.40 S&W recoil.


PDA






Spec ops Grunt
December 15, 2010, 05:16 PM
Was shooting my Grandpa's Beretta 96 today, maybe it was just bad technique, but I find that .40 recoil is really uncomfortable. Seems way too snappy. I'd much rather shoot my Makarov.


That leads to my next question, how does the recoil of a Beretta in .40 S&W compare to a full size 1911 in .45? To a 92FS?


I've always wanted both of those, but if the recoil is worse.......

If you enjoyed reading about ".40 S&W recoil." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
W.E.G.
December 15, 2010, 05:30 PM
"Snappy" recoil in a full-size .40 short-and-weak pistol?

Really???

Onward Allusion
December 15, 2010, 05:56 PM
The 96 is all steel... The recoil should be minimal. The only thing that comes to mind is the open slide making everything a lot lighter and you're not used to it. Maybe the recoil spring is worn? IMO, the MAK is a lot more snappy than the 96. The 1911 also has more recoil - though not snappy recoil.

1911austin
December 15, 2010, 06:02 PM
The 96 is all steel... The recoil should be minimal. The only thing that comes to mind is the open slide making everything a lot lighter and you're not used to it. Maybe the recoil spring is worn? IMO, the MAK is a lot more snappy than the 96. The 1911 also has more recoil - though not snappy recoil.


The beretta has an aluminum frame.

Onward Allusion
December 15, 2010, 06:10 PM
I know I'm splitting hairs, but it's alloy. It's no where near as light as aluminum and definitely much heavier than poly. It's similar metal as the 59.

Also, the 92 has little to no recoil (IMO).

Now, if we want to talk about snappy recoil, try an older 38 spl snub with wood grips. :D

Deanimator
December 15, 2010, 06:15 PM
I've got a Glock 22 and while the actual "recoil" isn't objectionable, the upward snap of the muzzle is considerable. The normal two hand hold that works with an M1911, whether with 230gr. ball, 230gr. Gold Dots, or 200gr. Hornady TAP is not sufficient to maintain enough control for quick followup shots. I found the muzzle climb most pronounced with 180gr. Blazer FMJ flatpoints.

When I had the money, I was considering a CZ-75 in .40 S&W for the extra weight. I don't like double-action autos, but the CZ can be carried cocked and locked. There are single-action versions as well.

cougar1717
December 15, 2010, 06:15 PM
Recoil is relative, but I perceive the recoil of the guns you listed in this order least to greatest: 92FS, 1911 (steel framed), 96.

Spec ops Grunt
December 15, 2010, 06:23 PM
Maybe snappy isn't the right word......

It just seems like the recoil is more, I dunno, intense, than the Mak.



My mak is all steel.

GLOOB
December 15, 2010, 06:32 PM
It is theoretically possible that the recoil of a heavier gun is "worse," at least in regards to followup shots, particularly if it has a higher bore axis.

I feel less recoil in a .40 Cougar than my compact/subcompact 9mm/40 Glocks. But the followup shots aren't as fast. I feel like the Glock sights come back on target a little quicker. The Cougar sights come back down pretty quick, but they don't want to settle down as fast, at least in my hands. It's likely just a familiarity issue, but maybe the weight and bore axis have something to do with it, too.

I suppose I don't really care how much felt recoil there is or how far the muzzle rises, as long as it gets back on target quickly. But as for the OP, I dunno. The Beretta should be really comfy to shoot! I've never shot one, but the 92 feels like a.22, and the 96 has an even heavier slide. The Makarov should also be a peach to shoot. My 2 smaller 9x18's are a picnic.

Spec ops Grunt
December 15, 2010, 06:34 PM
Pretty sure the Beretta has a higher bore axis than the Makarov.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/rus/makarov-pm-pmm-e.html


http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/it/beretta-92-e.html

Comedian
December 15, 2010, 07:40 PM
In my (albeit limited) experience of learning and teaching other people shoot, I see .40 S&W as kind of an acquired taste. A lot of people get turned off of it because they don't pick it up as easy as they did 9mm or .45acp. The more you shoot it, the more you learn to compensate for the snappy-ness.

clutch
December 15, 2010, 07:45 PM
My S&W M&P .40 compact is more of an effort to shoot than my other handguns. This one tends to give me a flinch for some reason.

