Recoil diff. between the 45 & 40 glocks
- Thread starter long shot
- Start date
I haven't shot the Glock 30 and Glock 23 side by side. I have a Glock 17 and Glock 23. I've shot the Glock 30 once. It was my impression that the Glock 30 recoil was less than the recoil of the Glock 23. But then I've always felt that the .45 ACP is not an especially hard recoiling round. YMMV, but don't be afraid of .45acp. Btw, at the time when I shot the Glock 30, I had my full-size stainless Kimber M1911 with me. Shooting the Glock 30 and the Kimber side by side, I felt that the Glock had less recoil than the Kimber (though neither was particularly punishing).
Personally, I'd much rather shoot a Glock 30 than a 4" revolver with full-boat .357 loads. THAT is unpleasant recoil.
Jared
Personally, I'd much rather shoot a Glock 30 than a 4" revolver with full-boat .357 loads. THAT is unpleasant recoil.
Jared
HYDRA-SHOKz
New member
For some reason I can shoot a .45 better the the .40.Not really a good comparison because my .40 is an HK USP Compact and my .45 is a Kimber Compact Custom.The Kimber is alittle heavier and this might be the reason.Even shooting 200gr Gold-Dots at 1080 fps I find recoil alot less then my .40. SHOKz
David Berkowitz
New member
The laws of physics say you get get more recoil with .45.
That said, I have to say that I don't notice the recoil as much with the 45 as compared to a 40. I think this due to the slide moves slower on the 45, thus it feels like less recoil.
Said another way, the slide moves so quick and hard on the 40.
I think second shot capability will depend on several factors such as the slide velocity, type and strength of recoils springs (the g23 for me recoils more than the 27), types of sights, and individual techniques.
That said, I have to say that I don't notice the recoil as much with the 45 as compared to a 40. I think this due to the slide moves slower on the 45, thus it feels like less recoil.
Said another way, the slide moves so quick and hard on the 40.
I think second shot capability will depend on several factors such as the slide velocity, type and strength of recoils springs (the g23 for me recoils more than the 27), types of sights, and individual techniques.
David,
I disagree... mainly... sorta... Unless I am really off-base in my physics here, recoil is a function of Newtons third law of motion which basically says that for every action there is an *equal* and opposite reaction. Energy is measured in foot-pounds-energy in most balistic data for bullets. In general, although you can find numerous exceptions, the .40cal delivers more foot-pounds than the .45ACP. Case in point:
.40cal Federal Hydra-Shok JHP 155gr 1140fps 448fpe
.45ACP Federal Hydra-Shok JHP 230gr 850fps 369fpe
In this case, the 230gr 45ACP was nearly 20% less footpounds of energy than the .40cal. Again, you can find numerous bullet combinations that give more energy to either caliber, but overall the 45ACP seems slightly less powerful than the 40cal.
I know this goes counter to conventional wisdom, but the numbers remain. I also am well aware that the cross sectional density of these rounds is also quite different and so the actual lethality of the rounds are not necessarily indicated by their fpe. As a matter of fact, some balistic wound camps (read fackler) would have you believe that fpe has virtually nothing to do with wounding potential in handgun calibers but I will leave that discussion for another forum.
Now just because there is more energy doesnt necessarily mean there is more PERCEIVED recoil (although there is obviously more ACTUAL recoil). The recoil impulse can be measured over time. Given the same amount of energy, recoil that is spaced out over 200ms will feel lighter than recoil spaced out over 120ms. This is the whole point to HK's recoil reduction system found on their USP models. They put a secondary spring that engages partway through the recoil impulse to slow it down, spreading the recoil energy over more time, hence making it feel lower.
Also, the weight of your gun changes the perceived recoil. It takes more energy to twist a heavy gun in your hand than to twist a light weight gun. Corespondingly, a heavier gun will have less muzzle flip, another part of *perceived* recoil.
