147gr ammo recoil attribution

Status
Not open for further replies.

Triple_Se7en

$50 Site Donor 2024
Joined
Dec 4, 2004
Messages
14,055
Location
1/2 hr N.E. of Detroit
I like holding my 9mm and firing it with the least recoil-as-possible. It is a compact Taurus PT111 G2. My aim / accuracy depends on control of that pistol. I am currently shooting 80gr Ruger Poly ARX ammo. I like the pistol control I have using that lighter-weight ammo.

As a member of a few gun message boards and concentrating on pistol discussions there lately, a few members have stated felt recoil is actually less with the 147gr, versus that of 115gr. All involving factory ammo.

I have never purchased the 147gr for my 9mm. But I had noticed the 115gr has slightly less felt recoil than the 124gr.

So how can that be? How can a 147 be felt less (in my hand) than a 115? I was about to enter a Bass Pro Shop to buy some 147gr ammo. But then I thought I would inquire about it here-first.
 
Last edited:
Buy a box and head to the range. Good reason to do some shooting. I would much rather do my own practical evaluation than rely some unknown source on the www.
 
Agreed--experimentation is called for. It's also the best part!

Regarding felt recoil, a lot of it is personal perception. What feels one way to one person will feel different to another. That said, it seems popular now for .45 target shooters who handload to use heavy (230 - 250 grain) bullets over light loads of faster powder for the specific reason of reducing the felt recoil impulse. I've never tried that myself though.
 
Usually the heavier the bullet, the greater the felt recoil. This may not be the case with 147 Gr. FMJ 9 MM, because most of it is loaded to subsonic levels for use with suppressed weapons.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Usually the heavier the bullet, the greater the felt recoil. This may not be the case with 147 Gr. FMJ 9 MM, because most of it is loaded to subsonic levels for use with suppressed weapons.


147gr is subsonic because you can't push that weight bullet supersonic within SAAMI pressure levels. Same reason 45ACP is "subsonic".
 
I'm one of those rare cases that do not think handguns have any real recoil. I just don't understand, be it a .22lr, 9mm, 40mm, 45acp, or even a 44 magnium. I just don't see any real recoil (felt in hand). It might just be the way I hold them or I've been using some handguns with great ergonomics but still.

Closest thing to recoil would be the 44mag I shot and I only really say that because it had a small revolver grip that didn't quiet fit my hand well.

From shooting shotguns, .308's, and 7mm mag I always thought I was sensitive to recoil but when it comes to handguns I just don't really notice it.
 
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en

But I had noticed the 115gr has slightly less felt recoil than the 124gr.

So how can that be? How can a 147 be felt less (in my hand) than a 115?


Why did you forget to take the gun powder charge into equation? Some gun powder loads are light, some are heavier, some are maximum pressure (+P), and some are over pressure (+P+)

A Remington 124 might have more recoil than a Winchester 124, but less recoil than a Federal 124.

Also, European ammo, loaded in Europe, is typically loaded to 9MM NATO pressure, which is higher than most American companies, but slightly less than +P pressure. So Fiochi, S&B, and others loaded in Europe will have more recoil.

Target 147 ammo will likely have less recoil than 115 or 124 target FMJ ammo that you have tried.

Premium 147 loads such as Federal HST will be charged with more gunpowder or more powerful gun powders and will likely have more felt recoil than target 147 JHP.

As to firing with the least amount of recoil as possible, any of the 115, 124, 147 grain target FMJ loads on the market will be pretty close in recoil. If that is too much recoil for you, than that gun is not a good fit for you and you need to look for a heavier gun in perhaps a smaller caliber. Smaller calibers recoil less, as do heavier guns.
 
I like the recoil of a 147gr better than other weights in the 9mm. It feels like a softer push in any of my 9's from the CM9 to the CZ75 Tactical. A part of the perceived recoil is muzzle blast, which a subsonic load will have less.

Try it and see. I personally carry 147gr. loads, so I practice with them the most.
 
