Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-20-2012, 19:37   #1
MP1983
Senior Member
 
MP1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 181
Recoil: .357 Sig vs. .40 S&W at the range

I took my Glock 22 (2nd generation) out to compare recoil with a Sig Sauer P226 in .40 S&W (which I recently bought). With the lower bore axis of the Glock, it had less felt recoil in .40 even though it is a lighter gun than the P226. My Glock 22 is my house-gun, and has been for the past 11 years.

I next compared the P226 in .40 S&W to .357 Sig by switching out the barrel (both barrels are factory Sig Sauer). I had read that the .357 Sig had less felt recoil than the .40 S&W, but I had never shot the two one right after the other to really try to judge them for myself. I was pleased to find the .357 Sig is easier for me to shoot. I have gotten a little recoil sensitive due to some bad discs in my neck, and I prefer the .357 Sig round over the .40 S&W for a number of reasons (particularly, Speer Golddots w/ 1350 fps muzzle velocity in a 125 gr bullet).

I had also read that the .357 Sig was "snappier" and louder than the .40 S&W, and that the .40 S&W was a little heavier in its recoil straight back against the shooter (due to the heavier bullet). I have no arthritis in the wrists or hands so the snappy recoil does not bother me, but the heavier push backward through the arms, shoulders, and ultimately the neck was uncomfortable in .40 S&W. Just a couple 12 round magazines of .40 S&W and I was feeling it, but I shot at least six full mags of the .357 Sig and it didn't bother me a bit. I was very pleased, since I prefer .357 Sig slightly over the .40 S&W (though I don't think you can go wrong with either).

I did not notice whether the .357 Sig was any louder; I was in the outdoors with hearing protection and they both sounded about the same.

I now know what my next Glock is gonna be...a Gen 4 Glock 31


_____________________________________________________________

Glock 17 X 3 (Gen1 marked MPDC, Gen2, OD Gen3), Glock 19 X 2 (Gen2 & Gen3), Glock 22 (Gen2), Glock 30 (w/o rail)



"Incompetence is the worst form of corruption" - Harve, Electra Glide in Blue

Last edited by MP1983; 10-20-2012 at 20:13.. Reason: typo
MP1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2012, 22:03   #2
bobtheelf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nashville
Posts: 474
I guess I'm just not that sensitive to the nuances of recoil, but I don't really notice much of a difference between my G23 and my G32, both shooting defensive loads. It is easier, however, to find weaker target loads for the .40.
bobtheelf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 01:23   #3
NEOH212
Diesel Girl
 
NEOH212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: North East Ohio
Posts: 9,091
Recoil is a very individual thing.

My experience is just the opposite of the OP. I notice much less felt recoil with my Sig 226 and 229 in .40 than I do with all .40 caliber Gen 3 and older Glocks. The Gen 4 Glock 22 is the only exception.

My Gen 4 gun has about the same felt recoil as the Sigs. That's noticeably less felt recoil over ay Gen 3 or older Glock .40 that I've ever fired. (Noticeable to me that is. Some people like the OP say differently.)

None of the recoil from any of the guns is anywhere near excessive though. They all shoot fine but they all handle different.
__________________
When you finish speaking, don't forget to wipe.
NEOH212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 05:03   #4
dpadams6
Senior Member
 
dpadams6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP1983 View Post
I took my Glock 22 (2nd generation) out to compare recoil with a Sig Sauer P226 in .40 S&W (which I recently bought). With the lower bore axis of the Glock, it had less felt recoil in .40 even though it is a lighter gun than the P226. My Glock 22 is my house-gun, and has been for the past 11 years.

I next compared the P226 in .40 S&W to .357 Sig by switching out the barrel (both barrels are factory Sig Sauer). I had read that the .357 Sig had less felt recoil than the .40 S&W, but I had never shot the two one right after the other to really try to judge them for myself. I was pleased to find the .357 Sig is easier for me to shoot. I have gotten a little recoil sensitive due to some bad discs in my neck, and I prefer the .357 Sig round over the .40 S&W for a number of reasons (particularly, Speer Golddots w/ 1350 fps muzzle velocity in a 125 gr bullet).

I had also read that the .357 Sig was "snappier" and louder than the .40 S&W, and that the .40 S&W was a little heavier in its recoil straight back against the shooter (due to the heavier bullet). I have no arthritis in the wrists or hands so the snappy recoil does not bother me, but the heavier push backward through the arms, shoulders, and ultimately the neck was uncomfortable in .40 S&W. Just a couple 12 round magazines of .40 S&W and I was feeling it, but I shot at least six full mags of the .357 Sig and it didn't bother me a bit. I was very pleased, since I prefer .357 Sig slightly over the .40 S&W (though I don't think you can go wrong with either).