As far as 45ACP vs 40cal goes... The perceived recoil is all a matter of personal perception, opinion and experience with various guns. I'll give you mine for what its worth.
I recently made a change in our main house defense pistol. The criteria was basically this: Buy the biggest caliber, most reliable autopistol in DA/SA that my wife could safely and comfortably shoot.
My wife has large hands so the size of the magazine well was not an issue. We had previously owned a Ruger .40cal auto chosen based on she could handle that caliber as well as a 9mm. This time I tested side by side several .40cals and several 45ACP's. I found that there was less perceived recoil from the .45cal. My wife agrees. Our HK USP45 has LESS felt recoil than the Ruger .40cal we had.
It probably has less ACTUAL recoil as well as those two rounds up there are actual rounds that we used in these guns. Also, the .45 is heavier than the .40. Again, less perceived recoil. Also, the HK USP double spring setup, lengthening the recoil impulse... less felt recoil.
Now the otherside of this...
I was at the range last week and a guy shooting next to me let me try his Kimber .40cal competition gun. It was a heavy 1911 clone. probably at least 5-6ozs heavier than my USP. Also, he loaded medium level loads for accuracy. The gun hardly moved when fired. VERY little felt recoil. Why? Heavy gun, lower fpe, differnt springs.
My final conclusion is that in general, the 45ACP has LESS felt recoil out of the SAME gun platform (i.e. glock to glock, HK to HK) than the .40cal. Heavier guns, lower energy (fpe) and longer recoil impulse (infered by lower velocity) all contribute to make this so. However, either calliber can feel hotter than the other based on the gun its being fired from and the round that is being chambered.
I strongly suggest that you do what I did. Fire both guns side by side, swapping guns every 10 rounds. All in all, I liked the 45 better even though I had owned a 40 first. In your gun of choice it might be the opposite.
J.T.
As usual, all the FWIW, YMMV, IMHO stuff applies.
I disagree... mainly... sorta... Unless I am really off-base in my physics here, recoil is a function of Newtons third law of motion which basically says that for every action there is an *equal* and opposite reaction. Energy is measured in foot-pounds-energy in most balistic data for bullets. In general, although you can find numerous exceptions, the .40cal delivers more foot-pounds than the .45ACP. Case in point:
.40cal Federal Hydra-Shok JHP 155gr 1140fps 448fpe
.45ACP Federal Hydra-Shok JHP 230gr 850fps 369fpe
In this case, the 230gr 45ACP was nearly 20% less footpounds of energy than the .40cal. Again, you can find numerous bullet combinations that give more energy to either caliber, but overall the 45ACP seems slightly less powerful than the 40cal.
I know this goes counter to conventional wisdom, but the numbers remain. I also am well aware that the cross sectional density of these rounds is also quite different and so the actual lethality of the rounds are not necessarily indicated by their fpe. As a matter of fact, some balistic wound camps (read fackler) would have you believe that fpe has virtually nothing to do with wounding potential in handgun calibers but I will leave that discussion for another forum.
Now just because there is more energy doesnt necessarily mean there is more PERCEIVED recoil (although there is obviously more ACTUAL recoil). The recoil impulse can be measured over time. Given the same amount of energy, recoil that is spaced out over 200ms will feel lighter than recoil spaced out over 120ms. This is the whole point to HK's recoil reduction system found on their USP models. They put a secondary spring that engages partway through the recoil impulse to slow it down, spreading the recoil energy over more time, hence making it feel lower.
Also, the weight of your gun changes the perceived recoil. It takes more energy to twist a heavy gun in your hand than to twist a light weight gun. Corespondingly, a heavier gun will have less muzzle flip, another part of *perceived* recoil.
As far as 45ACP vs 40cal goes... The perceived recoil is all a matter of personal perception, opinion and experience with various guns. I'll give you mine for what its worth.
I recently made a change in our main house defense pistol. The criteria was basically this: Buy the biggest caliber, most reliable autopistol in DA/SA that my wife could safely and comfortably shoot.
