Is it just me?

[Guest 435]

I see a lot of threads and articles talking about how snappy a .40 is. My question is, I tend to like the .40 and can handle it better than any other caliber, can anyone help me understand why this is if a .40 is snappier? I have shot the following:

in 9mm - Ruger p95, sr9c, Browning Hi Power,

in .40 - Ruger p94, Glock23 and 27

in .45 - Glock subcompact, Taurus pt145, Taurus 24/7, Kimber Pro TLE II

in .380 - Bersa thunder, Walther PPK, Kel Tec p3at

I have found the .380 and 9mm to be the snappiest for me. And the .45's I have shot were absolutely out of the question. It was like it would take a day to get back on target. I just seem to enjoy the .40 the best.

Can anyone explain to me the differences in perceived recoil in them and why I might do better with a .40?

Thanks

[DWARREN123]

I don't know but I like the 40 S&W also. I only have 40 cal pistols in centerfire now days. Maybe they are trying it in subcompacts?

A 357 mag ultra lite does have some recoil in my opinion.

Edited August 16, 2010 by DWARREN123

[Will Carry]

You will never have trouble finding ammo. Walmart always seem to have plenty of .40. I have a XDm in .40 and don't find it snappy at all.

[Smith]

These things are relative and subjective to the gun, the shooter, the grip, the ammo etc. When people say it is snappy it is in relation to the .45's described "push" and the 9mm's lighter recoil. In general most people find the .40 to have a snappier feel. It's the nature of the cartridge itself.

[JeffsSig]

You will see a lot of copy cats on the net. They may have never shot a 40 and just repeat what they have seen in a post someplace.

[Guest m&pc9]

I have a M&P compact in the 9mm and the .40. The .40 has more recoil than the 9mm. But it is not that bad.

[Raoul]

I like the 40. I've got a PM40, and I rather shoot it than an LCP. At least I can hit a target with it... I do think the round has more of a snap that a 9mm. No big deal though.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Raoul

[Garufa]

Is all boils down to this:

The mighty .40 S&W is a man's gun. Real men are not concerned with recoil or whatever "snappy" is. Anything less is merely a lady's purse gun.

[nightrunner]

Its all dependent on the shooters perspective.

example, at one time I had a XD-45, H&K USP-40, and a S&W Sigma in 9mm. I shot the XD-45 the best out of them all and a buddy of mine at the time shot the USP the best.

IMO, it has to do as much with the platform fitting the hand of the shooter as it does the cartridge its firing.

[Warbird]

I think part of it has to do with your shooting experiences and what you learned to shoot with. I personally prefer the 9 or 45. I shoot them better and find the recoil less snappy and faster reacquisition to the target. I learned to shoot pistols with 9 and 45. I have shot them for over 30 years. I am most comfortable with these calibers plain and simple.

That said in the last couple of years I have carried 40 cal Glocks (23 and 27). This leads to the second factor regarding recoil, fit. I did not like the Glock at all in 40 when I first shot it. However, my experience changed somewhat, actually quite a lot, when I had the grip reduced on the Glocks. The near perfect fit for me now makes the gun much more pleasurable to shoot. Any gun that does not fit will be less controllable and recoil will be bothersome. The only reason anyone would ever think the 380 or 9 had more recoil than the 40 would be because either the gun didn't fit or more likely the gun was small. A small pistol is light and anything more than 32 will have recoil. A 380 Euro Glock has nearly no recoil. My HK4 has virtually no recoil.

All things being even with a pistol the 40 is certainly snappier than the 9 or 45. The 45 might have a bigger bullet, but it is low pressure. The 9 is the easiest to shoot of all of the big 3 semi auto loads. That's why the 9 is the preferred round of competitive shooters.

I can shoot any of them and will deal with any of them and shoot well. But there is no doubt I can more rounds into a small area, faster than any other major semi auto round.

They all have their pros and cons and all are adequate as defense rounds. They all have their successes and epic failures. Choose the one you like and shoot well. It doesn't matter what anyone else likes. I admit I find the round fight hilarious when someone says the one they use is the be all end all and the others suck.

[TGO David]

I have several handguns in .40SW and find none of them to be snappy at all. As was pointed out by JeffSig, I think many of the posts you see about it are copy-cat posts.

[Guest Bronker]

I myself like the .40, and am not bothered by recoil. I have giant hands, and can shoot my XD40 subcompact all day long, even though I can get only 2.5 fingers on the short grip. Still not too much to handle.

Like Smith said, it's all relative.

[Warbird]

I have several handguns in .40SW and find none of them to be snappy at all. As was pointed out by JeffSig, I think many of the posts you see about it are copy-cat posts.

I think you can often say that about nearly everything gun related on gun forums. Few have experience with a lot of stuff. Others regurgitate what they read and not know. In the end most of the time, it is about so many personal preferences and different body types that everyone should find what they like and be good with that platform. I have shot and in fact still own something with most defense rounds and others that are not. I have my favorites and others I live with or don't chose to shoot often.

