Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
I'm saying that many of the guns out there now
were designed with the .40 as starting point...
Are you even cognizant of what you're typing? The Browning Hi Power went into production in 9 MM back in 1935.
A full 55 years before the .40 S&W cartridge was introduced. The 4006 was built on a modified 1006 frame that was
originally designed for the 10 MM cartridge, not the .40 S&W. Are you making this stuff up as you go along, hoping no one will catch it?
The H&K USP line of pistols were all available in both 9 MM as well as .45 ACP before they chambered it in .40 S&W.
Again, the gun already existed. The same thing can be said about the Sig P-229 and the Beretta M-9 / 92 FS, and the CZ-75... Which incidentally, was first produced in 9 MM back in 1976.
A full 14 years before the .40 was even conceived. ALL were built in 9 MM before they were chambered in .40 S&W. I really like jerking your chain. However you make it less enjoyable when you prove my point for me. But thanks anyway.
Saying you're jerking my chain is an attempt to save face, either you believe what you have said or you don't. Given it relays a significant amount of ignorance of particular platforms chambered in .40. I all allow you to come clean and admit what you're saying is false.
-Glad you're up to speed on Hi-powers. The point I made was that to build one in .40 they had to change the locking lugs and slide mass to accommodate for the extra recoil. A few seconds of handling and a field strip of one would prove the difference vs a 9mm HP. Again, speaking from ownership. Thus proving your statement
Quote:
None of them were built to any different specs, or added dimensions to handle the .40 S&W. You're not talking in circles... You're running in them.
.... incorrect.
-A 1006 and a 4006 are completely spec'ed different. Different barrel length, weight, and overall size. To clarify I was wrong about a ground up build in .40, seems they just added beef to a 59/5906 platform per Z06's link.
-I never discussed the Beretta, but isn't the slide heavier on a 96? Some beretta nut can tell me.
-Never mentioned a CZ 75 specifically but since you brought it up, the slide and locking lugs are different on a .40 too.
http://www.czfirearms.us/index.php?topic=55735.0
-Hopefully nobody can argue the difference in a EMP 9 vs .40?
-Hasn't Glock done the same over the years? 2 pins to 3? Aren't the .40 slides heavier? Wasn't the Gen4 built with the .40cal in mind? Given the gen3 in .40 problems that LE depts had? I know mine wouldn't run right with a WML and it seems several LEOs had this issue as well.
This doesn't even address platforms actually built around the .40 like the M&P, Steyr, and I guess more than a few H&Ks.