Taming the .40S&W

[cmort666]

I've had a Glock 22 almost since they've been on the market.

With bullseye handloads, it's fine to shoot.

However with factory practice and self-defense ammunition, especially 185gr., it's a monster.

It's not the recoil that's the problem. I'm used to shooting a 4" 29-2. It's the SHARPNESS of the recoil and pronounced upward "muzzle whip".

I've been trying to figure out how to deal with this for years, and just hit upon an excellent solution.

I've been looking at alternate recoil spring mechanisms, including multi-spring "recoil reducing" type units and metal guide rods and heavier springs.

I ruled out the former as of dubious value at a high price.

I then started looking at metal guide rods and heavier springs.

I ruled out tungsten rods as probably not worth the bother.

I then settled on a stainless steel guide rod and a 20lb. or 22lb. spring.

I ended up ordering an IMSI guide rod and 20lb. and 22lb. springs. I installed (with great difficulty) the rod and 22lb. spring Friday night. I got to try them yesterday.

It's an entirely different gun now. Whereas before, there was a lot of "snap" and "muzzle whip", it's now all just straight recoil, more like an M1911 with hot .45acp self-defense loads. The slide velocity has to have gone WAY down. It has visibly MUCH less muzzle rise.

Before changing the RSM, I was looking to sell this gun. Now, not only do I intend to keep it, I might buy a G23 to supplement my G19.

 

[Farmer17]

I think the Gen 4 guns have improved springs and don't kick as bad. I used to hear how everyone said the .40 had this terrible snappy recoil and wondered what the heck they were talking about. I have an old EAA Witness .40 that I got in about 1991 when the round first came out and it is very soft shooting and easy to control. It's had many thousands of rounds through it and I can tell the spring has gotten a bit weaker and it kicks a little snappier now so I need to change the recoil spring.

 

[Rule3]

It's the GUN

I have a G20 in 10MM and it is not as bad as the G22.
Know exactly what you mean about the "sharpness" or Snap.

Sold the G22

Not felt in a Sig, or a CZ.

 

[cmort666]

I think the Gen 4 guns have improved springs and don't kick as bad. I used to hear how everyone said the .40 had this terrible snappy recoil and wondered what the heck they were talking about. I have an old EAA Witness .40 that I got in about 1991 when the round first came out and it is very soft shooting and easy to control. It's had many thousands of rounds through it and I can tell the spring has gotten a bit weaker and it kicks a little snappier now so I need to change the recoil spring.

The Witnesses are all steel guns. The weight soaks up a lot of the energy. I'm sure that they and real CZ75s feel a lot different than polymer guns.

 

[Fishinfool]

The only guns I have tried changing recoil springs in is 1911's, and yes, it does make a difference in the slide velocity, and "snappyness" of the felt recoil. The key is to find the right weight, but not so much as to effect reliability with your chosen loads. How is reliability with that heavier spring when using bullseye loads?

Larry

 

[cmort666]

The only guns I have tried changing recoil springs in is 1911's, and yes, it does make a difference in the slide velocity, and "snappyness" of the felt recoil. The key is to find the right weight, but not so much as to effect reliability with your chosen loads. How is reliability with that heavier spring when using bullseye loads?

Larry

I fired it with 180gr. Federal FMJs, 155gr. Federal JHPs, and 155gr. Remington JHPs. Not a single failure to feed or eject with any of them.

The 22lb. spring seems to be perfect for full power ammunition, and that's all I plan to shoot in this gun, whether factory or handloads.

 

[Arik]

Having owned several 40s&w handguns and only shooting factory ammo I find that my G22 is probably one of the smoother shooting 40s. Internals are all factory. I've had 3 HKs, people say they are the smoothest 40s to shoot. Recoil isn't as noticeable as other guns. I tried. Had a USP full size, a compact and a P2000. I still own the P2000 but I wouldn't say they are the tamest. I'm even debating on getting rid of the P2000 and just keeping the G22

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[walkin jack]

I had the midsize Glock .40 S&W, The Model 23 for 11 years. I didn't have too much trouble with it. After getting used to the Glock trigger and putting over 7K rounds through it I could handle it pretty well.

But I bought the barrel for the .357 SIg which drops right in instead of the .40 barrel. Even used the same magazines since the .357 Sig is only a necked down .40.

THAT was when I got the worst muzzle flip I've ever encountered in any hand gun. I'll use the 1911 .45 as an example of a PUSH and actually rather pleasant and not interfering with 2nd shot capability. But that FLIP is a real deal breaker for me. I fired one box of .327 Sigs and sold the barrel.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I tried the 40 craze quite a few years ago and bought G22. Hated it for the same reason so I got rid of it. Then the M&P 40 came along and it was the softest shooting 40 I ever tried. But I never bought one because I decided I don't need a 40.

