May take the 40 game gun plunge

[kreativecid]

Up til now I've reloaded 9mm and 45acp, and gamed with both, and I enjoy owning the 9 and 45 singlestack 5" 1911.

Yet I read a lot about the benefits of owning a 40 for idpa and uspsa use. I'm all about getting the most out of a buck and a gun.

Hesitations going to 40 are silly. My first pistol was a flippy Glock 23 and I don't have the $100 in 40 reloading stuff. No biggie.

Read a recent thread and someone replied with links to a handful of other threads.

I'm not a national competitor. Do it mainly because I like 1911 and have fun putting holes in cardboard a few times each month.

What is a mainstream reliable 40 with undercut trigger guard, frontstrap checkering, f/o front and adjustable rear backed by good customer service? I guess I'd be looking for an equivalent of a Trophy Match or Trojan if that makes sense. Kind of middle ground but proven. I have some super duper expensive guns but for a gamer one of my favorite is a $625 STI Spartan: accurate, reliable, good customer service and I couldn't care less if scratched or holstered all day long. Don't want to pay for cosmetics and I'd rather not have to send it out to make it reliable.

Or has anyone been a 9 and/or 45 1911 shooter and thought it'd be nice to go 40 only to regret it?

Thanks in advance.

Edited February 19, 2011 by kreativecid

[blue edge]

I went 40 NOOO reason to go back to 45 or 9mm

[EkuJustice]

Main reason alot of people go 40 is they are shooting limited and want to use the same load for both and 40 brass is cheaper than 45. If your wanting a new gun go 40. The 40 is a little tougher to get going than a 45 though

[wmspdi]

If you are just looking for the feel of the 40 recoil impulse try loading a 180 gr 45 (Berry's make one) to a 170 PF. It will feel just like a 180 gr 40 S&W, but out of your favorite 1911 45. The cost of the 180 gr 45 bullets is about the same as 180 gr .40/10mm bullets. You'll need a little more powder in the 45 case to make the same power factor. I load 5.0 gr of W231 in the 40 and 6.0 in the 45. 40 S&W brass is cheaper but since the 45 is a lower pressure round your 45 brass should last longer than the higher pressure 40s. Wilson and CMC make 10 round 1911 45 magazines (I have the CMC version).

Now if you want a gun for USPSA Limited look into a 2011 or double stack 1911 in 40 S&W. Use 140mm high cap magazines for 20/21 rounds in Limited, then download them to 10 rounds for Limited 10. I have a pre 2002 Para P16-40 Limited set up with a Dawson magwell, Para factory 120mm magazines and Dawson base pads. My Para shoots flatter than my Glock 35 did at Major PF. I actually like the Para widebody a little better than my Springfield TRP because I have big hands. If I had the money to blow I would look into a 2011 STI. Just an idea.

Edited February 20, 2011 by wmspdi

[Joe4d]

A .40 single stack makes a good game gun because it can do what a 9mm can do in games designed around the 9mm like IDPA ESP, It can also be loaded major and do what a .45 can do in USPSA, Since you already have a 9 and 45 you like shooting Id just stick with those.

[kreativecid]

Thanks to all for the real-world input as it applies to starting the 40 setup. I've gone back and forth with the "oooh, I will get a new gun and it will be a 40 and I will..." but I believe sticking with the 9 and 45 is my best bet.

Shoot safe.

[wmspdi]

A .40 single stack makes a good game gun because it can do what a 9mm can do in games designed around the 9mm like IDPA ESP

He has a point. The 40 S&W can be downloaded with light weight bullets (at minor power factors) to shoot like a 9mm in ESP. The same 1911 40 could be used for ESP with minor loads, Single Stack and Limited 10 with major loads. You would still need a 45 to shoot CDP (45s only), and a double stack in 40 S&W to shoot in Limited.

I have a Glock 34 for SSP/Production, 1911 9mm for ESP, a 1911 45 for CDP/Single Stack/L10 (8 and 10 round magazines) and a 1911 double stack 40 (Para P16-40 Limited) with 21 round magazines for Limited and Limited 10. I don't shoot open (yet). I have all the divisions covered with four guns. Works for me.

Edited February 21, 2011 by wmspdi

[Strick]

I have the same setup as you, a 9mm and .45 and have struggled with the same "wants". I keep going back to the idea that if I am not going to be shooting Limited anytime soon there is no reason to get a .40. A new gun would be nice and a 40 might be a great choice but since I have 2 great choices for IDPA and SSTK I can't see the extra expense.

It would cost me the price of the gun, brass, bullets, and all the dies and equipment.

[chirpy]

I'm going back to .45 in Limited because on some of the longer shots .45 holes are easier to see...with my OOOOOLD Eyes. Otherwise nothing wrong with the .40. If I didn't already have a SS .45 for IDPA CDP and a SS .38 Super for ESP I would probably get a SS in .40!

FWIW

Richard

[twodownzero]

I've often thought about it, but haven't made the switch for a number of reasons:

1. Availability of .40 single stacks on the market is slim. The staple gun is the STI Trojan, which is not my preference because it lacks frontstrap checkering or the ability to add it. Others have been available at times, but to get the bundle of features I'd want, I'd probably need a custom gun, which is both beyond my budget and indefensible when I already own a reliable .45 1911 that I shoot in single stack (and have since my first year shooting in this game).

