LooseRounds.com5.56 Timeline


S&W FBI 1076

Picture and gun above courtesy of our friend and yours, Stuart Palmer (www.thevintage1911.com). It’s the S&W the FBI asked for in 10MM after their unpleasantness in a certain famous shootout in Miami. A very hot ticket at the time, but not around for long. The large heavy steel frame, pitiful shooting qual scores, female agent’s small hands and requests for lighter loads led to its demise and the birth of one of the most unneeded and pointless service rounds extant. The .40 Short& Weak. Er.. I mean .40 Smith & Wesson. Something between the 9mm and the .45 ACP that does neither of the things those two rounds do well. A perfect example of government compromise for the middle ground.

9 thoughts on “S&W FBI 1076”

      • Just trying to make lemonade. (Of course I’m also a fan of .22 TCM, so, feel free to question my taste in cartridges.)

        (And it’s been a couple of real long days with not nearly enough caffeine, which has detrimental effects on the filter between brain and keyboard.)

        Seriously, I do enjoy shooting .357 SIG; and one of these days I want to try a 9×25 Dillon. I can’t argue with DG’s points below re the .40 S&W.

    • I find they (the S&W second/third gen semi-autos) shoot and operate well. Others say they’ve never had “so unreliable a gun.”

      There are times I wonder if some guns other people don’t like behave for me, just because they know I’ll split them open on the bench and start making mods…

      That said, I’ve only ever fired one 1076, and I thought it was OK. It had a trigger pull that reminded me very much of a S&W revolver in DA mode – long, and about 12 pounds in DA pull, and more than a little like the DA S&W revolver trigger pull. In single action, it was heavier than a S&W revolver SA pull, but almost as crisp.

      I thought it was a nice gun to shoot, because it was heavy and allowed me to control the recoil well. Another gunsmith I know told me that the 1076 would take “hot” 10mm loads safely, but I have no personal evaluation of this. From a perspective of carrying it, it was on the heavy side, all loaded up with ammo. I’m guessing it must have felt like taking off a N-frame at the end of the day carrying one of them.

      re: the .40 S&W.

      The .40 S&W was a mostly useless development. I’ve never seen the point. I own lots of gun in “obsolete” cartridges, and I’ll make even more guns in “obsolete” chamberings for myself before I snuff it, but .40 S&W is one where I say “Meeeeehhhhh…. what ever was the point?” I could put together a 1911 in 9×21, or .38 Super, or 9×23 if I want something really hot that penetrates that doesn’t cost me magazine capacity like a .40, or… I could get a gun in 10mm single-stack for power, or… if I really want a hand-cannon, I’ll go get a .45 WinMag LAR Grizzly and have great gobs of kinetic energy and wound channel.

      The .40 S&W has always seemed to me to be a solution in search of a problem. If the problem was “not a big/heavy enough bullet,” the .45’s solved that problem better. If the problem was “not enough rounds in the magazine,” the 9’s and .38’s solved that problem better.

      The only problem the .40 every really solved was “how do we sell new guns to law enforcement?”

      All said, I think the FBI should have given the 10mm (the real 10mm, not the pussified 10mm) a better hearing, or they should have gone back to .357 Mag revolvers.

      • They could have adopted .45 ACP like their gel research said they could. But how would it be cool for the FBI to adopt a pistol cartridge from like 1909 or something, that was invented for the *Army*?

        The pistols would’ve been just as big, but I suspect that their girls would’ve had a much easier time shooting .45 than 10mm or .40 S&W. I expect .45 would’ve been a real pussycat out of those big, heavy Smiths.

    • I had the same opinion about Third Gen Smith aesthetics when I was younger, but they’ve grown on me in the last 10 or so years.


Leave a Comment