Glock Pro Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My understanding is that a 147 gr 9mm has less felt recoil than a 115gr 9mm. Is this correct and why is that? Intuitively the heavier bullet to me would feel more recoil.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,285 Posts
I believe there is a thread discussing this very issue somewhere around here.

Maybe one of the participants in that one will recall where it is and hook us up with a link.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,976 Posts
It's based on shooting at the same powerfactor... The heavier bullet would not need as much powder to make the same powerfactor as a light bullet...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I can imagine that in a 9mm cartridge, the bullet plus the powder take up the full space. If the bullet is larger, then the powder is smaller and vice versa. With less powder, less felt recoil? Is that the idea?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,102 Posts
This is not my area of expertise but here's what I did - My brain tries to tell me a heavier bullet should have more recoil (for every action there's and equal and opposite reaction). It stands to reason it would take more force to push a heavier bullet. But, as jb pointed out, not everything is equal. Typically the heavier bullet is not being accelerated to the same speed.

I thought if I just looked at a measurement of force, maybe this would make some sense. Foot-pounds is a pretty easy measurement of force to calculate and some ammo manufacturers publish it. Using Freedom Munitions published numbers for round nose 9mm (weight and speed) I cheated and used an online calculator to get ft-lb

115gr @ 1120fps = 320.3 ft-lb
124gr @ 1060fps = 309.3 ft-lb
147gr @ 890fps = 258.5 ft-lb

I believe this explains why heaver rounds have less felt recoil. I don't know if that necessarily means less powder was used (re-loaders would know more about that) BUT the resulting measurement of force is less.

If all things were equal - enough explosive force was used to make every bullet travel at 1120fps then:
124gr would be 345.4 ft-lb
147gr would be 409.4 ft-lb

In which case there would be significantly more felt recoil.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
756 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Yes, the boxes that I'm looking at make clear that the heavier bullet is slower (a little slower) than the lighter ones. Since I'm looking at Hornady self defense, I assume that there is enough power and penetration to be valid self defense charges.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,102 Posts
Hornady Critical Defense? Yes, it's quality self defense ammo. Check out

Federal HST ended up being his 9mm winner, but the difference between the two is miniscule. I would carry Critical Defense without hesitation. Since you are thinking about self defense, this article by the same guy doing the testing is an excellent real life incident evaluation Another Real-Life Shooting Incident ? The Waffle House Shooting | Shooting The Bull

The conclusion is the same as you'll find most everywhere today - handgun rounds are not great at "stopping" (any handgun round). The most important thing is shot placement and the understanding that multiple shots will be necessary. With that in mind, low recoil becomes desirable as long as the ammo is still performing to acceptable standards. From what I've read, this was a big part of the FBI's decision to switch back to the 9mm round.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
569 Posts
I've never done the math or used a chronograph, but using my 9mm carbine it's obvious that a 147 grain bullet has less felt recoil than a 115 or 124 grain round.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top