.40 recoil?

A .357 magnum round fired from a ~40 oz revolver compared to a .40 s&w round fired from a ~25 oz semi-auto is still a really broad statement.

At their hottest the .357 magnum round has more energy but it is still fired from a (usually) heavier revolver with more of the weight of the gun in line with the shooting arm. However, there is no slide movement or recoil spring to absorb recoil either.

The .40 s&w at its hottest doesn't match the power of the .357 (easily 200 ft/lbs less energy) but it could be fired from a gun easily half the weight of a revolver with the barrel sitting higher above the shooting arm.Some of the recoil in the semi-auto is absorbed when the inertia of the slide is defeated, the slide is propelled rearward, and the recoil spring is compressed.

I assert that both rounds, loaded hot, will be uncomfortable for the shooter. I also assert that both rounds, loaded "tamer", will be perfectly manageable to shoot.

To sum up, the .40 isn't bad at all. People who shoot .357 magnum revolvers are normally shooting much heavier guns with tamer loads of .357 (not the hottest available). So, when they pick up super light guns chambered in .40 (glocks, m&ps, XDs etc) it seems brutal to them because the recoil impulse is much shorter and more violent (due to the low mass of the gun... not so much the "harshness" of the round). But, if you shoot just regular loads of .40 or .357 magnum both of them are quite easy to shoot all day.
 
The recoil from my XD40 seems no more objectionable than most nines but not as much as a .45, but no wher near that of a .357, in my opinion. I happen to be a big fan of the .40 but I've only fired it from my XD.
 
I can shoot my S&W 40VE all day long with no problems. Well, I cant really because that would cost way to much but I can run through a box of 100 rounds without any issues.
 
Had a Glock 22 .40 and found the recoil excessive. Swapped it in on a Sig Equinox .40 and find the recoil hardly noticeable.

To me the recoil on the 40 is more of a "snap" and harsher than the "push" from a .45 ACP.
 
Thank you iMag for your explanation. Chuck Hawks recoil table, at first glance, appears to indicate .40 has "more" recoil than a .357 Mag, but the .357 revolvers are roughly twice as heavy as the .40 semi autos in the table, and, as stated previously, the revolvers design and action inherently produce more FELT recoil than a semi auto.
 
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.
Click to expand...

It really depends on the platform.

I shoot .40s out of a Glock 22 and find the recoil to be fairly mild. More jumpy than a 357 out of a 6" barrel revolver for sure, but not dramatic.

I used to hate .40s out of ANY platform....then I learned how to shoot :D.

To answer your question though, 357s out of my 686 recoil a little harder than .40s out of my Glock 22...BUT the recoil is also much smoother.
 
Zippy, you are correct. After the 1986 Miami shootout, the 10mm was developed as a new FBI load but proved to be too much, i.e., recoil, so the load (if I recall correctly) was reduced and a new cartridge large enough to hold the powder charge - the .40 - was developed, and, over many years, has become a common law enforcement cartridge.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout

The energy of .357 and .40 factory loads are comparable (more or less), but .357 is a revolver cartridge so the only energy loss is through the tiny gap between the cylinder and the barrel while the .40 is a semi-auto cartridge that uses energy to operate the action of the pistol. And, as mentioned previously, .357 revolvers are generally heavier than many (most?) .40 semi-autos.
 
Last edited:
I have to wonder if Stolivar is shooting full .357 loads from his SP101, or if he is using reduced .357 (or .38) loads, or if he has small hands that just fit the SP101 really well, but that don't fit well on most .40 auto grips.

Because I have yet to shoot a .40 that recoils as much as a full .357 from an SP101.

The platform will make a lot of difference. Weight, balance, bore axis, grip fit, grip composition... these will all impact how bad perceived recoil is.
 
MLeake, I agree. I have small (arthritic) hands. My SP 101 .357 fits nicely as did my much lighter Kahr P40. Nevertheless, the .357 bucks much more than the .40. I'm considering a K40, all black, and would expect it to be "relatively" comfortable to shoot for a concealable SD handgun with that much power. How about a Ruger LCR .357 at 17+ ounces OUCH.
 
Last edited:
Recoil depends on the platform as well as the person.

My brother has a S&W M&P and my father has a Sig 229, both in .40. The M&P felt snappy to me, but the heavier Sig soaks up the recoil of the .40 pretty well and I don't find it snappy at all. My father loves the way his Sig shoots and my brother loves the way his M&P shoots. My personal favorite platform is a 1911 in .45, which just shows that everyone is different.
 
.40 recoil

I have a Ruger SP101, a Glock 22 (full size .40) a M&P40c and a Colt Commander 45. I'm not a 9mm fan although I think it's a fine cartridge for compact guns.
My SP101 (2-1/4" barrel)with magnum rounds has the sharpest recoil of the 4, no contest. I have no issue with the recoil of my M&P compact but it is a bit sharp. Between my full sized Glock .40 and my Colt Commander .45 the latter has more recoil, not a slow push, more recoil period. Several people shooting both of those guns have stated the same feeling.
 
I can shoot the sp101 all day compared to the 40
Click to expand...

You can't fire a .40 without a gun. Perhaps you could be kind enough to tell us what .40 cal. pistol is harder to shoot than Ruger's small frame revolver using .357 Mag. ammo all day long.
 
I've found that shooting 165 grain .40 has less of a kick than my 115 grain 9mm...
This may be because ones a Glock and ones a Hi-Point...
But I've shot .40 thru inexpensive pistols also and have found the recoil not to be unpleasant...
 
I haven't shot the .40 in an M&P, yet, but I routinely shoot .45 from a pair of M&Ps, and .40 from a PX4. I found the .40 SIG P229 I used to own had similar perceived recoil for me, because with the PX4 and the M&P I can install the large backstraps, and get a better grip fit than I could get with the P229. The better fit (though the P229 was hardly bad as far as grip, just not as good) offset the weight advantage of the P229.

Now, with my .44Magnum S&W Mountain Gun, there is a lot of difference in perceived recoil between the Ahrend's woods it came with (ouch), the X-frame Hogue I put on it for a while (no big deal), and the Pachmayrs I have on it now (minor ouch, but easier to conceal). Same gun, same ammo, but different grip materials and contours.
 
KC Rob said:
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.
Click to expand...

Hey thanks for basically calling me a liar, chief. I am 23 and I did regularly shoot .40 at ages 5-6 from a Beretta 96. You'll have to check back with me later about whether I need you to believe me. :)

P.S., my smallish girlfriend also shoots .40 frequently with no complaints.
 
The .40 is a higher pressure round than the .45acp, and has a sharper recoil impulse - but not necessarily more net recoil.

Because the .40 can be fit into smaller framed guns than can the .45acp, it often is fit into smaller framed guns - which probably has a lot to do with people perceiving it as a higher recoil round.

I suspect the .40 wouldn't feel like anything unusual from a 1911.

Again, a lot of factors affect perceived recoil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top