Recoil of M&P 40C

Tom Goodrick

Member
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
67
Reaction score
9
Location
Madison, AL
I have had an M&P40FS for several months and am pleased with it on the range. My accuracy is pretty good as the trigger has worked in well. I like the feel of the gun. But it seems a little big for CCW. I would like that capability (and have the license). I tried a Taurus that others seem to like but I had a lot of trouble with the trigger because it was very different from the M&P. It was also much smaller and had much more recoil. I like the idea of the M&P compact in .40 because months ago I decided .40 was the most effective defense round. But I worry that the recoil would be worse. According to Genitron.com, the recoil of the .40 FS is 7.810 and the .40 C is 9.103 ft-lbs in recoil. That is quite a bit higher when you consider that a .357 mag revolver I used to shoot is only 8.531 ft-lbs in recoil. So it looks like I may have to settle for the M&P 9C which has a recoil of only 5.891. But I am not sure I want to use a 9mm in a short barrel where its energy is reduced below normal.

If anyone has experience with the .40C and .40FS, could you comment on the relative recoil strength? Does the recoil affect the accuracy of your second shot?
 
Register to hide this ad
A proper grip and a good stance makes the recoil issue almost irrelevant.Especially in the situation you described.
Randy
 
A proper grip and a good stance makes the recoil issue almost irrelevant.Especially in the situation you described.
Randy

Of course, what's the likelihood of you having both of those in a defensive situation? Get a CCW that you can confidently handle to put the shots on target.
 
I had the M&P's in 9, FS and compact, 40, FS and compact, and 45 compact. The 40 compact I found very difficult to control. I can shoot the 45 compact very well but just could not master that 40 compact. some guys told me it was me, but no matter why struggle with it when the 9 and the 45 were such great firearms. I do believe that the snappiness of the 40 made it difficult to shoot, especially as double taps. JMHO
 
I had a little bit of issue with the recoil, especially the longer I shot.. The polymer doesn't help. Once I installed grips, that all went away.

Another thing to consider is the 9mm conversion barrels for the 40c.
 
FWIW I carry a 40 full size in a CTAC and it's not too big. I'm 5'8 180. I can wear most of my T-Shirts over it as long as they're not too tight.
 
How about getting a 40c for carry and using a full size mag for the range? You can practice with the smaller mags but most of the time use the more comfortable long mags. In a 'need to use' situation you won't care if the gun is a compact or a bazooka.

Now tell me more about that kick difference you cited between a 40c and a 40fs. They shoot the same exact round and a 40c barrel is shorter so it should have less recoil. The grip is smaller but that won't matter if a small hand has all fingers on the grip anyway.

What factors are included in the quantifying of the recoil felt?
 
I have had an M&P40FS for several months and am pleased with it on the range. My accuracy is pretty good as the trigger has worked in well. I like the feel of the gun. But it seems a little big for CCW. I would like that capability (and have the license). I tried a Taurus that others seem to like but I had a lot of trouble with the trigger because it was very different from the M&P. It was also much smaller and had much more recoil. I like the idea of the M&P compact in .40 because months ago I decided .40 was the most effective defense round. But I worry that the recoil would be worse. According to Genitron.com, the recoil of the .40 FS is 7.810 and the .40 C is 9.103 ft-lbs in recoil. That is quite a bit higher when you consider that a .357 mag revolver I used to shoot is only 8.531 ft-lbs in recoil. So it looks like I may have to settle for the M&P 9C which has a recoil of only 5.891. But I am not sure I want to use a 9mm in a short barrel where its energy is reduced below normal.

If anyone has experience with the .40C and .40FS, could you comment on the relative recoil strength? Does the recoil affect the accuracy of your second shot?

Maybe my experience will help. I own the M&P9c. I recently rented FS M&P45, FS M&P40, and Glock 27 (approx same size as M&P40c, and caliber-ed in 40S&W).

The Glock 27 (recoil = 10.782 ft-lbs) felt better in my hands than the FS 45 and FS 40. I also had more control of the Glock since it was easier for me to grip. So recoil is just one data point, but other factors come onto play.

Not advocating the Glock my any means... the range did not have the M&P40c (most likely my next purchase) for rent, so I tried something comparable.

Hope that helps.

-T
 
The 40 is a great combination of bullet diameter and magazine capacity. It is a high pressure round with snappy recoil but is a great choice for a general duty pistol round (especially in the M&P40FS). The 40 is a handful for fast, accurate shooting out of subcompact CCW pistols.

The 9mm is a better choice in the subcompact guns than the 40, IMHO. It is easier to shoot fast, accurate double taps and helps maintain decent magazine capacity in shortened grips. Being a high pressure round, the 9mm does pretty well in short barrels.

As for the 45ACP, it is a low pressure round that really suffers in short barrels and is already limits magazine capacity in full size pistols. It is less than ideal in the subcompacts.
 
To add..
180 grain = less recoil, and is the best grain for short barrels.
So when you test, buy 180 gr.
 
FWIW, I fired both and found the 9mm C is WAY easier to shoot accuratly. It's just stays on target ..round anfter round...In addition because it's so cheap and pleasent to shoot, It's going to get shot more often. FWIW, I bought and carry the 9C often and feel very confident that 11 well placed ( premium) 9mm rounds will get me out of ANY situation my civilian tutkas is likely to come into.
Not looking to argue the 9 vs 40 thing. Just expressing my findings.
 
