Ouch, dang the 40SW

[silicosys4]

Had a pm9 and a pm40.
I honestly couldn't tell the difference between them by recoil.

Other .40's I've had were the same, nothing special as far as recoil. I enjoy shooting warm .357 loads through my sp101 though.

If it doesn't raise blisters or draw blood, "hurt" with a .40 is psychological, IMO....unless you have a medical issue. Unlike a lot of heavy loads in a light revolver, i doubt there is enough recoil to cause nerve damage.
If it does make you blister or bleed it's not the cartridge, it's a matter of the gun being a poor fit for your hand.

The most "painful" gun I own to shoot is a model 10 that has a set of grips that just doesn't fit me right. After a few hundred rounds of light wadcutter loads blood starts running down my hand from a blister that always raises at the base of my thumb. Been meaning to get a new set of grips....

 

[hemiram]

I've only had two .40S&W guns, an S&W 4006TSW, a near mint police trade in I got on an auction about 10 years ago. It was great to shoot, I didn't have a messed up right shoulder then, so I shot it quite a bit. My other gun was an Astra A-75, and it was downright unpleasant to shoot. I ended up selling the Astra and getting another A-75 in 9mm, which is a great shooting gun. I only sold the 4006TSW because I needed money, I didn't shoot it anymore by then due to my shoulder injury.

Now, my shoulder is a lot better, but I have shot a couple of .40's recently, and I still find it unpleasant, so I limit my calibers to 9mm and .45ACP, which isn't bad at all, surprisingly. At least from a big gun, like a 4506 or my new SAR K2 45.

 

[BP Hunter]

If it does make you blister or bleed it's not the cartridge, it's a matter of the gun being a poor fit for your hand.

I added the extended beaver tail/backstrap. The recoil is now "painless".

 

[ColoradoShooter77]

I've been shooting some warm 165 grain Longshot loads out of my PPX, its not bad at all, imo.

 

[Deanimator]

Had a pm9 and a pm40.
I honestly couldn't tell the difference between them by recoil.

Other .40's I've had were the same, nothing special as far as recoil. I enjoy shooting warm .357 loads through my sp101 though.

If it doesn't raise blisters or draw blood, "hurt" with a .40 is psychological, IMO....unless you have a medical issue. Unlike a lot of heavy loads in a light revolver, i doubt there is enough recoil to cause nerve damage.
If it does make you blister or bleed it's not the cartridge, it's a matter of the gun being a poor fit for your hand.

The most "painful" gun I own to shoot is a model 10 that has a set of grips that just doesn't fit me right. After a few hundred rounds of light wadcutter loads blood starts running down my hand from a blister that always raises at the base of my thumb. Been meaning to get a new set of grips....

For me, it's not a matter of "pain". it's a matter of finding it difficult to control.

The recoil of my 2nd Gen Glock 22 is SHARP enough to make it difficult to maintain a two handed grip on it. It feels like somebody's smacking the bottom of the dust cover with a pool cue when I shoot it. I don't have this problem with any of my .45acp or 9x19mm autos.

 

[horseman1]

I would really recommend reloading. You can make everything from mouse fart loads to full house rounds like what ColoradoShooter77 has loaded up. I do have to warn you that this "I will save money by reloading" business is really only kind of true in a far fetched sort of way. You will shoot way more. Not to mention the gawd awful reloading addiction......

 

[Warp]

Buy more 9x19 handguns instead? A full size Glock shouldn't be particularly difficult for any particular cartridge, if that is too much after a couple mags...I'd just ditch .40 altogether.

But I wouldn't start with it to begin with soo

 

[Busta Prima]

+1 to that.

Same here too but my friend timed me with an IPSC timer and said my overall time was consistently better with the G19 though I felt like both were the same.

 

[Warp]

Same here too but my friend timed me with an IPSC timer and said my overall time was consistently better with the G19 though I felt like both were the same.

This is a great thing to do. Lots of people think they are their own stopwatch and unless they feel excessively slow with something else, surely they aren't. But physics is physics, more recoil/muzzle rise takes longer to get back on target.

 

[Deanimator]

I would really recommend reloading. You can make everything from mouse fart loads to full house rounds like what ColoradoShooter77 has loaded up. I do have to warn you that this "I will save money by reloading" business is really only kind of true in a far fetched sort of way. You will shoot way more. Not to mention the gawd awful reloading addiction......

I've been reloading since Jimmy Carter was in the White House.

