Jump to content
tercel89

.40S&W pistols with high round counts

Recommended Posts

What is the highest round count that you guys have seen from a pistol chambered in .40S&W ? A certain trainer in middle Tennessee says in one of his videos that pistols chambered in this caliber will beat themselves to death because of the high pressures. I had a Glock 22 Gen 2 and had at least 8,000 rds through it and had no signs of destruction other than natural wear and tear. Any thoughts ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, tercel89 said:

A certain trainer in middle Tennessee says in one of his videos that pistols chambered in this caliber will beat themselves to death because of the high pressures.

BS.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tercel89 said:

 Any thoughts ?

He’s another one of those 9MM lost souls that desperately want people to believe .40S&W is going by the wayside. Don’t hate on him; try to help him get his mind right.

But you know what… I’ve been shooting for 50 years and I’ve never came close to “shooting out” a barrel or shooting a gun to failure. I would guess that’s true for most on this forum. The other observation I have made is… if you shoot out a barrel; buy a new one. Because the cost of that barrel is miniscule compared to the cost of the ammo it would take to shoot it to inaccuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tercel89 said:

....A certain trainer in middle Tennessee says in one of his videos that pistols chambered in this caliber will beat themselves to death because of the high pressures. ....

What is he of trainer of? How to talk out your butt?

The only case of known (small numbers) failures I can think of was with frame damage in Beretta 96's used by PD's. They added buffers in the A1's out of concern. But the fails were usually crazy high counts and potentially could have had other contributing factors outside it being originally intended to be a 9mm platform. The anti-Beretta folks love to point at this, but the numbers are not significant relative to total used and PD's that did not have any problems with high counts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DaveTN said:

He’s another one of those 9MM lost souls that desperately want people to believe .40S&W is going by the wayside. Don’t hate on him; try to help him get his mind right.

But you know what… I’ve been shooting for 50 years and I’ve never came close to “shooting out” a barrel or shooting a gun to failure. I would guess that’s true for most on this forum. The other observation I have made is… if you shoot out a barrel; buy a new one. Because the cost of that barrel is miniscule compared to the cost of the ammo it would take to shoot it to inaccuracy.

Oh I think the cartridge has its place and I still have my .40 pistol.  I was just seeing what you guys thought. My Glock 22 , like others , will wear the slide's rails about mid-ways on the slide then the wear will stop. Its like kinda like a marrying of the parts. After that , the parts no longer wear much at all. My Gen 2 and Gen 3 are the same in that manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Erich said:

What is he of trainer of? How to talk out your butt?

The only case of known (small numbers) failures I can think of was with frame damage in Beretta 96's used by PD's. They added buffers in the A1's out of concern. But the fails were usually crazy high counts and potentially could have had other contributing factors outside it being originally intended to be a 9mm platform. The anti-Beretta folks love to point at this, but the numbers are not significant relative to total used and PD's that did not have any problems with high counts. 

Here ya go . I don't agree with part of it , But it was interesting to hear him say this about the gun beating itself to death. I'm always open minded.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he should do another one titled what Stupid #### agnry know it alls say on their Youtube channel. 

My source, secret people you dont know and their conspiracy to keep that knowledge away from the public.

You can tell this guy has a real hardon against the caliber and its user base. Who cares what they think as long as they carry. Its really dumb for someone who is in his profession. He essentially contradicts what he preaches, having a carry and it not mattering what it is as long as your proficient with it.

Being open minded is one thing, but at least when someone is just openly hostile and insulting to support a position, they loose all credibility to me.

Do you not find it questionable that he has no real facts or support and offers insults and "insider info" (like they tell him and no one else)?

So 40 users only buy a box of ammo at a time? They never buy in case because they never shoot? Sure, does that sound right to you?

So how much hush money do you think Glock pays the members of the Glock forum with G22's to never post or remove their posts with all the exploded G22's? Since he knows all these secret industry insiders, he must know that number I am sure.  

Higher pressure rounds causing more wear is no secret, but only crap designed guns break from it. That applies irrespective of caliber.


 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Erich said:

Maybe he should do another one titled what Stupid #### agnry know it alls say on their Youtube channel. 

My source, secret people you dont know and their conspiracy to keep that knowledge away from the public.

