I’ve long been a a .40s&w guy when it comes to bottom feeding handguns. My logic runs like this: As a reloader, I can load cast or coated lead 180’s cheaper than I can load jacketed 115’s for range use. .40’s run slower, so don’t lead up the barrel like a 9 does with plain lead. I don’t own an 9’s… haven’t in many years.
I’ve long used Missouri Bullet Co’s 180g tc tek-coated lead for practice rounds. 14¢ each. I’ll still be using them for .38/.357, 44 and 500. Love those coated lead pills.
Midway has 9mm 115 FMJ’s from RMR for the same 14¢, or Hornady for 16¢. Same primer, powder cost is about equal, brass is a wash… It’s really _not_ cheaper to load .40 lead than it is to load jacketed 9mm.
Then, looking at buying loaded ammo… I’m seeing PMC Bronze 115g FMJ for as low as 14¢ a round. Why am I loading .40 again?
Yes, .40 is slightly more effective, perhaps… but every review I see shows 9 as preferable, with defensive bullet performance pretty evenly matched, and significantly reduced recoil, increased mag capacity…
Been thinking on a new carry gun, that Shield X is looking good… not available in .40. Been thinking on a pistol caliber carbine build, what with the NFA rules on SBR’s done for… Much easier in 9 than trying to find the parts for a .40 build.
Is it time for me to add 9mm to my caliber list? Even more applicable… is it time to sell off my .40 stuff, and _only_ use 9mm for bottom feeders?
