Marketing gimmick - factors that contribute to felt recoil

Posted by Will Beararms:
I use pistols as a self defense tool at self defense ranges. I guarantee you if, God forbid, you are forced to use a handgun, felt recoil will be the last thing on your mind.

I want the largest, most practical ammo and platform I can safely use with reasonable accuracy. I've hunted all my life----44 years since age 7. Not once have I felt recoil when shpoting a duck, deer, quail or pheasant----not once.
Click to expand...
For self defense, the objective is to be able to hit an attacker enough times to have a reasonable likelihood of striking something critical within his body in the time available.

If he is moving at, say, five meters per second at a range of three to five yards, that time will be short indeed.

Recoil will slow the defender's effective rate of fire, whether or not it is on his or her mind, or whether he or she feels it.
 
Bore axis would certainly have a direct effect on the direction in which the energy is disbursed, but is unlikely to significantly lessen the actual felt recoil. Just where on the hand or wrist it is felt. More likely, the type and amount of material between the breech and palm of hand have a higher impact on felt recoil. My .01¢
 
For a given power factor, a heavier, slower bullet will have a lower impulse and therefore less felt recoil. If you shoot IDPA or USPSA, there is a minimum PF, so this comes into play. If PF isn't important, then less bullet mass and velocity and a heavier gun will do the trick.
 
Caliber and gun weight are obviously at the top of the list. For me, the next most important factor is ergonomics - specifically the grip length. I have a lot of difficulty with the short grips that let my pinky hang off, but using the same gun with an extension that allows a full grip makes it much easier for me to control.
 
From a look at the responses here it sure seems to me like far too many folks are far too quick to come to confident conclusions. I just don't think it's accurate to do so. I would submit that is a whole bunch of different things -- and these factors vary WILDLY across different platforms. And there is a tremendous personal experience angle that simply cannot be quantified. (I mean, different people FEEL things differently!)

My experience tells me this is true.

I submit the following examples -- and I can't come to ANY solid conclusion except that I think you are reaching beyond your pay grade if you think you can easily figure it out and classify this, that & the next thing.

But these are all things I would lay a hand on the bible and swear to as true, in my own hands-on experience.

--My polymer frame Glock 29 runs the exact same ammo seemingly softer in my hands than my massive S&W 1006. Lower bore axis, polymer flex? Maybe there is less slide mass flying backward on my hand? The 1006 is a frickin' Lincoln Continental in mass and size.

--I shoot and carry 10mm, not the world's hairiest cartridge... but a handful on most anyone's scale, but I find the recoil entirely manageable and not damaging or stingy. But do you know what actually HURTS in my hands? A Bersa Thunder .380! I have owned one and shot FIVE different Bersa .380's and every one feels like my veins are hooked to a car battery upon discharge. Now a Walther PK-380 is, to me, the softest sweetest push I can imagine from a center fire pistol. My buddy's Kahr CM9? It wrenches my trigger finger with every shot, so every shot is wildly uncomfortable.

--I had a Glock 19 and I was surprised (and not in a good way) with the snappy recoil. 9mm. No, I don't think it punched worse than my G29, but it punched more that I thought it should have. Bone stock was the pistol, I sent it away.

--Perhaps the bore axis height is far more exacerbated here than most will "allow" for, but try .357 Mag from a Chiappa Rhino. All the energy is there but it just hits your hand FAR differently. What a horrendous shame that only Chiappa makes this design. This bottom-chamber deal WORKS.

--.460 Rowland from a 5-inch 1911 with a compensator. 185gr JHP's at 1,435 FPS and 846 ft/lbs and I just found it totally enjoyable. For sure, you knew it was going to push you around a bit, but it all WORKS. But a 3.5" Dan Wesson ECO, .45cal with 3.5" barrel, aluminum frame and G10 grips? Shootable for sure, but I don't enjoy it. First shot from the magazine has me counting rounds until it ends.