My wife has large hands so the size of the magazine well was not an issue. We had previously owned a Ruger .40cal auto chosen based on she could handle that caliber as well as a 9mm. This time I tested side by side several .40cals and several 45ACP's. I found that there was less perceived recoil from the .45cal. My wife agrees. Our HK USP45 has LESS felt recoil than the Ruger .40cal we had.
It probably has less ACTUAL recoil as well as those two rounds up there are actual rounds that we used in these guns. Also, the .45 is heavier than the .40. Again, less perceived recoil. Also, the HK USP double spring setup, lengthening the recoil impulse... less felt recoil.
Now the otherside of this...
I was at the range last week and a guy shooting next to me let me try his Kimber .40cal competition gun. It was a heavy 1911 clone. probably at least 5-6ozs heavier than my USP. Also, he loaded medium level loads for accuracy. The gun hardly moved when fired. VERY little felt recoil. Why? Heavy gun, lower fpe, differnt springs.
My final conclusion is that in general, the 45ACP has LESS felt recoil out of the SAME gun platform (i.e. glock to glock, HK to HK) than the .40cal. Heavier guns, lower energy (fpe) and longer recoil impulse (infered by lower velocity) all contribute to make this so. However, either calliber can feel hotter than the other based on the gun its being fired from and the round that is being chambered.
I strongly suggest that you do what I did. Fire both guns side by side, swapping guns every 10 rounds. All in all, I liked the 45 better even though I had owned a 40 first. In your gun of choice it might be the opposite.
J.T.
As usual, all the FWIW, YMMV, IMHO stuff applies.
David Berkowitz
New member
J.T.,
Yeah, what you said. That's sort of what I meant.
I was trying to keep it simple, though.
I am no physics expert, and I may be wrong here, but I think "actual" recoil is a measurement of both velocity and mass. Maybe that is how FPE is computed, I don't know.
You are certainly correct that recoil will feel diferent in different weight guns. I know I feel it less in my Kimber than I do in my 220.
Yeah, what you said. That's sort of what I meant.
I was trying to keep it simple, though.
I am no physics expert, and I may be wrong here, but I think "actual" recoil is a measurement of both velocity and mass. Maybe that is how FPE is computed, I don't know.
You are certainly correct that recoil will feel diferent in different weight guns. I know I feel it less in my Kimber than I do in my 220.
G30 with std velocity loads and G23 with 180gr target loads are much of a sameness. With hot loads in both guns, the G23 feels sharper by a 'tish. I'd guess it's a bit due to the higher velocity/pressure from the .40 and a bit due to the G30's broader grip spreading the force over more of your hand. A rule of thumb for recoil is to look at two things; muzzle energy of the round (action/reaction) and weight of the pistol. This is why my Glock 33 is worse than my 10mm Glock 29 with all but the heaviest loads. Despite roughly equal M.E.'s, theres just more gun to soak up the force in the G29.
------------------
"..but never ever Fear. Fear is for the enemy. Fear and Bullets."
10mm: It's not the size of the Dawg in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!
------------------
"..but never ever Fear. Fear is for the enemy. Fear and Bullets."
10mm: It's not the size of the Dawg in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!
D Crockett
New member
I've owned the G27 and G23, both great pistols. I've also owned a few 45's and shot the G30. The notes above,considering equally hot or standard loads, are true. Felt recoil is less w/ the 45 and the 40 is snappier, thats why I decided to sell the 40's and concentrate on mastering the one I shoot better. There's obviously some personal preference involved here but, by and large ,I think you'll find this true for most people.
The G30 is an excellent pistol, just a little fat for me for CCW. The G21 is also great but does'nt conceal as well. There's also the G36 ,the Para LDA, and other fine 45's if you go that route.
Shoot 'em and pick your best. There's not a loser among 'em.
