40`s recoil strange?

F

Fatelvis

New member
I`ve only fired the 40 a couple times, and I thought the recoil was very "sharp", meaning fairly stout, and having a bit of a quick snap to it. I`m used to a 45, or 9mm. I found it uncomfortable to shoot. Does anyone agree? Is this common, for the caliber, in general? Thanx for your opinions-
 
Last edited:
That has been my experience and I think a lot of folks will agree. It is a combination of a heavy bullet and high velocity with (in many cases) a light gun. Everything has a price.

Jim
 
My Glock 23 torques in my hand when I shoot it. Previously I had an HK USPc, and while it didn't torque it sure jumped. My shot-to-shot recovery is actually better with a .45, even an alloy-framed one. Like Jim says, everything comes with a price. The .40 is a powerful cartridge close to a .45 in power, yet it fits inside smaller 9mm-sized guns.
 
I agree that 40s kick differently than 45s or 9s. And I have found that they have a unique torque to them when shot from a plastic gun(Glock,USP,Sigma,SigPro). I isn't nearly as noticable in a metal framed gun but it's still there.

I had a P229 in 40 and couldn't shoot it nearly as quick and accurate as my P226 9mm or my P220 45. But I could put the 357 Sig barrel in it and hang right in there. The 357 Sig has a sharp snap to it but it doesn't have the torque of the 40 and comes back on target much faster. Plus I have found it to be much more accurate.

Some folks like the 40 but I prefer the choices out there with less problems and quirks.
 
That has been my experience. I've always described the recoil of the .40 S&W as the worst qualities of the 9mm and .45 ACP.
The 9mm's recoil is a quick snap. Very short in duration, but pretty light.
The .45 ACP is heavy, but slow - it is spread over more time.
The .40 S&W is quick, and heavy, so you have to deal with it all at once.
In spite of that, it is managable. The best .40 S&W for recoil, to me, is the Glock 35. With it, the recoil feels lighter than most 9mm.
 
I think it's very difficult to compare recoil of various ammunition without considering the effects of the different guns as well.

In general:

More powerful ammunition will have more recoil.

Heavier guns will reduce felt recoil by having more inertia to resist it. (Thank you Mr. Newton!)

Longer barrels will have a larger moment of rotation which will reduce muzzle flip.

Lower barrels, closer to the hand and therefore the axis of rotation, will reduce muzzle flip.

Three finger grips will distribute the recoil over more of the hand than a two finger grip as well as providing more control over muzzle flip.

The action itself (blowback, locked, semi-locked, gas) will effect both actual and perceived recoil. (I left out most of the non-semi-auto actions since this is the SA forum.)

And finally, ownership influences perceived recoil. If you particularly like one of your guns (or your only gun) you're probably going to like that caliber as well.

All that being said, there are a lot more variables than just the ammunition. I don't have any identical (except in caliber) guns to test these rounds with. However, I do have full size guns in each caliber with similar length barrels and grips. (9mm CZ75B, .40 S&W Beretta 96, .45 Colt 1911) And quite frankly, I don't find any of them unpleasant to fire. In fact I enjoy shooting any of these three calibers/guns. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them.

OTOH, if you want a nasty pistol to fire, try almost any pocket pistol! I have two .380's (NAA Guardian and AMT Backup) that I like to carry when anything else is too large but both are a pain to fire. Easily the two worst (for recoil) that I own. Based on my experience with these two guns I could probably say that .380's have very uncomfortable recoil. But I've also (once) fired a full sized .380 and the recoil was almost negligible. I'd even say that a full size .380 was a nice gun if I could figure out a reason for such a gun to exist. :rolleyes:

Tom
 
I don't find the .40 unpleasant to shoot. I put 50-200 rounds every Saturday through mine with no discomfort and mostly 180 grain loads. Number of rounds dictated by $$$$$ ofcourse I'd shoot more on a great $ week.
 
I agree. It has the sharp snap of a 9mm with the heavy push of a .45, but it is far from abusive. The .357 Sig is borderline abusive. Either way, I'd rather shoot a .45 or 9mm instead of either one. If I'm going to shooting something uncomfortable it might as well have the power of a .44 magnum.
 