My Ruger Superblackhawk in .44 mag doesn't seem to bother me as much. Why? Heck if I know.

Clutch

Cosmik de Bris
December 15, 2010, 09:27 PM
Maybe snappy isn't the right word......

It just seems like the recoil is more, I dunno, intense, than the Mak.



My mak is all steel.
I think snappy is a reasonable description of the recoil of a 40 as opposed to that of a 45.

Wishoot
December 15, 2010, 09:41 PM
I must be strange then. I like shooting .40. In fact, I like shooting my G22 more than most of my 9mm's.

Mike J
December 15, 2010, 10:22 PM
I have 2 .40 caliber full sized pistols. Recoil doesn't bother me when shooting either of them. My 9mm is a Kel Tec P-11. It recoils about as bad as either of the .40's due to it's small size. The gun can have as much to do with how recoil is perceived as the cartridge it fires. Guns with a high bore axis have more muzzle flip. Guns with a low bore axis tend to put more recoil into your hand. It seems to me everything about handguns is a compromise.

gsreimers
December 15, 2010, 11:10 PM
I have a CZ 2075 Rami which is a subcompact in 40 caliber. I feel it is a handfull and is not easy to hang on to. I shoot fairly well with is but is has a very snappy recoil. I have a friend I shoot with who has a full size glock in 45 and IMHO it has much less recoil than my subcompact 40.

QUICK_DRAW_McGRAW
December 15, 2010, 11:23 PM
i have carried and shot .40 for a few years now, i also own .38/.357 revolvers, 9mm, and .45's. i shoot the .40 the most. i havn't had my 1911 that long but the .40 is what i always grab when i head to the range.

sxcamaro05
December 16, 2010, 03:18 AM
I own a Beretta 96 and it is by far one of the least snappy .40's I have ever fired. I think you are psyching yourself out in the recoil. I'm a 5'10'' and mid weight and can more than handle the snap of this firearm. If you want to talk snap fire a Sigma in 40 or any compact.

easyg
December 16, 2010, 11:26 AM
Maybe snappy isn't the right word......

It just seems like the recoil is more, I dunno, intense, than the Mak.
This is because the .40 recoil IS more intense.

After all, the .40 is quite a bit more powerful than the 9x18 Mak.

Kind of like comparing a .32S&W to a .38 Special+P.


Here's a link to a video by Hickok45 demonstrating the recoil/muzzle-flip of the 9mm, .40S&W, and 10mm....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urxT53-Ukig


You can see from the video that there really isn't much difference in muzzle-flip between the 9mm Glock 26 and the .40 Glock 27.

Easy

Shawn Dodson
December 16, 2010, 11:40 AM
I never really noticed any difference in recoil when shooting .40 S&W. I reckon my focus is somewhere else when I'm shooting and I just don't notice it.

I carried a Beretta 96FS on patrol. I could quickly hit bowling pins at 35 yards, no problem, shooting weak hand only.

1911austin
December 16, 2010, 11:46 AM
The 96 is all steel...

I know I'm splitting hairs, but it's alloy. It's no where near as light as aluminum and definitely much heavier than poly. It's similar metal as the 59.


Your not splitting hairs. Your just plain wrong. The S&W 59 also has an aluminum frame. Aluminum frames are much lighter that steel frames. Also, the materials added to the aluminum to produce the "alloy" do not add any significant weight.

From Beretta. Light Aluminum Frame: Each pistol features a lightweight, forged frame made from extremely strong aircraft-quality aluminum alloy

Onward Allusion
December 16, 2010, 12:59 PM
If you want to talk snap fire a Sigma in 40 or any compact.

The Sigmas in 40 are a pleasure to shoot. Perceived recoil is less because of the excellent ergonomics. It's also still much more gentle than a 38 spl snub. Which brings to mind, why do people recommend 38 spls to 1st time women shooters as a SD/HD weapon...but I digress...