You can tell this guy has a real hardon against the caliber and its user base. Who cares what they think as long as they carry. Its really dumb for someone who is in his profession. He essentially contradicts what he preaches, having a carry and it not mattering what it is as long as your proficient with it.

Being open minded is one thing, but at least when someone is just openly hostile and insulting to support a position, they loose all credibility to me.

Do you not find it questionable that he has no real facts or support and offers insults and "insider info" (like they tell him and no one else)?

So 40 users only buy a box of ammo at a time? They never buy in case because they never shoot? Sure, does that sound right to you?

So how much hush money do you think Glock pays the members of the Glock forum with G22's to never post or remove their posts with all the exploded G22's? Since he knows all these secret industry insiders, he must know that number I am sure.  

Higher pressure rounds causing more wear is no secret, but only crap designed guns break from it. That applies irrespective of caliber.


 

 

 

Oh I agree with you . I think that with proper maintenance , Glocks in .40 and a few others WILL last past 50,000 rds. I just wondered how many rounds members here had on their .40 guns. A friend of mine went through one of Yeager's fighting pistol class with a .40S&W pistol which was a Springfield Armory XD40 . It ran just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally don't comment on cal specific topics because they are usually just a never ending debate.  I also won't comment on the youtuber posted above as I'm sure he will track me down and kill me. But here goes.

I carried a Glock 35 gen3 for about 6 years before department made the switch to 9mm. I bought the gun used and appeared high mileage.  I put atleast 15k rounds through it conservatively which isn't a lot but more than most owners.  The round count could be significantly higher as I used this in numerous training classes plus however many previous owner shot.  Never a problem. I seriously doubt any issues would have come about had I continued to use that gun. I would not hesitate to use it again if we switched back. I have no dog in the cal debate as long as its 9, 40, or 45 as long as ammo is free. Maintain it like anything else and it will work. Outside of the Glock platform I have no idea and cant say if there have been issues. Just get training regardless of cal and enjoy.

Take some youtube comments and forum comments with a grain of salt. Some people are more personality than professionals and they get youtube famous. My comment included.  I'm not famous or a professional. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have or have had several 40's with 10k plus round count. I still have an early S&W 40 SS frame that easily has 30k on it with zero issues and an early sig alloy frame that is at 15k ish. Both were used hard in IPSC limited matches for years. Both show slight wear on rails, but nothing more than a bit of burnishing, no battering or damage.

Slide velocities are higher than 9mm but keep a fresh recoil spring in them as regular maintenance and this won't be a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how USPSA Limited division guys shoot thousands of rounds of .40 each year and their guns don't come apart.  And no, they are not using "powder puff" ammo. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Sidecarist said:

It was all lead bullet, but made major with a 155gr. No not powder puff

Was major 175 back then?  Either way, major with 155 gr. is nothing to sneeze at.  I'm all about 180.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes 175, 180 was harder to reach with the powders then. Better choices now. Still 175 in a 4" barrel was as you say nothing to sneeze at. Much easier to make with a 45ACP in a commander but the capacity reduction sucked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I readily admit that I don't like the .40. Had one years ago, hated it,  dumped it, didn't look back and will never own another.  But that's just me. If you like it, I couldn't care less. To each, his own. 

