Just a question: If you were to load a cartridge with a fast burning powder like Red Dot or N310 to achieve a bullet exiting the muzzle at 1000 FPS you might have a high pressure cartridge. Now, load the same bullet with a slow burning powder, IMR4427 or H Lill' Gun, at 1000 fps you might have a low pressure cartridge. Would the recoil, or felt recoil, be the same? Just wondering. Thanks in advance.
effects of slow vs fast powder on recoil
- Thread starter dgang
- Start date
Assuming the same firearm
Same bullet weight
Same muzzle velocity
Same powder charge; recoil energy will be the same.
But if one powder charge is heavier that is the one that will have the most recoil. I'm guessing the slower powder will require a bit heavier powder charge. With handgun cartridges there usually isn't enough difference to be noticeable.
But it can matter with rifle cartridges. For example, a 30-06 might need 55 gr of powder to generate the same velocity as a 308 burning 45 gr of powder. Even though the bullet weight and velocity are the same the 308 will have noticeably less recoil because it burned significantly less powder.
There is also recoil velocity. It doesn't actually change the recoil energy, but if the recoil is spread over a longer period of time it will feel like less recoil. You usually see this with heavy bullets vs lighter bullets that generate roughly the same recoil energy. The heavier bullet will spread the recoil over a longer time period and feel like it recoils less.
It is also possible the faster burning powder might result in faster recoil velocity. But that is just a SWAG. I've never seen any data on that.
Same bullet weight
Same muzzle velocity
Same powder charge; recoil energy will be the same.
But if one powder charge is heavier that is the one that will have the most recoil. I'm guessing the slower powder will require a bit heavier powder charge. With handgun cartridges there usually isn't enough difference to be noticeable.
But it can matter with rifle cartridges. For example, a 30-06 might need 55 gr of powder to generate the same velocity as a 308 burning 45 gr of powder. Even though the bullet weight and velocity are the same the 308 will have noticeably less recoil because it burned significantly less powder.
There is also recoil velocity. It doesn't actually change the recoil energy, but if the recoil is spread over a longer period of time it will feel like less recoil. You usually see this with heavy bullets vs lighter bullets that generate roughly the same recoil energy. The heavier bullet will spread the recoil over a longer time period and feel like it recoils less.
It is also possible the faster burning powder might result in faster recoil velocity. But that is just a SWAG. I've never seen any data on that.
The pressure at the muzzle when the bullet exits will determine the velocity of the gas - created by burning powder. The mass of the gas will be the same as the charge weight. The mass x velocity of the powder is the momentum acting against the firearm resulting in recoil.
You can minimize recoil by using a small charge weight that hàs a very low pressure at the muzzle (small and slow). This is something trap shooters discovered a long time ago.
You can minimize recoil by using a small charge weight that hàs a very low pressure at the muzzle (small and slow). This is something trap shooters discovered a long time ago.
LeverGunFan
New member
jmr40 is correct, heavier charges will produce higher recoil energy. Here is the link to the SAAMI recoil formulae.
Most of the necessary data is easy to get, except for the velocity of the gas escaping the barrel. They give some estimates for that, although it probably varies some for different powders.
Most of the necessary data is easy to get, except for the velocity of the gas escaping the barrel. They give some estimates for that, although it probably varies some for different powders.
Ok, I tried to make this short, but it did not work. Short answer is, in my experience, given the same bullet weight, and similar pressure, faster burning powder produce less recoil, and less velocity.
I did some testing a couple of years back. I was shooting a Ruger LCR in 38spl with a 1.87in barrel. My goal was to see if I could achieve a full powder burn in that little barrel as I was getting massive fireballs and high extreme spreads due to the incomplete burns.
I tested with Hodgdon clays, HP-38, and Power Pistol. I did this with the same bullet, and all at max listed charge, so that should have all be about the same pressure give or take a little.
Found my testing results in my old thread
Ruger LCR chambered 38spl P+ (no +P loads used) with a 1.87in barrel.