I didn't buy that Glock 22 as a range gun. I bought it as a self-defense gun. If it's not controllable with self-defense ammunition, it's of dubious utility to me.

 

[CDW4ME]

Differences in 40 calculated recoil (PF) based on my chrono data, 5 shot averages:
Glock 23:
Federal Hydra-Shok 180 gr. @ 969 fps / 375# KE / PF 174
Federal HST 180 gr. @ 1003 fps / 402# KE / PF 181
Winchester Ranger T 165 @ 1,146 fps / 481# KE / PF 189
An 8% difference in recoil between the hardest kicking and softer kicking.

Recoil compared to other calibers that can be fired from the same size pistol (Glock 19/32)
Glock 32:
Federal HST 125 gr. @ 1,358 fps / 512# KE / PF 170
Glock 19:
Federal HST 124 gr. +P @ 1,210 fps / 403# KE / PF 150

"Apples to apples" HST in all calibers...
357 Sig produces a modest 6% less calculated recoil than 40.
9mm +P produces 18% less calculated recoil than 40.

 

[SDGlock23]

My initial thought is that if you think the .40 hurts then you're doing something wrong. I get that it does recoil more than 9mm but it's nowhere near painful. That said, the Sig 226 and 229 are heavy everyone says they soak up .40 recoil very well.

 

[wnycollector]

I own a CZ40B, Sig Pro 2340 and a SW40VE. The CZ and the Sig are ~32.5oz and 31oz respectivly. I find both to be very easy, soft shooters. The Sigma .40 on the other hand is sub 24oz pistol that is manageable to shoot but deffinitly not as pleasant as my other 40's. I'm of the opinion that one cannot escape the laws of physics...heavier pistols absorb recoil better than lightweight ones. Good design can only overcome so much.

 

[Overkill870]

OP, I would recommend you stop buying .40s. They are obviously not your cup of tea. Nothing wrong with that. I'm not a fan of 40 because I don't like have the recoil feels. I definitely wouldn't call it painful, but they are not as pleasant to shoot as 9mm or 45.

 

[horseman1]

I've been reloading since Jimmy Carter was in the White House.

I didn't buy that Glock 22 as a range gun. I bought it as a self-defense gun. If it's not controllable with self-defense ammunition, it's of dubious utility to me.

Congratulations on reloading for so long. This was intended for the original poster, who did not mention that they reload.

 

[wingman]

After a number of 40's I settled for a high power in 40, does not have the flip of other brands IMO. If I purchase another it would be 1911 style which seems to work for me.

 

[jwalts27]

I think the only unpleasant 40 I have shot is my dads shield running Fed Hydrashok. But then again look at the size of the gun your shooting.

 

[BP Hunter]

OP, here. Thanks for all your comments. I added the extra back strap with beavertail on it and it now shoots sweet. I really like the .40. especially the Glock 22. It has always been my sidearm when I hunt or when I in the woods. My carry is the Glock 17.

 

[Deanimator]

After a number of 40's I settled for a high power in 40, does not have the flip of other brands IMO. If I purchase another it would be 1911 style which seems to work for me.

I missed out on one of those when CDNN was practically giving them away.

As an alternative, I'm thinking about some sort of single-action CZ75 type.

 

[Zerodefect]

My initial thought is that if you think the .40 hurts then you're doing something wrong. I get that it does recoil more than 9mm but it's nowhere near painful. That said, the Sig 226 and 229 are heavy everyone says they soak up .40 recoil very well.

Exactly. I'd usually point towards a bad grip, or a pistol that isn't properly in contact fully with the users hand. 400ft/pounds of energy ain't going to move my arms and shoulders much. It's all about getting a good grip.

I can get 100% of my two hands on a Glock 41, 35, etc. And almost that good with a 23/32. But my 1911's leave a little room for improvement, so there's a little bit of a recoil penalty when I shoot them.

 

[jhb]

i own many many handguns. i think around 60 or so now. all brands, calibers and sizes. i have never found .40s&w to be any worse than a 9mm, apples to apples on the gun. same goes for .357sig. i shoot all calibers. from .22lr to full saami load 10mm and everything in between. i've never shot a handgun yet that hurt my hands. other than a 9mm hi point i shot a couple of mags that had trigger slap that actually stung my trigger finger a bit. i'm amazed how many feel recoil and how it hurts them and affects their decisions.

i kinda agree if any gun is hurting your hands it's poor grip or a size that can't fit your hand properly...whether too big or too small...or a combo of both. a caliber difference that small, shouldn't make the difference in comfortable or pain.... in my experienced opinion.