bullet weight difference skewed your comparison. My understanding is that it's the same frame just different trigger. Recoil shouldn't be affected.

 

It was mostly the ammo, winchester white box is a fairly week round.

 

Ammo difference. I've shot them both and the recoil was the same.

 

I find the recoil of the LC9 to be a bit stout and compounded by the long trigger.

 

The recoil of the 9 reminds me of why I keep carrying the LC380, as much as I think I want the LC9S. Galloway mods can remedy some of that long heavy trigger, too.

 

Did you have trouble releasing the slide with the LC9s Pro? Did you have difficulty dropping the magazines? I am having trouble with both on my new LC9s Pro. I shot it in a BUG match Sunday and found it easy to shoot and like the trigger. I've not shot the older LC9 but have shot the XDS in 9mm. I'd consider the recoil comparable. Since the LC9 is lighter, I was very pleased with the recoil.

 

I find the recoil of the LC9 to be a bit stout and compounded by the long trigger.

Regarding the hammer-fired and striker-fired versions of the LC9...

I'll agree that the LC9 and the similar K-T PF9 are stout. (I'd say downright unpleasant...) but I've never shot the LC9s...

It seems to me that

1) if you're shooting the same ammo,
2) the gun is basically the same size and fits the hand in the same way, and
3) the guns weighs the same,​

the recoil generated by firing a round, and the felt recoil passed to the shooter's hand and arm ought to be about the same.

I don't understand how the longer trigger stroke of the LC9 would have much effect on felt recoil -- as the recoil caused by firing the round starts only after the hammer or striker are released, and not WHILE they are being released. (Maybe you mean something different that I don't understand, when you write "compounded by," above, and your point simply sailed over my head... Won't be the first time that's happened here.)

The other things above being equal, it seems that any difference in felt recoil would have to be due to the springs that are powered by the slide. Springs can slow the slide, or allow it to move faster, and that can have the effect of changing the recoil impulse and how it's FELT. The springs affected are the recoil springs in both guns, and the striker assembly in one gun or the hammer spring in the other. In the hammer-fired gun, that's a pretty stout spring; I've not handled or tried the striker-fired version, but I would expect the trigger to be lighter if the slide tensions (or partly tensions) the striker spring. They all store force from slide movement to strip and chamber the next round and to power the striker/hammer when thr trigger is ready for the next shot. How much or how little is used power those springs can change the FEEL of the gun in the hand as the gun recoils.

Does the Pro version weigh less than the LC9 or the LC9s? Are the recoil springs the same or different? In such a small gun, minor change in springing or weight (even the number of rounds in the mag), or the load used, could make a big difference in felt recoil.

Am I overlooking something that is obvious?

 

I have shot both. I have a LC9s. There is only one thing I can figure other than the ammo is different. The trigger may break so far back on the LC9 that you effectively have another finger wrapped around the grip.

 

I was about to say that with a longer trigger pull, you're likely changing the angle of the gun in your grip (downward, without realizing it), so that would change felt recoil.

 

I was about to say that with a longer trigger pull, you're likely changing the angle of the gun in your grip (downward, without realizing it), so that would change felt recoil.

Seems like THAT would change sight alignment, too.

 

I think it would happen too fast to notice.

 

I traded an LC380 for an LC9S Pro, and haven't looked back. Depending on ammo of course, I have found the 9s Pro to be very similar in handling to the 380 that I had modded with Galloway trigger bar and hammer spring upgrades.

I'm very pleased.

 

I think it would happen too fast to notice.

You may be right, but I wonder...

My reason for questioning that point is that recoil starts after you pull the trigger, and if the long trigger pull is changing the angle of the gun in your hand, the barrel should be pulled down a bit, too -- lowering the point of impact. Although the bullet leaves the barrel very quickly, the slide/barrel is already moving before the bullet leaves the barrel, so any movement caused by the trigger pull should already have changed barrel alignment. A tiny bit of change at the front can have a big effect on where the bullet hits.

I suspect most of the change mentioned in this discussion has to do with bullet weight or the power {type or amount of powder} in the loads being used.

I've often felt that heavier bullets tended to be softer shooting than lighter ones -- if only because the duration of the recoil impulse (due to a slower-moving bullet) is slightly longer and more spread out over time. I shot some 147 gr. the other day -- which I had not shot in a long time -- and was really surprised by how light the recoil felt compared to some 115 gr. I was shooting from the same gun. None were unpleasant -- but I wasn't shooting an LC9 or (my now-sold but similar PF9). Maybe it was my imagination... or maybe the loads themselves, were the biggest difference, rather than just bullet weight.

 

I bought my wife the LC9s and I think its a very snappy little gun. much more than she had anticipated on.

 

What ammo is she shooting? I run Hornady 115 grain FTX in that pistol and find it pretty agreeable. 115 FMJ seems snappier for some reason. A pachmayr grip sleeve is a good addition.

 

she is running 115 FMJ.

 

I don't know why the Hornady 115 gr. defense rounds have less felt recoil, but it was noticeable to me. Try some.