Recoil In .40 Cal

[emann]

I'm wondering how the recoil varies in different grains of .40 ammo. For instance will 180 grain Speer Gold Dots kick more or less then 165 grain? I'm looking for something effective but with as little recoil as possible in .40. I'm an old 9mm man moving up. Gun to be used is a G23 by the way.

 

[Surefire]

Generally, heavier bullet weights will have more recoil.

Having said this, recoil is subjective.

I like the 180 grain bullets in .40 because TO ME they snap less than the lighter bullets.

 

[Lonestar49]

On the fence on this one

...

It seemed with the factory sights on my Beretta, the 165gr was the more accurate bullet, all distance's taken into account, however, I did not like those sights, especially the 2 dot rears. To narrow/close together, for clear separations, with these eyes, so I went with some wider rear 2 dots.

However, since I got a combo of new sights for her, rear 2 Dot Night Sights, white/glow-orange, and a front Trijicon night sight, white/glow-green, and now that I have them set, and the rail mounted Laser Max dialed in, I'm gonna go thru 300 rounds (total) of the 180gr vs the same of 165gr, and make my decision of which offers both, all distances shooting, along with rapid ,reacquiring target, shots with the most accuracy/consistency.

I would suggest you do the same when you get your 40cal, get equal amounts of 165gr and 180gr, and start off with 50-100 of the 165gr, then the same with 180gr, then take 50 of each, and load one mag with 165, and the other mag with 180gr, and you should be able to determine what gr weight bullet is best for all around shooting.


Enjoy


LS

 

[ARTiger]

I'd recommend Speer Gold Dot Shot Barrel 180 grain. Moves out at about 990 FPS and has the "rolling" recoil like .45 ACP versus the sharp snap of some of the lighter faster loads. Does a great job in terminal ballistics as well.

 

[fattsgalore]

I don't know but Winchester white box 180grn has less kick then the Winchester ranger 155grn.

 

[OnDuty]

I reload 165gr and love it over the 180gr.

 

[ball3006]

My practice ammo is...

155 gr rn that I load up. My carry ammo is 135 gr Golden Sabre. I have shot several feral pigs with that load and all have been one shot kills, they all dropped dead. They weighed 100-125 lbs. Besides, the lighter bullet means a lighter loaded carry gun. Load up a mag with 180 gr ammo and one with 135 gr ammo and feel the difference.......chris3

 

[Koblenz]

I have a Glock M23, and the first time I fired it the recoil was the heaviest of any handgun I had ever fired. I was using Georgia Arms ammunition, and I think the bullet weight was 150 or 155 grains. The recoil was so violent that it broke my grip on the gun.

As a result I tried to find ways to tame the pistol. I put a Hogue grip sleeve over the handle, and installed a Hartz recoil reduction guide rod.

The next time I fired the pistol, the recoil was much less severe. However, I don't remember what ammunition I used, so I don't know if the modifications to the gun made the difference, or if the reduced recoil was simply due to using a less powerful load.

I have not fired the gun since. Recently, I learned that there are significant differences in power in various .40 loads. The original 180 grain loads tend to yield far less foot pounds of energy than the newer lighter bullet loads.

I plan to take the gun to the range and try it out again with 155 versus 180 grain loads. I fear that it will be the loads which make the real difference in recoil. If that turns out to be the case, I might be selling my Glock M23.

The reason is that the best stopping power statistics are from the lighter bullet loads. The 180 grain loads perform no better than average 9mm loads, in which case there is no reason to use the .40 over a 9mm. So if the only way to get superior stopping power in my Glock M23 is to use loads that make the gun uncontrollable, then I would be better off with a 9mm that I can shoot fast and accurately.

The other option would be to replace the M23 with a .40 pistol which handles recoil better. I have read that the Beretta M96 is much softer shooting than other .40 pistols.

 

[ZeSpectre]

I generally fire either 165gr or 180gr. My unscientific opinion is that the 180gr recoil does seem less "snappy" and therefore is -perceived- as lighter recoil. What little (Speer) 155gr I've fired "felt" really hot to me.

 

[rbernie]

I find the snappiness of the 155gr offerings to be more distracting than the push of the 180gr offerings.

I run the 180gr stuff, and find it quite manageable.

 

[CountGlockula]

I love my G35's recoil. I use Winchester White Boxes of 165 and 180 grains and really don't notice a huge difference.

 

[wally]

My experience with new shooters suggests muzzle blast and flash goes a long way to influencing perceived recoil and developing a flinch to be overcome.

I tend to go with the heaviest bullets for the caliber.

--wally.

 

[Lonestar49]

Off the Fence now..

...

