CZ75B

Creeker

Active Member
#1
I have a Pre-B model & like the 9MM just fine in that platform. I'm thinking of adding a B model to the herd & was wondering about the 40S&W. I'll be shooting cast of course & wonder if the 40 might be easier to load lead for? Some of you experts fill me in here on barrels, chambers & such. I'll read as much as you care to write. Thanks guys.
 

Brad

Administrator
Staff member
#2
I don’t own a 40 S&W but word on the street is that it is one bear of a cartridge to load lead for. Lots of case taper, high pressure.
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
#3
I load for the 40 but don't own one.
3.5grs of titegroup under the magma 38-40 bullet sized at either 401 or 402 I have both sizers but don't remember which one I used last.
I have had 3 guys shoot that load in 4 different guns and they were all happy with it.
 

358156 hp

Well-Known Member
#5
I cast for two 40s in the past, a Beretta 96 & a Colt Defender. Everything was pretty straightforward, I really didn't have any problems in either gun. I tend to cast pretty hard for autoloaders out of respect for the feeding cycles, and that had to have had some bearing on my results. I flogged both guns pretty hard (IPSC days), and the harder I pushed the bullet, the better my results became.
 

CZ93X62

Active Member
#6
The 40 S&W is not a tapered case; it is a straight-wall, for all practical purposes. Almost all of my 40 S&W brass is W-W, but Rem and Federal IME are very close in weight and in case mouth thicknesses. This differs markedly from 9mm brass, which IS tapered-body and varies in weight, capacity, and case mouth thicknesses WIDELY. 40 S&W chambers and barrels tend to be closely-toleranced from make to make; throats and grooves are remarkably consistent at .400" to .401" IME. I have not yet tried cast bullets in my Glock 40 S&W barrels and do not have a "read" on their dimensions internally.

Specific to the CZ-75B, I have owned one for about 12 years. It has about 3,000 rounds through it, and has never failed to cycle a factory load or a reloaded cartridge--jacketed or cast. Throat is a few tenths larger than .400", grooves are right on the money at .400". Unlike most 40 S&W barrels, the CZ-75B's barrel has a 1-16" twist, which is very lead-friendly; most 40 S&W run a 1-10" or 4 turns/meter twist, which is ridiculously fast for the short, squatty bullets commonly used in 40 S&W.

More to follow........
 

CZ93X62

Active Member
#7
My shop brought in the 40 S&W c. 1994, adding it to the 9mm and 45 ACP that had been added in 1987. Our carry load was the W-W Ranger SXT 180 grain JHP, which is now sold as the WWB JHP 180 grain load. We used the less expensive WWB 180 grain FMJ as training ammo. The ballistics of all three of these loads is practically identical--they run at ~975 FPS from the Beretta 96, around 940-950 FPS from the CZ-75B, and 915-925 FPS from the Glock 23. Most of the makers' offerings run their 180 grain loads in the 950 FPS ballpark from 4.2"-4.5" barrels.

Recoil from the 40 S&W is a bit snappier than that of the 9mm or the 45 ACP. It is not uncomfortable, but a bit more than shooters of the 2 older calibers are accustomed to. My view, as one of the guys that trained folks how to shoot it and also examined the street results of its deployment and projection--the 40 S&W is the equal of the 45 ACP in terms of shutting down exchanges of finality, and most of the platforms so chambered hold more rounds than do 45 ACP pistols of similar size. The CZ-75B is all-steel, and the extra heft helps tame the recoil just a bit more than my compensated Glock 22C. I have shot a LOT of 40 S&W pistols, and have owned 6 of them--3 are still with me. The CZ-75B is the most accurate 40 S&W I have ever fired, by a significant margin. Its ergonomics suit me well, its heft soaks up recoil nicely.

My factory-load duplicator uses W-W brass and either WSP or CCI 500 primers, 4.7 grains of WW-231 powder, and the Lee 40-175-TC bullet is seated with .020" of its front drive band exposed above the case mouth. Alloy is 92/6/2, lube is Alox/BW in the bullet's conventional lube groove. These run about 950-960 FPS from the CZ-75B.

The 40 S&W is a mid-point in reloading effort that splits the difference between the extreme user-friendliness of the 45 ACP with the crankiness of the 9mm.
 

RBHarter

Well-Known Member
#8
Although not in a CZ my XD40 experience pretty much mirrors x63s .
Addendums ;
I needed to use WQWW for the 40 or I had tumbling with both an LBT 403-175 RNFP and Lee 401-175 TLTC .
Groups closed as loads increased to max at 5.7 gr Unique over a CCI 500 in W-W brass . The 2 bullets showed no favorite for speed , groups , feed or powder consumption . As a result the LBT was rehomed in favor of the 6C Lee and production ability . Across the Chrony at 4000' MSL 940 fps was the standard .

