least recoil?

[Ura-Ki]

Another consideration, type and design of the pistol will effect recovery time as well.
A 1911 is relatively slow in it's cycle where a Beretta 92 is much faster even in the same 9 mm chambering. Grip style, angle, and width will effect how your hand reacts to recoil, and finally the sights, how fast your eye can reacquire them!

 

[mkwerx]

115s shoot softer but 124s are not really much tougher. My fav 9mm loading is 124s

 

[Koda]

115s shoot softer but 124s are not really much tougher. My fav 9mm loading is 124s

thats what Ive observed too, the question is if there is any terminal difference between the two...? I dont have anything to go by but doubt it...

 

[mkwerx]

124s may penetrate a tad deeper. With typical capacities between 10 and 20 rounds in the average pistol you can put enough rounds into an aggressor to make them rethink their actions even if the extra inch a 124 may give does not drop them hollywood style.

Its probably out of date but when i used to religiously read gun magazines mas ayoob wrote quite a bit about his preferred guns - his HD gun for a long time was a beretta 92 loaded with 115ers. His duty gun as a cop was a ruger p345 - department issue. I bet they quickly switched to a gun that did not have a 45lb trigger. The p345 was a gun I do not regret ditching. The P90 and even 97 were far better shooters.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Here is the Ballistics link that shows most of the standards!
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/

 

[teflon6string]

Parameters: premium self defense hollowpoint ammo only.

Observation: typically a lighter bullet has higher velocity and the result is often higher energy (ft-lbs)

Does a lighter grain (weight) bullet traveling faster have less felt recoil than a heavier bullet traveling slower?

But where will the shock of those higher velocity foot pounds be absorbed more? At the weapon, or at the target?

I'm no rocket surgeon, but it seems a lighter round would require less energy to push out the end of the barrel. Therefore (assuming the same measure of powder), wouldn't shoving a heavier round through the same tube cause more felt recoil in the weapon?

 

[DieselScout]

But where will the shock of those higher velocity foot pounds be absorbed? At the weapon, or at the target?

I'm no rocket surgeon, but it seems a lighter round would require less energy to push out the end of the barrel. Therefore (assuming the same measure of powder), wouldn't shoving a heavier round through the same tube cause more felt recoil in the weapon?

It depends on the velocity at which it's pushed. Some quick calculatations show a 115 gr 9mm at 2500 FPS and a 147gr 9mm at 2200FPS have the same muzzle energy, near 1590 ft/lbs, so should have the same recoil. Can you "feel" 300 FPS difference in velocity.

EDIT: I should note my velocities are way off what you'd see out of a pistol, but it's just math to help visualize a point.

 

[Koda]

But where will the shock of those higher velocity foot pounds be absorbed more? At the weapon, or at the target?

I'm no rocket surgeon, but it seems a lighter round would require less energy to push out the end of the barrel. Therefore (assuming the same measure of powder), wouldn't shoving a heavier round through the same tube cause more felt recoil in the weapon?

yes, this is true but what confused me was all the choices in ammo between different manufacturers, using the same weight but they use different velocities... or different weights with different velocities. But yeah, what you said is what Im generally looking at now.

 

[MrMillspecer]

You might try these.

<broken link removed>