I did not notice whether the .357 Sig was any louder; I was in the outdoors with hearing protection and they both sounded about the same.

I now know what my next Glock is gonna be...a Gen 4 Glock 31


_____________________________________________________________

Glock 17 X 3 (Gen1 marked MPDC, Gen2, OD Gen3), Glock 19 X 2 (Gen2 & Gen3), Glock 22 (Gen2), Glock 30 (w/o rail)



"Incompetence is the worst form of corruption" - Harve, Electra Glide in Blue
I think the opposite. Recoil wise its not even close. Sig 226/229 40 or 357sig is far less recoil than any glock. I don't think the low bore axis makes much of a difference for me. I think the weight makes more of a difference. Try shooting a sig 226/229 in all stainless. With its even more extra weight, there's not much recoil at all.
dpadams6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 06:11   #5
CDW4ME
Senior Member
 
CDW4ME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,158
According to the power factor calculation (PF) the .357 Sig has less recoil than the 40

According to my shot timer there is no real difference in 2nd shot follow up time using equivalent pistols in my hands.
__________________
No internal lock or magazine disconnect on my pistols!
CDW4ME is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 09:33   #6
unit1069
Senior Member
 
unit1069's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: So. Central US
Posts: 8,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP1983 View Post
I now know what my next Glock is gonna be...a Gen 4 Glock 31
If your 2nd generation G-22 is a three-pin model why don't you just buy a G-31 barrel for it?
__________________
Rocket Scientist
unit1069 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 09:57   #7
MP1983
Senior Member
 
MP1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by unit1069 View Post
If your 2nd generation G-22 is a three-pin model why don't you just buy a G-31 barrel for it?
I realize that's an option, but I don't have a Gen4 yet and with the new recoil set up I think the .357 Sig will shoot very comfortably for me.

I have .357 Sig barrels for both a P229 and a P226 that left the factory as .40's, but I can't warm up to the idea in Glock's. Just a personal prejudice I guess.

Also, I can get a Gen 4 G31 w/ 3 mags for $400 new

Last edited by MP1983; 10-21-2012 at 10:08.. Reason: can get G31 relatively cheap
MP1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 10:05   #8
MP1983
Senior Member
 
MP1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpadams6 View Post
Try shooting a sig 226/229 in all stainless. With its even more extra weight, there's not much recoil at all.
I had thought about that, but for now the P226 in .357 is very comfortable for me to shoot. Plus, I really like the DAK trigger & I think I'd have to switch the trigger out since I haven't seen any all stainless Sig's with DAK.

I'm also not a fan of the cost & weight of the all stainless Sig's. I bet they do gentle-down any load they shoot though.
MP1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 11:43   #9
dpadams6
Senior Member
 
dpadams6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP1983 View Post
I had thought about that, but for now the P226 in .357 is very comfortable for me to shoot. Plus, I really like the DAK trigger & I think I'd have to switch the trigger out since I haven't seen any all stainless Sig's with DAK.

I'm also not a fan of the cost & weight of the all stainless Sig's. I bet they do gentle-down any load they shoot though.
Yeah. All Stainless is a bit heavy, especially if ccw. The all stainless come with the srt trigger, which is really nice. Still da/sa, but reset real short and smooth. Depends on what you want. We carried the 226 357sig at work for about 15 years, and never a problem.
dpadams6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 12:46   #10
MP1983
Senior Member
 
MP1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 181
I am completely sold on the DAK trigger in Sig's...I started shooting in the 80's & really liked and excelled w/ the double action pull on K-frame S&W revolvers, and always practiced dry fire drills...w/ the DAK, you can dry fire all you want and never have to pull the slide back, you just reset the trigger w/ a very short trigger stroke...I know w/ a DA/SA you can manually cock the hammer back each time, but the weight in pound presure to do this is a lot higher than what the short trigger strke on the DAK is required to reset the trigger (about 8 lbs or less on the DAK trigger to reset, I'm guessing about 18 lbs or so to reset the hammer on a Sig DA/SA because the tension is off the mainspring)...

I can do dry fire drills w/ the DAK trigger from Sig more easily than any other auto, Glocks included (though I have read a piece from Duane Thomas where he puts a piece of cardboard in the chamber to allow for easier dry fire drills w/ Glocks...don't ask me how it works, I never tried it)...

