Am I stronger than I realize?

[Rob377]

Nope still a wuss. Welcome to INGO!

All light hearted joking aside I think the general idea behind the recoil comparison is that because a 9mm recoil is less you can perform at a higher level with it. It's not that the 45 acp recoil is so bad, it's just that you can shoot faster with a 9mm so why wouldn't you do that and have the added bonus of more ammo for the same weight. It's one of those things that when you take the macho emotion out of it and look at the facts on pistol ammunition performance you see that the results aren't noticably different between premium defense ammo's performance between a 45 & 9. At that point what would you gain by more recoil and higher priced ammo and half the ammo in a mag that you'd have had with a 9mm?

There's really no difference. Trigger design has more effect in shooting speed than cartridge. I'll run .17-.18 splits on a 7yd A zone with 130PF 9mm or with 190PF hardball 45.

 

[Spike_351]

sounds to me like your an experienced shooter with a good amount of experience and skill with your sidearm.

 

[JetGirl]

Frame size/weight to frame size/weight, a 9mm and a .40 are WAYYY snappier than .45acp.
I sold my 9mm because it wasn't fun to shoot for extended trips to the range. After a box or so of ammo, I was DONE.
All my .45s are much kinder... even the 3" lighter ones.
YMMV

 

[88E30M50]

Maybe it's less a case of strength and more a case of comfort with a specific firearm or comfort in shooting as a whole. I used to notice recoil more than I do now and I'm no stronger today than I was several years ago. My favorite guns to shoot are a Glock 23 and 27 in .40 as well as a Glock 20 and 29 in 10mm. I also like shooting .45 with small aluminum framed 1911s and full size steel frame 1911s. I really don't feel any difference in any of them. When shooting, I'm focused on the front site and have to think later on what the recoil felt like. It's all the same to me and I'm by no means overly strong. The one exception was when I shot some Underwood 1300fps 10mm out of the Glock 29, but even then, I was looking for the recoil. I was expecting it to be sharp and it was. I don't know that I'd notice much of a difference if the Underwood ammo were mixed in with the normal Hornady XTPs or reloads.

If you shoot a gun expecting it to be harsh, it will probably be harsh. If you shoot it and pay no attention to the recoil, you will probably not notice anything unusual until you get into the really big stuff. But, for all of the common carry stuff, the recoil is about the same if you are focused on the front site instead of thinking about the recoil.

 

[flatlander]

Over the years I have owned and shot .22- .50 pistols A LOT. Also have had other activities that entailed sudden stops to hard objects with my hands. As a result I've developed small fractures in my wrists. I can run about 200-250 rds thru a .45 before it becomes painful enough for me to have to stop as it's becoming counter productive. I still lift etc and am in pretty good shape for a guy my age. I have sold all my .45's and gone completely over to 9mm for this and also for the fact that now ALL my family can shoot the same guns/ caliber. It is really not about strength at all for me.
I really hated getting rid of the Kimbers and HK's. ESPECIALLY the HK Tactical with KAC suppressor

Bob

 

[Marksman]

So I hear/read all the time about people who choose a 9mm or smaller caliber weapon instead of a .45 because of the tremendous recoil of the .45... I am a bald, out of shape, middle age man and I have zero trouble controling the recoil of my .45. I have practiced my grip, stance and presentation as you should with any firearm. I just don't get it. I can fly through two 13 round mags in under 5 seconds at combat distances keeping my groups smaller than my fist. I was in great shape 10+ years ago, but that is hardly the story now. I see people who are in better shape and seemingly stronger complain about the recoil of a .45. Am I stronger than I realize?

Yes, you have the POWER!

 

[Dustzilla]

Over the years I have owned and shot .22- .50 pistols A LOT. Also have had other activities that entailed sudden stops to hard objects with my hands. As a result I've developed small fractures in my wrists. I can run about 200-250 rds thru a .45 before it becomes painful enough for me to have to stop as it's becoming counter productive. I still lift etc and am in pretty good shape for a guy my age. I have sold all my .45's and gone completely over to 9mm for this and also for the fact that now ALL my family can shoot the same guns/ caliber. It is really not about strength at all for me.
I really hated getting rid of the Kimbers and HK's. ESPECIALLY the HK Tactical with KAC suppressor

Bob

Sorry to hear you had to get rid of such nice guns.
I had a friend that tore the tendons in his hand and couldn't shoot anything bigger than a 9mm after he healed.

 

[jamil]

I haven't really heard all that many people say they shoot 9mm because .45 recoils too much.

