Felt Recoil .40 vs. .45

[KY Sparky]

Ok, I have done some research and have yet to uncover a definitive answer on the difference in felt recoil between a .40 S&W and .45 ACP. What I would like to know is: What has been your experience with identical or nearly identical guns and loads in .40 and .45, which produces more felt recoil? I haven't had the opportunity to test my hypothesis yet, but here is my take. Consider for comparison's sake two nearly identical firearms Kahr CW40 at 19 oz. and CW45 at 22 oz. both loaded with (7) 165 gr Hydra-Shoks. According to Federal, the .40 load produces 352 ft-lb at the muzzle and the .45 produces 412 ft.-lb. According to Newton's 3rd Law, the .45 generates more recoil. I haven't done the calculation, but I doubt the inertia (Newton's 1st Law) for the slightly more massive .45 is enough to significantly affect the rearward motion of the pistol compared to the .40. Therefore, the 45 should produce more felt recoil given equal loads and pistols regardless of "snappiness". Does your experience confirm this phenomena, or suggest otherwise?

Sparky

 

[Arcticfox]

It is very noticeable.

My comparison was a 1911 vs a Witness full size in .40. For me, the difference was noticeable. I apparently don't have the wrists for a 1911 in .45; I did not enjoy it. But I loved the .40, and will eventually own one myself.

 

[BCRider]

I've had the chance to shoot some .40 and .45 back to back from 1911's. I found that the .40 has more snap to it than the .45. The .45 pushes a lot but it's more of a shove than a slap.

If you look at the reloading data for both the peak pressure suggests the same thing with .40's having up around 30K or more while .45 is down at just over half of what most .40's are running. The higher peak pressure is going to support the slap aspect while the lower peak pressure and heavier bullet of the .45 suggests the "shove" aspect

 

[SFreed]

I can't help you with the specific examples you list. I have a Ruger Sr40c that I carry and love to shoot. I also have 2 different Colt 1911's that I carry. There is quite a difference in recoil on these, but there is also quite a bit of difference in weight. The .40 is quite a bit snappier. I have shot a Kahr CW40 and it was no fun, but it's only an 18 ounce gun. My thought is that between the 2 you list, there would be no difference in perceived recoil. Just MHO.

 

[peacemaker45]

To answer the question you actually asked, considering fairly standard loadings, ie 180 grains at 1050 fps for the .40 S&W, and 230 grains at 850 fps for the .45 ACP, when fired in identical guns, the .45 does indeed have more recoil, both on terms of total energy and speed.

Where it gets complicated is that you very rarely find them chambered in identical guns. Most modern guns are built in two frame sizes, 9 and 45. The 40's great claim to fame has always been that it gives nearly the power of the 45, but will fit in the 9 mm sized gun. At that point, it actually does have more felt recoil than the .45.

I'm no fan of the pocket rockets you mentioned, I think guns and cartridges should be proportionate to one another. So, when I decided to do the math and answer this question definitively, I used standard service pistols instead.

So, lets consider Glock. The standard sized Glock .40 is the G22. Fully loaded, it weighs 34.42 oz, and with the aforementioned standard load, delivers 6.44 ft/lbs of recoil, at 13.88 fps. The standard Glock .45, on the other hand is the G21, which bears a significant resemblance to a cinder block. It weighs 38.48 oz fully loaded, and delivers 6.12 ft/lbs of recoil at 12.8 fps. That's slightly milder than the smaller .40. To actually get the .40 in a gun the size of the G21, you would first buy a G20, and fit it with a .40 conversion barrel. If you did this, it would only smack your hand with 5.76 ft/lbs at 12.41 fps, which is milder than the equivalent .45.

Still another factor in explaining the .40's nasty reputation is that it's a fairly recent caliber. As such, its natural habitat is in modern, lightweight plastic pistols. The .45, on the other hand, is comparatively ancient. While all the major plastic pistols can be had in .45, it's natural habitat is the M1911, which is a big steel gun, admirably suited to controlling big bullets. It weighs 46.67 oz loaded, which brings the .45's recoil down to a mere 5.05 ft/ lbs, at 10.55 fps.

That's the comparison people usually wind up making, not the apples to apples of G21 vs converted G20. Not even the apples to oranges of G21 vs G22, but G22 vs 1911, which is more like apples to watermelons.

 

[Bobson]

Well done, Mat.

 

[Revoliver]

http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_recoil_table.htm

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I've had the chance to shoot some .40 and .45 back to back from 1911's. I found that the .40 has more snap to it than the .45. The .45 pushes a lot but it's more of a shove than a slap.

If you look at the reloading data for both the peak pressure suggests the same thing with .40's having up around 30K or more while .45 is down at just over half of what most .40's are running. The higher peak pressure is going to support the slap aspect while the lower peak pressure and heavier bullet of the .45 suggests the "shove" aspect

Not much to add there! I agree...