As far as the claims in that video, all I had to see was the guy making those claims and any credibility it might have had went straight down the toilet. Total BS and a waste of almost 6 minutes. :stick:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By ken_mays
      I visited the range and put about 250 rounds through the 92X Performance.
      The trigger measures about 6.5# in DA and 3.3 # in SA.   Weight of the gun without a magazine is 2 lbs, 13 oz.
      The reliability was perfect with both included magazines.   I was shooting reloads, 115gr Brazos coated LRN atop 4.6gr Titegroup.   Accuracy of this load in this gun was mediocre, about 2" at 15 yards.   I didn't have any other ammo with me to test with.  I don't know if they had any special accuracy requirements for this gun; I did detect slight movement of the muzzle when the barrel is in battery, so that's not great.
      Shooting impressions:  Sights provided a good picture.  I'm going to nitpick the front fiber sight a bit and say that the fiber was placed higher than I like.  I'm used to Dawsons, which are easier to align vertically.  I found myself looking for the top of the black front sight to get alignment for precise shots, only to find glowing dot there.  So I'll probably replace that.   The rear sight was easy to adjust, I had to dial it a few clicks up and over to get my hits where I wanted.
      I disliked the "gas pedal" style takedown lever.   It's only large enough to get maybe half the tip of my thumb onto it, and the edges and corner are far too sharp for comfort.  I'm going to look into swapping it out for a standard 92 part.  I shot most of the time with my thumb underneath it.
      I also wasn't fond of the slide stop's angled tab.  Its proximity to the safety lever and its downward rake of the tab meant it was more difficult to find and hit than it should have been.  I'm not really sure why they didn't use a standard 92 part; maybe they were worried that people who ride the safety would accidentally hold it down with the tip of their thumb.
      The thumb safety was OK: it had a good tension on and off, and the extended "shelf" was easily reached by the thumb, although I would have preferred it to extend further back.  Beretta says they will offer 3 different sizes of safety lever, but I haven't been able to find out what they look like yet.
      The safety did make slide manipulation a bit more of a challenge than I'm used to on 92s.  Between the location of the serrations (low on the slide) and the prominent safety levers, it makes grabbing the "sweet spot" more of a challenge -- if you grab too low, your fingers will be blocked by the safety.   I'm glad they included forward serrations, they're probably going to see a lot of use on this gun.
      The frame serrations were a bit of a help, but not what I'd call sharp enough to be really useful, and the slick nickel/tin finish wasn't helpful here.  I would skateboard tape over the frontstrap if I were going to do much competing with it... not that such a heavy gun is all that hard to hang onto in 9mm, but I like my grip to be locked in.
      The built-in mag funnel was well done.  No lanyard loop, and it looks like you can get to the mainspring housing pin without taking the grips off. I thought the beavertail might prove to be a problem due to its sharp corners, but that was pretty much a non-issue.


    • By Grayfox54
      With Glock's  announcement of their new .22, it got me to thinking about understudy guns. Basically, that would be guns that look and feel like full size centerfire defensive guns, but in the much cheaper and easier to shoot .22 caliber. It simply makes for more trigger time with a gun that feels like what you carry. I'm a long time fan of this concept. 
      I've said many times that my S&W Model 18 is the gun that taught me to properly shoot a DA revolver. Its my favorite revolver and goes to the range more than any other gun I own. My favorite carry revolvers are also S&W K-frames. 
      Some years ago I picked up a Ciener Platinum Cup .22 conversion unit for the 1911 at a great price. I became so fond of it that I built up a bare frame to mount it on permanently. 
      A year or so ago I bought a Walther PPK/S .22 and enjoy shooting it. 
      Not too long ago I picked up a LNIB .22 conversion for my Sig P226. Honestly, I've gotten so that I shoot the .22 more than the 9mm. 
      Anybody else have an understudy gun? How do you feel about the idea? 
    • By BHG123
      I just purchased a used Smith and Wesson 3913, in decent condition.  It is not the LS, but it is DA/SA.  Overall, this is a great little gun, and I think it is worthy of replacing my M&P PC Shield as my carry gun but I want to get the bugs worked out first.  I think it needs a little, hopefully minor work and I am hoping someone here might have some quick answers for me.
      (1) Failure to return to battery
      It looked like someone did not use it for a while and it needed a clean and lube.  I shot it prior to the clean and lube, and I had intermittent failure to return to battery issues where I just had to gently push the slide about 1/8 inch to continue firing.  I did a clean and lube with Lucas oil.  My BF also thinks the feed ramp may need some smoothing. 
      I took it back to the range after the cleaning, and no more issues with failure to return to battery.  I am not sure if the clean/lube was the only problem.  I am going to get a new recoil spring.  I am hoping that I really do not need to do much with the feed ramp.
      (2) Take up in Single Action mode
      The Take up in SA mode is gritty, not smooth, almost feels like it is "hitching".  If I shoot and do not let the SA trigger back out, no issues.  If I shoot DA, no issues.  It is only if I let the trigger take up all the way out before firing in SA mode, that I get that gritty, not smooth feeling.  Any ideas of what this might be?  Also, the safety feels a little gritty.  I am wondering if I just take the Lucas Extreme Duty Contact Cleaner to the trigger assembly and safety, if that will do the trick.  I am not sure if I should do this without removing the firing pin, and that looks like quite the project on this gun.
      Any ideas, feedback, are welcomed. 

The Fine Print

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.

Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions. TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines