Least Recoil/Muzzle-Flip on a 9mm
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Semi-Auto Handguns > Least Recoil/Muzzle-Flip on a 9mm

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-29-2012, 06:17 AM   #1
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
vulgar_hands's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 16
Default Least Recoil/Muzzle-Flip on a 9mm

Wanted to narrow down the pistols you all thought was the softest shooting or had the least flip.
Now I know there are a lot of external factors that come into play when shooting (like grip and the Ammo used) But I wanted to talk strictly about the guns dynamic capabilities to absorb recoil and reduce muzzle flip. So without further due, my short list is in two categories are...

All metal frame: Beretta m9/92
This gun just spits lead like a squirt gun does water. The overall weight of the pistol absorbs much of the forces right off the back. Muzzle flip is honed in with a giant ergonomic grip, the lengthy 5" exposed barrel and most importantly a cut out slide reducing much of the reward weight coming back to flip up during the cycle.

Polymer Frame: Steyr m9
This little polymer amazes me every time I shoot it. Its a simple recipe, The combination of an extremely high grip with an extremely low bore goes a long way. the grip angle makes you point with your finger (think Glock angle) instead of your pointing with your fist (think 1911) and you really have the ability to soak in every shot and be ready for the next with this pistol.

Honorable mentions would be the sig p226, Cz75, and M&P 9

image-4195849404.jpg   image-2722009443.jpg  
__________________
vulgar_hands is offline  
 
Reply With Quote

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today - It's Free!

Are you a firearms enthusiast? Then we hope you will join the community. You will gain access to post, create threads, private message, upload images, join groups and more.

Firearms Talk is owned and operated by fellow firearms enthusiasts. We strive to offer a non-commercial community to learn and share information.

Join FirearmsTalk.com Today! - Click Here


Old 05-29-2012, 04:21 PM   #2
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,580
Liked 2493 Times on 1422 Posts
Likes Given: 1945

Default

As much as I like the 92, the polymers

absorb a lot of recoil.

IMO, the real advantage of the Beretta is the

grip, overall design, size and weight, which, for

your parameters, works for, rather than against the gun.

IMHO, in most cases VS polymers, the 92 flips more,

but is easier to control. YMMV...

__________________
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2012, 02:09 PM   #3
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
vulgar_hands's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 16
Default

My understanding is a Gun's recoil is a function of the weight or mass of the gun relative to the mass times velocity of the projectile leaving the barrel. In other words, the heavier the gun, the LESS energy/recoil being transferred, the lighter the gun, the MORE energy/Recoil.
Perceived recoil is more or less the recoil springs ability to transfer that energy over time. Perceived recoil is also the way the gun is engineered, ( grip serrations, grip angle, Bore Axis ect ect)
I haven't thought of polymers absorbing more recoil or perceived recoil, than metal frames is simply because Ive never notice the frame flex at all when I shoot. I imagine if a frame flexed a considerable amount, then yes, I would consider the frame a major component in recoil absorption.
Perhaps you can help me see more clearly regarding this idea.

__________________
vulgar_hands is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2012, 02:48 PM   #4
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,580
Liked 2493 Times on 1422 Posts
Likes Given: 1945

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vulgar_hands View Post
I haven't thought of polymers absorbing more recoil or perceived recoil, than metal frames is simply because Ive never notice the frame flex at all when I shoot. I imagine if a frame flexed a considerable amount, then yes, I would consider the frame a major component in recoil absorption.
Perhaps you can help me see more clearly regarding this idea.
My experience isn't theoretical, it's from shooting said pistols.

The plastic pistols seem to soak up more recoil than my 92s to me.

The 92s also seem more controllable. But this is just my perceptions

from actually shooting the guns.

