Shorter barrel expectations

[scandmx5]

Currently I'm using a Smith and Wesson SD40, but am trading out for a Bersa Thunder UC40 this weekend. The Bersa has a 3.2" barrel where as my SD is 4" I believe. It is also polymer, the Bersa is not. The Bersa weighs a tad more but the barrel is obviously a good bit shorter. What should I expect with these variables... more recoil, less, about the same? Weight is a pro, but the shorter barrel could be the con. I definatley won't be using those 165grainers out of this one.
Thanks

 

[Jed Carter]

My only experience with a compact pistol chambered in .40 S&W is with a SIG P239 with a 3.6" barrel. Recoil was very managable, very accurate. The Bersa looks like a nice pistol, does it come with a flush fit magazine? Not fond of magazines with a pinky rest adding extra length to a CCW.

 

[Bama5.0]

I'm pretty sure the shorter barrel will actually LOWER the recoil. I know it definitely lowers the muzzle velocity. Because of this, given the same bullet weight, your recoil should be less. I doubt it will be a huge difference anyway. You are only reducing your barrel length by 5%, so I assume you could expect similar reductions in velocity and recoil. Also, the added weight of the gun should help with recoil, although with most or all of the extra weight being in the frame, it should be a minimal help.

 

[scandmx5]

Thanks fellows. Jed- it comes with 2 magazines...one flush fit, the other with pinky extension. I am fond of the extension for me