HKPRO Forums banner
  • Beware of Scammers! Does it sound too good to be true? New user has just what you were looking for? Don't get scammed! When in doubt, use escrow.
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

· Registered
77 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am pretty happy to announce that I have just purchased a new USP(f) tactical in .40 With my new membership here at HKpro I hope to gain an extensive knowledge to merit the fact as to why I purchased a $1000.00 pistol, lol. Anyways here is my introductory newbie question....

HK recoil reduction system?

I just bought a USP tactical in .40 and I wanted to ask how manageable is the recoil. All the ranges near me didn't have one to shoot, but I was able to get my hands on a USP .45. My hands weren't even big enough to feel comfortable with the .45 but I was amazed at how little recoil it had compared to my 1911! I know that .40 is said to be snappier than the .45's "push", but I also hear a lot that the .40 feels like 9mm in a "full sized" gun like the USP .40, not to mention that the HK boasts it's "recoil reduction". I felt this reduction in the USP .45 and I couldn't even get my grip around it properly. The .40 feels real good in my hand so I feel this is a plus. Will I be disappointed? I have a G19 and the recoil is nothing. I hear a lot that the .40 in a compact gun is what's harsh, but that .40 in a full sized will feel like 9mm in a compact. Does this sound about right...?

Plus if anyone out there has the knowledge, what is the advantage about a tactical model compared to the others besides the adaptation of the silencer, and adjustable sights? They give no info on the official website.

Thnx to all

· Registered
315 Posts
well, I made a thread earlier asking the question about .40 in a full compared to a 9mm compact, and decided to try it out for myself.

BUT, keep in mind that I'm an inexperienced shooter (I bought my first gun, a .22 Buckmark in June, and then a Springfield M1911 in July). Also keep in mind that due to my not having a lot of time at the range, and not thinking things through very well, I took out the two guns on different days. And finally, if I really wanted to keep things pure, I would have shot the two guns immediately after warming up on the .22, but instead I was inconsistent in what I shot before the two.

But here were my impressions of things.

My impression of the .40 was that it was very easy to control. It was snappier, but the recoil wasn't as strong as the .45 and felt very manageable.

A week later, I went back and after shooting some .45, I put 50 rounds through a glock 17, and then 50 through the USP compact. The compact felt louder, and more flash, and while was probably less snappy, I feel like there was more muzzle flip than the 40.

But again, keep in mind that I shot the .40 after a .45, which is going from the hard push to the less hard snappy recoil. Whereas I shot the 9mm compact after the full size glock, which was less snappy, flippy, and loud. So my impressions were probably skewed so that there was more difference than if I had shot just the two next to each other.

Personally, I feel more comfortable shooting the fullsize because the compact cuts off just below the middle of my palm (which isn't huge) so I just never really felt like I was totally in control of the gun (and could be the reason why I noticed the compact's flip more).
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.