Low recoil centerfire

After 18 months rehab on my elbow I can shoot the 22. I tried the 45 (with the lightest load I have - suitable for indoor only) and after 5 shots it was "nope".

I guess with time I will get to the stage of being able to cope with the 45 but I'm of an age now where healing is a much more drawn out process than it was 4+ decades ago. Even then I'd much rather only shoot 90 rounds with it and not 180. Therefore the search is on for a (much) lower recoiling CF. I'd rather stay on the 1911 platform as I use that for the 22. I realise that I could spend $4K on a Pardini and conversion - but the ensuing divorce proceedings would make that a poor choice :-)

So - any suggestions on a sensible way to approach this. There's nothing I can see that springs out and says "me". My ideal would be a 32 ACP conversion. I spoke to Larry Nelson about that a couple of years ago but he said that although it's possible there wasn't a business case for doing one. How about a 380? Is that doable at 50 yds? Using my Beretta service pistol as a benchmark I don't think 9mm is the way to go. 38 special I suppose but model 52s are like hen's teeth nowadays - is anyone doing a modern version?

1911 in 9mm.  If they're building Bianchi Cup guns that are doing 1.5" at 50 yards, I'm sure a CF gun would be no problem.

In my opinion the Euro pistols and 32 calibers with a low bore Centerline recoils directly into your arm and is not your friend. That is if you're battling recovering from an injury. The 9 mm requires too much velocity to be accurate and is snappy so I don't think that's a good option. I think the best option is a 1911 38 Special. If you were only shooting 25 yds you could probably download it. Jerry Keefers last 38 spl build with frame mount cycled 2.0 gr BE.
Jon

Yeah - I tried my revolver and the 50yd load, while still a little too much was much more amenable to work with. That's using 2.9 gr TiteGroup so I'm guessing that a 1911 with 2 (ish) gr BE would be in the same ball park. 148g wadcutter I assume to get into the frame?

Anyone building / converting these as a matter of course or am I looking at a full custom build?

Thanks

I shoot a 38 super in a 1911. Very accurate. And softer shooting.

Either the 38spl or 38 super..both have very light recoil. I have both as wad guns and there is very little difference in recoil with a dot mounted on the slide. Both lay spent cases on the bench

I would go with a 38 super downloaded with 147 gr SWC bullets. 2.5-2.6 BE or about 700 fps. Spring the gun so it functions. Probably 9-10 pounds.

Thanks a lot for the input guys. Am I wrong in assuming that a 9mm Range Officer (or similar) would be a good start point for a 38 super?

Yes. Use .38 super comp brass though

You can tweak the metalcraft un-crimped mags by removing the back insert for .38 super. You might have to change out slide stops if you want lock back function

straybrit wrote:Thanks a lot for the input guys. Am I wrong in assuming that a 9mm Range Officer (or similar) would be a good start point for a 38 super?

RO breech face has to be opened up for 38 Super case rim. 38 Comp brass will work in 9mm slide with no modifications

You might consider a 32 long.  Mine will hold the x ring at 50 y with 1.6 gr 310 or WST. For me, quite a bit less recoil than my Clark 38 special with light loads or my 9mm (also with light loads). Not snappy like the ACP.

Several Alternatives, some with 22 conversions.

Jon/James - yeah - I kinda knew about super comp but thanks for the reminder.

Greg - I'd rather stay with the 1911 platform if possible. If only because of cost.

Jon Eulette wrote:The 9 mm requires too much velocity to be accurate and is snappy so I don't think that's a good option. I think the best option is a 1911 38 Special.

So, rake me over the coals for my ignorance, but why can't a 9mm load be developed to perform the same as a 38sp load.

9mm/38/357 are basically the same diameter and are available in ranges that makes them identical so the same bullets can be loaded and fired in the different calibre firearms. So what's the limitation?

Certainly the online comparisons between the three calibres are more of less totally correct due to standard commercial loads. But surely hand loading blurs the lines between them. No?

Now, I'm certainly a victim of lack of information. Is it bullet and seating depth that limits 9mm loading and makes it so that the 2.0 of BE just can't fit in the 9mm case with the same weight bullet loaded to the correct OAL?

Did find a "bullet database".
http://www.shootforum.com/forum/bulletdb.html

.355 dia bullets range from 77gr to 247gr and .404 to 1.36 in length
Unfortunately, can sort but can't filter that database. But surely considering that 147gr is common commercially, does going to a common 38 weight of 158gr end up being too long?
Obviously that database isn't extensive, there's only 7 147gr bullets and 2 158 bullets. But the max difference in length is 0.64 to 0.695. So, 0.055.

Case volume for one thing. You can duplicate.38 spl by loading the 148 wadcutter waaay out. But then it won’t chamber, picks up debris. Etc.

I'm sure one of the more knowledgeable people will correct me - but I thought it was due to the twist rate of the barrel. To stabilise the 'standard' 115g jacketed bullet at 50 yds they need to turn it quick and push it hard. 

