.40 S&W 180gr ball vs. .45 ACP Rem Golden Saber 185gr - velocity comparison

[The Heretic]

I have more than once shot these loads back to back and claimed that the velocity was about the same, but that I could shoot the .40 faster than the .45 due to the greater perceived recoil of the .45 vs. the .40

Note that the 226 and the 227 are almost the same gun, except for the caliber.

Rem 180gr FMJ .40 - SIG 224 3.5" barrel - 927 fps

Rem 180gr FMJ .40 - SIG 226 4.4" barrel - 948 fps

Rem Golden Saber 185gr JHP - SIG 227 4.4" barrel .45 ACP - 912 fps

My hi-tech ballistics lab:

Read More

 

[kmk1012]

Your posts with all this info makes me really want to get a chrony, I'm sure I don't need one but the info obtained would be nice.

 

[American123]

I'm unsure how the recoil would be substantially different if the velocity of projectile, mass of projectile, and length of barrel are the same. Handgun weight the same too?

What other differences exist that haven't been accounted for yet?

 

[gmerkt]

Probably has something to do with bullet weights. However similar your examples seem by weight, 185 gr. in .45 ACP is kinda light for caliber, and 180 gr. in .40 S&W and while common, is kinda heavy for caliber. You get different recoil impulses based on different bullet weights and their appropriate propellant charges. 165 gr. is thought by many to be a more optimal bullet weight for .40 S&W. In reloading, the 180 uses up a lot of internal capacity. On the other hand, the 180 was my bullet weight of choice for 10mm auto.

 

[gmerkt]

Your posts with all this info makes me really want to get a chrony, I'm sure I don't need one but the info obtained would be nice.

They are nice to have and put more exact information at your disposal. Downside, just like going from a beam scale to an electronic, you will become obsessive with numbers.

 

[The Heretic]

I'm unsure how the recoil would be substantially different if the velocity of projectile, mass of projectile, and length of barrel are the same. Handgun weight the same too?

What other differences exist that haven't been accounted for yet?

Velocity & projectile mass give a starting point, but from what I have read, three are other factors like caliber, and the pressures involved - especially the pressure curve. I am not knowledgeable enough to expound on the other factors, but I have seen some mention of them.

The handgun weight/etc. is almost exactly the same between the 227 and the 226.

 

[The Heretic]

They are nice to have and put more exact information at your disposal. Downside, just like going from a beam scale to an electronic, you will become obsessive with numbers.

My main takeaway is that I can't trust the velocity claimed by the manufacturer

That and there are some surprises - like the other thread where I was comparing .45 ACP handguns. I did not think the comp on the Glock would cause that much velocity loss, and I was surprised that the revolver hung in there with the semis; I expected more velocity loss from the cylinder/barrel gap.

 

[The Heretic]

Probably has something to do with bullet weights. However similar your examples seem by weight, 185 gr. in .45 ACP is kinda light for caliber, and 180 gr. in .40 S&W and while common, is kinda heavy for caliber. You get different recoil impulses based on different bullet weights and their appropriate propellant charges. 165 gr. is thought by many to be a more optimal bullet weight for .40 S&W. In reloading, the 180 uses up a lot of internal capacity. On the other hand, the 180 was my bullet weight of choice for 10mm auto.

I went with 180 gr for all of my .40 ammo because looking at the claimed velocities I noticed that most of the 180 gr ammo was just as fast as the 165 gr ammo. Or close to it - the 180 gr only giving up 100 fps to the 165 gr.

Given my tests so far, I should probably verify that. I think I might have a box of 165 gr somewhere, although my inventory doesn't indicate it.

 

[The Heretic]

Your posts with all this info makes me really want to get a chrony, I'm sure I don't need one but the info obtained would be nice.

IIRC, I got a decent price on it used from a seller here. I had a Chrony before, but it took a .45 for the gipper.

So far, with this one, I have impacted the standoffs twice - I think the Glock is shooting to the left more than I knew.

There is a saying in software engineering and metrics in general - you don't know until you measure.

