BIG recoil difference is between .40 & .45

[rsrocket1]

It doesn't.

230g @ 800 fps = 326 ft-lbs

180 @ 1000 fps = 400 ft-lbs

and for 9mm, 120g @1200 fps = 384 ft-lbs <<-- this is a super light recoiling round even though the muzzle energy is comparable

Energy is a really misleading quantity when it comes to recoil.

I used to shoot a hundred rounds of 45ACP in my 1911 at 190 PF followed by 180g @ 1000 fps 40 S&W in my M&P40 (180 PF) and the 40 felt noticeably lighter in recoil.

In fact I did the same thing on Thursday with my XD45 and M&P40 again and the 40 felt lighter and I was able to get back on target better and faster. Maybe it's just that I am more comfortable with the M&P. When I swap barrels and shoot 9mm through it, it feels like shooting a rimfire gun.

Last week I was shooting pretty stout 357 loads with 158g bullets and full house charges of AA#9 and Power Pistol in the 180 PF range. The blast from a 4" revolver seemed much bigger and it made the standard 1911 shots seem tame.

[hambam105]

40...Recoil?

40 cal recoil addiction sounds like it would be akin to going to a AA meeting and saying you are addicted to doctor pepper soda pop.

Then again I really wouldn't know because those guys drink the hard stuff and I only drink beer.

[W.R.Buchanan]

I don't get direct Ftlb to Ftlb comparisons there are so many other factors to consider.

For any round above 35 caliber the Taylor Knock Down Factor (TKO) is more indicative of terminal performance than Ftlbs.

For those who don't already know the formula is Bullet weight in GR x velocity x diameter divided by 7000.

9MM Para with 124 gr bullet will be 124 x 1200 x.356 / 7000 = TKO 7.56

.40 S&W 180 gr bullet at 1000 fps 180 x 1000 x.401/7000= TKO 10.3

.45 ACP 230 gr at 850 fps 230 x 850 x.452/7000= TKO 12.62

.223 Rem 55 gr 3100 fps. =TKO 5.45

By comparison .30-06 180 gr at 2600 fps = TKO 20.6

.45-70 with 405 gr at 1600 fps = TKO 42.4

12ga 1 oz Low Recoil Slug at 1300 fps = TKO 53.5

12 ga Federal Max 1 oz Slug at 1610 fps = TKO 73.5

.375 H&H 300 gr at 2500 fps. = TKO 40.17

.458 Win Mag. 500 gr Solid at 2150 fps =TKO 70.3

This should give you a decent relationship from where to gauge the relative effectiveness of any given round. The formula does tend to favor larger diameter rounds as illustrated by the TKO of 5.45 for the .223 Rem which we know is much more effective than a 9MM or most any Pistol Round.

However as the bullet dia. goes up the effectiveness of the round increases dramatically. This is due to the frontal area of the boolit, which is what hits the target first.

.44 Mag 250 gr bullet from revolver at 1300 fps. =TKO 20
.44 Mag 250 gr boolit from Rifle at 1750 fps. = TKO 26.8

So the .44 Mag leaves all the auto pistol rounds in the dust and takes a lot of rifle rounds with it.

But people still think the larger slower rounds are obsolete next to the Whamer Jammer Magnum rifle rounds, but this shows they are not.

This guy had more experience with killing stuff than all of us combined.

I tend to go with experience over "science."

Randy

[igorts]

comparing Knock Down Factor to recoil? LOL ..."experience over "science."

[W.R.Buchanan]

Whatever. I have a G23 which many say is "snappy" which is about as scientific as saying its hot outside. I shoot it better than my G35 with the exact same ammo. But its not as snappy?

I also have a G21SF I shoot both equally as well and have no problem shooting 200 rounds in a day with either. It's not as Snappy either.

Maybe I just have a decent grip?

Neither one of these guns has enough recoil to effect anything I do, and in fact the G23 is going to a 3 gun shoot tomorrow along with a Kel-Tec SU16CA and a M500.

All this hubbub about how the 9MM is superior to the .40 and. 45 is such BS. The ONLY reason 9MM is more popular is because the ammo is cheaper. I have seen too many women successfully shoot G 22's and 23's to believe that they can't be taught how to manage the snappiness. It's all in the grip guys !!!

The Army figured out the .45 ACP was superior to the 9MM by 1905. The only reason it changed was due to Politics and Cost.

Now there's all kinds of "science" that says 9MM is more effective? Mainly trying to justify the changeover when really more of our guys will get killed due to less first round kills. Anyone who actually thinks that 9MM ball ammo is more effective than regular 180gr .40 S&W or .45ACP ball ammo is being way too scientific and not too practical in their assertions. We have 2 World Wars and countless conflicts that prove otherwise.

If it was actually true there would be no .40 S&W or .45 ACP and we'd all be speaking German.

The Army bought P320's because they were $207 ea, and G19's were $270! Once again Cost as nobody with a brain actually thinks the P320 is a superior gun. Maybe in 20 years when it actually has a Track Record to look at and all the bugs are worked out, but right now they all just got replaced because they had trigger problems. That doesn't look all that good?

I saw this video on Youtube the other day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jVbvwWtWIA

It is by the owner of the Glock Store showing the "Combat Grip" and shooting a 9MM, and if this is what your grip looks like I can see why you think these bigger rounds are so punishing.

Notice how flexed his arms are, he is actually squeezing the snot out of his firing hand to control the recoil and has no Isometric Tension on the gun whatsoever.

Experience over BS Science every time.

Randy