Lucky1 wrote:
jrohio wrote:
The recoil for a .45 isn't necessarily less than a .40 most people feel the recoil from a .40 is "snappier". I don't know how to define snappier but if you fire both I think you'll get it.
I prefer a .45 for what it's worth.
I prefer a .45 for what it's worth.
Thanks for the info. I don't have to shoot a .40 to "get it" now. I know exactly what you are referring to. Bought a Glock 36 and the recoil is far better and easier to manage than on any of my 9mm! Don't get me wrong, I still love my little Ruger SR9c....but the Glock....there's NO comparison. Mr. Ruger is tucked away safely in the gun safe getting a break from EDC.
Good for you Lucky1! In the event you shop for another Glock in 9mm to complement your 9mm collection I think you will have the same experience with a 9mm Glock versus your other 9mms. It's not so much the round as it is the gun firing it in some cases. The Glock is proof of that.
Keeping true to the thread I chose a Glock 22 for versatility. During the ammo shortage .40S&W was still on the shelves. Through some research I discovered that a Glock 22 could also be altered to accommodate .22LR, .357 SIG and even 9mm with simple parts swaps. They will feed everything but solid lead reliably and a simple aftermarket barrel swap would allow me to shoot pure lead if I want to.
My reasons for choosing the Glock go way beyond that but my reasons for a .40 S&W were settled when I discovered it's real world tests. The 9mm is left in the dust and the .45 doesn't look so special anymore.
Proud Member of the NRA, Crossbow Nation, Buckeye Firearms Association, Ohio Freedom Alliance
So! This is how liberty dies...With thunderous applause.