November 19th, 2006 01:37 PM
Perceived recoil....no difference
I have shot 9mm, .40 s&w, and .45 caliber in many platforms including Glocks, Sigs, and H&Kís and I donít notice one round recoiling or kicking harder then the other. I always hear that some people prefer 9mm for the controlled recoil but it seriously feels the same to me as .40 caliber or .45 caliber.
I have tested each caliber in different guns back to back so that if there was a harder kick to any one gun or caliber it would be most noticeable at that moment. T
The different calibers also donít affect my groupings....some times I am dead on with the .45 or .40 while I am not with the 9mm, but then everything will change in the next couple magazines. I am also pretty anal retentive about being 100 percent consistent. If I leave the range without putting almost every round in the bulls eye I feel like I am shooting poorly. Anyways, back on subject the differing rounds donít seem to affect me any. Anyone else experience this before?
November 19th, 2006 03:16 PM
Similar but - once again I think the weight of platform still has a bearing, such that ultra compacts will feel a bit more ''snappy''.
If I shoot my SIG 226 ST 9mm and go straight to the 220 - then there is a perceptible difference but not enough to matter. The ST is a bit heavier.
Comparing too 9mm out of 226 and SW99 - the latter is again a shade more snappy.
Overall tho I think most of us with some experience are much less aware of gun movement because we largely have things like grip and overall technique down to a tee.
The most obvious change is going to 9mm in the R9 - now that IS snappy!!
Chris - P95
NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.
"To own a gun and assume that you are armed
is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."
- a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.
November 19th, 2006 05:00 PM
Gun weight and ammo loading
I shoot a variety of guns and ammo, and can feel recoil differences as gun weight or ammo load change.
For example, I have taken a Glock 23 (24 ounces) and a Sig P229 (32 ounces) to the range together, with the same .40 caliber ammo. Then I alternate between the two guns, from one magazine to the next. The lightweight Glock 23 recoils noticeably more than the heavier Sig P229.
I have also alternated with the Glock 23 and an almost identical Glock 19 (9mm). The .40 caliber G23 has noticeably more recoil than the 9mm G19, even though the guns are the same weight and size.
November 19th, 2006 05:27 PM
If you shoot often enough and use consistent shooting
techniques you WON'T notice much difference between
9mm,.40,and .45 in a full size autopistol.
Where it gets interesting is shooting magnums and or small
guns with different grip sizes and angles.
But it's been shown many times by competitive shooters that
all other things being equal , the highest skilled shooters will
clean your clock if given the advantage of a lighter caliber
with less recoil.
-SIG , it's What's for Dinner-
know your rights!
"If I walk in the woods, I feel much more comfortable carrying a gun. What if you meet a bear in the woods that's going to attack you? You shoot it."
November 19th, 2006 06:04 PM
I owned a Glock 27 and now a 26; the first is .40, the latter 9mm.
This is the subcompact size, where you're little finger is not on the grip. While that contributes some to muzzle flip, my comments are to address the difference in recoil between the two identical pistols, .40 and 9mm.
The model 27 has noticably more recoil/snap to it than the 9mm, to the point of discomfort. It's not just me, either, I've had at least a dozen other shooters try each of them and comment on how much more recoil and muzzle blast the .40 puts out. It was painful for me to shoot the .40, so I switched to the 9mm and love it.
While I carry the round with less punch, the 9mm, I shoot it much better--shot placement, shot placement, shot placement....
"It's a big gun when I carry it, it is also a big gun when I take it outĒ Ė Clint Smith
November 19th, 2006 06:41 PM
Im going to buy a gun and gona to use it for home defence. The answer im looking for is what caliber to use. I would like a biger caliber than 9mm but i was afraid of a recoil and the impact of the recoil on the acuracy but when i think about if the bd came too my home the distance beetwen us would be no more 5-6 meters (15-18 feet"s) so i belive thet the stooping power of the bulet is more important.
November 19th, 2006 08:11 PM
Home defense and not carry? - heavy gun
If you're buying a gun for home defense and don't have to carry it, you might as well go with a gun in all steel with full size grips. Since you want a caliber larger than 9mm, the heavy gun will handle the recoil better and allow faster followup shots. There are many guns on the market that would meet these requirements, including full size 1911s in .45 caliber, all steel Sigs in .40 or .45, full size steel revolvers, etc. Here is a Sig P226 in all stainless that weighs 42 ounces, has night sights, and is available in .40 caliber with 12 round magazines, for example:
Originally Posted by andrlje
November 19th, 2006 09:03 PM
I rented a large glock in .40sw, I thought the recoil too sharp.
Originally Posted by JimmyC
In a baby eagle and a pt-101, the .40sw is pleasant shooting. so gun weight has to be the issue. An N frame 28 .357 is harsh a ruger blackhawk in .357 is tame, weight issue again.
November 19th, 2006 11:17 PM
Lots of factors in recoil. The most unpleasant gun I've personally shot is only a .380, but it only weighs 11 ounces loaded. It is snappy, abusing fingers more than wrist. By comparison, a .40, .45 or even a .44 magnum in a full-sized gun have more push straight back, but spread out and far more comfortable and controllable.
November 19th, 2006 11:48 PM
I never got the whole recoil thing. Don't obsess over it, and its a non issue.
November 20th, 2006 12:02 AM
Whether you perceive a difference or not, it's still there. I can tell the difference between loads in the same gun.
One way to really see what effect it has is to shoot the same COF (multiple targets & presentations) with different guns/calibers while using a timer. Check your run times combined with your accuracy by caliber/platform.
Anytime I run my 200 LSWC "gamer" load against my Hardball load, there's a difference.
There's a reason why min power factors exist
November 20th, 2006 12:24 AM
I just tried a G19 and G23 yesterday side by side and alternating between the two. There is noticeably more recoil in the .40 S&W G23 compared to the 9mm G19. I didn't think it was a problem, but I did notice the difference. Follow up shots were just slightly quicker with the 9mm. The G19 was more pleasant to shoot too.
After much reading, I think speed in [accurate] follow up shots is more important than the difference between caliber sizes. Handguns are poor man stoppers to begin with. One stop shots should not be expected with any handgun caliber. If you have a handgun, expect to have to hit your adversary multiple times [in COM or head] before he stops. Hence the need for quick follow up shots. For those that can't practice often enough, the 9mm would offer this compared to larger, hotter calibers.
For a home defense handgun, I'd go with a full size .45 acp from a reputable manufacturer. However, I have a Rem 870 12ga pump for home defense. For me, I'd choose 9mm for carry.
Just my two cents.
November 20th, 2006 07:59 AM
Originally Posted by Chuck R.
By bruce272 in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
Last Post: December 14th, 2009, 09:31 PM
By dal205 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: November 29th, 2009, 09:57 PM
By magictag in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: July 3rd, 2009, 09:24 AM
By mojust in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: March 12th, 2008, 12:26 PM
By Bud White in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: May 8th, 2006, 12:15 PM
Search tags for this page
bulet caliber, 45 vs 380
perceived recoil of handguns
perceived recoil per caliber
what is perceived recoil
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors