9mm vs 40 recoil advise

H

hardluk1

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
2,194
Reaction score
1,079
I had hand surgery a while back and when I could handle and carry a handgun again I found my long time cc a kahr tp40 simple hurts to shoot . I changed to my wifes 4.25" m&p9 and found that more than a soft shooter.

Now some 4 months later I can cc and shoot my kahr again but I don't have the same quality grip I had and some hurt is still there when at the range. I still have a lot of loading supplies for the 40 and trust the 155gr ho and have in stock for carry

Question is for any one that owns both a 9mm and a 40 in the same size how does the recoil feel using comparable to the cartridge mid weight ammo. 124gr 9mm to 155 or 165gr 40 .

I am trying to decide if I can deal with any extra snap of the 40in the m&p .


Thanks for any input .
 
I don't own both but can say if it hurts you're not going to shoot it and if you don't shoot it you will never be as proficient with it as you want.

I've shot 40's, 9MM, 45ACP, 38spl and 357mag out of concealed carry size firearms. I own 9mm's 45acp's and 38/357 J frames. Notice absence of 40 in the list of firearms I carry and own.

I have nothing personal against 40 but I've just never been drawn to a firearm chambered in it. If I want something bigger than a 9mm, I'll go to a commander size 1911 in 45acp. If I want a revolver I go to the J-frame. Otherwise, I'm carrying a Shield 9mm.

I know it's not the answer you were asking for but I do hope this helps.
 
jeffnles1 said:
I don't own both but can say if it hurts you're not going to shoot it and if you don't shoot it you will never be as proficient with it as you want.
.
Click to expand...

I think this actually says a lot overall.

OP, are you near a range where you can rent a couple different handgun models to see if one works better for you now? Maybe its not just a caliber concern but grip, etc that will make a difference in what you are comfortable shooting.
 
I own two of the same models, PT140 G2 and a PT111 G2. The .40 is just a tad snappier than the 9mm. The .40 was more manageable than I expected it to be when compared to the 9mm.
 
Just try'n to stay with these to cartridges in a M&P full size.
 
Last edited:
I have a Glock 23 Gen 4 which is .40cal. Even with the dual recoil springs there is a MAJOR difference in felt recoil when compared to my heaviest 9mm - a Browning High Power.
Considering the effectiveness of todays ammunition I see no reason to punish yourself with the .40, when the 9mm will provide sufficient protection. I carry a Shield 9mm.
 
Maybe one of our members lives close to you that has a gun you could try, where do you live, you don't have it posted in your profile.
 
FWIW Phoenix police can upgrade their 40 Glock to a 45 caliber Glock -- I've been told by someone who has used both that the recoil on the 45 is actually less than on the 40.
 
John R I live above Ashville in the NC mountains .
 
I shoot the .40 in Glocks only. The 180 grain loads seem to have less recoil than the 165 grain ones, in my experience. Recoil difference in the 9mm and 40 through full size Glocks is noticeable, but not painful in my hands. It just slows me down a bit. I've shot a .40 M&P once with rental range ammo and thought the recoil was comparatively mild compared to my Gen 3 Glock 22. If you reload, a lighter recoiling practice load that still functions OK may be a solution for you. Good Luck!
 
Last edited:
There is no doubt the 40 has more recoil than the 9mm or 45 in the same sized guns. And the smaller the gun the more noticeable it is. I myself do not care for 40 in compacts and don't see that much advantage over 9mm in short barrels, especially if one is not comfortable.
 
Funny that you should ask this. I just answered it in the other post.

Bottom line, a standard 9mm load (120g, 1100 fps) will need a 165g 40 bullet at 800 fps or a 180g bullet at 730 fps to get the same recoil. Typical factory loads with those weights are in the 900-1000 fps range and quite a bit more recoil. In an SD situation, you'll never know the difference. When shooting 200 rounds at the range with hand surgery, it might make a difference between going home feeling normal and needing an ice pack for the next few days.
 
Just trying to get a comparison between full size M&Ps from an OWNER of a 9 and 40. I did not find a 155gr 40 at 1302fps hard to shoot or the 1125fps reloads before surgery . Only harder to control after a few mags do to strength issues with my idex and middle finger and then if I pushed soreness will set in. I have right about 1250 rounds of reloads and 250 of underwood for carry ammo now . I would like to stay with the 40 . Just try'n to decide if its a M&P as I like the m&p feel. It will be a 40 even if it end ups a all metal CZ . I know the cz is fine for me other than that heavy da pull and that fixable as I have shot a compact P-06
 
Last edited:
I am used to shooting 9mm with the occasional 45 acp thrown in. My first plastic gun was a Steyr m40-A1. The gun felt good in my hand and I could handle it fine. The heavier bullets seemed like they had less recoil than the lighter ones. I tried to be friends with the 40 for over a year. I just could not do it. I traded it for a M&P 9c and I have never looked back. I really do not care for the recoil of the 40. I found it to be too snappy and my hands got tired a lot faster shooting it than they do with the 9mm (I don't remember the last time my hands/arms got tired shooting the 9)
So I went back to a 9 for my carry gun. I don't regret the decision at all. I find that the 9 has a lot less snap than a 9 does. So for carry for me it is a 9mm. For competition it is either a 9mm or the husbands 1911 45 acp.
 
I have both a 9c and a 40c. I don't shoot tons of ammo, maybe 50 rounds of each on a trip to the range. I shoot 115gr in the 9 and 165gr in the 40 and find the 40 to be very slightly more snappy, but hardly so.
I think the size of the double stack grip helps a lot in getting a good, solid hold, and as Ras has stated the geometry of the barrel in relation to the grip in the M&Ps also helps. If you have the opportunity and prefer the 40 as a SD round, see if you can find one to try.
Having said all that, the jury is still out as to whether the 40 really is all that much more effective than a 9 in a SD situation.
 
Johnmuratore I new there had to be one of you out there that owned both. As it turns out I went thought it over and decided the M&P can't be worse than the old sd40 I had a few years back and picked up a 4.25" with safety. sku 206300 . It was test fired on the 13 of this month. and checked in at our gun shop on the 17. Trigger really sucks at 7lb 12oz but that fixable .

I did a quick clean and fired 8 rounds of the underwood thru it and 8 rounds thru my wifes 4.25 core and it does not feel much snapper than wifes 9mm to me . So detail strip and clean tomorrow and get it ready for some range time . See how long the hand last !
 
Best of luck.
I hope it works out for you.
Go easy at first, don't overdo and hurt your hand.
 
Will do. I'll take a .22lr along to help make time go by and step back to shoot a few mags in the 40 and see how it goes.
 
Hardluk I shoot the 40 primarily and notice little more snap over the 9 which I also own. One area of interest to me is that I perceive less snap when I use the large back strap instead of the small or medium. That might make a difference for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
.40-9mm conversion
Replies
17
Views
849
toddstang
T
P
Recoil spring
Replies
3
Views
326
Beju
B
AH64DB2
Carry Comp Full Size Recoil Spring
Replies
3
Views
248
hardluk1
H
K
M&P 40 Recoil Spring
Replies
4
Views
821
WR Moore
W
S
Recoil guide rod length difference 5" barrel
Replies
1
Views
463
M1A4ME
M

Latest posts

Back
Top