I have a degenerative joint condition that forces me to think outside the box in just about everything I do (i've already had my low spine fused twice & my right knee has been replaced, so I got limits)...finding something that works for me is always a plus...I'm not trying to push what works for me off on others, I'm just sharing my experience (FWIW)...

regardless, as Hickok45 always says, "Life is good"...

stay safe out there...the Goblins are loose
MP1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 14:06   #11
cowboy1964
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 15,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by MP1983 View Post
I'm guessing about 18 lbs or so to reset the hammer on a Sig DA/SA because the tension is off the mainspring)...
I don't think that's correct. I had a Sig 229 and there was no way a second DA pull was 18 lbs. I don't remember it being any heavier than the first DA pull.
cowboy1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 14:37   #12
MP1983
Senior Member
 
MP1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboy1964 View Post
I don't think that's correct. I had a Sig 229 and there was no way a second DA pull was 18 lbs. I don't remember it being any heavier than the first DA pull.
this site w/ Wolff Springs has the "hammer spring" (mainspring) at 24 lbs for P 225, P226, P228, P229...

http://www.gunsprings.com/Semi-Auto%...D1/mID4/dID254

the mainspring is pretty much always stronger than the DA pull in a hammer-fire auto, and you are going against the mainspring if you manually cock the hammer back...at least that's what I always thought, maybe I'm wrong about this...

Last edited by MP1983; 10-21-2012 at 16:36.. Reason: "hammer spring" at 24 lbs
MP1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2012, 21:54   #13
bac1023
Senior Member
 
bac1023's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 91,391
I notice very little difference between those two rounds.
__________________
.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
bac1023 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2012, 11:19   #14
Comedian
Senior Member
 
Comedian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by bac1023 View Post
I notice very little difference between those two rounds.
40 and 357 Sig feel quite similar to me as well.
__________________
HK VP9
S&W M&P 9mm
Sig P320 9mm
Walther PPS 9mm
Comedian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2012, 11:28   #15
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 16,020
For years I have used the grip-squeeze excercisors, and I grip my G17 and other handguns very well.
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2012, 20:01   #16
krazey karl
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 35
had a gen 3 g23 for a while .sold it .the recoil bothered me.i'm 55 yrs old with arthritis in my hands and probs with my right elbow.went back to my g19.just bought a g32 gen 4 and love it. no pain at the range.shot 250 rounds my 1st time out with it. like the 357 sig round.
krazey karl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 18:29   #17
Poohgyrr
trout fear me!
 
Poohgyrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sutter's Fort
Posts: 1,173


Interesting. For me, with my Gen 3 G35, using 180gr +P JHP's in 40S&W, vs 125gr JHP's in 357Sig; there is a clear difference in both recoil and accuracy.

The 357Sig wins both contests. Muzzle flip is noticably less, recoil is more straight back and is simply easier overall. Accuracy is much much better.

I've been happy with the 40S&W for a long time, but run the 357Sig now for carry. And we recently bought a G31, with a factory G22 barrel on order. For me, it is that much better.
__________________
Snoopy Lives!! Luke 22:36 Ephesians 4:26-32
357Sig Club #3531 S&W Club #10 BHP Club #35
"Life brings both sorrows and joys alike. It is what a man does with them - not what they do to him - that is the true test of his mettle." T. Roosevelt

Last edited by Poohgyrr; 11-05-2012 at 18:31..
Poohgyrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 18:45   #18
barth
six barrels
 
barth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Free Zone
Posts: 5,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by bac1023 View Post
I notice very little difference between those two rounds.
+1
At least in the hot 40 loads.
barth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 20:01   #19
JesseA
Glock Historian
 
JesseA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Shawnee Oklahoma
Posts: 55
I have the Gen 3 G31C with a SS guide rod and I love it, I like the round so much I bought the Gen 3 G33. I am planning on a SS guide rod for it very soon.
__________________
Glock 21, 31C and 33. All 3rd Gen. Coming soon-34, 22C, and 20 SF
JesseA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2012, 22:59   #20
barth
six barrels
 
barth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: The Free Zone
Posts: 5,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by JesseA View Post
I have the Gen 3 G31C with a SS guide rod and I love it, I like the round so much I bought the Gen 3 G33. I am planning on a SS guide rod for it very soon.
I've tried several SS and Tungsten RSAs, with mixed results,
in my triple threat Gen 3 G27.

The only one I can recommend is Lightning Strike.
Not that I had any real trouble with OEM RSAs.
Just the plastic tip getting chewed up and having seating problems.

Caliber Corner
barth is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:11.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,221
311 Members
910 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31