[bb21]

I am interested in buying a duty weapon and I think I will go with the M&P. I am not interested in ballistics as I feel they are quite similar in that aspect.

I am however interested in the opinion of those of you who have shot or own both. If you could have only one, which would it be? And Why?

Any opinions on reliability differences, recoil differences, longer sight radius, weight difference, and anything else I am missing. Oh yeah capacity is kind of obvious but it is also a deciding factor.

Thanks in advance!

 

[HankH]

I know there will be many who disagree, but I would select the 40 over the 45 for the following reasons:



1) Greater magazine capacity.

2) Smaller frame, less weight to carry all day and easier to conceal in warm weather if concealment is necessary.



I enjoy the 45, but if I had to choose...it would be the 40.

 

[sholling]

Well since we aren't counting ballistics (which is where the 45 beats the 40) then I guess you just have to go by magazine capacity and weight. :wink:

 

[TOF]

The extra rounds in .40 probably equalize the weight difference if not swinging it around. That said I have a .40 and do not plan on purchasing a .45.



Hand size could be important also.



Either should make a fine duty weapon.



We make our choices and take our chances.



:twisted:

 

[MTech]

Due to capacity/followup shot ect. I'd say 9MM or 40. Ammo pricing and more range time 9mm. Normally I avoid the 40 with it's snappy recoil but on the M&P it's very manageable. You can get a thumb safety on the .45 though if that means anything to you?

 

[choochboost]

Which is better? That would normally be hard to say, but because you said it would be a duty gun, I voted for the .45.

 

[akr]

I agree with HankH, and the .40 is just as deadly. I voted for the .40.

 

[akr]

Well since we aren't counting ballistics (which is where the 45 beats the 40) then I guess you just have to go by magazine capacity and weight. :wink:

.........that depends, and whatever it DOES beat the .40 in, it is insignificant.

 

[98z28]

I purchased an M&P 45 as a potential replacement for my G21 duty weapon. I have had major issues with reliability and do not feel comfortable putting it in a duty holster. A family member purchased an M&P 40 and has had great luck with it. He is working on getting his department to T&E the M&P to replace their G22's.



Lots of folks have and love the 45. I think I just got lemon.

 

[coltman1985]

fortie, foshizzle

 

[Omikron]

What?

No 9mm option?



I would say whatever gun you can shoot with the most accuracy and feels the best for you. If your life is on the line I'd take any gun that I can hit what I'm aiming at with certainty.

 

[Fabius]

The M&P 9mm is the first of that caliber that I feel may be comparable to a .40 for carry. That's because the M&P 9mm is one of the most accurate and soft shooting pistols that I've ever owned. With 18 rounds in the gun and quick, accurate follow up shots, I feel as comfortable carrying it as I do my .40's. As for the .40 vs. .45 debate, I think that the .45 has the edge in stopping power, but the .40 is a better balance of stopping power, capacity and concealibility.

 

[gtmtnbiker98]

You took the words right out of my mouth, Fabius! The MP9 is my favorite as well and I typed a near identical reply on another forum today. Smith got it right with the MP9 - but my MP45 has some reliability issues. My MP40 has been 100% reliable as well but I only have 200-rounds through her. The jury is still out on the MP45.

 

[UPSguy]

You say you are buying this as a duty weapon. Does your department have restrictions? Are they providing the ammo, if so, what caliber?



When shooting duty type ammo, many people will say the 9mm and .45 is a much easier gun to shoot than the equivalent .40. Notice I said duty ammo and not down loaded to just make power factor game ammo.



There is not much difference at all between the 9/40 M&P and the .45 M&P in the grip area. So, if mag capacity is one of your desires, I'd go 9mm. More mag capacity, easier to shoot, less expensive ammo to practice with.



If we take ballistics into account, if your rounds do not expand then the .45 has a big advantage in more bullet mass and wider bullet.

 

[Kymas23]

Well in Hawaii, we have a 10 round handgun mag limit so I side with the 45 on this argument. I rather have 10 large bullets on tap than 10 medium ones. Since I dont carry, and we have no CCW licenses here for the masses, weight is not an issue. Ergronomics and reliabilty is more important for me.

 

[45guy]

Read a post somewhere from a guy in Kentucky that investigates shootings in the state. He stated these stats on the average number of rounds in a dead man.

9mm 11rds

.40 9rds

.45 1.5rds

Which one would you stake your life on?

I was talking to one of the best and well know tactical instructers in the world about this just yesterday. I stated that I just didn't see much need for the .40. 9mm is cheap to shoot and the .45 to carry and stake your life on. He agreed.

Guess where my vote went in the poll.

 

[JoeM&P]

My dept. is approving the 40 for duty.I have been putting in extra time with it to get use to it. I like the ambi safety, and the steel laynard loop on the 45. The 45 does not fit my hand as well as the 40, not bad just different. Sooo I vote 40

 

[Steelshooter]

I own and shoot the snot out of both the .40 and .45. I use the .40 for carry. Both are equally reliable and I am comfortable with the ballistics of both. To be clear I have never had a single issue such as FTF etc. with either. I prefer the .45 because I have big hands and bigger pistols just feel better to me. The M&P is the only pistol I have every really enjoyed shooting .40 in as recoil is very mild. I can quickly and accurately fire a full mag of 15 rounds. I have a lot of affection for the .45 round but do not feel it is noticeably ballistically superior to the .40. I waited quite a while after the .45 was out before buying one because so many had poor triggers, finishes, and ejectors. Also rough welds on the mags. I'm not seeing this in the newer .45's which is why I finally bought one.



Which feels better in your hand and shooting?



Do you need or want a thumb safety?



Do you care about the difference in round counts?

 

[Steelshooter]

I have heard an awful lot of BS from competitive shooters who also teach. I don't know this guys background so it's hard to say if he knows what he is talking about. I strongly believe in shooting what you carry. So I would not shoot a 9mm and carry a .45 unless you also shoot the .45 a lot. This guys question is about the .40 vs. the .45 though not the 9mm so I'll leave it at that.

Read a post somewhere from a guy in Kentucky that investigates shootings in the state. He stated these stats on the average number of rounds in a dead man.

9mm 11rds

.40 9rds

.45 1.5rds

Which one would you stake your life on?

I was talking to one of the best and well know tactical instructers in the world about this just yesterday. I stated that I just didn't see much need for the .40. 9mm is cheap to shoot and the .45 to carry and stake your life on. He agreed.

Guess where my vote went in the poll.

 

[ToddG]

9mm 11rds

.40 9rds

.45 1.5rds

Whoever reported this is on crack, relying on ridiculously skewed data, or both.

I was talking to one of the best and well know tactical instructers in the world about this just yesterday. I stated that I just didn't see much need for the .40. 9mm is cheap to shoot and the .45 to carry and stake your life on. He agreed.

I bet I know who that was.

And last time I saw him, he was carrying a 9mm.