Which has more recoil/muzzle flip - .40 or .45
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Joined
·
1,595 Posts
my .40 berretta with hydrashocks flipped more than the spinger loaded with hydrashocks in .45
It all depends which Gun you use.
As an example the other day I shot my Glock 27 .40, alongside my Kimber ten II 5", a Para Tac 4 .45 and a Glock 30 .45,
The softest shooting were the Glock 27 and the 30, it was a close call between those two, the other .45's were noticably harsher. The Tac 4 was terrible very harsh and snappy. The kimber was less harsh than the Para but noticably harsher than the Glocks.
Overal the Para was uncofortable. The others one could shoot for a while no problem.
Ammo was S&B 180gr. .40 and S&B 230gr. .45 acp.
Overall id say the .45 will feel stronger and harsher given identical platforms.
As an example the other day I shot my Glock 27 .40, alongside my Kimber ten II 5", a Para Tac 4 .45 and a Glock 30 .45,
The softest shooting were the Glock 27 and the 30, it was a close call between those two, the other .45's were noticably harsher. The Tac 4 was terrible very harsh and snappy. The kimber was less harsh than the Para but noticably harsher than the Glocks.
Overal the Para was uncofortable. The others one could shoot for a while no problem.
Ammo was S&B 180gr. .40 and S&B 230gr. .45 acp.
Overall id say the .45 will feel stronger and harsher given identical platforms.
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
mark1174 said:
+1
Not only is this subjective since it does not track equally across weapon types, it is subjective for the person because of different grip/shooting styles.
You will have to obtain a timer and the weapons you wish and go try it for yourself.
By the strangest of coincidences I just came off the range where I was firing 5 shot strings on steel using the timer and measuring the groups.
My group shot with a Glock 17 (9mm) was 33% slower and Twice as big as my group shot with a Combat Commander in .45. Add to that the fact that I had just spent some 300 rounds practicing with the Glock and had not shot the .45 in 2 days, and it even surprises me!
There is no substitute for measurement because the next guy may reverse those number for himself.
Onward,
Jim
You will have to obtain a timer and the weapons you wish and go try it for yourself.
By the strangest of coincidences I just came off the range where I was firing 5 shot strings on steel using the timer and measuring the groups.
My group shot with a Glock 17 (9mm) was 33% slower and Twice as big as my group shot with a Combat Commander in .45. Add to that the fact that I had just spent some 300 rounds practicing with the Glock and had not shot the .45 in 2 days, and it even surprises me!
There is no substitute for measurement because the next guy may reverse those number for himself.
Onward,
Jim
Joined
·
5,968 Posts
Awwww Jim. You took the wind out of this thing before it really even got going! Really. Sometimes you are just too logical.JimH said:
Put me in the "40 is snappy" camp. I prefer to shoot 45acp handguns to 40 S&W handguns. Does this include lightweight 45s? Yes, I will opt to shoot my Scandium M325, S&W CS45, or Glock 30 over 40 S&W handguns with similar size and weight. Regards, Richard
While nowhere near the same weight, I have a glock23 in .40 and a springfield mil-spec in .45. Just from my experience with those particular two, the .40 is a much quicker, more pronounced flip upwards while the .45 is almost a straight back, much slower push. It's actually MUCH easier to shoot the fullsize 1911 quickly and accurately because of the direction it recoils. The slowness of the recoil may also make it easier for a slightly more novice shooter like myself to manage it and stay on target. I still shoot better with my glock, simply because I've put 2500 rounds through it since it was new and only 200 or so through the 1911, which is my first. I feel that the accuracy and capability in the 1911 will surpass the glock for me in time though. I had a RugerP95 (durable, nothin wrong with it but, man it's got no stlye!) that I just traded for an Arcus 94 (the hi-power clone). The P95 in 9mm was even snappier and harder to re-acquire target after shot than the mil-spec. The P95 is quite heavy as well.
Needless to say, I was pleasently surprised with the way the recoil on a full-size 1911 works. It's actually kind of comfy/nice to me. I'm hooked
I even changed my mind about using the glock in some competition stuff and now will be learning to shoot the 1911 for competition instead.
Results may vary
Needless to say, I was pleasently surprised with the way the recoil on a full-size 1911 works. It's actually kind of comfy/nice to me. I'm hooked
I even changed my mind about using the glock in some competition stuff and now will be learning to shoot the 1911 for competition instead.
Results may vary
Joined
·
230 Posts
yep, that's the bug that bikt me too....smoke63b said:...
Needless to say, I was pleasently surprised with the way the recoil on a full-size 1911 works. It's actually kind of comfy/nice to me. I'm hooked
I even changed my mind about using the glock in some competition stuff and now will be learning to shoot the 1911 for competition instead.
Results may vary
I don't care for the .40 at all. However much total recoil there is (I suspect it is less overall than a .45) it is delivered more rapidly, giving it that snappy feel a lot of people describe. I just shot a friend's P229 in .40, and I found it unpleasant compared to either a Govt Model or my LW Commander. I also dislike the muzzle blast, which seems worse than a .45 as well. I believe my overall take is that I don't like high-pressure cartridges much.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!