Another 200 rounds of FMJ, both 165gr and 180gr, with laser and without. And without a doubt, 165gr wins for both, accuracy, as they fly straighter than the heavier bullets at any distance IMO, and there is a perceived, less recoil effect, to back on target (more accurate) with the 165gr as well.

Of course this may vary per type gun, as this is with my Beretta Px4.


LS

 

[frenchwrench]

I've carried and shot my 23 for ten years now. 165 gr Golden Sabres seem to me, to be the best all around as to recoil and accuracy. I also reload 180's and last weekend used the wrong ones....could not say I noticed the difference until I got home and noticed the short stack of 165's.

 

[Koblenz]

If the Glock M23 can handle the 165 grain Golden Sabres, then that would be the way to go. If Evan Marshall's stopping power statistics are to be believed, the 165 grain Golden Sabre gives 94% one shot stops. (I know there are people who violently disagree with Marshall's statistics. I have no idea who is right and who is wrong in that debate.)

 

[Eyesac]

+1 for 180s being softer than 165s.

 

[C-grunt]

The 180 grain loads perform no better than average 9mm loads, in which case there is no reason to use the .40 over a 9mm

My department issues 180 grn Gold Dots or Rangers (depends on who gives the best deal that year) and, according to the firearms instructors, have been peforming very well over the old issue 9mm's when barriers (windshields mostly) are involved.

Not that Im a huge .40 nut, I love my 9mm. I recently found out the importance of gun fit in the hand. I sold my 2nd gen. Glock 23 because the recoil was to much. But any 3rd gen. guns shoot great in my hands.

 

[jeepmor]

Buy a box of each and make your own decisions, not to be a smarty pants, but recoil is subjective for everyone. Shoot what you feel comfortable with.

For budget concerns, maybe start with FMJ fodder in varying weights, find what you like best. Then buy some carry ammo once you narrow it down and see how that works. Sure, there will be a difference, because I bet self defense ammo is a bit hotter. But this way you get to shoot more, and that's always a plus.

Smaller pills allow room for more powder, so this may or may not translate into snappier recoil. This is why I state you should try several weights to find what you like. Bigger pills mean less room for powder, so it's hard to make blanket statements here.

I'm a heavy is better fan myself. The windshield statement by C-grunt reinforces that for me.

jeepmor

 

[Koblenz]

My department issues 180 grn Gold Dots or Rangers (depends on who gives the best deal that year) and, according to the firearms instructors, have been peforming very well over the old issue 9mm's when barriers (windshields mostly) are involved.

I guess police have more to consider than just stopping power alone. I was basing my claim on the stopping power statistics of Evan Marshall. For example, the highest rated 180 grain .40 is the Federal Hydra Shok, which Marshall says has given 88% one shot stops. Corbon and Speer 9mm +P loads also rate 88%. The Winchester 180 grain JHP load is rated at 83% one shot stops, which is the same as the standard pressure Federal 124 grain 9mm Hydra Shok.

 

[browningguy]

I shoot 165 gr. in my IDPA and carry guns, mine seem to like it best. I have tested 165 and 180's, and my shot to shot times are marginally quicker with the 165's in a Witness Elite Match. This leads me to believe the felt recoil is lower allowing me to get back on target very slightly faster. Each gun will be somewhat different, so try the different weights and see what feels best to you.

 

[Headless]

What they heck, i'll chime in...

I find the WWB 165's milder to my perception then the 180's out of my Beretta 96. The super light 140gr Corbon DPX's remind me of a 9mm, just with a bit more snap. I find the 180's seem to have alot more twist/torque effects than the lighter rounds and it makes it difficult for me to follow-up. I seem to find snap easier to deal with than torque. Interestingly, i've read a few people complaining about excessive torque/twist out of snub .38 revo's but i've never felt like my 642 had as much torque as the 180gr .40's i've fired from my Beretta.

 

[Rokman]

I target shoot mostly 180 grain because that is what I have found to usually be the cheapest in my area. I feel like the 155 grain ammo in my Glock 23 has the most perceived recoil. The 180 grain stuff seems a little less than the 165 grain ammo to me, but not much.

 

[czbegenner]

OK guys,I will be receving my Glock22 40cal this weekend.So your saying that if i use 180 grain it will kick like a mule,so i need to keep the grain around 165.

 

[ZeSpectre]

No, we're saying that the 180 grain "seems" to kick less. The working theory is that it's mostly because the "impulse" is a little more drawn out. Lighter bullets (under 165 grain) seem to have a "sharper" impulse, more of a snap as most call it, and most people perceive that "snap" as higher recoil.

personally I like 180gr okay, 165gr my favorite, and 155gr not so much.

 

[czbegenner]

Sorry i got it now,i misunderstood what you were saying at first,got it.