Longer barrel = more recoil?

[OpFlash]

I have always heard that the bigger the gun, the less recoil. Well I'm here to tell you, it ain't so! I agree this might be true with heavy barreled guns, but that's not what I'm experiencing now.

I've had two short barreled .45s, a Springfield Micro Compact and more recently a Taurus Millennium Pro. 3" and 3.5" barrels respectively. Both I shot well. I recently purchased a full sized 5" Rock Island 1911 and I'm having trouble holding on to the thing. I've even put rubber finger groove grips on it, but the longer barrel length means longer bullet time in the barrel which translates into more total recoil and I'm having trouble holding the thing down. At close ranges its not a problem, but at 25 yards I have to squeeze the dickens out of it and still hold a foot or two low to hit anywhere close. I never had this problem with the shorter guns. Maybe my grip sucks, but I've been shooting pistols for 3 years including Glocks, etc. and have never had this problem. Comments? Suggestions?

 

[MarshallDodge]

Could it be the recoil springs?

I have a full size Kimber and a Springfield Champion. The Champion's muzzle flip is more noticeable, the Kimber is easier to keep on target.

 

[Majic]

At close ranges its not a problem, but at 25 yards I have to squeeze the dickens out of it and still hold a foot or two low to hit anywhere close.

Distance to target have nothing to do with bullet time in the barrel. All guns recoil and you can't stop that in fact you shouldn't be trying. You recover from recoil. The harder you squeeze a handgun the worst you will shoot it. You should hold the 5 incher no harder than you hold the 3 inchers. If you have to hold 12 to 24 inches to stay on target then either you have a serious sight problem or you are physically snatching the pistol upward in anticipation of recoil. A .45 acp is a rather pleasant shooting cartridge in a 5 inch gun.

 

[OpFlash]

I wasn't trying to imply that distance had anything to do with the amount of recoil, only that the error is more noticeable at longer ranges.

Why would I "snatch" a 5" 45 pistol upwards and not my Glock23, my Ruger MKII, or the previous 45s I mentioned above? I remember having this problem with a full sized Witness .45 I owned previously too, but not nearly as bad. If I concentrated on my grip I could control it, if I didn't, I would shoot high. The Witness was a much heavier pistol though.

 

[Onmilo]

Recoil is a consistant force.
Simple physics
Felt recoil is, as it sounds, implied and perceived by the recipient.

It could be the way a five inch barrelled handgun is held by you that causes the felt recoil to be perceived as more severe than when you fire an identical cartridge in a shorter barrel weapon.

I have a Glock 26 in 9mm and a CZ-83 in ,32acp.
Everyone who has ever fired both pistols at the same time swears the .32 recoils more than the 9mm Model 26 even though it is a larger, heavier pistol shooting a smaller, lighter bullet cartridge.

The CZ doesn't actually recoil more than the Glock, the design of the gun transfers the recoil forces to the shooter in a different manner that is perceived by the human brain to be more severe than it actually is.

A Bevertail grip safety and a clearance cut on the triggerguard junction to the grip frame will allow the five inch gun to sit lower in your hand and this will alter the perceived recoil forces.
If you take a hard look at your Micro Springfield I believe you will see these alterations have already been done by the factory.
The Taurus pistols also incorporate ergonomic features into the gun allowing them to sit lower in the hand and this high hand low bore allows transfer of the recoil forces to the hand in a more sedate manner than the low hand high bore design of a standard 1911.

Two of the most truely unpleasant .45 caliber handguns I have ever fired are the Smith and Wesson 1917 and the Colt New Service revolvers with factory service style stock panels.
Cutting edge technology for their time and the fathers of the term "Wristbreaker" too.