Recoil Comparison Advice, Please

[tbige]

Appreciate your thoughts on which would give most (perceived, if you like) recoil in 44 Special: a 180-grain bullet at 980 fps or a 210 at 700?

 

[BigG]

My belief is the 180 grain @ 980 fps will be perceived to kick more.

 

[tbige]

Think you're probably right. Can't find ballistics data for the Black Hills 210-grain but comparing the 180-grain PMC to a 240 PMC on energy shows the 180-grainer yielding 383 pounds versus 308 for the 240 -- almost a 25% gain.

 

[Sean Smith]

Lighter bullets going faster tend to have shorter, sharper recoil impulses, while heavier bullets going slower tend to feel more like a longer push. Different people perceive recoil differently, but you can get a rough estimate by just doing bullet mass x velocity.

If you have the load data (including powder weight) you can calculate the actual recoil energy here: http://www.robsoft.nu/omvandlare_en/rekyl.asp?MainID=5

 

[P95Carry]

Firstly I'd consider muzzle energy comparisons .... ( these seem pretty low figures but then I ain't checked for 44 spl)

180-grain bullet at 980 fps - ME= 384 ft lbs

210- grain bullet at 700 fps - ME= 228 ft lbs

Now - true the perceived recoil of lighter bullets is usually brisker and that of heavier more of a ''shove'' .... the heavier bullet will (must) resist acceleration to a greater extent due to inertial factors .. and so there is ''more reaction time'' available to initiate the gun's rearward (recoil) motion.. it is spread longer over time.

However with these ME figures I would hazard a guess that in fact the lighter bullet will produce both a brisker recoil and also a more strongly perceived one too .... simply thru energy transfer.

And - even tho the lighter bullet should accelerate more easily .. if the round's powder charge and thus pressure is increased enough to up the ME figure as we see here - then that lighter bullet will need accelerated quicker and thus its inertial resistance will get nearer to the heavier one .. if ya see what I mean!

 

[tbeb]

I think felt recoil of 180 grainer will be about 15% more than 210 grainer.

 

[bountyhunter]

but you can get a rough estimate by just doing bullet mass x velocity.

Actually: mass X velocity = linear momentum.

Energy = 1/2 m X velocity (squared)

This is the reason that the 180-gr has about 70% more energy (see post from P95carry).

 

[MrAcheson]

Actually: mass X velocity = linear momentum.

Energy = 1/2 m X velocity (squared)

This is the reason that the 180-gr has about 70% more energy (see post from P95carry).

Yes but when you are doing recoil calculations, its momentum that matters not muzzle energy. Momentum is always conserved and is purely mechanical. Energy isalways conserved as well but is not purely mechanical so it could change to heat, sound, etc.

Here are the equations you need to know:

(1) mass_bullet*velocity_bullet=momentum_bullet
(2) mass_gun*velocity_gun=momentum_gun
(3) momentum_bullet+momentum_gun=0
(4) momentum_gun=force_recoil*time_gun

Look at the momentum of the bullet at the muzzle and this will dictate the momentum of gun in recoil (eq 3). The bullet velocity will also tend to reflect the "flavor" or the recoil. Faster bullets tend to be "snappier" than slower ones because time_gun is usually shorter for faster bullets so force_recoil is larger.

The 180 gr seems to have the edge in energy, momentum and recoil. It should be a heavier and snappier recoil than the bigger slower round.

 

[Ankeny]

What matters most is the perceived recoil and how the sight tracks through the recoil cycle. Physics are dandy, but Sean nailed it:

Lighter bullets going faster tend to have shorter, sharper recoil impulses, while heavier bullets going slower tend to feel more like a longer push.

Everything else is academic.

 

[cratz2]

I definately agree that the lighter bullets tend to be snappier and tend to have a bit more muzzle flip than the heavier bullets but I don't think the loads listed are really comparable. Looking at them, I have very little doubt that the lighter load would be preceived as the 'harder kicker' but the 210 gr load looks kinda light to me... 230 ft/lbs from a 44 Special? That just seems pretty light.

And I think as far as using either as a defensive load against human targets, I'd much rather go for the 180 gr load between the two listed. I've been thinking of picking up probably one of the Taurus guns but I might have to do some more research as looking at the numbers, I'd rather have a 357 Magnum.

 

[Hal]

The 180 will get your attention in just about any gun.
The 210 will feel like a *big* .22 in some guns.

I regularly handload both weights @ those velocities.

 

[John Ross]

Go to http://www.john-ross.net/recoil.htm

to download an excel spreadsheet which will give you recoil velocity.

11.9 FPS for the 180 grain load and 9.8 FPS for the 210 in a 39 ounce Mountain Revolver. 5.3 foot-pounds vs 3.6 foot-pounds.

JR