felt recoil "quantification"

S

simonrichter

New member
I know that's quite a disputable approach, but sometimes intuition can be more significant than measuring:

Given the felt recoil of 9mm, say in a G17 or a similar pistol, is 100%. How would you intuitively rate other calibers out of a weapon the same size?

I would especially be interested in your opinion of felt recoil of, again, a full size 9mm (=100%) vs. a mouse-gun sized straight blowback .25acp vs. the same in .22lr asf.
 
Last edited:
Here is my very exact list:):
5" 1911 9mm --- 85%
Polish P64 9mm mak --- 110 %
Walther PPK .380 --- 105%
5" 1911 .45 --- 110 but not painful as P64 and Walther PPK %
kahr K9 9mm --- 100%
S&W M&P 9mm --- 90%
Walther P99 9mm --- 100%
Xdm 3.8 9mm --- 100%
 
It would be a fairly simple thing to build a clamp that could be fit to any handgun that you could fit to a force meter so when you fired the gun the force applied to be measured in foot pounds or newtons BUT if this was done will all handguns it would clearly show that the tupperware guns exert more force against the user and as such are harder to control.

It all gets down to one equation and one law of physics.
 
I guess I am the odd one out. I don't feel recoil.
Click to expand...
I don't exactly feel it either....
I crave it - like a drug...

Except if the gun goes against my shoulder. Then I turn into a real wuss....

;)
 
If a Glock model 17 gen 3 with factory loaded 124gr fmj is 100%

-Then my Springfield 1911 .45 5" shooting standard factory 230gr fmj is 110%
-Glock model 21 gen2 230gr fmj is 140%
-A glock model 20 gen 3 10mm shooting factory CCI blazer 200gr fmj is 175%
-A gen 3 glock model 19 9mm with 124gr fmj is 110%
-gen 4 glock 26 9mm shooting 124gr is 120%
-a S&W M&P40 shooting blazer brass 165gr fmj is 175%
-H&K VP9 115gr fmj is 110%
-cz52 7.62x25mm shooting S&B 85gr fmj is 100%
-Romanian TTC tokarev shooting S&B 85gr fmj is 115%
-a keltec PF9 9mm shooting 115gr fmj is 220%
- S&W M&P shield 9mm 124gr fmj is 130%
-glock 23 gen3 .40 165gr fmj is 120%
-glock 42 .380 shooting prvi partisan 90gr fmj is 85%
-bersa .380 75%
-keltec .32auto 80%
-ruger GP100 6" full lug 158gr SJFP 175%


And finally my Walther PPQ .40 is about 130% with 165gr fmj and about 140% with 180gr fiocchi 180gr HP. These are roughly all of the handguns I have fired, any information I left out would because I don't have enough knowledge about the gun or what type of ammo I was shooting out of it.

Generally I think glocks have lower recoil than similar sized guns in the same caliber, I shoot a glock 17 really well, but hate everything about the gun so I don't own one. I chose a 1911 instead and do not regret it. The most accurate I have been with any pistol is the glock 42 pocket .380. And if I ever decide to get a pocket gun that is the one I will be getting. My Walther .40 definitely has some recoil, and I notice more felt recoil shock in the hand when shooting a heavier hotter load.

A heavier weight gun, increased recoil spring weight, lower bore axis, and lower bullet weight will all result in less recoil. Also revolvers and autos have completely different recoil characteristics.
 
Interesting idea. It would be interesting if several people shot a lot of guns side by side and rated them on this scale. Just going from memory I don't think it is that accurate.

Of course, there is fit mixed into it, so even someone able to accurately compare them and give perfect data would not result in perfect information to the end user.
 
I don't think I can attempt to "quantitate" perceived recoil using numbers. It is not just the magnitude of recoil but the recoil velocity of the slide that influences how "pleasant" or "unpleasant" perceived recoil is.

I do have three pretty similar pistols chambered for three different calibers: a 9mm Luger Beretta Cougar, a .40 S&W Beretta Cougar, and a .45 ACP Stoeger Cougar. Of the three I would judge that the recoil of the .45 is the "greatest" in that it has the most rearward push, but the recoil of the .40 is distinctly less pleasant because of the greater recoil velocity.

I don't own Glocks but I have shot a few. A would say that the perceived recoil of my Beretta 92FS is comparable to that of a G 17 but perhaps a bit less. Part of that is due to the fact that the grip of my Beretta fills my hand much better than that of a blocky Glock grip so it distributes the force of the recoil better. The recoil of my Beretta Cougar 9mm is comparable to that of a Glock 19 but perhaps slightly less.

In very general terms rating the perceived recoil of my currently owned handguns from "mild" to "severe" is as follows starting with mild:

Walther P22 blowback .22lr
Beretta 92FS 9mm
Beretta Cougar 8000 9mm
Ruger GP100 shooting .38 Special 125gr
Stoeger Cougar 8045 shooting 230gr .45 ACP
SIG Sauer P320 full-size .45 ACP 230gr tied with Government model 1911 .45
Beretta Cougar 8040 shooting .40 S&W 180gr
Ruger GP100 shooting 125gr .357 Magnum
 
I think genitron.com does a pretty good job of quantifying it mathematically. You can look for a free recoil calculator online, too.

