What has more "felt recoil" between Sig P938 and Kimber Solo?
- Thread starter Orion8472
- Start date
- Status
horsemen61
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 6,756
I've shot both and I prefer the sig 938 not only is it cheaper it had less felt recoil IMHO because it was heavier at least it felt that way I didn't put them on a scale and the sig felt like it was built better that is just me though
Old Dog
Member
I'll play. I roll with the 938 (mine is an Extreme). Major plus: far superior trigger.
I tried out the Solo, just didn't care much for it (but just personal preference -- I like the baby 1911 concept of the 938). The SIG feels better balanced with a slightly heavier slide. Great-shootin' little piece.
I tried out the Solo, just didn't care much for it (but just personal preference -- I like the baby 1911 concept of the 938). The SIG feels better balanced with a slightly heavier slide. Great-shootin' little piece.
Olympus
Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2008
- Messages
- 4,212
The Solo has a snappy recoil, but I can't tell it's any more than the 938. I actually prefer the Solo to the 938. Seemed to be a little smaller and was easier to conceal for me. I love mine. I always thought the 238/938 was a fugly design. But that's just me.
shooter1
Member
The 938 is a single action pistol, and is indeed carried cocked and locked. Of the two, I would go with the Solo for it's trigger action which is more appropriate for a pocket pistol. The safety is a bit small for my liking on the 938, making it potentially slower to get into action. I love the 1911 platform, but don't want anything smaller than my Officer's size, which is a belt gun. If felt recoil is important to you in a pocket pistol, go with the Sig. If you want something that's more appropriate for it's intended purpose,(IMO) go with a DA.
I don't own either one, but when I carry a lightweight single stack 9mm it's a Kel Tec PF 9. It's lighter than any of the pistols in that class and has recoil proportional to it's size and weight. A pistol in this class is not made to be a range toy, if you plan on shooting a couple hundred rounds each range trip it's gonna wear on you. I don't find the recoil bothersome, but after a couple magazines, it's not a lot of fun to shoot.
I don't think it's necessary to spend close to a grand for either the Sig or the Kimber for a pistol in this class. The LC9, and the Shield are both good choices and are affordable to boot. The Sig is nice tho------.
str1
I don't own either one, but when I carry a lightweight single stack 9mm it's a Kel Tec PF 9. It's lighter than any of the pistols in that class and has recoil proportional to it's size and weight. A pistol in this class is not made to be a range toy, if you plan on shooting a couple hundred rounds each range trip it's gonna wear on you. I don't find the recoil bothersome, but after a couple magazines, it's not a lot of fun to shoot.
I don't think it's necessary to spend close to a grand for either the Sig or the Kimber for a pistol in this class. The LC9, and the Shield are both good choices and are affordable to boot. The Sig is nice tho------.
str1
Great post. The 938 is a great gun, but it is NOT A POCKET GUN. I have had two customers tell me they've pulled them out of their pocket and found the Safety disengaged. It must be carried in a IWB or OWB holster designed for the gun to protect the trigger area and safety.
As far as snappy recoil, I have a LC9 and find it more than manageable, Not a range gun, but not a tough shooter.
Old Dog
Member
Were we talking about pocket guns?
Think most of us would agree, you downsize so much, you're gonna have to expect more recoil ... For sure, in 9mm, you can only go so small before recoil makes the piece unpleasant to shoot (much the same as .38 SPL and .357 MAG).
For small pistols, which are presumably easier to conceal, and not necessarily by using pocket carry (which I suspect most of us would agree is a sub-optimal carry mode anyway), aren't we just arguing which is a better all-around subcompact 9MM? If one can't agree that the trigger on the 938 is much better than that of the Solo, one either hasn't shot both of them, or just doesn't get it ...
Think most of us would agree, you downsize so much, you're gonna have to expect more recoil ... For sure, in 9mm, you can only go so small before recoil makes the piece unpleasant to shoot (much the same as .38 SPL and .357 MAG).
For small pistols, which are presumably easier to conceal, and not necessarily by using pocket carry (which I suspect most of us would agree is a sub-optimal carry mode anyway), aren't we just arguing which is a better all-around subcompact 9MM? If one can't agree that the trigger on the 938 is much better than that of the Solo, one either hasn't shot both of them, or just doesn't get it ...
So an SA pistol with a frame-mounted safety would be inherently less safe than a DAO pistol?