The only recoil problem I have with .45 is my response to the price tag in the store these days. I shoot mostly 9mm because of price, capacity, and generally smaller carry guns, although the XDs 45 kinda changes that.

 

[Dustzilla]

Maybe it's less a case of strength and more a case of comfort with a specific firearm or comfort in shooting as a whole. I used to notice recoil more than I do now and I'm no stronger today than I was several years ago. My favorite guns to shoot are a Glock 23 and 27 in .40 as well as a Glock 20 and 29 in 10mm. I also like shooting .45 with small aluminum framed 1911s and full size steel frame 1911s. I really don't feel any difference in any of them. When shooting, I'm focused on the front site and have to think later on what the recoil felt like. It's all the same to me and I'm by no means overly strong. The one exception was when I shot some Underwood 1300fps 10mm out of the Glock 29, but even then, I was looking for the recoil. I was expecting it to be sharp and it was. I don't know that I'd notice much of a difference if the Underwood ammo were mixed in with the normal Hornady XTPs or reloads.

If you shoot a gun expecting it to be harsh, it will probably be harsh. If you shoot it and pay no attention to the recoil, you will probably not notice anything unusual until you get into the really big stuff. But, for all of the common carry stuff, the recoil is about the same if you are focused on the front site instead of thinking about the recoil.

Good point. I am never thinking about recoil, I'm focused on the target. I can understand that if you are worried about it you are more likely to notice it. I guess decades of "self gratification" must have strengthend my grip.

 

[Dustzilla]

I haven't really heard all that many people say they shoot 9mm because .45 recoils too much.

The only recoil problem I have with .45 is my response to the price tag in the store these days. I shoot mostly 9mm because of price, capacity, and generally smaller carry guns, although the XDs 45 kinda changes that.

Yeah I'd love to have the XDS as a carry piece. I carry the XDM 3.8" compact .45 and she is a sweet shooter. Coming from a full size 1911 it is like carrying air.

 

[rhino]

I can't handle the recoil with .45ACP.

I am quite delicate.

 

[LANShark42]

I'm certainly no expert, but I think there's a common misperception absolute - that the larger the caliber, the stronger the recoil - when there are factors other than caliber that affect recoil.

But what do I know...?

 

[Tanfodude]

When I first shot a 45, I though it felt the same as my 9. A 45 magnum is a different story though.

 

[2tonic]

Recoil sensitivity seems to focus on three criterion:

1. Bone structure, or more specifically, lack of cushioning material in hand/elbow joints. Possibly related to age.

2. Caliber, as it influences recoil impulse. Some large calibers give a broader "push" while others (.40sw comes to mind) are more "whippy". The guns physical size and weight also matter. A wide backstrap spreads the energy and a narrow one tends to focus and magnify it.

3. Bore line height above grip site. The 1911 is capable of one of the highest grip positions on a handgun, minimizing torque to the wrist. In contrast, a Bisley gripped SAA has quite a bore-line/grip site differential, requiring the stocks to slip in your hand to reduce recoil.

Bottom line is ...strength has little to do with perception of recoil.

 

[wtfd661]

I can't handle the recoil with .45ACP.

I am quite delicate.

 

[rhino]

The gun also makes a huge difference. Shooting 9mm from a stainless steel 1911 is a bit milder than from a Keltec PF9. Shooting .45 ACP from a Glock [STRIKE]13[/STRIKE] 21 is a bit milder than from a lightweight officer's ACP-sized pistol.

 

[Rob377]

The gun also makes a huge difference. Shooting 9mm from a stainless steel 1911 is a bit milder than from a Keltec PF9. Shooting .45 ACP from a Glock 13 is a bit milder than from a lightweight officer's ACP-sized pistol.

Glock 13? Is that the new model made of porcelain that goes through metal detectors and costs more than you make in a year?

 

[rhino]

Glock 13? Is that the new model made of porcelain that goes through metal detectors and costs more than you make in a year?

Yeah, it's the high capacity version of the old Glock 7.

Okay, I goofed! Thanks for the correction. I was thinkin' Glock 21, so I don't know what happened. Either a typo, or my fingers went rogue.

 

[Rob377]

Yeah, it's the high capacity version of the old Glock 7.

Okay, I goofed! Thanks for the correction. I was thinkin' Glock 21, so I don't know what happened. Either a typo, or my fingers went rogue.

I know, but I owed ya one for the semi-colon issue.

 

[rhino]

I know, but I owed ya one for the semi-colon issue.

TOUCHE'!