Don't discount also the difference in perception -- it's not felt recoil per se, but if your first dance with something that doesn't feel "great" is on an indoor range... the simple shock & blast in closed quarters amplifies the experience that just isn't there much on a wide open piece of land outdoors.

All the points that everyone has made are valid points but I think it's a major reach to come to firm conclusions with those points. Shuffle a hundred different handguns all across the spectrum through your mitts and it all gets awfully blurry. You feel what you feel and you know it's real but it's hell to try and pin down specifically what is happening... because when you switch out the one gun for another, you are switching SO MANY THINGS.
 
Felt recoil is totally subjective - the same gun with the same loads will "feel" different to two different shooters, simply because they have different sized or shaped hands, hold he gun differently, grip strength, stance, etc. etc. etc. In my opinion, a properly held SAA will always FEEL like it has less recoil than just about any other gun of the same weight simply because the shape of the grip allows the gun to absorb much of the recoil as is rotates upwards by slipping a bit in the hand instead of slamming backwards into the shooters skeletal structure. But if you are not used to that type of gun, trying to stop that rotation and control the perceived recoil will rattle your teeth.

There are many things that will contribute to it, as have been ably pointed out by many above, but trying to create a definitive ranked list is a less than useful consumption of time. The big one between two guns with the same caliber and ammo is weight - just start with that as a general guide and then see how it FEELS to you personally.
 
A lot of folks FLINCH and pull shots when practicing, because of a wariness about recoil.
Click to expand...

Flinching, of course, is an anticipatory reaction. A bullet is long gone out of the barrel by the time the first physical sensations of recoil detected by your hands are transmitted to your brain allowing you to feel it. A nerve impulse may travel up your 36-inch arm at a rate of about 300 ft/s, while your bullet goes from 0 to about 1,000 ft/s in 4 inches.

Not directly relevant to the discussion, but biologically interesting.
 
?!?!
You make it sound like a flinch is a physical REACTION only... and discount the idea that a shooter wary of being POUNDED isn't already doing a half dozen things wildly different in his hold even before he puts a finger through the trigger guard -- all of which radically affects how that handgun is going to react when the recoil actually is delivered.
 
Recoil and the mind can be funny.
I was a RO at a gun expo this past year. I was in charge of the S&W 500 booth for two hours. All I did for two hours was load and help shooters shoot the big 500. I had kids as young as 12 shoot the gun as well as women and old guys that didnt shoot pistols much. Reality was every one that shot the gun with some minor instruction on proper shooting and grip stance did great. Smiles on everyone's faces and they were allowed to keep the brass from their shots. After two hours of 500, I was ready to work the HK booth and give my ears a rest. Too bad the HK booth was next to the 50BMG demo shooting range.
 
You make it sound like a flinch is a physical REACTION only...
Click to expand...

Read it again. I clearly said that flinching is anticipatory. Biologically it cannot be a physical reaction, at least not one that can effect POI, because nerve impulses travel too slowly.
 
I'm more of a rifleman, but some things carry over.

A semi-auto will have less felt recoil than a fixed action like a revolver. The movement of the slide increases the time of the recoil making it feel less harsh.

Plastic frames, just like plastic stocks and recoil pads do the same thing. The tiny bit of frame flex works just like a recoil pad in that it increases the time recoil happens.

Larger bores seem to recoil less than smaller bores of similar power for the same reasons as the previous 2 sentences. Recoil velocity is the reason. While the actual recoil may be exactly the same it is often more comfortable. Imagine that I quickly punched you with 20 ft lbs of force vs gradually pushing on your with my fist until I reached 20 ft lbs of force.

A rifle or shotgun with a large butt pad spreads the recoil out over a larger area, handgun grips that are wide do the same. I find a narrow gripped 1911 to feel much harsher than the lighter G-21 shooting the same loads.