Deanimator
December 16, 2010, 01:34 PM
Which brings to mind, why do people recommend 38 spls to 1st time women shooters as a SD/HD weapon...but I digress..


The only firing controls are the trigger and (on exposed hammer guns) the hammer.
They can reliably fire any ammunition which can safely expel the bullet from the barrel.
They're MUCH harder to fire negligently, especially the concealed hammer guns.
The immediate action drill for a failure to fire is to pull the trigger again.
They can be fired from INSIDE a coat pocket or purse.
They can be fired from contact distance without fear of the mechanism being taken out of action, unlike a semi-auto pistol.

Ledgehammer
December 16, 2010, 01:44 PM
Now, if we want to talk about snappy recoil, try an older 38 spl snub with wood grips

The worst for me is the airweight snubbies - I rather shoot a S&w 500. Seriously I have shot both many times and prefer the 500.

To me - the .45 acp is more of a push than the snap of the .40. jmo The .45 is not uncomfortable at all.

Arkansas Paul
December 16, 2010, 06:25 PM
The worst for me is the airweight snubbies


I believe that. I shot a friend's airweight snubbie with full throttle .357 mag loads and WOW! It was plain painful. I've shot a .50 Desert Eagle and a .480 Ruger that were more comfortable than the airweight.

FIVETWOSEVEN
December 16, 2010, 06:32 PM
Glock 23 is thee most uncomfortable pistol I have ever shot, second is the Springfield Armory XD. Although the SIG Sauer P229 in .40 S&W is a joy to shoot and I shoot it very well.

Its not the cartridge but the gun itself.

CDR_Glock
December 16, 2010, 06:33 PM
Was shooting my Grandpa's Beretta 96 today, maybe it was just bad technique, but I find that .40 recoil is really uncomfortable. Seems way too snappy. I'd much rather shoot my Makarov.


That leads to my next question, how does the recoil of a Beretta in .40 S&W compare to a full size 1911 in .45? To a 92FS?


I've always wanted both of those, but if the recoil is worse.......

The recoil is equal to a 1911. More than a 92 FS.

Why are so many people intimidated by 40 SW recoil? Recoil is relative. It, IMO, dictates what happens with follow up shots.

FIVETWOSEVEN
December 16, 2010, 07:16 PM
Not intimidated but just annoyed with polyguns.

Deanimator
December 16, 2010, 07:27 PM
Why are so many people intimidated by 40 SW recoil?
Not "intimidated" at all. It's just more difficult to control than I like.

The same grip that affords me excellent control of an M1911 with ball or 200gr. JHPs won't allow me to keep the gun in both hands. I don't need a death grip on either my M1911 or my Browning Hi Power.

varoadking
December 16, 2010, 08:29 PM
I know I'm splitting hairs, but it's alloy. It's no where near as light as aluminum...

To spilt that hair even further, it's an "aluminum alloy"...so it actually is as light as aluminum...

GLOOB
December 16, 2010, 08:53 PM
I read that FEG has used 99% aluminum and 1% titanium in some of their alloy gun frames, just for reference. :)

I think some people get the idea that a .40 SW cartridge is smaller than .45, so it should recoil less. Well, a 10mm cartridge is smaller than .45 ACP. As is a luger cartridge, compared to .38 special.

Onward Allusion
December 16, 2010, 09:55 PM
To spilt that hair even further, it's an "aluminum alloy"...so it actually is as light as aluminum...

I was hoping that you would have gone away after I had a chance to look it up but I guess if you've been around since 2003, you're not going anywhere. :D

I'll still say that the recoil from a 96 is not bad but I've only shot one a few times.

gga357
December 16, 2010, 10:22 PM
I haved moved from the Glock 23 & 22 to the S&W M&P compact and full size because the are much more comfortable.

Airburst
December 16, 2010, 10:46 PM
Onward Allusion
IMO, the MAK is a lot more snappy than the 96.
I concur. I had a PA63 and that thing hurt.

