Thread: .45 ACP: Too Much Recoil??

I have noticed in several threads the sentiment that the recoil associated the with .45 ACP is "too much". Too much for what? What is the opinion of the group?

I think the recoil is perfect. Granted it can change with your load, and the size/weight of your gun etc., but in all the .45's I've shot, I felt the recoil was just right.

It's too much for some people with inadequate wrist/arm strength to keep a decent grasp for a follow up shot. Some do not like the recoil as they are not used to that much or just plain cant handle it.

My 120 pound wife is well into her 60's and doesn't think so. Then again, she shoots full size and Combat Commander weight .45's. She might feel differently about the recoil if she were shooting one of the fly-weight mini-1911's. Me, I can't tell much difference from most 9 mm's. Most of the "recoil" is between the ears.

Not for me, but perceived recoil depends a lot on the the gun design and weight as well as loads used. I personally fell less recoil in a large 45 than a smaller, lighter 40 (neither one is excessive). A persons physical strength and gun handling techniques also effect perceived recoil.

I'm more comfortable with the 45 boom than with the 9mm POP. JMHO.
Dave

I say no way but it also depends not only on the person shooting but on the pistol itself. A full size 1911 is going to be alot more manageable than say a Kahr PM45.

I really love shooting .45's

No, but the cost is...

Nah, not in a fullsize, steel frame, recoil operated gun at any rate. I'm faster with 9mm though.

Actually I think the recoil is too much in direct blowback .380s and 9x18s. They are kinda snappy. Seems to me weight and the way guns are operated (blowback vs. recoil or gas) makes the bigger difference.

I don't feel that the .45 is much worse than 9mm. I think that .40 is snappier than .45...

Originally Posted by jordanvraptor

No, but the cost is...

+1

Not much more than a 9mm IMO. Very manageable and personally, I see no reason for the current wave of +P, +P+ loadings.

Originally Posted by jordanvraptor

No, but the cost is...

You don't need to spend a lot of money to get a great shooting weapon. If you want flash and fancy detailing you can spend a load. But there are a lot of fine shooting and well made weapons out there on the market. I have a mix-master 1911A1 I'd shoot against any high end big name weapon.

Someone voted "Yes". Would love to hear their thoughts.

My step son has been shooting my 4" aluminum framed Kimber .45 since he was 11 years old. If he can handle it, then anyone can. Proper grip, stance, and mindset are more important than anything else.
Recoil on a .45 is more like a solid push... rather than a sharp snap of a light weight .40.

There's a video online somewhere of a 9/40/45 comparo with time to reaquire sight picture with x amount of shots.
In theory, it was lighter recoil = faster reaquisition of target.

But too much recoil?
I'd have to say no?

Not a problem - my wife even prefers .45acp over 9mm, .40, and .357 mag.
I've always looked at the .45acp as a "push" recoil vs. more of a snap recoil on even the Glock 17 9mm.

Originally Posted by Rix

There's a video online somewhere of a 9/40/45 comparo with time to reaquire sight picture with x amount of shots.
In theory, it was lighter recoil = faster reaquisition of target.

But too much recoil?
I'd have to say no?

I would guess time to reacquire would be a function of technique and strength, although I have no data to back that up. I can only go by my own experience in timed drills for the DPSST Range qualification.

If I was a smart-***, ( which of course I will deny) I would say while you might need to reacquire and shoot again with a 9mm....you don't with a .45. But I'm not like that....really

Originally Posted by Swedish K

I've always looked at the .45acp as a "push" recoil vs. more of a snap recoil on even the Glock 17 9mm.

Same here and the 40 is even snappier.