Which raises the question of what twist rate would work for non-jacketed 158g bullets and would they physically fit in a 9mm luger case with a suitable powder load. I have no idea - but I'd be willing to wager that someone in here does.[Edit - Jim got in before I did - so what bullets would fit I wonder]

Of course - you then have the issue of finding a barrel at the required specification and associated magazines. I suspect that the short-form answer is '38 super with light loads'.

In my limited experience with the 38 super (working on it now, I have several I'm trying to finish) I'm under the impression that the extra case volume and powders available for use are what make the 38 Super capable of the 38 spl type velocities and performance. As we all know 50 yds is our standard distance for accuracy testing. 9mm is heavily dependent on new brass and velocity to achieve this accuracy. A good 38 spl 1911 will get 1.5" with mixed used brass which most of us desire. So I lnow from Jimmy that he's had great results with his Supers. I always forget about the super becsuse I'm a big special fan.
Jon

james r chapman wrote:Case volume for one thing. You can duplicate.38 spl by loading the 148 wadcutter waaay out. But then it won’t chamber, picks up debris. Etc.

But 9mm is easily available with 147gr bullets. Do you need more case volume to drop velocity?
You added wadcutter to the mix, is that a necessity for accuracy?

147gr 9mm SWC seems to be abundant enough to generate quite a number of results in a Google search. 

Or, 150gr: http://www.acmebullet.com/bullets-reloading-brass/9MM-Lead-Cast-Reloading-Bullets?product_id=486

straybrit mentioned twist rate. I can understand that could be an issue with slowing down a 9mm load.


Twist rate does seem to be a rabbit hole down which I'll only get myself lost.
But, found one page that gives a formula for bullets: https://www.chuckhawks.com/rifling_twist_rate.htm
Another that gives the rates for different manufacturers and pistols (obviously not extensive): [url=http://www.exteriorballistics.com/reference/pdf/Twist Tables_handgun.pdf]http://www.exteriorballistics.com/reference/pdf/Twist%20Tables_handgun.pdf[/url]
And a barrel manufacturer that states: 

http://blog.westernpowders.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Webfile_Barrel-Twist-Rate.pdf wrote:Our second analysis, intended to determine the optimum twist for 1911 pistol barrels, identified 24 inch twist as the optimum twist. Using our 38 Super, as an example, a 24 inch twist will minimally stabilize a 170 grain bullet while simultaneously it will somewhat overstabilize 124 grain bullets, but without noticably degrading their accuracy. Experimental work confirmed these predictions. We have therefore used the 24 inch twist exclusively with our AET barrels and excellent accuracy has resulted with 38 Super, 9x19, 40S&W, and 45ACP AET barrels, often sub-one inch accuracy at 50 yards. 

From all that I'll infer that a standard 9mm barrel and twist won't be correctly stabilising a heavier slower bullet when designed for the standard 115 gr @ 1100 - 1400 fps.
But, if the Schuemann article is to be believed, I don't see why what could be accomplished in a 38sp couldn't also be done with a 9mm if the twist is appropriate and the same.

No, the 147 is a boattail bullet, it seats very deep in the case. You still get 950-1000 FPS with it in 9. The 38 super, longer case, more volume gives a much lower velocity with a comparable charge.

I have built several accurate 9mm 1911's that were intended to emulate the balistics of the 38 Sp, i.e. a 147gr bullet at about 700-725 fps.  They used 12 and 10 twist barrels to stabilize the long 147gr bullet at those low velocities.  I got 1.5-2" 10-shot groups at 50 yds using Hornady XTPs but could not get that level of accuracy using any of the readily available cast 9mm 147gr bullets.  Some of this work has been published here on the forum.

The catch is that there is no published (and therefore pressure tested) data available for the 9mm using 147gr bullets at those low velocities.  I had to experiment with powders and charges that I felt were safe for me based on extrapolation, but I would not publish them for others to use.

I should also note that the 9mm, even at these low velocities, still has to my hand a small bit of the "crack" rather than "push" that is characteristic of both the 38Sp and the 45acp.

I always find it interesting learning more about what is out there and available commercially.

9mm, 158 gr, FMJ, 850FPS Fiocchi
https://www.targetbarn.com/fiocchi-9mm-luger-subsonic-ammunition-50-rounds-of-158-grain-fmj.php

Subsonic 9mm is easy. Accurate at 50yds and subsonic - now that's the trick.

I switched from my 45 to a model 52 when I had hand problems and could no longer handle the 45.  Eventually the hand problem got worse and I was switched to shooting left handed for a year.  I am back to shooting right handed now and all is good but I have stayed with the model 52.  The recoil is much less than a 45.  I load the 148g HBWC with 2.6g WST or 2.9g HP38.
DJW1CAV

Yeah - I've looked longingly at the 52 - the issue I have is maintenance. The youngest one has to be, what, 25 years old? AFAIK there's no supply chain for after-market spares (though I'd love to be proved wrong) so what do you do when something breaks?

Don't get me wrong - I think it would be approaching the ideal alternative for me assuming I can put a red dot on it - if I thought it was maintainable.  Getting Jon to make an equivalent from proven 1911 parts strikes me as being a more sustainable solution. I am working from a position of ignorance however and I've learned a lot from this thread - so keep 'em coming.