I have all of the compact models: 9/357/40/45 and I don't find any of them difficult to control. The 357 is the punchiest of all as it is a very fast round, but is still comfortable to shoot. I also own full-sizes in these calibers and am always surprised at how well the compacts compare in accuracy and fun to shoot.
 
The 40 is a great combination of bullet diameter and magazine capacity. It is a high pressure round with snappy recoil but is a great choice for a general duty pistol round (especially in the M&P40FS). The 40 is a handful for fast, accurate shooting out of subcompact CCW pistols.

The 9mm is a better choice in the subcompact guns than the 40, IMHO. It is easier to shoot fast, accurate double taps and helps maintain decent magazine capacity in shortened grips. Being a high pressure round, the 9mm does pretty well in short barrels.

As for the 45ACP, it is a low pressure round that really suffers in short barrels and is already limits magazine capacity in full size pistols. It is less than ideal in the subcompacts.
All of these comments seem generic and not really to the OP's question. The difference between each compact M&P is 2 rounds: 12 for 9mm, 10 for .40/.357, and 8 for .45, so the quantity isn't that much of a factor. Secondly, the 45C has a 4-in barrel vs. the 3.5-in barrel of the other compacts. How much of a handful any caliber can be is entirely subjective.
 
I shot the full sized 40 before getting my 40C and it does kick quite a bit more than a nine which I have a full sized as well as a Model59 (kinda older semi).

I have posted that I tend to shoot left of POA and with the M&P 40C it is exaggerated so more trips to the range or even a sight adjustment is in order.

I do not mind recoil as the grips on an M&P make them less hurtful, I went through 100 rounds today with mine as well as 100 rounds through two other 9 mm pistols one M&P and the other Glock subcompact G26!
 
All of these comments seem generic and not really to the OP's question. The difference between each compact M&P is 2 rounds: 12 for 9mm, 10 for .40/.357, and 8 for .45, so the quantity isn't that much of a factor. Secondly, the 45C has a 4-in barrel vs. the 3.5-in barrel of the other compacts. How much of a handful any caliber can be is entirely subjective.



Subjective? Not really. An IDPA taget at 10 yards and a shot timer will clearly give a shooter the skinny on how things stack up. Based on my experience with compact 40 (not M&P) and 9mm guns, the 9mm will be easier to get quick, accurate hits with. Based on the specs you provided, if we strike the 40 compact from consideration, the M&P9C is more compact and has 50% greater magazine capacity than the M&P45C...

Once again, for full size guns the 40 is a great combo of capacity vs bullet diameter (I carry one daily). It just isn't my first choice for compact carry gun use. Other folks may feel different. That is fine by me. My goal here is to help the OP by relaying my experience / opinion on the subject he asked about.
 
Subjective? Not really. An IDPA taget at 10 yards and a shot timer will clearly give a shooter the skinny on how things stack up.
As I said, it is subjective. Perhaps that is how it works for you, but I have seen others shoot a .45 like it was a .22 with amazingly fast shot recovery. I don't feel a significant difference in shot recovery times due to recoil-mine is almost always in sight recovery due to my aging eyes.
Based on my experience with compact 40 (not M&P) and 9mm guns, the 9mm will be easier to get quick, accurate hits with.
The OP asked specifically about experience with both calibers in an M&P compact. You admittedly don't have that.
Based on the specs you provided, if we strike the 40 compact from consideration, the M&P9C is more compact and has 50% greater magazine capacity than the M&P45C...
Not to the OP's point. Solid hits with either caliber should stop the fight before 8 rounds are needed. He was asking about self defense, not which to use shooting IDPA.
 
As I said, it is subjective. Perhaps that is how it works for you, but I have seen others shoot a .45 like it was a .22 with amazingly fast shot recovery. I don't feel a significant difference in shot recovery times due to recoil-mine is almost always in sight recovery due to my aging eyes.

The OP asked specifically about experience with both calibers in an M&P compact. You admittedly don't have that.

Not to the OP's point. Solid hits with either caliber should stop the fight before 8 rounds are needed. He was asking about self defense, not which to use shooting IDPA.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


OP, I stand by my previous statements. The 40C will slow your shot splits down (for the same level of accuracy) and cost you two rounds over the 9C. You'll have to decide what is the best option for you.
 
According to Genitron.com, the mass of the gun is the main cause of small guns having more recoil. In a few days I intend to test this by taking my 40FS with me when I rent a 40C and shoot a box of ammo at the range. I do normally shoot 180 grain on the range and as home defense ammo with the FS. I'll alternate 10 shots with each.

Had a case locally last night of a home invasion where the owner shot the BG 3 times. The BG ran away to a hospital where the police caught him. Caliber was unreported but must have been small. The BG also had a gun but the owner was unhurt. He must have kept the BG busy. I guess it is OK since the robbery was foiled. But I don't want to use any less than 40 S&W.
 
Try shooting the 180 grain mag tech for practice and use 180 grain hollow points for defense. The give me less recoil.
 
Tom,
I understand the relationship between mass and inertia, so when you are doing this test, maybe you could try the compact with a full mag and the full size with just one in the pipe and an empty magazine.

If the slide and barrel difference matter that much (your testing will show us) then someone shooting a compact could add weight to the gun (weapon light or just clamp a weight on the rail) while at the range to reduce the felt recoil.

Could be a million dollar idea.... The Lower Recoil-inator! :D
 
Back
Top