 

[American123]

Velocity & projectile mass give a starting point, but from what I have read, three are other factors like caliber, and the pressures involved - especially the pressure curve. I am not knowledgeable enough to expound on the other factors, but I have seen some mention of them.

The handgun weight/etc. is almost exactly the same between the 227 and the 226.

Makes sense (kind of) although the barrel is the same length and the velocity is nearly identical, and the mass of the bullet is the very similar. 5 grains is a difference. I thought originally I read the bullet weight to be the same, but 5 grains represents almost 3% more weight, that's a difference.

 

[gmerkt]

I had a Chrony before, but it took a .45 for the gipper.

Funny this should come up. Just now, I've been looking online for a source of 4mm steel rod. To replace some I nicked with bullets going through the Chrony. In the US, we'd call it, 5/32 inch, .156 +/-. Ebay prices are too high. Graingers and Tacoma Screw have it for less in lengths that I can use. I've found that wood is a poor substitute.

Chrony is out of business now, those of us who still have one have to make do the best we can. One of the cord plugs on mine went bad. A four wire telephone cord WILL NOT substitute, the original Chrony cord has a resister or whatever cleverly spliced and well hidden somewhere in the middle. So I just bought some of the typical clear plastic telephone plugs with the little tab on them and changed the broken one on my original cord.

I'm not one to easily give up on equipment. It all costs money initially, I care for it from day one and when it gets old and cranky, I try to nurse it along for as long as poss. Of course bullet damage is unintentional, accidents happen.

I gave up using a chrono at the range. The set-up and adjustment time tend to gum up the schedule of the range and irritate other shooters with delays. When I use a chrono now, it's way out in the woods where nobody else is around. Accidents are less apt to occur if you aren't rushing around setting up, then hobbled with long periods between cease-fires if further adjustment is needed.

 

[gmerkt]

Makes sense (kind of) although the barrel is the same length and the velocity is nearly identical, and the mass of the bullet is the very similar. 5 grains is a difference. I thought originally I read the bullet weight to be the same, but 5 grains represents almost 3% more weight, that's a difference.

From what I've read, it has more to do with the interior ballistics. Meaning, the heavier bullet tends to be propelled by slower powders, for both reasons, it exists the barrel more slowly. Said another way, time moving in the bore is slower than lighter bullets propelled by faster powders. Which go off more violently, the lighter bullet exiting more quickly. The slower bullet exits more gently, "perceived" recoil is less. Or something like that.

In the .40 S&W, the 180 is a heavy bullet. In the .45 ACP, the 185 is a lighter bullet.

Pistol bullet weights can effect point of impact as well. With the longer in-bore time, the heavy bullet allows the muzzle more time to rise. Example, older long-barreled revolvers had sights that were regulated for use with heavier bullets. Take one of those old revolvers now and fire 110 gr. bullets and your point of impact will be significantly lower. Years ago, a guy gave me a bunch of 155 gr. target bullets for .45 ACP. Which is a very light bullet for .45 ACP. My bullets were off paper, making furrows in the range lawn.

 

[American123]

From what I've read, it has more to do with the interior ballistics. Meaning, the heavier bullet tends to be propelled by slower powders, for both reasons, it exists the barrel more slowly. Said another way, time moving in the bore is slower than lighter bullets propelled by faster powders. Which go off more violently, the lighter bullet exiting more quickly. The slower bullet exits more gently, "perceived" recoil is less. Or something like that.

In the .40 S&W, the 180 is a heavy bullet. In the .45 ACP, the 185 is a lighter bullet.

Pistol bullet weights can effect point of impact as well. With the longer in-bore time, the heavy bullet allows the muzzle more time to rise. Example, older long-barreled revolvers had sights that were regulated for use with heavier bullets. Take one of those old revolvers now and fire 110 gr. bullets and your point of impact will be significantly lower. Years ago, a guy gave me a bunch of 155 gr. target bullets for .45 ACP. Which is a very light bullet for .45 ACP. My bullets were off paper, making furrows in the range lawn.

