I was somewhat surprised by some comparison shooting at the range today.
I had my Colt 1991 (40 oz.) and Beretta 92 (34 oz.). With the ammo I use (115gr. Remington 9mm and 200gr. Zero .45), my guns have nearly identical calculated recoil energy and recoil velocity. I intentionally chose to duplicate recoil in the two guns to help my son transition from the 9mm to the .45.
My perception is that the .45 has more push and the 9mm has more snap.
The eye-opener came when my son tried one of the range's Glock 17 rental guns. At 22 oz., the Glock's calculated recoil energy and recoil velocity are substantially more than either of my guns. However, actually shooting the G17 back-to-back with the Beretta, I did not feel any - none, nada, zip, zilch - difference in recoil.
Unless I slept through a chapter in high school physics, something about the Glock has to make up for its weight deficiency, but I can't figure it out.