running now.  We shall see.

Edited November 22, 2016 by DHart

[eff10mm]

My STI 45 mag lips were generally to narrow. I did have one or two that were too wide. The followers like to come up too high in the magazine as well. I have recently switched over to all grams guts with TTI pads. That has made a significant improvement. the factory mags just don't run as smoothly as the MBX. I'm sure if I spent several hours polishing the internals the STI tubes could be acceptable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DHart]

eff10mm... I take it you adjusted the feed lips to be within the acceptable range?  Between that and the Grams guts, sounds like good to go.

 

MBX mags must be pretty incredible, given the asking price. But if I can make the STI mags work reliably, that would be my preference.  I'm ok with adjusting feed lips as necessary and switching to grams guts.

 

I've got a number of 126mm and 140mm mags for my Edge .40S&W and they all work reliably, even with a slight variance in feed lip measurements.

Edited November 23, 2016 by DHart

[Chutist]

Great read guys!  

I have a Tactical 5.0 in .40 that I'm fixing to take on duty, lots of good info here.  My .45 Kimber single stack is going back in the safe for the time being.  My Dept requires 45 rounds on my person... that was 5 mags with the Kimber!  Only 3 gets me there with the 5.0