I was shooting with some friends the other day when one of the ladies commented that she didn’t like to shoot her concealed carry gun. She loved carrying it because it was so light but it hurt her hand when she fired it. It was one of the small .380 Autos so common these days. I remembered when she first got the gun because she let me try it and it hurt my hand too. In my case the trigger guard banged against my trigger finger on each shot.

I frequently carry a small .380 myself, of another brand. That gun doesn’t cause me any trouble while shooting. However I once let a rooky shooter try it on the range and he told me that he was surprised at how “powerful” it was. He had been shooting an older 9mm before trying the .380 and most of us know that the 9mm is more “powerful” than the little pocket gun.

These incidents, and others like them, really got me thinking about the guns we men tend to pick for our “girls”, be they wives, girl friends or daughters. Almost invariably women who are new to shooting get steered toward small, “cute” guns that are light weight and chambered for lower powered cartridges. I’ve seen it over and over at gun shows and stores, and have been guilty of it myself. The important factor we all seem to over look is that little guns KICK!

These thoughts lead me to do a comparison of the recoil energy of various gun and cartridge combinations. The choices that were made came from various discussions I’ve had recently about handguns in general. This chart is intended as just a basic tool and does not attempt to indicate the actual “felt recoil” because I simply have no way to calculate all the ergonomic effects involved in that.

The method I used was to pick a load for each cartridge from Hodgdon’s “2012 Annual Manual”, with one exception. The Hodgdon loads for .357 Magnum were for a 10” barrel and, after I ran the numbers, the resulting velocities just looked too high. So, for the .357 Magnum only, I used loads from Speer Manual #14. Then I found the gun’s weight and barrel length on the manufacturer’s web site. To adjust for various barrel lengths I threw in a SWAG (Sophisticated Wild Ass Guess) of +/- 50 ft/sec per 1”of difference between the tested barrel length and the gun’s actual barrel length. I calculated the momentum of the bullet plus the powder at the muzzle. Newton’s “equal and opposite reaction” says that the gun will have the same momentum as the bullet plus the powder, but in the opposite direction. That enabled me to calculate the gun’s recoil energy, measured in foot-pounds. I did all this in an Excel spreadsheet.

I stuck twenty three gun/cartridge combinations in my spreadsheet and sorted them by recoil energy. Here are my results:



In my family we have three “girl guns”. My wife, who rarely shoots, has had a S&W Model 36 since shortly after we got married. She learned to shoot with revolvers and likes them. My oldest daughter likes to shoot and prefers her Ruger SR9c. My youngest daughter doesn’t shoot as much but seems to like her Ruger SP101 in .32 H&R Magnum. When you look at the chart you see that the Ruger LCP that I sometimes carry actually has more recoil energy than my daughter’s SR9c. It also has a MUCH smaller grip! As I said, I can’t calculate the “felt recoil” but I can sure tell you that that particular .380 is a lot harder to shoot well than that particular 9mm, and nowhere near as comfortable.

At the end of the list I threw in a couple of heavy weights, just for comparison. I don’t mind firing the Super Redhawk in .44 Magnum and the .480 Ruger was certainly controllable. Over the years though, I have decided that I have no desire at all to shoot another .357 Magnum “snubby”. As you can see the recoil energy is pretty high and, again, there just isn’t much to hang on to.

The point of this whole exercise is to get folks thinking about their choices for “girls’ guns”. We should realize that a larger, more powerful gun might be a better choice than a little cute one for our lady friends just learning to shoot. As always, I encourage new shooters to try as many different guns as possible before buying their own. A gun you are comfortable with is going to be much more effective than one that you don’t like to shoot.

Ive always wondered why the .22 wmr isnt used in these types of way..it would seem to me to be a better choice????
am I way off track???

Pkslinger, nice work!

However, I don't think your list is complete unless it includes some Glocks and Kahrs. At least the G26/27 and G17/22. I never learned the Kahr model numbers.