Yes, if that single action has a light trigger, is carried as it should be in condition one, and that safety is easily disengaged. Obviously if that DAO trigger is reworked to be extra light they might be equally bad. But the reality is this most SA carry firearms have dual safeties (grip and frame) for a reason. And in this case when comparing pocket sized pistols, the fact that one isn't safe for pocket carry is certainly a factor.
I haven't shot the SIG.
I bought a Solo because it is a striker-fired pistol. The safeties are redundant. It won't fire unless the trigger is pulled. It is pretty much the same design as an M&P.
I had a Shield, and LC9, which do have less recoil, but, they are a lot bigger guns, and weigh more. My M&P compact is the same size as the shield, except a little fatter, and even easier on the hand, but, I usually carry the Solo.
I bought a Solo because it is a striker-fired pistol. The safeties are redundant. It won't fire unless the trigger is pulled. It is pretty much the same design as an M&P.
I had a Shield, and LC9, which do have less recoil, but, they are a lot bigger guns, and weigh more. My M&P compact is the same size as the shield, except a little fatter, and even easier on the hand, but, I usually carry the Solo.
what he said!!!
Old Dog
Member
Sorta seems as though a couple of ya just want to argue. The 938 has anything but a "light trigger," the safety is not easily disengaged and the lack of a grip safety means nothing. An SA pistol with a manual safety and no grip safety, designed for pocket carry, is actually a concept that dates back to ... oh, 1903 or so.
Were they using a pocket holster, or just have them flopping around in their pocket? I used to carry an original Mustang in my pocket, in a pocket holster, and never had an issue with the safety.
I started carrying with BHPs and 1911s, so I never gave a second thought to carrying "cocked & locked" in my pocket too.
I couldn't agree more with Old Dog. I have a P238 and have never had the safety come off in my pocket.
Pocket carry of any DA or SAFE action pistol requires - as a mandate - that the trigger be covered to preclude anything getting to it and firing it. Belt holsters must - as a mandate - be constructed so that the material they are made of can't fold, bunch, or otherwise snag the trigger when holstering.
Which is exactly how so many do have negligent discharges with them. They, in and of themself, are not a superior design in safety, they require an accessory to ensure safety will be had.
It seems so many blame the SA with safety, when a DA with NO safety is just as problematic. It gets a little old seeing the same old cliches repeated over and over with no study or consideration of what is really going on.
Anyway, the OP asked about recoil. Sorry, neither is ideal, in fact, most CCW and small pocket carry guns don't handle it well. That is why you don't see them in competition much - in fact, the NRA had to set up a separate course of fire just for the smaller guns. Their size, the nature of their use, and the recoil are not the same as a full sized duty gun with 19 rounds of ammo soaking up a lot of the initial felt recoil. It's physics, a bigger gun soaks up the impulse and that's why long slide guns are preferred in competition - to get the front sight back down sooner for the next shot in timed courses. A short barreled version will always snap back and more severely to some degree.
SIG or Kimber, the appropriate way to know is shoot both back to back. Realizing that many of us don't have a rental range or even buddies who own them, it's going to boil down to picking the one you want, and living with it. After about 500 rounds it likely will either be a major factor, or you get used to it. By then other issues may have come to mind and the gun will be seen in different light. It's really a matter of perception to the shooter, the different grips and muzzle rise are part of the equation just as much as the slight difference in foot pounds of recoil.
If you can shoot them, sure, you will know. Otherwise, reading a lot of side by side reviews or watching reputable shooters videos might get some answers. The SIG was reputedly a less sharp recoil compared to other mini 9mm's, and a lot better than the LCP. The Kimber I didn't research - I select the trigger action first, and only studied those guns which had the one I needed.
I consider the style of trigger to be more important than level of recoil when the guns shoot the same cartridge, the difference while perceived might be significant, the use of the trigger more important. Small guns kick.
Which is exactly how so many do have negligent discharges with them. They, in and of themself, are not a superior design in safety, they require an accessory to ensure safety will be had.
It seems so many blame the SA with safety, when a DA with NO safety is just as problematic. It gets a little old seeing the same old cliches repeated over and over with no study or consideration of what is really going on.