 

[cmort666]

THAT was when I got the worst muzzle flip I've ever encountered in any hand gun.

That's what the Glock 22 in .40 S&W was like for me.

Mine is a VERY early 2nd Generation gun from right after they came out.

The 22lb. spring completely tames all of that. Now it's just normal recoil.

 

[sasu]

This thread needs pictures.

I can only imagine how nasty a 40 is!

Do I get an infraction for sarcasm now?

 

[Rastoff]

I find this interesting. Wasn't the .40S&W developed because the recoil of the 10mm was too much? Now people are complaining about the recoil of the .40S&W?

You know, the .22LR is an effective round.

 

[cmort666]

I find this interesting. Wasn't the .40S&W developed because the recoil of the 10mm was too much? Now people are complaining about the recoil of the .40S&W?

The .40S&W wasn't designed for polymer handguns. The standard weight Gen2 Glock spring for the G22 isn't strong enough for the cartridge. It's about five pounds too light, giving an excessive slide velocity. With a twenty two pound spring, it's just fine, equivalent to hot self-defense loads in an M1911.

You know, the .22LR is an effective round.

At contact distances.

I might need to defend myself from an unlawful deadly force attack. I don't expect to need to shoot somebody in the back of the head by surprise from the backseat of a car.

 

[Steve912]

The .40S&W wasn't designed for polymer handguns..

True, but it wasn't NOT designed for polymer, either; nor was it "designed for non-polymer guns."

It was designed after the FBI went back to Winchester and asked them to download the 10mm. Winchester came back with a slower 180gr load and the FBI liked it. Winchester and S&W put on their thinking caps and realized the FBI's 10mm Lite load could fit in a shorter case, that would fit in "9mm size" frames, and the .40 S&W was born. That--is what it was designed for.

Recoil tolerance is subjective.

So how's function with your bullseye loadings, as previously asked?

 

[Faulkner]

I've been training new deputy recruits to use the G22, G23, and G27 for 10 years or so. The only recruits that consistently have problems with the recoil are girls, usually the smaller framed ones.

After a few hundred rounds of practice they invariably stop complaining.

 

[shouldazagged]

I might need to defend myself from an unlawful deadly force attack. I don't expect to need to shoot somebody in the back of the head by surprise from the backseat of a car.

I'm relieved to hear you gave that up.

I've only owned two .40's, a Smith 411 and a second-generation G22, both bought used. I found the Glock much less snappy/flippy than the Smith, but that was nearly twenty years ago when I had better wrists. My .40 S&W days are over.

 

[YogiBear]

Aloha,

The only gun I thought the 40 S & W was "snappy" on was a 610 that I owned.

I have several Beretta 96s, full size and Compact.

Also a PX4 polymer with steel slide.

I will agree that the 40 is a small bit snappier than a 9mm,

But, after firing a magazine or 2, I do not notice it as I have gotten used to the recoil.

 

[federali]

I respect the OP's efforts to tame the recoil of his 40. You might wonder, why didn't the many law enforcement agencies who have adopted the 40 S&W and are now going back to 9mm, experiment with springs?

My guess is that LEOs of smaller stature and women probably could not retract the slide with a 22 pound spring installed.

 

[cmort666]

True, but it wasn't NOT designed for polymer, either; nor was it "designed for non-polymer guns."

It was designed after the FBI went back to Winchester and asked them to download the 10mm. Winchester came back with a slower 180gr load and the FBI liked it. Winchester and S&W put on their thinking caps and realized the FBI's 10mm Lite load could fit in a shorter case, that would fit in "9mm size" frames, and the .40 S&W was born. That--is what it was designed for.

Recoil tolerance is subjective.

So how's function with your bullseye loadings, as previously asked?

The smaller case increased chamber pressures. That's one reason for the "kabooms".

None of the original guns were polymer framed. I'm not even sure S&W had a polymer gun when the .40S&W came out.

.40S&W throws a lot of recoil energy into light guns, in a very short period of time.

I only intend to shoot full power ammunition in this gun. I have no plans to load any bullseye ammunition for it. With full power factory ammunition it was completely reliable with the 22lb. spring. If for some unforeseen reason I decide to shoot it in the centerfire match of a 2700, I can always put the OEM spring back in.

 

[cmort666]

I've been training new deputy recruits to use the G22, G23, and G27 for 10 years or so. The only recruits that consistently have problems with the recoil are girls, usually the smaller framed ones.

After a few hundred rounds of practice they invariably stop complaining.

With the OEM recoil spring, I find the nature of the recoil objectionable. There's no reason for me to put up with it if there's a reliable solution.