• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

Heavyweight (subsonic?) 9MM for less muzzle lift/lower recoil

Brettly1961

Default rank <500 posts
Fortified by Time
20   0
Joined
Oct 24, 2019
Messages
433
Reaction score
181
Location
Ft. Oglethorpe, GA
I'm sure this as been asked many times so I'll try to make this brief in hope of a easy answer.

The question is what is the best 9mm round for less felt recoil? I know it's a tough physics question with frame and barrel configurations, but let's simplify it and narrow the field to sub-compact 9 mm pistols. DAO and DA/SA: specifically a Sig P290 RS and A Taurus PT111 G2.

I want to hear comments and experiences about using heavy grain 9mm ammunition at about ~147 to 154 grains in a non-suppressed compact/Subcompact 9MM Pistol.

I don't see much difference in recoil between 115 to 124 gr FMJ/JHP. So my thought is to go heavyweight bullets in lieu of buying a different gun. The Sig P290Rs is a little snappy, a little hot, with a top heavy steel slide and a light polymer frame.

So combine that snappishness an with a long, DAO pull and the Sig is a little uncontrollable especially in a double-tap. Again I accept that some of the uncontrollability may be a shooter "flinch response" anticipating that long DAO pull. I often land high and left which is a true sign of right handed flinching. But whether I flinch or not the gun still has pronounced muzzle lift.

My question is: will a subsonic rounds (or a heavyweight round and are they synonymous? Assuming all heavyweight rounds of a certain grain are subsonic) 1) first cycle reliably in the guns I have described? And 2) will the heavier weight bullet, say Norma 154 Gr subsonic, Or like the Federal 150 Gr or similar have any lessening of felt recoil over 115 or 124 grain?

Thanks to those who know more than I.
 
Most competitive shooters I know shoot 124 to 135 gr bullets in non compensated handguns.
I recently changed to 135. At the same power factor which is velocity X bullet weight, 135s seem to give me less muzzle oscillation than 124s.
Your grip will make a bigger difference than the bullets used. I cringe when I hear an instructor tell someone to grip an handgun lightly. I tell people to grip it like it is the head of a live cobra and let off until you stop shaking. In full size guns I will shoot .16 to .20 second splits on the same target 7 yards or less. That is 5 to 6 rounds per second with combat accuracy.
That is not going to happen with gripping a gun lightly.
Keep working on your grip, If you can find a range that will allow you to practice rapid fire you can achieve amazing results with a few hours practice.
Drawing to first shot is an overlooked skill. The first hit makes more difference than follow up shots in self defense. Untrained threats usually drop their gun and run after the first shot is fired in their direction and almost all of them drop the gun and run after the first hit.
 
If you want it from a physics standpoint, it's all energy. So 1/2 MxVxV of the bullet is 1/2 MxVxV, mass times velocity squared. Some of the energy of the bullet goes into compression of the recoil spring, the rest into the gun. Heavier gun is less felt recoil, all else being equal.
 
Big Mike, I have never really studied the difference between energy and momentum in ballistics.
For purposes of classification in competition, momentum is used instead of energy.
I assume momentum is a better predictor of difficulty in managing recoil.
If energy were used I believe people would all search for the lightest and fastest load since the velocity is a term with a power of 2 in energy calculations.
Energy may be a better predictor of tissue damage when a projectile impacts tissue. Not sure why all discussions in the gun industry use energy and all competitive groups use momentum as the determining factor of “power”
 
Great info, maybe a hair over my head technically, so given BigMikes formula the mass of the bullet does "indicate or calculate" the momentum/energy of that bullet to compress the recoil spring?

Then would we get a 33% reduction in felt recoil going from (A) 115 Gr 9mm to (B) 154 Gr? Simply "bullet B minus bullet A, divided by bullet A" or it's probably not that linear of a reduction accounting for other shooting variables and artifacts?
 
Using energy, youd want the lightest and slowest bullet that would function as velocity is the driving factor in the equation. I've heard of power factors but I dont shoot in the circles that use them.

When I get wrapped up today I'll do some more explaining and incorporate springs, the numbers are neat to play with. Ultimately, the felt recoil is more on the shooter and less on the gun.
 
147gr subs were much better to me shooting in my 290RS than 115gr in felt recoil to me. That gun is a little snappy; but it was the long/heavy trigger pull that I couldn't get used to. Switched to Kimber Micro 9 and like it much better and it is even lighter weight.
 
I'm probably not really qualified to even weigh in on this topic, as my experience is limited and I've never concerned myself with the differences or power factors or any of that stuff.

However, in my own experience, the Federal Syntech 150gr had significantly less felt recoil than any of the 115gr or 124gr stuff I had on hand at the time. That being said, I have zero experience with any other 9mm over 124gr to compare it to and good luck finding any of the Syntech stuff now.
 
Back
Top Bottom