The XD has a readily visible throat and leade both in the neighborhood .15 in the 3.25" barrel . This I think accounts for the same velocities in the shorter barrel . Sized nominally to .402 for the .396×.401 barrel the front band was untouched to scuff marked in sizing and full contact without any battery resistance in the chamber .
There would be no expansion with these so that is "tick" for the Lee with it's almost SWC profile . The nose flat is .250 with a .02 or so front band shoulder . I haven't had the need to shoot anything with it yet but I would expect a full pass through on up past 175# of hog as a 250-265 45 Colts does even through the hard parts .
 

Intheshop

Well-Known Member
#9
One of my boy's has the two tone CZ. We bought him the fancy factory walnut grips for a Christmas present a few years ago. Beautiful rig.

It's been easy to shoot and load for. I'm with Freebullet,easier to handle than 9mm's from a loading standpoint.

Been using the Lee 175.... beercan acc @25 yds. Bttm of can @10.
 

Bret4207

Well-Known Member
#10
I've not yet got into reloading, much less casting for my wifes EAA Witness, but I can tell you the 40 is a nice round for field type work in an auto loader. As Al said, the recoil is much more pronounced with the 40, but the heavier framed guns soak it up nicely. I would not feel undergunned on the road with a 40.
 

popper

Well-Known Member
#11
40SW is the cats meow for reloading with cast. Wore out the Lee mould, now it a 165gr TC like the Lee. XDm & PX4. ACWW can work Softer needs 402 that might not chamber. I've gone to ~acsoww but got some tumbling.
 

CZ93X62

Active Member
#12
The 40 S&W is my most-carried CCW caliber--more often is the Glock 23, in winter the CZ-75B gets the nod in a Bianchi X-15/Medium. The CZ is carried cocked & locked/Condition 1, as it lacks a decocking capability; if that is desired, CZ makes variants with that sort of off-switch. My last 5 years of duty saw me carry the Beretta 96 for uniform assignments. I REALLY like the 40 S&W--it may not be uber-accurate, but it is goblin-capable to 50 yards IME--which is 10x farther away than most social engineering taskings require. The current police admin thrust to de-emphasize the 40 S&W and promote the 9mm is unmitigated BULLSQUAT--I could consume tons of bandwidth on this subject alone, but that is outside the scope of Artful Bullet and most members' focus areas.
 

Bret4207

Well-Known Member
#13
Yeah Al, I dunno what the currrent rush back the 9m is, but I bet a lot of it is recruits that don't break 5'4" and have names like TIffany, Jennifer and Michelle. Probably some females that need less recoil too. I hope I disguised that enough....
 

Intheshop

Well-Known Member
#17
Have said it before,will say it again...

Simple economics, ammo companies have a higher margin on smaller cartridges. If I can charge you the same $$ for a cheaper to produce product...... where do you think our engineers and publicists are gonna focus their attention?

Edit,this is in response to the 9mm "push" over other,larger chamberings.
 
Last edited:

CZ93X62

Active Member
#18
Shop--

That is part of the scenario, certainly. But there are bean-counters on the consumption side of the ledger as well. Cost-per-round on the State ammo contract my agency participates in make the 9mm cheaper than 40 S&W, and the 45 ACP is more expensive than both. This applies to both training ammo and to war shots. That is half of the issue--the other half is that the sharper recoil of the 40 S&W causes more deputies to require a second or third attempt to qualify with their sidearms. Interestingly, this was not very much of an issue when the choices were 45 ACP with strong biases in its favor over the 9mm. The S&W and SIG-Sauer variants were the only pistols authorized. Everyone got trained up on their own time, and just about everyone who took our classes shot well with the 45s and continued to do so. The onset of the Glocks and the 40 S&W caliber in 1994 were contemporaneous with onset of the "problem". The admin pogue response with bean-counter input is to require smaller calibers with softer loads so that low-performance personnel can put the requisite number of holes in a B-27 target at 3/7/10/15 yards. 30 rounds, 70%, hits inside the "7-bottle" count. Not daunting in the least, especially if you have pulse and respiration. Don't get me started.
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
#19
well had they listened to me and went with a 375 instead of a 40 we wouldn't have these problems, and the 10mm wouldn't have had to wait this long to try to make a resurgence.
see problem solved but no one asked my opinion.
 

Bret4207

Well-Known Member
#20
I was part of the transition from 9mm to 45GAP on the NYSP. There wasn't enough difference n felt recoil between the 9 and 45 to say so IMO. The 40S+W was quite a lot snappier than either. I never heard any complaints on field performance of the GAP. I understand they went to the 45ACP over the past couple years for money savings. Truthfully, our retired Chief Range Officer was a big wig with Glock and I think he got there by selling the NYSP on the 45GAP for advertising purposes.