Usually weight helps the most, all else being equal. That said, a mild recoiling cartridge like a 9mm doesn't have much recoil to mitigate in the first place. Move to a heavy recoiling cartridge like the 10mm and you really appreciate more weight...no comparison in recoil between a Glock 20 and a Sig P220, the heavier pistol is much easier to shoot.

Quick and dirty... power factor (weight x velocity) / handgun weight, just have to compare autos to autos (blowback vs. blockback and lock breech vs. locked to breech) and revolvers to revolvers.
 
Last edited:
I don't think felt recoil can be quantified or compared except that "this" is more than "that" for a given shooter. But felt recoil involves the mass of the gun, the mass of the bullet, velocity of the bullet, type and material of the grip, shape and size of the grip, etc. Size of the shooter, size of the shooter's hand, and the experience of the shooter. The same gun, and ammo may have a recoil that one shooter will feel is brutal punishment, while another may feel is quite mild.

Jim
 
One aspect of "felt recoil" is how toughened a shooter's hand/hands are.

If you shoot exclusively right handed and switch you'll feel, or think you do, more recoil with the left hand.

It's why with new shooters a trainer has to be patient. What's mild or easy for
the trainer, say a standard .38 in a K frame, might seem pretty mighty to
a total novice.

This obviously is just an expansion of what James K. said in the previous posting.
 
Here's the formula for calculating free recoil energy in footpounds:

E = 1/2 (Wg / 32.17) (Wb x MV + 4700 x Wp / 7000 x Wg)squared.

Where E = recoil Energy in ft. lbs., Wg = Weight of gun in pounds, Wb = Weight of bullet in grains, MV = Muzzle Velocity of bullet in feet-per-second, Wp = Weight of powder in grains. (the 4700 is the escape velocity of the powder gasses, 32.17 is the gravitational constant, and the 7000 is to make the answer come out in foot pounds and not grains)
 
It's very subjective and relies on a lot of semi-related factors.

My shooting buddy has tiny hands and mine are huge. He has less felt recoil from his SP101 than I do, because my hands are just too big for it. He can hold my ancient K frame 38, but it is borderline too large for him. Its recoil bothers him. To me it is nothing.

When I was younger I shot at a racoon with a 12 gauge (yes, my family ate them) and did not get it pressed firmly into my shoulder before I pulled the trigger, probably more like two inches away. It was a light single-shot shotgun with a narrow stock and I didn't have much meat on my bones. I had a bad flinch for a long time afterwards - imagine that. Handguns whose recoil had never bothered me before suddenly bothered me. I was fine beforehand, and fine months later after a lot of careful training with 22's, but for a while anything else would have rated 400%.

My alloy-framed 38 snub is brisk to shoot. My friend fired it once and did not care to do so again. But he loves shooting my 3" 44 special.

This one is the best: my daughter shot a magazine through my little tip-up barrel 22 auto and said the recoil hurt her hand because the grip was so narrow. Then she shot a magazine through her grandpa's 9mm service pistol and thought it was fun!?!?

I think that this sort of thing is just too personalized and weird to get any useful data from. No offense meant to the OP, who had an interesting idea.
 
Last edited:
Cowboy action 45LC's out of my SRH are a real joy compared to .454 Casulls. Pretty close to barely felt.
 
Free recoil is easily measured and quantified. But "felt" recoil is mostly subjective, and the OP asked about the latter. No neat math formulas for that.

Jim
 
felt

don't think felt recoil can be quantified or compared except that "this" is more than "that" for a given shooter. But felt recoil involves the mass of the gun, the mass of the bullet, velocity of the bullet, type and material of the grip, shape and size of the grip, etc. Size of the shooter, size of the shooter's hand, and the experience of the shooter. The same gun, and ammo may have a recoil that one shooter will feel is brutal punishment, while another may feel is quite mild.
Click to expand...

This^^^^^^.
One can post their perceptions of felt recoil one gun compared to another; the idea, though, is not particularly useful as one shooter may post one set of ideas about a series of firearms and another might post essentially the opposite. So what have you learned then....firearms recoil, that is about it.
Pete
 
I don't think I can attempt to "quantitate" perceived recoil using numbers. It is not just the magnitude of recoil but the recoil velocity of the slide that influences how "pleasant" or "unpleasant" perceived recoil is.
Click to expand...

Putting numbers with perceived recoil just isn't going to yield any sort of reasonable results. Most people can't even lift two objects of unknown different weights and provide you with any sort of accurate quantitative assessment of the weight difference by percentage as is being noted above.

You can put numbers to perceived recoil, but in reality, they are just make believe for most folks.
 
A person with meatier hands and that has more mass on their arms will probably be less effected by recoil/recoil shock/impact. The muscle and fat would act like rubber or water and spread/absorb the energy. A person with skinnier boney hands and arms would probably feel the recoil more so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top