I shoot .40 in two 1911 guns and I find the recoil to be much better than .45. It's over quicker, doesn't lift the nose as much and lets me follow up faster. .45 recoil is like a long, slow push: you just have to ride it and wait. I find .40 recoil easy to control, but it depends on the gun and your hand and wrist strength.
 
yup the .40 has a very disconcerting rcoil impulse. i tried it for over a year in a sig 229 and it was never as comfortable as my 226 in 9mm or my 220 in .45.

the recoil was too "snappy" for rapid followup shots. i had the same experience with my glock 22 and figured it must be the round rather than the gun...i figured it must have been the sharp presure peak from squeezing the 10mm down to a 9mm lenght case.

i was about to give up on the .40 until i took a beretta 96 in trade and tried it out. it has proved far more accurate then either the sig or the glock and is very controlable as well. i liked it so much it now spends time on my duty belt ;) ... i'm thinking that the longer slide/additional mass is spreading out the impulse.

i also find the light slide on the browning p35 disconcerting too :eek:
 
You guys said it all. I thought it was just me. I find a .45 more of a pleasure to shoot then the .40, I know it varies by gun but all things being equal I still am not crazy about the .40 recoil.
 
So if a majority of the people replying to this thread agree that .40 has an unpleasant pop to it (I also prefer .45's feel), why the rapid increase of the popularity of this round?

Are only the people who dislike .40 bothering to reply? Or perhaps us gun nuts are more discerning than the general non nutty gun toting public? Or is everybody who buys .40 being forced into it by their need to follow the local PD?
 
the attraction of the .40 is the larger diameter bullet in the same size package (frame size) as the 9mm

until the 10 round capacity thing the 9mm was very popular, at least in part, because the guns fit most of the folks out there. and with many guns you were still loading 12-13 (vs 7 in a .45) rounds in a mag
 
Asdaf, that`s what I was really thinking! I guess the small frame/fast and heavy bullet is appealing enough to overshadow the "sharp" recoil. Well, to each his own! Thanks for the imput guys-
 
I honestly believe the 40 to be the hardest recoiling "regular caliber" s/auto round. It hits hard and fast but my 8 year old still doesnt mind my K40....with 180gr's. The 357 reference is quite accurate....hard, fast and sharp. For those who will make this point later....no a DE 50 AE is not a regular caliber.......:D
Shoot well
 
Being genereally a higher pressure round than the .45 (but not 9mm) may have a little impact. But I think the fact that almost all .40's are in 9mm weight guns makes the most difference.

Try a G-26 (baby Glock) an you do get that "quick" recoil impulse people refer to. Shoot the same round in a G17-L or G-34 (heavy long slided Glocks) and it seems like you could stop off for a nice lunch before the slide ever gets back to the chamber.
 
Question: if you were having to defend yourself by shooting ONE-HANDED to the side, a little off balance maybe, which would be the fastest caliber to put a couple good shots on target: 9, 40 or 45? Would there be much difference in the timing? (I don't have any experience with the 40.) Thanks
 
If I thought I would only be able to shoot 1 handed, I would opt for a 9mm. I can shoot the .45 one handed but it is slow.(Remember when Tom Hanks shoots at the oncoming tank with his sidearm at the end of Saving Private Ryan? About like that.)
I do best with a .38 one handed. Also, in a revo you dont have to worry about limp wristing it. I don't shoot a .40 one handed. It snaps enough with two. Just my .02.
 
In answer to asdaf...

I LOVE the .40 out of my P229!! I think the recoil is over a lot quicker than the 9, and has more of a straight-back push, whereas the 9 has more "flip" and side-action "torque" combined.

Since it's over quicker, and is more straight-back, I seem to be able to put it back on target quicker, as well. I also think the .40 shoots more to the point of aim regardless of the distance. All 9's seem to shoot low between 5 and 15 yards, and to rise back towards POA between 15 and 25.

BTT, anyone who thinks the .40 is too much, maybe you should try some 165 or 155-grain instead of the 180 you're prob'ly using on the range. Just my 2¢. Enjoy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top