Felt recoil revolver vs. auto pistol

S

stubbicatt

New member
Had a pleasant day in the National Forest yesterday shooting at clays on the berm, 35 - 40 yards away. Shot 45 ACP revolver and 1911 pistol, same ammo in both. Both steel firearms, no alloy frames or the like.

I noticed a perceptible reduction in recoil shooting the 1911. I wouldn't have thought that it would be as noticeable.

I have not weighed them, there may be a difference in weight.

Thought I would share my experience.
 
The weight difference depends on which .45 revolver you are using. A quick check of an old book, tells me that an N frame S&W (6") can be 4-5 ounces heavier than a standard Colt Govt Model (1911A1).

A 4" med frame gun (S&W M19) is about 5 ounces lighter. A Ruger Blackhawk (7.5" barrel) weighs the same as a 1911, although the balance is much different.

The size, and shape of the grip make a big difference in how one "feels" the recoil. Also, the "spread out" nature of the auto pistol recoil makes a big difference, too. In an auto pistol, the moving mass of the slide changes the feel a lot, compared to a revolver.

Also, the height of the bore axis over the grip makes a big difference, too. Revolvers place the hand further below the bore than autos, and while the recoil energy of the round may be identical, the effect on the gun (muzzle flip) is significantly different, even when all other factors are the same.

Shooting .45ACP from a 1911 and from a 7.5" Ruger Blackhawk is an interesting comparison. Both guns are about the same weight. Both fire the same ammo. But the Blackhawk, to me, recoils less. Your experience might be just the opposite.

My opinion might be colored by the fact that I rarely shoot .45ACP from my Ruger, its diet consists almost exclusively of .45 Colt, a 250gr SWC at 1100fps (handload). SO, by comparison, .45ACP in the same gun has a lot less felt recoil. Not quite bunny phart loads, but it feels like there isn't much there, compared to what I am used to, in that gun.;)
 
If you tried another brand of auto, the results might be different.
1911s are obviously designed for shooting, or they wouldn't still be so popular, especially among the competition folks.
 
All else being equal, a semi-auto will, by the very laws of physics, have less recoil than a revolver.
It has to... some of the momentum that would otherwise be recoil is instead moving the slide.
Of course, all else is rarely equal.

I can tell you that my Glock 33 (.357sig) shooting truly max loads, 125gr at 1350+fps from a 3.46" barrel, has less recoil than a Ruger Security Six 4" shooting factory Speer 357mag SD ammo. The Glock weighs 6-12oz less too.
Grip size/angle/width has a significant effect too.
 
All other things being equal (they never are...), physics says force (against your arm) equals the change in the gun's momentum times the time over which it changes. For equal gun masses firing identical ammo, the momentum change is the same, so the difference is the time. A semiauto has a big spring that soaks up the momentum and spreads it out over time as it compresses, while a normal revolver has nothing but the solid frame, so the revolver will **tend** to feel like it kicks more. But there are so many other factors, many of them subjective, that I'm not sure there is an answer - depends what you think when you fire the guns. Just thought I'd add the physics perspective. :-)
 
It's like a bolt action rifle vs semiauto. I have no problem with my Garand, while a bolt 30-06 leaves quite a welt after a few rounds.
 
All other things being equal (they never are...), physics says force (against your arm) equals the change in the gun's momentum times the time over which it changes. For equal gun masses firing identical ammo, the momentum change is the same, so the difference is the time. A semiauto has a big spring that soaks up the momentum and spreads it out over time as it compresses, while a normal revolver has nothing but the solid frame, so the revolver will **tend** to feel like it kicks more. But there are so many other factors, many of them subjective, that I'm not sure there is an answer - depends what you think when you fire the guns. Just thought I'd add the physics perspective. :-)
Click to expand...

There's also muzzle lift to consider. I'm a great deal more inconvenienced by muzzle lift than pure recoil.
 
To me, a big but light auto like a USP 45 or Glock 21 has much less felt recoil than any .45 Colt revolver shooting similar loads.
 
Most of you are on the right track. The energy of the bullet is mass times velocity. By the first law of physics the recoil energy equals the bullet energy for both guns. The recoil energy is simply dissipated over a longer period of time so feels less. Also, since the gun is heavier than the bullet, the recoil velocity is lower. gunslinger
 
gunslinger2000 said:
Most of you are on the right track. The energy of the bullet is mass times velocity. By the first law of physics the recoil energy equals the bullet energy for both guns. The recoil energy is simply dissipated over a longer period of time so feels less. Also, since the gun is heavier than the bullet, the recoil velocity is lower. gunslinger
Click to expand...


Momentum is mass times velocity, not energy. It is momentum that is responsible for recoil.

It's not the first law of physics either. They are the three laws of motion and it's basically all 3 laws that relate to recoil.
 
Last edited:
All else being equal, a semi-auto will, by the very laws of physics, have less recoil than a revolver.
Click to expand...

The measured recoil will be the same. The fact that the recoil spring spreads that recoil out over a longer time frame certainly makes it FEEL like it is less

To me, a big but light auto like a USP 45 or Glock 21 has much less felt recoil than any .45 Colt revolver shooting similar loads.
Click to expand...

Not any recent experience with a HK, but my G-21 is considerably softer shooting than my 1911's. In addition to the recoil action spreading the recoil out over a longer time period, there is far more grip material in contact with my hand. Spreading the recoil out over a larger area rather than concentrating it in one spot.

If you actually calculate recoil there is a complex math formula involving

projectile weight
powder charge weight
firearm weight
projectile velocity.

Rather than doing the math data can be plugged in here.

http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp

This does not calculate how you feel it though.
 
my 4" 625 feels like it kicks more than a steel 1911. I have a lightweight Commander, it may be on a par with the 625. I shot in an IDPA classifier, 90 rounds of 225gr. and the Commander was working on me on stage 3. I usually shoot 200gr RN in the 625 and that would make a difference too. The 200 gr in the steel 1911 are pleasant.
 
Felt recoil in my collection is greatest in that awesomely powerful cartridge: .32 ACP.
The Kel-tec P32 is very light and very skinny so the recoil is concentrated on a small area. My experience with this one says I'm not going to look at the polymer .380 or 9mm subcompacts.

I am comparing this with .357 and .l41 full power magnum loads, which are fired from much larger, heavier revolvers.
 
only scanned a few of the posts, so i'm not sure if anyone else mentioned this, but in addition to the moving slide with a spring eating up some of the recoil, the direction of recoil is also a little different. while both styles have some muzzle flip, the grip angle and somewhat lower bore axis on a semi auto tends to push the recoil a little straighter back into the shooters hand rather than radially shift it upward. a gun that "leaps" upward has higher perceived recoil.
 
The movement of the slide bothered my wife to the point of not wanting to shoot a semi. For me, if we are talking service type calibers I have never really noticed enough difference between them to matter to me, auto or revolver. Full power 357's in small frames change everything though, for me.
 
Squeezing off five .357 magnum rounds from my M&P340 leaves me wantin' to just put the gun down and soak my entire forearm in ice water... Extremely nasty sharp kick.
 
I wonder if anyone here has tried to use the ballistic pendulum approach to measure recoil? I don't have a revolver and semi-auto that shoot the same shell do I could do a direct comparison. Would be interested in some actual experimental results. gunslinger
 
I haven't seen anyone mention the barrel being higher in a revolver.
The shape of the grip is also important. The typical plow shape grip of the revolver is not as easy to hold as the 1911. That's doubly so if you have to use a little finger under the grip hold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top