Different bullet weights can feel very different. Some light bullets will have a sharper recoil while heavier bullets can have more of a shove type recoil, caliber specific of course. Recoil can change by powder choice as well ie faster vs. slower burn rates.
 
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
All good responses so far. Wish there was a "Like" feature here, imbedded in everyone's post.


Please let's not go down this road. There are posters on here yet to reach a one year anniversary date and over 1000 posts seemingly for an automotive resume dressing..

"ranking member of BITOG"
 
It is my perception the 147 grain loads have a heavier felt recoil than the typical 115 gr blasting ammo does. Not that either of them is offensive, the 9mm is a very friendly round to shoot.
 
The heavier 9mm bullet uses less powder, according to Lyman #48 handloading manual. Also I was adamantly told by a professional reloader and maker of bullets that 147 has less recoil. Don't ask me to explain it....take it for what its worth. I reload 9mm and 45acp for plinking in my backyard. I start with what the book calls for, using the minimum load that will cause the slides to
function well. I started with 100 and 115gr bullets and have never tried 147gr.
 
RA9T did indeed have VERY sedate recoil, in my experience, but then, so does 9PBLE. Recoil is kindof a moot point in 9mm if you're holding the pistol correctly, regardless of ammo, IMO/IME, though. I shoot whatever. I think these mags actually had a mix of 115gr WWB, and 124gr remanufactured ammo. I dunno. I just loaded them with ball and went and trained:


ETA: If you have a pistol that is so small that you can't control it because you can't grip it properly, either figure out how to properly manage it, or get a pistol big enough to fight with, is my .02.
 
Last edited:
Today's American shooters have evolved into a bunch of pantywaist's. 40 years ago you couldn't find an article that mentioned "recoil" with "9 MM" or ".223". Now they're everywhere.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Today's American shooters have evolved into a bunch of pantywaist's. 40 years ago you couldn't find an article that mentioned "recoil" with "9 MM" or ".223". Now they're everywhere.


I don't know that I agree with that. The late Elmer Keith, I believe at one point even lamented the nerve damage that he caused shooting heavy caliber revolvers, in his later years. Also, shooters now days both in combat, and competition, are performing at a higher level. Physics is physics, and less recoil can't help but improve rapidly and accurately mixing lead with the target. That said, the margin is so small in 9mm between 115, 124, and 147, that you would have to be performing at a VERY high level to actually note it.

https://books.google.com/books?id=T1jgdd...ers&f=false
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Ws6


If you have a pistol that is so small that you can't control it because you can't grip it properly, either figure out how to properly manage it, or get a pistol big enough to fight with, is my .02.


...... or get what I currently use, that being Ruger ARX Polycase 80+p grain ammo for my sub-compact 9mm. Definitely more controllable / lighter recoil ammo, that keeps me more on-target / improved accuracy. These bulets faired very well in gel tests done at truthaboutgunsdotcom, using the Ruger's virtual twin-sister bullet, that being the Polycase ARX Inceptors.

There appears to be mixed reviews/opinions here on the 147gr's felt-recoil, in comparison to the very commonly used 115 and 124gr varieties. So I will venture over to Bass Pro Shop to purchase the 147gr Hornady Custom HPs and conduct my own testing on how those 147s recoil, in comparison to the 80+ps - 115s and 124s.

Thanks everyone for their opinions here.
 
Last edited:
I can't say that I've done apples to apples comparisons, but I've noticed that 147-gr defense ammo has stronger recoil than typical 115-gr range ammo. Which is the opposite of what I expected, because I've also heard that 147-gr was softer shooting.

FWIW, I've also tried 115-gr defense ammo and noticed no difference in recoil between it and standard FMJ range ammo.

Not that any of it is bad! In my opinion 9mm had very low recoil even in small handguns.
 
Originally Posted By: Ws6
The late Elmer Keith, I believe at one point even lamented the nerve damage that he caused shooting heavy caliber revolvers, in his later years.


He wasn't talking about 9 MM's and .223's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top