1911Forum banner

9mm vs. .40 longevity

1697 55
How much less is the lifespan of a modern .40 (not .45) pistol compared to a modern 9mm?

There's the Glock 17 in 9mm and the Glock 22 in .40, for example. S&W makes the M&P in both 9mm and .40 the last I checked. I think Sig makes both polymer and steel/aluminum pistols in .40. There was the CZ 75 in .40 but the don't make them anymore. I don't recall is Springfield makes their polymer guns in .40 anymore.
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

· Administrator
Joined
·
80,882 Posts
Asking this question is like asking your doctor how many cheeseburgers you can eat before you get heart disease. The answer is, it depends. There are far too many variables to put any kind of realistic number on it. All else being equal a .40 will beat itself to death before a 9mm will, but then again how many people do you know who have ever worn out a handgun of any sort?
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
80,882 Posts
What I hated about the .40 was its very snappy recoil. I tried a Gen 3 and Gen 4 Glock 23, and both torqued harshly in the hand and the triggerguard abraded the bottom of my trigger finger. I sold those and later tried a S&W 4006, but it was a tank by comparison and not practical as a carry gun. The only .40 I ever had that I liked was an H&K USPc, but the DA trigger on that one was virtually unusable so I ended up selling it as well. I'm now done with the .40 completely and probably won't ever get another one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Levian and FDM1
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top