Your theories do sound better, however...
__________________
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 01:36 AM   #5
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
linuxuser3890's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Jonesboro,Arkansas
Posts: 278
Liked 12 Times on 8 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vulgar_hands
My understanding is a Gun's recoil is a function of the weight or mass of the gun relative to the mass times velocity of the projectile leaving the barrel. In other words, the heavier the gun, the LESS energy/recoil being transferred, the lighter the gun, the MORE energy/Recoil.
Perceived recoil is more or less the recoil springs ability to transfer that energy over time. Perceived recoil is also the way the gun is engineered, ( grip serrations, grip angle, Bore Axis ect ect)
I haven't thought of polymers absorbing more recoil or perceived recoil, than metal frames is simply because Ive never notice the frame flex at all when I shoot. I imagine if a frame flexed a considerable amount, then yes, I would consider the frame a major component in recoil absorption.
Perhaps you can help me see more clearly regarding this idea.
You are getting into a certain part of physics known as impact forces. Think about a nail being struck by a hammer. The force generated is a function of how long the hammer is in contact with the nail. Same for say a kicker in football. The same force could be applied to the ball or the nail without impact but it wouldn't be the same.
__________________
linuxuser3890 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 01:42 AM   #6
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
canebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 150 miles NE of Sloppy Joe's Bar
Posts: 21,941
Liked 1419 Times on 808 Posts
Likes Given: 1290

Default

The Browning Hi Power hands down!

__________________
http://i695.photobucket.com/albums/v...brake02jpg.jpg

http://i1060.photobucket.com/albums/...ps18cfbeae.jpg

Get her dirty, then clean her so she starts to respect you. When her trust is complete, she will serve you well for a lifetime!

"...if doves shot back, there wouldn't be a need for a bag limit."
- orangello
canebrake is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:11 PM   #7
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
vulgar_hands's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxuser3890

You are getting into a certain part of physics known as impact forces. Think about a nail being struck by a hammer. The force generated is a function of how long the hammer is in contact with the nail. Same for say a kicker in football. The same force could be applied to the ball or the nail without impact but it wouldn't be the same.

Agreed, this is why I believe a heavier will have a greater inertial mass therefore pistol will recoil less than a lighter one with a lower lesser inertial mass regardless of composition (polymer/metal framed) That having been said, in general metal framed guns tend to be heavier, with the exception of some aluminum or titanium framed pistols.
Perhaps therewolf is talking about the elasticity of polymers when the collision occurs between frame and slide. Again, I have found that polymers were designed to be just as ridged as metal frames although at some level I'm sure a polymer frame is less elastic than metal, just so little that the difference is negligible.
Thanks for engaging in this discussion.
Back to the question at hand. What pistol do you find recoils and flips least for you?
__________________
vulgar_hands is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:13 PM   #8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
vulgar_hands's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by canebrake
The Browning Hi Power hands down!
Great choice. I've never owned one, but after shooting one it made me want to. They're such smooth operators and scary acurate!
__________________
vulgar_hands is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:22 PM   #9
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
vulgar_hands's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therewolf

My experience isn't theoretical, it's from shooting said pistols.

The plastic pistols seem to soak up more recoil than my 92s to me.

The 92s also seem more controllable. But this is just my perceptions

from actually shooting the guns.

Your theories do sound better, however...
Your right, this is a subjective inquiry based on perceptions and the answer resides in each individual shooter. That been said, what is your answer? Which 9mm do you find easiest to control?
__________________
vulgar_hands is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2012, 04:24 PM   #10
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
onetuza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Sebastian,Florida
Posts: 9
Default

Smith & Wesson M&P line, without a doubt.

__________________
onetuza is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Flip up sights mt232 AR-15 Discussion 5 04-08-2012 06:52 PM
muzzle loader recoil compair? mrbirdguy Blackpowder & Musket 4 07-25-2010 01:16 PM
primer flip joshfireart Ammunition & Reloading 3 05-23-2010 12:19 AM
Muzzle Brakes - JP Recoil Eliminator Stevesdl General Rifle Discussion 3 01-08-2010 10:17 PM
flip up sights tdtucka5 Curio & Relic Discussion 2 12-09-2007 12:26 AM