Spec ops Grunt
December 16, 2010, 11:03 PM
The pa63 weighs 595 grams.


http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/hu/feg-ap-63-pa-1963-e.html
Mine is the original Makarov, PM Makarov, East German manufacture.

It weighs 730grams.

http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg/rus/makarov-pm-pmm-e.html

AKElroy
December 16, 2010, 11:04 PM
the 96 is about as beefy a platform as can be had to launch a .40. I think that Mak has you spoiled. That said, I have a renewed interest in 9's. Cheaper practice, and not a knats kiesters difference in actual SD value between it and the .40.

For that reason, I have 3 9s & only 1 .40.

sxcamaro05
December 17, 2010, 12:50 AM
Eh or you could be very poor with recoil do to your mindset. My buddy Dave will only shoot 9mm loads because "40 hurts his hands" and the recoil is "too strong". Gentlemen (and Ladies) this guy is 6'3'' and 230 lbs so I think it is a matter of mindset as I'm substantially smaller and can fire .40 just fine.

easyg
December 17, 2010, 11:11 PM
Glock 23 is thee most uncomfortable pistol I have ever shot,
Because of the recoil???


No way!

The Glock 23 is one of the mildest of .40 pistols out there.

Heck, I've yet to meet any female who couldn't shoot the Glock 23 just fine....even with one hand!

ColdDeadHand
December 18, 2010, 03:48 PM
I can only speak for my experience with the M&P full-size vs. the compact, both in .40 S&W.

I started on the compact and I must say it took several trips to the range to get used to it. I would go and shoot maybe a box of 50 at the very most and then switch to something else. After some period of break-in time (for me, not the pistol), it became a pleasure to shoot.

I got to shoot my buddy's full-size well after I learned on the compact and I can say it is a much gentler gun. It still commands attention, but it's nothing like the recoil from the compact.

Long story short: My recommendation is not to run head-long into shooting a pistol that's not comfortable for you. Take your time with it. Like anything else there is a learning curve.

Just because you don't like it today, doesn't mean you'll never enjoy that pistol.

The Lone Haranguer
December 18, 2010, 03:54 PM
Seems way too snappy.
You aren't the first to make this observation. I find it tolerable in a full size gun (rental Springfield XD), but is a handful in a small gun (personally - and briefly - owned Glock 27). I actually like the "push" of the .45 Auto better.

Marshall
December 18, 2010, 04:23 PM
I'm rather mystified by some of the comments.

My Springfield XD-40 service models is one of the guns I shoot best, and it's in 40 S&W. I don't find the recoil harsh at all, rather mild actually. Maybe it's all my revolver shooting in magnum calibers, I dunno? Snappy? Maybe a little. I have a Browning BDA in .380 ACP that I would consider to be more "snappy" feeling and that's probably because of the blowback action. But I sure wouldn't classify either as uncomfortable, by any means. Heck, they're not rimfires, you have to expect some umph out these things. :scrutiny:

onthecount
December 18, 2010, 04:27 PM
I love my beretta 90-two...in 40 s&w...I dont find the recoil all that bad and I'm probably the smallest person on here 6' and only 130 pounds on a good day. Snappy is my Walther PPK/S .380...but thats so much fun to shoot I dont even care.

Lobo_79
December 18, 2010, 05:09 PM
In my (albeit limited) experience of learning and teaching other people shoot, I see .40 S&W as kind of an acquired taste...

An acquired taste indeed. I normally shoot a 92G Vertec but recently I picked up a CZ75B in .40 S&W. I like the CZ and its recoil-absorbing steel frame, but after the holidays I think I'll convert it to a 9mm.

Surefire
December 18, 2010, 05:09 PM
I think it is just a matter of personal preferences.

To me the .40 S&W recoil is snappy in comparison to some other cartridges, but still that is not an issue for me. I am very comfortable shooting the compact Sig P239 in .40 all day.

Having said that, I do prefer the .45 ACP recoil type more. To me, the .45 ACP recoil has the perfect balance between total recoil and type of recoil of the semi-auto chamberings.

If you enjoyed reading about ".40 S&W recoil." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!