Mixed 38spl brass
CCI #500 Small Pistol Primers
Brazos 158g SWC (hi-tek coated lead)
5 shot groups unless otherwise noted
Power Pistol (the one with a lot of unburned powder)
4.7g, avg 734fps, SD 4.35, ES 8 (4 shots, 1 registered at 13,000fps was removed)
5.2g, 804fos (only got 1 good reading, 1 error, 104fps, 99fps, 102fps, 804fps)
HP-38 (aka W-231)
3.1, avg 524fps, SD 22.6, ES 53
3.7, avg 652fps, SD 27.63, ES 75
4.4, Avg 739fps, SD 4.39, ES 11
Hodgdon Clays
2.8, avg 632, SD 12.77, ES 28
3.1, Avg 677, SD 14.17, ES 37
Notes,
Power Pistol had an unholy muzzle flash, Bright light yellow, about 8in in diameter and about 1ft long. Recoil was painful in the light gun.
HP-38, Has minimal muzzle flash, small orange fire ball, maybe 1in by 1in. recoil was moderate, not painful.
Clays. No muzzle flash. Mild recoil not snappy or abrupt. Could shoot these regularly in the snubbie.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=613662&page=2
I did some testing a couple of years back. I was shooting a Ruger LCR in 38spl with a 1.87in barrel. My goal was to see if I could achieve a full powder burn in that little barrel as I was getting massive fireballs and high extreme spreads due to the incomplete burns.
I tested with Hodgdon clays, HP-38, and Power Pistol. I did this with the same bullet, and all at max listed charge, so that should have all be about the same pressure give or take a little.
Found my testing results in my old thread
Ruger LCR chambered 38spl P+ (no +P loads used) with a 1.87in barrel.
Mixed 38spl brass
CCI #500 Small Pistol Primers
Brazos 158g SWC (hi-tek coated lead)
5 shot groups unless otherwise noted
Power Pistol (the one with a lot of unburned powder)
4.7g, avg 734fps, SD 4.35, ES 8 (4 shots, 1 registered at 13,000fps was removed)
5.2g, 804fos (only got 1 good reading, 1 error, 104fps, 99fps, 102fps, 804fps)
HP-38 (aka W-231)
3.1, avg 524fps, SD 22.6, ES 53
3.7, avg 652fps, SD 27.63, ES 75
4.4, Avg 739fps, SD 4.39, ES 11
Hodgdon Clays
2.8, avg 632, SD 12.77, ES 28
3.1, Avg 677, SD 14.17, ES 37
Notes,
Power Pistol had an unholy muzzle flash, Bright light yellow, about 8in in diameter and about 1ft long. Recoil was painful in the light gun.
HP-38, Has minimal muzzle flash, small orange fire ball, maybe 1in by 1in. recoil was moderate, not painful.
Clays. No muzzle flash. Mild recoil not snappy or abrupt. Could shoot these regularly in the snubbie.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=613662&page=2
Last edited:
I see this question was also posted on The High Road forum.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...fast-vs-slow-burning-powder-on-recoil.923339/
On that forum, post #2 seems to cover the FACTS about recoil, so I will post that response here in hopes that others might find the links of interest. All credit goes to the person who posted it, namely fxvr5.
Gunpowders that use a greater charge weight for the same speed produce more recoil. This is consistent with the principle of conservation of mass. Gunpowder weight is part of the formula for calculating recoil force. Slow powders use more weight and therefore produce more recoil force.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recoil#Including_the_ejected_gas
It has a real effect and can be measured.
https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/measure-relative-handgun-recoil/99442
edited to fix wikipedia link.
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...fast-vs-slow-burning-powder-on-recoil.923339/
On that forum, post #2 seems to cover the FACTS about recoil, so I will post that response here in hopes that others might find the links of interest. All credit goes to the person who posted it, namely fxvr5.
Gunpowders that use a greater charge weight for the same speed produce more recoil. This is consistent with the principle of conservation of mass. Gunpowder weight is part of the formula for calculating recoil force. Slow powders use more weight and therefore produce more recoil force.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recoil#Including_the_ejected_gas
It has a real effect and can be measured.
https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/measure-relative-handgun-recoil/99442
edited to fix wikipedia link.
Last edited:
Understand that there can be a difference between the calculated recoil and what you FEEL in your hands.
Calculated recoil is energy numbers and a constant.