Good Luck,
Dave
The G30 is an excellent pistol, just a little fat for me for CCW. The G21 is also great but does'nt conceal as well. There's also the G36 ,the Para LDA, and other fine 45's if you go that route.
Shoot 'em and pick your best. There's not a loser among 'em.
Good Luck,
Dave
I own a G22 and a G21 the full size versions of the .40 and .45 respectively....here are my findings for what its worth.
The G22 (.40) has very little difference than the G21 (.45) in my hands,as far as felt recoil, then I have large hands. The G22 seems to be easier to get back onto target for follow up shots due to the fact that the 22 is quite a bit thinner than the 21. Even with my large hands the 21 feels very blocky and big. With practice I have overcome the size problem. In my opinion if you are of average size you would be better served by the 22 since it feels a little better in the hand, and you don't have to reach as much for the trigger.
------------------
Compromise is not an option
"Semper Fidelis"
[This message has been edited by SgtGunner (edited May 21, 2000).]
The G22 (.40) has very little difference than the G21 (.45) in my hands,as far as felt recoil, then I have large hands. The G22 seems to be easier to get back onto target for follow up shots due to the fact that the 22 is quite a bit thinner than the 21. Even with my large hands the 21 feels very blocky and big. With practice I have overcome the size problem. In my opinion if you are of average size you would be better served by the 22 since it feels a little better in the hand, and you don't have to reach as much for the trigger.
------------------
Compromise is not an option
"Semper Fidelis"
[This message has been edited by SgtGunner (edited May 21, 2000).]
Foot Pounds is found using the following method.
Kinetic Energy = 1/2 m*(v^2)*(1/gc)
m = X grain bullet * 1 lbm/7000 grains (convert to lbm (pounds-mass).
v^2 = Rated muzzle speed (fps) * Rated muzzle speed (fps) (Squaring the number).
gc = english units 32.2 lbf/lbm (a constant used when dealing with these pound units).
Using the Hydrashok example for 40 cal.
155 gr * 1lbm/7000 gr = .0221 lbm.
1140 fps * 1140 fps = 1.2996E6(big number)
KE = 1/2 * .0221 * 1.2996E6 / 32.2
KE = 445.98 ft-lbf
Although the energy is greater in the 40 due to the velocity being squared, the momentum equation does not square the velocity.
p (momentum) = mv
The 40
p = mv
m = 0.0221 lbm
v = 1140 fps
p = (0.0221 * 1141)
p = 25.216 lbm-fps
The 45
p = mv
m = 230 gr * 1lbm/7000gr = .0329
v = 850 fps
p = (0.0329 * 850 fps)
p = 27.929 lbm-fps.
The 45's momentum is 11% greater than the 40.
If the gun weight is similar, the 45 should have the bigger kickback, but 45's usually weigh more than the 40, some of the kick back would be spend moving the greater gun mass backwards. If the gun- 45 is much heavier then the 40, more than 11%, then the 40 will have the greater kick.
I hope this helps.
Kinetic Energy = 1/2 m*(v^2)*(1/gc)
m = X grain bullet * 1 lbm/7000 grains (convert to lbm (pounds-mass).
v^2 = Rated muzzle speed (fps) * Rated muzzle speed (fps) (Squaring the number).
gc = english units 32.2 lbf/lbm (a constant used when dealing with these pound units).
Using the Hydrashok example for 40 cal.
155 gr * 1lbm/7000 gr = .0221 lbm.
1140 fps * 1140 fps = 1.2996E6(big number)
KE = 1/2 * .0221 * 1.2996E6 / 32.2
KE = 445.98 ft-lbf
Although the energy is greater in the 40 due to the velocity being squared, the momentum equation does not square the velocity.
p (momentum) = mv
The 40
p = mv
m = 0.0221 lbm
v = 1140 fps
p = (0.0221 * 1141)
p = 25.216 lbm-fps
The 45
p = mv
m = 230 gr * 1lbm/7000gr = .0329
v = 850 fps
p = (0.0329 * 850 fps)
p = 27.929 lbm-fps.
