If you're shooting factory ammo for targets or defense, you're probably limited to what sells at a reasonable price and what's available. If you're practice is to perform with a carry load, it makes sense to practice with something that has similar recoil. If you're trying to minimize the flash, blast, and gas while still obtaining effective velocity, penetration, and bullet expansion, this is where handloading for the revolver can be a great benefit. Whether you're loading your carry rounds or using factory, you can obtain a load that's achieves an objective standard for penetration and expansion, like that of the FBI, with your revolver's barrel length. To match this load's recoil and point of impact with an inexpensive bullet, will take some crafting of the recipe on the loading bench.
In my experience, I found it difficult to obtain my weight/velocity goals from short barrels (3" or 2") with maximum pressures within the SAAMI spec for 38+P. It takes a slower burning powder which results in less consistent combustion prior to the exit of the bullet base from the muzzle. SD's and ES's suffer. What's more, the muzzle pressure is higher than loads that use a faster burning powder with a higher peak pressure. It just wasn't worth working within this arbitrary limit.
To limit flash and blast, lower the muzzle pressure. The best way to lower the muzzle pressure is to use a longer barrel. But if the barrel is a given length, a faster powder can be used to have lower muzzle pressures at the same velocity as slower powders. The faster powder will produce a higher peak pressure to deliver the same velocity as the slow powder, but the muzzle pressure can be lower.
Recoil for a given gun is mostly a function of bullet velocity. If the bullet exits the muzzle at 1000 fps, the recoil won't be different whether this velocity was attained with a slow powder or a fast powder. The difference in muzzle pressure will be noticeable, especially in report (sound pressure level), but the recoil is mostly a result of the bullet weight and velocity and the reaction in the mass of the revolver. It's not slow vs. fast powders that make the difference between a slow "push" and a fast "snap" in the felt recoil. What I've found makes this difference is the mass of the revolver vs. the mass and velocity of the bullet. The more mass and velocity in the bullet, the more it's going to accelerate a given revolver. A lot of acceleration in the revolver (12 oz. 340 PD being pushed by 140 grains exiting at 1350fps) generates sharp pain. A 35 oz. 2.5" L-frame accelerated by a 158 grains exiting at 1100 fps produces more recoil than a pansy likes, but is otherwise reasonable. Put a 6" barrel on that L-frame and reduce the charge so the bullet still exits at 1100 fps and the recoil will be the same, but the additional 11 ounces of gun slows the acceleration of the gun considerably and the "felt recoil" is lower. The muzzle pressure will also be lower and it will seem to be a pussy load.
Light bullets will lower the recoil, but the penetration will be decreased for a given velocity. Because sufficient penetration matters for most meaningful purposes, we can consider what will meet our penetration goal with the least amount of recoil. In my experience, it is the heavier bullets. Theoretically, we know lighter bullets will require higher velocities to achieve similar penetration to heavier ones, notwithstanding differences in terminal expansion etc. Not only is higher velocity required from light bullets to achieve similar force, but light bullets of a given velocity also have a lower sectional density. This means they'll need even greater additional velocity over a heavier bullet to achieve goal penetration. To accelerate lighter bullets to sufficient velocities requires accelerating a greater powder mass. That acceleration of powder mass generates recoil that does not contribute to terminal performance -- it exits as gas.
While "slow and heavy" seem to be the best way to achieve penetration goals, we should also have an expansion goal. Given bullet materials and design, this is going to take a given minimum terminal velocity. This is why 180 grain bullets are not the most popular for 357.
Heavy revolver, long-barrel, fast powder, and optimal bullet mass, sectional density, and suitable materials and design for expansion -- these are the recipe for good terminal performance with a minimum of recoil, flash, blast, and gas. Any of them can be compromised for the available trade-off's. Compromising any one of these variables may require compromising some of the others to achieve terminal ballistic goals, but compromising one variable will not reverse any of these characteristic's optimality.
of shooting. It's not bad, if you clean the gun every time and have the right tools. A Lewis Lead Remover takes most of the work out of it, it will scrub the powder ring just as well as lead fouling. I've had this one since 1978. One piece for the forcing cone, another for the chambers The rubber washer swells when tightened, so it will get the chamber as well as the throat.
