.40 recoil?

C

cosmicdingo

New member
Looking into a .40 cal, BUT the recoil is a consideration.Is it comparable to a
.357mag? If so, I'd just as soon stick to 9mm/.45.
 
NO. Not close.

Some small pistols might be a bit of a handful---the G23 isn't pleasant to shoot, but my P229's handle any load very well. So does the P226 in .40.
 
^ Not close. I have an SP 101 .357 Mag and had (until very recently) a Kahr P40. The recoil of a .40 is quicker and sharper than a .45 ACP, but it is not very close to a .357 Magnum.
 
Really? My Kahr P40 recoil was stout, but not even close to .357 Magnum in my little SP 101 despite the Ruger's heavier weight. I now limit my SP 101 to .38 +P.
 
Recoil is strictly subjective. Where my XD40 Subcompact doesn't present a problem to me, it could be intolerable to you!
The best way for you to find out is to actually shoot one. Is there a range close to you that rents guns? Most rent by the hour, and you can switch off between different firearms.
 
Recoil is indeed subjective and it certainly depends on the gun as well. Personally, I feel a .40 is snappy compared to a .45 but I don't find it unreasonable. I also don't think that my Glock 22 .40 is as harsh as my 686 6" .357.
 
I consider the recoil of my Glock 23 or Kahr K40 as being less than the .357.

Frankly I've never understood the complaints about the recoil of the .40. Even having arthritis in my wrist and thumb joint, I don't have a problem with it.
 
The only thing more exaggerated on gun forums than Bigfoot or One Shot Stop statistics is the .40 recoil. I started shooting it when I was 5 or 6 and never knew it was considered "snappy" until I came online.

It's just different. When I went from .40 to my first time shooting 9mm regularly, my shooting got much worse. Each round has a unique recoil impulse that takes getting used to, but I find 9, .40, and .45 all extremely shootable.
 
The .40 seems to have a really sharp recoil impulse, while the .45 has a stronger shove spread out over a longer period of time. In a heavy steel-framed .40 like a 1911 or S&W 4006 the recoil is not much different than a +P 9mm, but in a light polymer pistol (such as a Glock 27 or 23) it can be punishing for some users.
 
I have a Sig 226 .40, a Kimber .45 3" Covert Carry, and a .357 S&W 686 4". Of the three, the .40 is the lightest and most manageable recoil. The .357 is significantly more powerful than any of the three UNLESS you're shooting .38 loads.

I would definitely agree with cheapshooter's suggestion to rent a model that you are considering buying.

Good luck!
 
I have a 6" Colt Python in 357 Magnum and a G-35 and Para 16-40 in 40S&W. The Colt Python has more recoil and muzzle flash than either of the others. I have some Winchester 158GR JHP from the late 70's that are more stout than the Remington 125GR Golden Sabers that I keep in the gun and the Dade Speed Loaders. The 40S&W guns are great to shoot and I just hope if I have to use the Colt Python it is in the daylight hours.
 
The only thing more exaggerated on gun forums than Bigfoot or One Shot Stop statistics is the .40 recoil.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that and stories of 5 years olds shooting double taps from a .40. :rolleyes:

If you were shooting .40's when you were 5 or 6 then that would make you around 22-23 years old right now, at most, so you are just a young pup! When I was in my early 20's I could have shot a .50 BMG pistol and thought the recoil wasn't that bad!

The .40 is a high pressure cartridge, and its perceived recoil can be uncomfortable to some shooters. I personally don't like it, but I can shoot .45 ACP all day long. It is definitely subjective, so shooting one will be the only way to tell how you feel about it.
 
Here's the problem. 357's come in revolver platforms, while the 40 is in an autoloader, which has softer recoil due to the slide action.

I think a more appropriate question is a comparison between 40 and 357 Sig in the same gun.

But to answer your question, both are unpleasant to shoot IMO. Much prefer a 45.
 
Comparable to .357 mag?


NOT EVEN CLOSE:eek:


I shoot my .40 (SW M&P) better than any of my others. The recoil is said to be more "snappy" as opposed to the slow push back of .45 but I don't find that at all. it's controllable, light, and EASY AS PIE to handle accurately.


EDIT:Can someone explain to me what Perceived recoil is as compared to felt recoil?
 
I have a few .40's. I am committed. But if I had to do it over again, I would go with .45 ACP. The .40 is snappy. It takes a lot of practice and the right pistol to get good with. Unless you are looking for a specific pistol that is only available in .40, you'd be better of in 9mm or .45 ACP. I have no idea why PD's went with the .40.
 
I have no idea why PD's went with the .40.
Click to expand...

I would assume the added power over 9mm and the added capacity over .45

But then my assumption could be outweighed by the invoice the PD was given as compared to others:D


If I was at a PD where you could choose own gun. It'd be SW M&P .40
 
To me, 40, 357 mag and 45 ACP can be comparable depending on the gun. I prefer the 40 over the other 2. The 40 is a good stopper with moderate recoil in small guns like a Kahr P40.

9mm is smaller, less effective and the same size gun usually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top