Anyway, the OP asked about recoil. Sorry, neither is ideal, in fact, most CCW and small pocket carry guns don't handle it well. That is why you don't see them in competition much - in fact, the NRA had to set up a separate course of fire just for the smaller guns. Their size, the nature of their use, and the recoil are not the same as a full sized duty gun with 19 rounds of ammo soaking up a lot of the initial felt recoil. It's physics, a bigger gun soaks up the impulse and that's why long slide guns are preferred in competition - to get the front sight back down sooner for the next shot in timed courses. A short barreled version will always snap back and more severely to some degree.
SIG or Kimber, the appropriate way to know is shoot both back to back. Realizing that many of us don't have a rental range or even buddies who own them, it's going to boil down to picking the one you want, and living with it. After about 500 rounds it likely will either be a major factor, or you get used to it. By then other issues may have come to mind and the gun will be seen in different light. It's really a matter of perception to the shooter, the different grips and muzzle rise are part of the equation just as much as the slight difference in foot pounds of recoil.
If you can shoot them, sure, you will know. Otherwise, reading a lot of side by side reviews or watching reputable shooters videos might get some answers. The SIG was reputedly a less sharp recoil compared to other mini 9mm's, and a lot better than the LCP. The Kimber I didn't research - I select the trigger action first, and only studied those guns which had the one I needed.
I consider the style of trigger to be more important than level of recoil when the guns shoot the same cartridge, the difference while perceived might be significant, the use of the trigger more important. Small guns kick.
OP
OP
Orion8472
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,638
I actually like the trigger, safety, and feel of the Solo much more than the P938. Well, if I can get a Solo Carry DC at a fair price, I may just do it and see how it goes. Hopefully, it won't suffer from the peening at the locking lugs and will have a more robust finish [seen some issues with easily scratched finishes].
SC Shooter
Member
I have never fired a Kimber Solo, but did recently purchase a Sig P938. The day I took it to the range for the first time, I also took my trusty BHP. I sent about 100 rounds down range with the BHP, then fired for the first time my shiny new P938. It was a shock to my hand and wrist. I was amazed at what a few ounces of weight can do. I love my P938, but learned that when at the range, fire it first if I am going to be shooting multiple weapons.
OP
OP
Orion8472
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,638
I actually owned a P938 and thought the snappiness was definitely there, but manageable. I just think the Solo feels a LOT better [to my hand, that is] over the P938, so that's why I was wondering how different the recoil impulse of the Solo was compared to the P938.
Recoil is more of a personal thing, some guys feel it and others don't. I think you really have to shoot both before making a call on which one is better for you.
Many guns I have given a friend to shoot and he will say, how do you shoot this thing, when it doesn't bother me at all. Even a seacamp that we both had, My friend Bob and I. To watch him shoot it, you would think it was a 50 caliber short barreled gun. Where for me it is painless and easily fired one handed. So it's very individual.
Many guns I have given a friend to shoot and he will say, how do you shoot this thing, when it doesn't bother me at all. Even a seacamp that we both had, My friend Bob and I. To watch him shoot it, you would think it was a 50 caliber short barreled gun. Where for me it is painless and easily fired one handed. So it's very individual.
OP
OP
Orion8472
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,638
For a short time, I was "recoil sensitive". Even shooting my CZ SP-01 was an issue. I'm not that way today. And I recognize my SP-01 as one of the softest shooting 9mm guns I've ever shot.
I think I could handle the recoil of the Solo fine enough. It isn't a "range gun", so I doubt I would put thousands of rounds through it.
I think I could handle the recoil of the Solo fine enough. It isn't a "range gun", so I doubt I would put thousands of rounds through it.
Pete D.
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2010
- Messages
- 2,659
felt recoil
Felt recoil is a subjective thing...not measurable. How a particular gun feels is a function of the gun, the load, the circumstances, the experience of the shooter, the size and shape of the shooter's hand, the ergonomics of the firearm....and probably a few other things also.
The gun that i found stung me the most of all my handguns was a 9mm Makarov.....not a heavy, powerhouse of a cartridge. Stung more than my other 9s, than my .45s.
Pete
Felt recoil is a subjective thing...not measurable. How a particular gun feels is a function of the gun, the load, the circumstances, the experience of the shooter, the size and shape of the shooter's hand, the ergonomics of the firearm....and probably a few other things also.
The gun that i found stung me the most of all my handguns was a 9mm Makarov.....not a heavy, powerhouse of a cartridge. Stung more than my other 9s, than my .45s.
Pete
- Status