FELT recoil is entirely subjective, and each shooter can feel it differently even when the calculated recoil is identical, or very close.
To ME, faster powders give more of a "slap" feel while slower powders feel more like a "push", relatively speaking.
You might not notice the difference, or you might experience it the way I do, or you might find it feels the complete opposite in your hands.
Calculated recoil is energy numbers and a constant.
FELT recoil is entirely subjective, and each shooter can feel it differently even when the calculated recoil is identical, or very close.
To ME, faster powders give more of a "slap" feel while slower powders feel more like a "push", relatively speaking.
You might not notice the difference, or you might experience it the way I do, or you might find it feels the complete opposite in your hands.
Your question did not ask about other factors. You had indicated high and low pressure, but your question was: Would the recoil, or felt recoil, be the same?
Physics addresses the recoil force based on powder weight, bullet weight and speed. It can be calculated and measured. But if you're looking for subjective factors, people report different perceptions given the same event, so don't expect anything objective there. And for that reason, it's not reliable or predictive, which makes it of little value for generalizing to all conditions.
Last edited:
Excluding the weight of ejecta, looking for other factors as the hypothetical question posited all things being equal except for the burn rate. Searching for something in the realm of cause and effect or physics. Something that could be proven, not subjective as to each individual.
One thing I can think of off the top of my head would be barrel time - the time the bullet spends in the barrel before exiting. A fast powder might accelerate the bullet faster which could result in less barrel time. This is a 'maybe' but might be worth a look in QuickLOAD. But then it's a matter if we could really tell the difference of something that might differ in a few milliseconds.
I'll stay away from the math and physics, mostly because I'm not that smart.
But I can tell you from 39 years of loading - specifically 38 Special - that the propellant changes recoil.
I've loaded a lot of 125gn JHP's in 38 Special with a lot of different propellants. And even with similar velocities, slower propellants will have more felt recoil. With the slower powders, it's more of a push, and with faster powders, it's more of a snap.
I much prefer snap. Easier to bring the gun back on target.
But I can tell you from 39 years of loading - specifically 38 Special - that the propellant changes recoil.
I've loaded a lot of 125gn JHP's in 38 Special with a lot of different propellants. And even with similar velocities, slower propellants will have more felt recoil. With the slower powders, it's more of a push, and with faster powders, it's more of a snap.
I much prefer snap. Easier to bring the gun back on target.
I've done a lot of tinkering with cast bullets in rifles and handguns. I agree the with comment on the difference with handgun based simply on my experience. One of my pet loads was Unique in the 30-06 with a 225 gr. cast bullet. Have read some of Mike Venturino's article where he was using AA5744 in the 06, when I reach the same speed as I got with Unique recoil was noticeably heavier with the slower 5744 although as mentioned, average velocity was for all practical purposes the same. However, accuracy with the Unique load was better and I had to increase the velocity substantially to regain equal groups. Shooting cast fan be fun but also frustrating as hell. 
Paul B.
Paul B.
By Newton's third law, if the powder and propellant gas had no mass, then recoil momentum would be equal and opposite for the gun and bullet, and the ratio of bullet kinetic energy to recoil kinetic energy would be proportional to the ratio of gun mass to bullet mass. in other words, if the gun weighs 300 times what the bullet weighs, the bullet will have 300 times more kinetic energy than the recoiling gun does (which is the main reason shooting hurts the target more than recoil hurts the shooter, with difference in contact area being a secondary and smaller reason).
A slower powder usually achieves bullet velocity with a lower peak pressure and a longer sustained barrel pressure with a little bit longer barrel time, which means that, for equal velocity, the peak momentum transfer rate is a little lower for the slower powder. This might account for reported perceived differences in recoil quality as being lower but sharper for quick powders, but I think it's hard to prove, as other factors affect perception.
A slower powder usually achieves bullet velocity with a lower peak pressure and a longer sustained barrel pressure with a little bit longer barrel time, which means that, for equal velocity, the peak momentum transfer rate is a little lower for the slower powder. This might account for reported perceived differences in recoil quality as being lower but sharper for quick powders, but I think it's hard to prove, as other factors affect perception.