Secondary cavitation velocities........hmmm.It's always hard for me to believe that a .75" hole with similar penetration characteristics hitting with more energy doesn't do more damage than another round creating a .61" hole with less energy, both going well below secondary cavitation velocities.
Lucky Gunner Labs does a good job of allowing you to compare calibers and rounds.
It seems to me that dissing the 40 as people do is kind of like dissing the 6.5 CM in rifles. If you are into long range this is a common theme. "No need for it...compromise cartridge...marketing driven cartridge...etc. Some of which may technically be true. But that doesn't negate the effectiveness of the cartridge. In this advanced day and age, driven by capitalism technology gives us more choices than we actually need. That's not necessarily a bad thing. I noticed 10 different kinds of Oreos at the grocery store the other day. America.
9mm stopped being cheap months ago. 40 is a caliber that came and is on it's way to "gone". Great idea but more and more folks including LEAs have gone 9mm. If I could carry want I wanted to when I get a call to pull some duty hours, I'd carry 45acp. But sadly it's 9mm although I won't carry plastic striker fired pistols, I carry what I'm having a lot of fun with, my ROC with HSTs or Win. Rangers in it. Ranger punches light metal nicely.9mm is cheap to shoot and it will get the job done. .40 is the perfect solution for a problem that never existed. .45 is fun to shoot, cheap and fun to reload, and it is a proven man stopper.
I shoot 9mm and .45 a lot. I have never really seen the need for .40 S&W. I have shot them and find the recoil to be very snappy and unpleasant.