2. Reliability. .40 is frustrating to load. Glocked brass is a problem and I have to chamber check every round that I shoot in Limited. I would suspect that without doing so, the amount of malfunctions that I would have in .40 would be on the order of ten times as many as I have in 9mm or .45, or even .22 LR for that matter. That's completely abstracting from the magazine feeding issues, of which there have been lengthy discussions here in the past, especially with single stacks. Some people have very good luck with them. Others try all different kinds of magazines before settling. I met a guy last summer at the Indiana state match who finally gave up and sent his Trojan back to STI to get it to run, because no amount of changing magazines or loads would do it for him. This probably wouldn't be worth the hassle, for me.

3. Recoil. .40 is a nasty cartridge with a lot of recoil. It also seems that recoil impulse is not rewarded by a slide that cycles fast enough to increase my scores. In fact, if it were possible to be competitive in Limited with a .45, I probably would not shoot .40 at all. Even with 200 grain bullets, .40 kicks a lot more than .45, to me. I love shooting Limited, so I won't give that up, but I suspect that a .40 single stack would bounce around enough to make me uncomfortable. In fact, when I shoot single stack (which has become more rare since I bought my STI), I really notice what a nice, soft recoil impulse a 230 grain .45 has. Some people prefer .40, but I've had a hard time enjoying it as much. Perhaps I should download my .40 a bit and see if the gun calms down a little more, but thus far, shooting 172 pf ammo hasn't felt any softer than 180 pf, although going minor probably wouldn't be the end of the world and I could cut it closer if it'd really get the gun to settle down. I did add about two ounces of weight to my Limited gun, which did definitely make a big difference. Beyond that, I'm going to the gym to get my grip strength up and using dry fire to improve my grip and stance.

I do think the pros for .40 are strong, however:

1. The ammo is just cheaper all around, and not shooting .45 would negate any reason to keep large pistol primers at my house since I don't own a .44 Magnum or anything else using large pistol primers for that matter. The bullets are cheaper, the brass is cheaper, and the powder is about a wash.

2. Commonality with Limited. It'd be nice to have one load for both guns.

3. Reloads in single stack. Cramming a full mag full of .45s up against a closed slide can be a real pain sometimes. I've missed a few reloads in my day. A 9 round .40 mag with 8 rounds in it would load smooth as butter.

4. Not having to barney. It would be really nice to just throw a mag in the gun at the make ready command and be ready to rock and roll.

5. I'd buy a lot more .40 bullets and not have to worry about stocking two types of bullets if I didn't shoot the .45 as much. This reflects on (1) and (2). Whether I had the materials to make ammo would be dependent then on whether I had bullets or not, instead of whether I had bullets for one division or the other.

6. A .40 single stack would eliminate any interest in keeping a 9mm single stack around, or if not, diminish my interest quite a bit. I love how soft a 9mm single stack shoots and now own one that I plan on shooting steel with. If I had a .40 to shoot major in USPSA and minor in steel, I'd only have to own one single stack instead of two.

At the end of the day, it's the recoil that really is a deal breaker for me, because I'm not too lazy to chamber check my ammo, figure out how to get a gun to run, or scour the market until I can find a good/inexpensive used gun to suit my purposes. Perhaps the compromise is found in trying to get 220 grain bullets to work in .40, but I've never done that so that is pure speculation. I suspect that you'll see a .45 in my single stack holster for quite some time, though, because I doubt I'll become any less of a recoil wussy any time soon.

For the record, I have shot .500 S&Ws with 700 grain, gas checked hard cast handloads and not really found the recoil objectionable. For me, the discomfort with .40's recoil isn't so much a physical complaint (it doesn't hurt), it just seems like it slows me down.

Strangely, I shoot my .40 STI faster than my 9mm Production gun, which may negate everything I've said above, since the timer seldom lies. Who knows? YMMV.

[Joe D]

Well since I don't shoot IPSC any longer I can only address the IDPA aspect. As far as recoil goes the 9mm kicks the most followed by the .40 then the .45 when all are loaded to a 128-130 pf. The .45 almost has no recoil. I use a 160 gr bullet in the 9mm, 180 in the .40 and a 200 in the .45.

There is not an issue with "Glocked" brass any longer. Glock has tightened up the .40 chambers a good bit. There never was an issue if you used a Lee sizing die.

I had a .40 Kimber that would feed just about anything. I fitted a 9mm barrel to it and had the best of both worlds. Kimber used the same breech face for 9mm and .40. Someone offered me way too much money for it so it left the safe. I did, several years later, buy a 9mm Kimber and fitted a .40 barrel to it.

Edited February 21, 2011 by Joe D

[Aircooled6racer]

Hello: I have 1911's in 9mm,40 and 45. My favourite is the 45 with major or minor loads. Next would be the 40 for both major and minor. Lastly the 9mm just because I like a double stack 2011 in 9mm better I shoot my 45 with 200 grain bullets and it feels like a 40 shooting 185's. I just like the feel of the 45 better. Why? I just do I do use 45 mags in my 40 and they work great. Since you are playing any gun games yet I would just use what you have. If you do start playing then get a 6" 2011 in 40 Thanks, Eric