The 45's momentum is 11% greater than the 40.
If the gun weight is similar, the 45 should have the bigger kickback, but 45's usually weigh more than the 40, some of the kick back would be spend moving the greater gun mass backwards. If the gun- 45 is much heavier then the 40, more than 11%, then the 40 will have the greater kick.
I hope this helps.
there is a significant recoil difference between the G22 and the G21 and between the G23 and the G30.
As dvc stated, the 40 snaps and the 45 pushes.
40 is a great round for self defense and police work BUT for accuracy and quicker followups, most competitive shooters chose the 45 round.
PS - the G30 recoils like a 9mm 147 grain bullet!
------------------
The Seattle SharpShooter
As dvc stated, the 40 snaps and the 45 pushes.
40 is a great round for self defense and police work BUT for accuracy and quicker followups, most competitive shooters chose the 45 round.
PS - the G30 recoils like a 9mm 147 grain bullet!
------------------
The Seattle SharpShooter
Agree with Jtduncan and dvc. The 147 9mm out of a G19 is like 230 hardball. The g23 is snappier and slower on getting back to target. The G21 is a soft shooting .45(low bore, poly flex) compared to other .45's. The only difficulty I found with the G21 is that the grip size is uncomfortable to me. This does affect my target reacquisition time.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Berkowitz:
The laws of physics say you get get more recoil with .45.
[/quote]
I'm curious, which laws of physics are we referring to? Since many .40S&W rounds exceed typical .45ACP muzzle energies, I fail to understand that statement.
The laws of physics say you get get more recoil with .45.
[/quote]
I'm curious, which laws of physics are we referring to? Since many .40S&W rounds exceed typical .45ACP muzzle energies, I fail to understand that statement.
David Berkowitz
New member
johnwill,
I was making an over simplification.
All other things being equal, the heavier bullet should have more recoil. But there are other variances, as stated above.
Also, there is a difference between perceived recoil and actual recoil.
I didn't say it near as well as others.
I think you will get a good understanding from the other posts.
Did for me.
I was making an over simplification.
All other things being equal, the heavier bullet should have more recoil. But there are other variances, as stated above.
Also, there is a difference between perceived recoil and actual recoil.
I didn't say it near as well as others.
I think you will get a good understanding from the other posts.
Did for me.
It's a magical illusion 
In general, people "think" a gun kicks less if the slide moves slower and pushes back, rather than having a fast slide recovery which causes more of a snap feeling.
In actuality, the .45 and .40 kick about the same. I personally go for the .40 with a faster snap. And I especially go for the 357 Sig with a healthy snap, less torque, and faster slide recovery time, plus superb accuracy, as well as working excellently in 3" to 4" barrels. I also like the flatter trajectory of the .40 and 357 compared to a .45.
I've gone back and forth with the Glock 30 -- excellent gun. Bottom line: try both calibers and pick the one you like the best for whatever reasons you decide upon. Don't tell anybody, but all the typical duty calibers work just fine
[This message has been edited by petej88 (edited May 26, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by petej88 (edited May 26, 2000).]
In general, people "think" a gun kicks less if the slide moves slower and pushes back, rather than having a fast slide recovery which causes more of a snap feeling.In actuality, the .45 and .40 kick about the same. I personally go for the .40 with a faster snap. And I especially go for the 357 Sig with a healthy snap, less torque, and faster slide recovery time, plus superb accuracy, as well as working excellently in 3" to 4" barrels. I also like the flatter trajectory of the .40 and 357 compared to a .45.
I've gone back and forth with the Glock 30 -- excellent gun. Bottom line: try both calibers and pick the one you like the best for whatever reasons you decide upon. Don't tell anybody, but all the typical duty calibers work just fine
[This message has been edited by petej88 (edited May 26, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by petej88 (edited May 26, 2000).]