 

[plateshooter]

Good info Matt, I have a G21 and a G20 with a Lone Wolf conversion barrel. To ME, the converted G20 has more noticeable recoil that sends a shock wave up my arm when loaded with a "almost" max load of power pistol with a 180 grain bullet. However, the converted G20 makes it easier for me to shoot the 40 as it has the jumbo Glock frame. My G21 with a 185 grain bullet is very tame in comparison from my experience.

 

[peacemaker45]

Good info Matt, I have a G21 and a G20 with a Lone Wolf conversion barrel. To ME, the converted G20 has more noticeable recoil that sends a shock wave up my arm when loaded with a "almost" max load of power pistol with a 180 grain bullet. However, the converted G20 makes it easier for me to shoot the 40 as it has the jumbo Glock frame. My G21 with a 185 grain bullet is very tame in comparison from my experience.

Sounds like you're pushing the .40 a lot harder. What velocities are you getting from your 185s in the 45?

 

[87hurricane]

I think its almost impossible to ignore the "snappiness" of .40 when considering felt recoil. While I've never shot .40 and .45 back to back in the exact same platform, I have shot .40 and .45 back to back a lot in similar sized guns. While I think that .45 does have more recoil, the way it produces it is completely different. .40s generally use a slower powder and push the bullet at a faster speed, which seems to produce the "snap" of the round. While its not pushing as hard on your hand, it feels more pronounced due to the way it is delivered. I prefer the push of 45 vs the snap of 40, but that's just my opinion, and as you know, everyone has one...

 

[ATLDave]

The snap of the .40 - or even 10mm - has never bothered me, while .45 ACP has taken some getting used to. Interestingly, I find a 185 grain or 200 grain .45 round pushed fast (+P) to be more comfortable than even a fairly slow 230. Somehow, when you get north of 200, the big push just becomes qualitatively different in my subjective experience. It's not that it's unpleasant, it's just that it really triggers my flinch/push reflex. My lizard brain thinks I need to lean on the gun as it goes off... it takes a lot of focus on trigger control to avoid stringing shots low and left.

 

[TestPilot]

Your question is impossible to be answered in any degree of accuracy.

The recoil amount is specific to gun and ammo type, even among the same caliber.

Some 40S&W and pistol combination have stronger recoil than some 45ACP and pistol combination, and some 40S&W and pistol combination have lower recoil than some 45ACP and pistol combination.

Glock 22 and Glock 21 felt nearly the same for me. May be Glock 22 felt a little more snappier, but keep in mind that Glock 22 is ligher than Glock 21, and most manufacturers did not properly engineer guns specifically for 40S&W until recently.

M&P40 recoils less than Glock 22. S&W started shipping some SKU M&P40 with green paint marked springs which has higher strength this year, and those recoil almost felt like a 9mm to me. I think those were the srping they used for 357 SIG version, and they should have been. They should have started using those springs for M&P 40 a long time ago.

 

[TestPilot]

If you look at the reloading data for both the peak pressure suggests the same thing with .40's having up around 30K or more while .45 is down at just over half of what most .40's are running. The higher peak pressure is going to support the slap aspect while the lower peak pressure and heavier bullet of the .45 suggests the "shove" aspect

Pressure has NOTHING WHAT SO EVER, to do with it.

It is the amount of force generated and its relation to how much the weight of the gun absorbs it. 40S&W combat load generally are higher power than standard pressure 45ACP, and they generate more force.

If "pressure" generates "snappiness" then 9mm should recoil stronger than 45ACP.

 

[Kayaker 1960]

The .40 recoil thing AGAIN!

I haven't fired .45 and .40 from the same platform. I used to have a Colt Commander .45 ( sold it) I have a Glock model 22. (.40 ) The profile of the 2 guns are nearly identical, the Colt is thinner and heavier. My son and I fired them back to back and agreed that the .45 had more recoil, not a soft push either, just more recoil. I have fired a Kimber long slide .45 with a rail and it has milder recoil, it's a big, heavy gun.
My wife is recoil sensitive and doesn't like shooting my .40 Glock so I recently picked up a G-17 (9mm). My son and I went to the range a few days ago and fired the G22 and G17 back to back (exactly the same platform except for caliber) . The G-17 does have milder recoil, I think my wife will like it. The recoil of the .40 never bothered me, it's really not that big of a difference.
My feelings about the 9mm is in a full sized pistol it's a good round for women and guys with small hands. It's great round for compact pistols. Go shoot stuff with 9mm and .40 back to back, No question about it, the .40 moves things with more authority.
Every time someone calls the .40 short and weak and then says it kicks too hard I want to :banghead:

 

[BCRider]

Pressure has NOTHING WHAT SO EVER, to do with it.