Makes sense - time to achieve velocity matters. Hence why if you speed up to 60 over a mile you feel less force than if you speed up to 60 in 200 feet.

 

[oremike]

In comparing the like bullet weight in the 40 vs. 45 the amount and kind of powder in each loading will have a different "feel". The 45 will traditionaly use a smaller amount of faster powder so might have a sharper perceived recoil while the 40 uses a larger amount of slower powder making the power peak bell curve slightly flatter and therefore the recoil will "feel" different.

 

[The Heretic]

It takes more than 3% difference to have a perceptible difference in recoil

Human perceptions are usually not linear, they are often logarithmic.

E.G., it can take changing something by double or half the amount for us to perceive the difference.

 

[oremike]

It takes more than 3% difference to have a perceptible difference in recoil

Human perceptions are usually not linear, they are often logarithmic.

E.G., it can take changing something by double or half the amount for us to perceive the difference.

And yet you, yourself have noted a difference in perceived recoil...... As have I. I've loaded a 240gr JHP in a 44 Mag with Unique to 1100fps and at a book pressure of 38,000psi. Useing the same book, I've also loaded the same bullet to the same FPS and book pressure with W-296 powder then shot both loads in the same gun on the same day. The Unique load was snappy and I didn't like it. The 296 load felt like it had more thump but hurt my hand less to shoot. The 296 load is my go to load.

 

[The Heretic]

And yet you, yourself have noted a difference in perceived recoil...... As have I. I've loaded a 240gr JHP in a 44 Mag with Unique to 1100fps and at a book pressure of 38,000psi. Useing the same book, I've also loaded the same bullet to the same FPS and book pressure with W-296 powder then shot both loads in the same gun on the same day. The Unique load was snappy and I didn't like it. The 296 load felt like it had more thump but hurt my hand less to shoot. The 296 load is my go to load.

Yes, I am just saying that a 3% or 5 grain difference in projectile mass does not account for the perceived difference in recoil.

IMO

 

[American123]

It takes more than 3% difference to have a perceptible difference in recoil

Human perceptions are usually not linear, they are often logarithmic.

E.G., it can take changing something by double or half the amount for us to perceive the difference.

I disagree, but I believe the power used is a factor responsible for the biggest difference, as others have mentioned.

 

[The Heretic]

I disagree, but I believe the power used is a factor responsible for the biggest difference, as others have mentioned.

If you are asserting that 5 grains of mass accounts for the recoil difference, then you are ignoring the difference in velocity:

Rem 180gr FMJ .40 - SIG 226 4.4" barrel - 948 fps

Rem Golden Saber 185gr JHP - SIG 227 4.4" barrel .45 ACP - 912 fps

Note that the .45 ACP velocity is 36 fps less or almost 4% less. Considering the FPE = V^2 times mass - the recoil impulse of the .40 180gr @948 fps should be more than the .45 ACP load, and this calculator https://shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php agrees with that assertion. And yet, my perception of the recoil is that it was less, including the fact that I shoot the .45 slower than the .40 when using those loads.

 

[American123]

If you are asserting that 5 grains of mass accounts for the recoil difference, then you are ignoring the difference in velocity:

Rem 180gr FMJ .40 - SIG 226 4.4" barrel - 948 fps

Rem Golden Saber 185gr JHP - SIG 227 4.4" barrel .45 ACP - 912 fps

Note that the .45 ACP velocity is 36 fps less or almost 4% less. Considering the FPE = V^2 times mass - the recoil impulse of the .40 180gr @948 fps should be more than the .45 ACP load, and this calculator https://shooterscalculator.com/recoil-calculator.php agrees with that assertion. And yet, my perception of the recoil is that it was less, including the fact that I shoot the .45 slower than the .40 when using those loads.

Why is the velocity of the .45 less?

(One might notice that is also weighs more by 5 grains)

There is A LOT of math that can be done here relative to all the data already available, as well as data not provided, but definitely still part of that equation.

I'm not interested in getting into it further. Enjoy your experiment