I'll also say and this certainly doesn't apply to everyone, but sometimes shooter do not like the 40 because they do not use correct form and grip. I my experience of shooting with and training with many people, the 40 does seem to need more discipline than the 9 or 45. I have witnessed more people of low to moderate experience has issues with the 40 than the other two. Especially in smaller guns, but that may not be everyone's experience.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Warbird

[Guest Bronker]

I think you can often say that about nearly everything gun related on gun forums. Few have experience with a lot of stuff. Others regurgitate what they read and not know. In the end most of the time, it is about so many personal preferences and different body types that everyone should find what they like and be good with that platform. I have shot and in fact still own something with most defense rounds and others that are not. I have my favorites and others I live with or don't chose to shoot often.

I'll also say and this certainly doesn't apply to everyone, but sometimes shooter do not like the 40 because they do not use correct form and grip. I my experience of shooting with and training with many people, the 40 does seem to need more discipline than the 9 or 45. I have witnessed more people of low to moderate experience has issues with the 40 than the other two. Especially in smaller guns, but that may not be everyone's experience.

This.

[Guest FiddleDog]

I used to think that I couldn't handle a 40 cal, after 1 bad range session with a 23. It was, in fact, my first range session ever. I just blamed the caliber. In retrospect, I now realize that I had started the session with 1911, and was reading the sights incorrectly on the 23, as well as slapping the heck out of the 23's trigger. I now keep a 23 on my bedside table. I cc a 9mm, for no other reason than my 23 has the RTF2 frame. I'm sure that in a crisis situation, poking a 9mm hole in a bad guy at 963 fps is just as effective in stopping a threat as poking a 10mm hole in a bad guy at 964 fps. That being said, I do notice that getting back on target takes a hair longer with the 23 than with my 26.

[daddyo]

I've shot a .40 cal. That's why I don't own one.

[Guest nashvegas]

I've shot a .40 cal. That's why I don't own one.

I've shot a plastic gun. That's why I don't own one.

[Guest jackdm3]

I've shot a .45 cal (1911 style). That's why I want to own one.

[Guest db99wj]

If it is more snappy, who cares, fire some more rounds down range and get over it.

Kind of like the Glock feels weird and points weird argument. Fire more than a mag through it, get use to it, shoot the hell out of it.

[Guest FiddleDog]

I just realized that the op is current experiencing less snap with his experiences with .40s, and as this is counter intuitive, was wondering why this could be the case.

The only thing that I see as far a major differences with the 40s that you've shot is that 2 of the 3 are Glocks. Not sure if that signifies anything.

[I_Like_Pie]

40 is, in fact, a much higher pressure round than 380, 9mm or 45. The perceived recall in your case it due to the mass of the gun.

A 40 though a S&W 4006 is much more pleasant than a 380 though a P3AT for the same reason

[I_Like_Pie]

I've shot a plastic gun. That's why I don't own one.

FWIW...I've made love to many an ugly woman, but they sure could cook. That sure works well if you like hush puppies.

[Will Carry]

LOL! Now that's funny I_Like_Pie! You're OK with me.

[JReedEsq]

I consider myself a 9mm fan but I recently ended up with a RTF2 Glock 22 in .40 that I shot for the first time yesterday. I don't find it difficult to shoot at all, and I shot groups very similar to my 9mm groups with a G19 or G17. It takes maybe a slight bit longer for me to be back on target but it's not really that noticable. I practice often but I've been shooting less than a year and I was surprised that I kept 9 of 10 rounds in the 10 ring at 7 yards with slow fire. I must have been having a good day because that equals my best shooting with my G17. Maybe I was more focused because I expected harsh recoil. Also, the .40 definitely has a more satisfying "bang" instead of the "pop" of a 9mm. As stated, a lot of recoil has to do with the platform. The snappiest gun I have is my LCP. I much prefer the Glock 26 (9mm) to the Glock 27 (.40) in the subcompact relm, and I think I would slightly prefer my Glock 19 over a 23 if I shot them back-to-back. Overall, I prefer 9mm for capacity, availability, cost, and because I think caliber is overrated (assuming we're limiting ourselves to service calibers). Now, if we discuss sub-service calibers, like .380, .38, .32 it may be a different story. I don't like to chime in on these things but I couldn't pass up a caliber comparison since I shot my .40 for the first time yesterday. I was a new shooter when I previously tried a few .40s and I really didn't like them but I could also attribute that to smaller platforms. Yesterday, I was surprised at how flat-shooting it felt and how it wasn't that much different than my other Glocks. I really think the differences between the calibers (both in effectiveness and recoil) are over-rated to say the least.

Edited August 18, 2010 by JReedEsq

[G27]

I dunno, I really like the .40, my EDC is a G27 and I've been known to carry a G22 on occasion as well. I'm pretty good with both and love what they bring to the table...