[Langenator]

Since there are several pistols available in both calibers, and with interchangable barrels on top of that, which caliber has less felt recoil, when fired from the same gun?

40SW fires a heavier bullet at slower speed. 357SIG pushes a smaller, lighter bullet faster and achieves, IIRC, greater pressure in the shell case.

If you were buying a gun available in both calibers for someone who is recoil-averse, which would you choose?

[Black Snowman]

I have a Glock 24P which is a ported .40 S&W long slide so the recoil from it is very mild. My friends Glock 33 (mini frame .357 SIG) is quite "snappy". The differance in guns is a huge factor and a lot of recoil differance is personal preference.

I've never had a chance to try both side by side in the same gun but physics of it say the lighter bullet should be less recoil energy for the same muzzle energy. However that recoil may FEEL sharper and less comfortable.

So basicly you're at "almost the same recoil delivered differantly". I can't really say one way or the other how to go. I have a .40, but I got it before the .357 SIG was available. I'm not running out to get a .357 SIG barrel for it, but I thought about it a lot.

[critter]

I have a Para Ordnance P-16 .40 cal to which I recently bought an Ed Brown .357 Sig barrel and fitted. Same gun-both barrels is about as close as you can get although the barrels do not weigh quite the same.

I think the analysis above 'same recoil delivered differently' is about as close as you can get. The .357 SIG seems to me to be a bit sharper and quicker recoil. Neither is harsh nor hurtful-just a little different. There may be a little more muzzle rize with the .357. Noise/blast IS more with the .357 which may make the recoil SEEM more harsh.

Interesting comparison. I have come to like the .357 SIG a great deal and it is VERY accurate in the above setup.

[mrapathy2000]

135 gr federal hydra shock in 40S&W feals like a 9mm to me. easiest stuff to shoot in 40S&W.

havent shot .357sig though tempted to get conversion barrel but last thing I need is another caliber.

[Sean Smith]

If you were buying a gun available in both calibers for someone who is recoil-averse, which would you choose?

If they are recoil-adverse, neither one is a good choice. Put another way, I've owned and shot both and there is no real difference between the two, both are loud and snappy. If someone who is recoil-adverse is shopping for an autoloader in a useful caliber, 9x19 is probably the correct answer... not .40 S&W or .357 Sig.

[10-Ring]

I prefer shooting the 357sig more than the 40. It's not that there's less recoil, it's just that the 357 sig is more manageable & more accurate.

[G33InMyPocket]

I got a Glock 33 and my wife has a Taurus PT140 . I have 125 grain Cor Bon in the Glock and she has 150 grain Cor Bon in hers. Recoil seems pretty much the same to my palate.

[M58]

Have guns with both barrels.
Pretty close. The .357 is a bit snappier.
The .40 more of a push.
A bit like the old 9mm to .45 comparison.
But less difference.
YMMV

FWIW, my pin times do not show a difference.

[antsi]

Agree with Sean Smith. Neither .40 SW or 357 SIG is an optimal choice for someone who is recoil sensitive. There is very little difference between the two - they both have a pretty brisk kick. Of the major defensive calibers, these two are among the snappiest recoiling rounds. Even .45 ACP is milder recoiling in a full-size metal pistol than 40 SW or 357 SIG.

[jnb01]

I also agree that the .40SW or 357 Sig would not be a good choice for an individual who is at all recoil sensitive.

It depends on load used as well as platform. JMO, but the 180gr loads have less recoil (snap) than the hot 155/165gr .40's and the 357 Sig. The recoil of loads like the 180gr Ranger, Gold Dot, ect. is quite manageable even in polymer based pistols for me, whereas, I do not much care for the recoil charachteristics of the hot .40 & 357 Sig loads in most of these platforms.

The hot 155/165gr .40's and the 357 Sig seems to be very similar, both producing a hard snap (high slide velocity), considerable blast, more muzzle flip, ect.......

The .40SW does offer some "down-loaded" ammunition both for defense and practice. However, IMO, given the performance charachteristics of these loads, one would be better served with a properly loaded 9mm. The one exception to the "down-loaded" rule is the 165gr Federal Tactical, it is not loaded to the spec's of the 165gr Gold Dot, Ranger, Golden Sabre, ect...but it offer's the same or better performance vs. the other top loads, and improved shootability.

From Doc Robert's over on Tactical Forums, results thru 4-layers of denim.

165gr Federal Tactical: vel= 1013fps/ pen= 12.9"/ rd= .65"

165gr Ranger (RA40TA): vel= 1166fps/ pen= 13.5"/ rd= .66

Federal Tactical 125gr 357 Sig: vel= 1390/ pen= 13.5/ rd= .62

Performance is excellent with all three, however, "shootability" favors the 165gr Federal Tactical, as it simply is not loaded as hot as the other two.

Best, jnb01