Who would have thought that a small punny .380 or .22 WMR would be harder to handle than a 9mm? That was the surprise I got when I went out to find a carry pistol smaller than my G26 and tried a Kahr 9mm. Wow!!! Hang-on Nellie!!! I also tried Kahr and LCP .380s and a 5-shot .22 WMR mini-revolver with a laser! They all were amazingly hard to control including trigger pull. Yes, Elvis, a .22 WMR - it was so small and light, controlling it was almost impossible. I could barely keep the hits on the body at 10 ft. The entire experience made me decide to stick with my G26 9mm subcompact which I can shoot as well as my full-size Glocks.

Here are some Glock velocity data points if you need them.

www.huntingnut.com/ind...rel+length

A true "ladies gun". Light recoil and my loves hers. And it never even made your list. Bersa Thunder .380.

I bought a keltec p11- 9mm,the most recoil abusive inaccurate pos in my safe!I have another compact nine-almost identicle to the keltec,and it is totally controllable,accurate and comfortable-all using the same loads.I have derringers that are less recoil abusive and more accurate that the keltec!I have a keltec rifle,and it is a good product!

Bushmaster wrote:

A true "ladies gun". Light recoil and my loves hers. And it never even made your list. Bersa Thunder .380.

What model is yours? That CC model looks pretty cool, I'm going to try to find a range with one to let my wife try out.


-DallanC

The regular one not the CC one. Wife uses hers for target work and CCW. The sights on the standard Bersa are much better. The rear leaf is adjustable for windage. Three orange dots. It's light and recoil is low. If it weren't she wouldn't carry it or shoot at targets with it. She's recoil senitive.

Excellent work. Design is everything. My daughters love to shoot .45 ACP rounds in my 1911s but draw the line at my Kahr CW 45. I don't find it offensive, but do admit that it recoils more than the 1911s...and why not? It only weighs 27 ounces loaded. For long term shooting I reach for a 1911 too. My middle daughter can shoot her LC9 very well, but still prefers a 1911 .45 for target shooting. She says that they seem to recoil less.

I have run across many men who dislike the recoil of the .380 in the Ruger and similar size pistols, but my friend has a Llama miniature of the 1911 in .380 that is a pleasure to shoot. Again...design. Too much emphasis is being placed on concealability and not enough on ergonomics.

This is an Excel spreadsheet, in case anyone wants a copy. Just send me a PM with an email address to send it to.

THANKS !!! VERY NICE< I'm in !!

[quote=" Llama miniature of the 1911 in .380 that is a pleasure to shoot. Again...design.[/quote]

I came across one of these Llamas and bought it for my wife because she had here eye on a very nice little colt that was very expensive...... I did have to shell out quite a lot of cash on the Llama. It is the mini 1911 chromed with complete scrolling. It.s an easy shooter but my wife still prefers my Colt 1911 Officers Model.

I've been playing with the spreadsheet some more (up to 40 guns now) and my observation is that new shooters are usually comfortable with guns having 6 ftlbs or less of recoil energy. Again, this doesn't account for ergonomics, etc. that affect "felt recoil".

Well, I was reading "Understanding Firearms Ballistics" by Rinker again and found some info that made me change one of my spreadsheet formulas. I was using a constant of 4,000 ft/sec for the powder velocity but Rinker said a rule of thumb is to use 1.5 times the muzzle velocity. I also added a few more guns to the original group. Here's what I have now:



Once again, this does not take into account the ergonomics, etc. that would affect "felt recoil". For example, the Ruger LCP and the Ruger Redhawk have the same recoil energy with standard loads and I can tell you that the Redhawk is more comfortable to shoot.

Anyone wishing the corrected spreadsheet just let me know. By the way, this would obviously work on rifles or shotguns too.

Thanks, Pkslinger, for adding in the Glocks!

Is there any reduction of recoil for semi-autos and energy used to cycle the action?

Slim, from what I'm reading, no difference in recoil energy. Rinker mentions shooting an M1A with the gas port closed and comparing it with the gas port open. There is a difference in "felt recoil" because of the slide movement, etc.