It is the amount of force generated and its relation to how much the weight of the gun absorbs it. 40S&W combat load generally are higher power than standard pressure 45ACP, and they generate more force.

If "pressure" generates "snappiness" then 9mm should recoil stronger than 45ACP.

Not the pressure by itself. But the pressure combined with the bullet weight do seem to go together to result in how the recoil feels.

I got the same effect when I was playing around with my IPSC loads trying to decide to go with cheaper 115gn ammo vs the popular competition 147gn in 9mm. The 147 gn ammo had a far different feel to the recoil than the 115. The 147's having more of that "shove" aspect while the lighter 115's have more of a "slap". This all from the same gun and loaded to achieve an IPSC 130PF rating.

I also feel much the same results from a semi auto in 9mm vs a revolver in .38Spl when shooting 124's in 9mm vs 125's in the .38 but at roughly the same 1000 to 1100 fps. The 9mm produces more "slap" despite the recoil spring spreading out some of the recoil. Of course these are two pretty different styles of gun so a direct comparison is a bit iffy.

At any rate all the guns I've shot that tend to have lower chamber pressures also tend to have more of that "shove" feel. And the guns that use small cases with high peak pressures tend to feel more "slappy".

YMMV but this has been pretty consistent in my experience.

 

[Bovice]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iCgjQD1kvrc

Couldn't help myself.

 

[ATLDave]

Not only that, BCRider, but I can tell you that playing around with different powders that are achieving similar velocities can create different subjective recoil impressions. I think that sound is probably part of it.

Golf club designers learned that golfers would describe clubs as feeling harder or softer at impact based almost entirely on the sound the club makes. (Compared to a golf ball, all steel irons are essentially infinitely hard.) From that, they learned that they could tweak the "feel" of a club by changing the noise that it makes at impact. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704608504576208583180153672 In shooting, I think that the muzzle blast and noise gets rolled up by our brain into the physical recoil, in much the same way. (Similarly, our brains roll smell up into taste... most of what we "taste" is actually smell.)

When people talk about "snappy" recoil, I think they're mostly talking about the noise - not just the volume, but also about pitch, timbre, etc. So, while a calculation of the recoil velocity of the firearm, or even the impulse peak or duration, might suggest that pressure doesn't matter, I'm not sure our subjective brains agree.

 

[LeonCarr]

IME When shooting identical types of handguns the .40 will have more FELT recoil than the .45, due to the .45 ACP handguns generally being larger and the fact that most .40 S&W handguns are lighter in weight due to most of them being based on existing 9mm designs. IME the .40 has more rapid muzzle rise, or more "Snap", than the .45. This could be due to the higher pressure the .40 S&W is loaded to.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Robert101]

There is a difference in felt recoil. However, I attribute the differences to the gun setup (springs, hammer spring, gun weight, gun design, recoil spring, etc.) more than the cartridge. In my opinion the difference b/n 40 & 45 really isn't that different. Shoot that gun and caliber combination enough and you get accustomed to the recoil impulse. To me it is that simple.

 

[Rule3]

Pressure does have a lot to do with it.

Actual recoil and felt or perceived recoil are different animals.

Take a round you can use in both say a 180 gr FMJ Load them up with the same powder to max load of that powder. Shoot out of the same platform lets say a metal 1911. Which one has more recoil??

 

[BlindJustice]

Redcoil calculator

http://www.handloads.com/calc/recoil.asp

ok, let's assumer a full size 1911 at 40 oz empty for
both

Enter .40 & .45 ACP

.40 .45 ACP
180 185 bullet weight in grains
1000 1000 Velocity FPS
7.0 7.0 powder charge
2.5 2.5 Gun Weight

calculates to:

0.92 0.94 Recol impulse ( lbs sec.)
11.89 12.17 Velocity of recoiling firearm fps
5.48 5.75 Free Recoil energy in ft lbs

Most platforms for the .40 are polymer framed
and less weight = more recoil

Randall

 

[TestPilot]

Pressure does have a lot to do with it.

Not in this context, which is between different caliber.

Within same caliber, then yes.

But, to say 40S&W has stronger recoil then 45ACP because it has higher pressure would mean 9mm would recoil stronger than 45ACP.

 

[CraigC]

Pressure has NOTHING WHAT SO EVER, to do with it.

Completely untrue. It's not the only factor but it is a factor. Backthrust is a product of pressure and backthrust, is recoil.

 

[Fast Frank]

There's another factor that's being ignored here.

While half the weight at twice the speed is the same amount of power, it's not going to feel the same when it hits you.

This holds true for the bullet, and the recoil.

Sure, the example given is far more dramatic than the difference between a .40 and a.45, but the effect is the same.

Yes, the two rounds make similar power levels, but they are different and it can be felt when they are fired.