[skeeter25]

I recently became a Glock 23 gen. 4 owner and I am new to this forum. I am a Glock noob so forgive my incorrect jargon. I tested some remington umc 167 gr. .40 for the first 100 rounds and felt the gun was giving me a lot more recoil than it should (with a .40, I do know to expect more), and my accuracy was not up to par. I purchased some inexpensive monarch brass 180 gr. .40 for the next 100 rounds. I did much better, and I felt I had more control. I am unsure if I just settled into the .40 with my stance and posture more, or if the 180 gr. is just better to be used out of the 23 in a .40 cal. Can anyone assist in my understanding why I did better with 180 gr.?

I am coming from a Ruger SR9 as my first handgun. I do understand the large difference in calibers and recoil.

THANKS and God Bless

 

[cohland]

I recently became a Glock 23 gen. 4 owner and I am new to this forum. I am a Glock noob so forgive my incorrect jargon. I tested some remington umc 167 gr. .40 for the first 100 rounds and felt the gun was giving me a lot more recoil than it should (with a .40, I do know to expect more), and my accuracy was not up to par. I purchased some inexpensive monarch brass 180 gr. .40 for the next 100 rounds. I did much better, and I felt I had more control. I am unsure if I just settled into the .40 with my stance and posture more, or if the 180 gr. is just better to be used out of the 23 in a .40 cal. Can anyone assist in my understanding why I did better with 180 gr.?

I am coming from a Ruger SR9 as my first handgun. I do understand the large difference in calibers and recoil.

THANKS and God Bless

Skeeter,

Welcome aboard! You've given us a reasonable question and some actual information to work with, so allow me to offer the first educated guess at an answer.

If you compare the muzzle energy of the 167 vs the 180 grain ammunition, does the 167 have more? You'll need to look up the muzzle energy and velocity online if they are not provided on the ammo cartons.

Typically the lighter bullets are loaded to higher velocities, producing more muzzle energy and therefore more recoil than the heavier bullets. It might not look like much on paper, but you can feel it (at least I can). I also have a vague theory that heavier bullets just take longer to accelerate, and that quicker acceleration is what you feel as that unpleasant "snap" from a lighter round. I am not enough of a mathematician or physicist to be able to prove that theory, however. It's probably pretty basic Newtonian physics.

Chris

 

[haysmclean]

I have a G23 Gen 3 and have noticed that the heavier (180 gr) rounds seem to have less recoil or shock to my hand than the lighter rounds (155 gr is the lightest I've used).

One instructor that was used to using 40 cal glocks as a cop told me (rightly or wrongly) that the lighter rounds still have the same amount of powder, so that creates the increased shock when you shoot it.

I feel more accurate with 180 gr.

 

[skeeter25]

Thank you cohland and mclean, this furthers my confidence. Your comments make great sense.

 

[rangerbluedog]

+1
Also the type of powder; burn rate and gas generation make a difference. You'll probably want to try a few more different bullet weights and manufacturers just to compare.
You may want to try a 155 grain bullet to get another sample of bullet weight to compare.

 

[Tactworld45]

Welcome to the forum.