Efficient loads make a noticeable difference in long guns, much less noticeable in handguns, but still there. If you can find a load, or different cartridge that will shoot the same bullet weight, to the same speed, and use less powder you will get less recoil. I've seen some rifle loads that were only 1-2% slower, but use 15% less powder that were significantly softer recoiling. This is actual recoil, not felt recoil.

The biggest difference is between your ears. If you believe a particular gun or cartridge has excessive recoil, then it will. Noise is a factor here. If a gun has a shorter barrel and is excessively loud it tricks your brain into thinking it is worse than it is.
 
Thrust/weight ratio, as in aviation.

Not only is shooting under a cover (or inside) much noisier, but many people using rifles find the muzzle flash and boom from an Enfield #5 ("Jungle Carbine") etc indicate that the recoil is stronger, even though it is Not always the case.
Many hear rumours which they can't put into the right context or compare, and already feel intimidated.
 
My experience about ammo and spring rate of a pistol find two components make a difference in recoil or rather felt recoil to me. Using the same ammo to judge two different make/model of pistols is limited specifically to that ammo. In other words it does not necessarily mean one pistol has less felt recoil than the other for all ammo.

Example 1. Two different loads with my S&W 66 stainless 4” revolver using Federal 357mag brass and primers. Bullets are cast 157 gr. and Speer jacketed 125 gr. Powder is 700-X. I load a batch, about 50 each using 4.0 gr. of 700-X for the lead bullets. Another batch is loaded using 6.0 of 700-X for the jacketed bullets. The higher charged jacketed bullet gave less recoil by giving a quick pulse type feel while the lower charged lead bullet gave what I described as a longer pulse. The difference in intensity of the pulse was higher with the higher charged jacketed bullet but not by much.

Example 2. My very first center fire auto-loading pistol was a Beretta 84 380ACP, blowback, alloy frame 13+1 semi-auto 3”. Grip panels are un-checkered walnut and the feel is fat compared to the 1911 (45ACP) and Glock 19 (9mm). This thing kicked but what do I know. At the time a friend of mine in the service accustomed to the 1911 said my Beretta 84 recoiled more than the 1911. Factory new ammo for the 380ACP is pretty consistent from the various makers (including European) with a ME (muzzle energy) of about 200. Factory new JHP Federal was the only ammo used for 380ACP, I never handloaded this cartridge. I don’t advise doing this in general, I shortened the main spring (hammer spring) by 1.5 turns. This tamed the recoil substantially to the point it is a 380ACP not a 9mm or 45ACP in terms of recoil.

Conversely, rather than changing/altering spring(s), I believe a change in powder charge or type and bullet will affect felt recoil for a given pistol.

Unlike the 380ACP, the 9mm and 45ACP have a ME range of about 270 to 440 for factory new ammo and rolling your own, handloads. You’ve got a substantial range to work with for the desired effect or a form of tuning.

While I feel caliber/cartridge, lock work and mass play a role in felt recoil there is, IMO, a sweet spot to attain reduced felt recoil in terms of specific ammo used for a given make/model pistol.

Assuming what I think of felt recoil to be true the 45ACP using a lead bullet with a low ME (muzzle energy) and low PF (power factor) makes for good range practice by giving a felt recoil the same or greater than that of a 45ACP cartridge using jacketed bullet at a higher ME and higher PF while keeping the wear/tear of the pistol and overall cost to a minimum. :o
 
In other words it does not necessarily mean one pistol has less felt recoil than the other for all ammo.
Click to expand...

Just changing grips can make a difference. As can changing recoil springs. (Different recoil springs change the shape of the recoil impulse -- slowing it down or speeding it up. The recoil being handled by the gun is the same, but the way it is transferred to the shooter is slightly different. It makes a big difference.

One pro-shooter I know uses light recoil springs and buffers to speed up slide cycling, and uses buffers to stop the slide. He says this speeds cycling and the barrel/slide rise is noticeably less; this allows him to get back on target more quickly. Total recoil would be the same, using either "system", but I'm sure the "felt" part is different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top