[Auburn]

Is the S40 that much smaller than a G23...or does it just look that way in photos?

 

[Flashpoint]

The G23 is about the same size as the M series. So to answer your question, yes it is that much smalller.

 

[Guest]

I am on the verge of buying a NIB S40 (I'll pick it up tomorrow). I'm interested in the recoil difference between these two. I owned a G23 but eventually sold it, because it was unpleasant to shoot. I love the .40 S&W round, I own Sigs P229 and P239 as well as a Ruger P94, all chambered in 40. But the G23 was just a pain in the *** at the range.

I'm looking forward to the S40, and expect it to become my new carry gun. But has anyone here shot both, and what can you say about differences in recoil?

Thanks.

 

[Guest]

never shot a 23, but i can tell you the steyr will have less felt recoil than any of it's glock counterparts in same caliber (or sig for that matter).

1. Lower bore axis than any other pistol i've seen/shot or even know about.
2. Ditto for greater grip angle (111 degrees vs glock 109)

these two things drive the recoil back into the hand and reduce muzzle flip.

light recoil, great trigger, faster follow ups (due to sights and previous two points), and fantastic accuracy are the steyrs biggest points.

there might be other pistols w/ lower bores or greater angle, but not that i know of.

 

[hiramabiff]

Correct me here please.

How come nobody mentions that the "longer or extended beaver tail" of the Steyr helps reduce muzzle jumps, prevents accidental touching of the slide, therefore increases shooting speed and accuracy, better gun control. The Steyr pistol does not require any attachments for that matter!

I check the manual of the Steyr and does not mention of this important design or I was NOT just reading it throughly...

This part of the Steyr is one of the MANY reasons I consider it over Glock!

Can you actually call it "beaver tail"... the rear end of the Steyr?

 

[noblesavage]

Hello S-Vierzig,

I had a G-23 a few years ago and I did not care for that pistol at all. It was my only shooting experience with th .40 S&W round at that time and it somewhat put me "off " that round. I found the 23 somewhat inaccurate and the ergonomics and recoil of it especially not condusive to quick follow up shots. And, just plain no fun to shoot.

I now have an S40 and think it is great. Felt recoil is pretty close to my M9. It is a bit "snappier" than my M9 but I would expect that anyway from a .40 round compared to the 9mm. I find it to be very accurate and I can usually place more accurate rapid fire follow-ups with the S40 than the M9. This is probably an eyesight issue specific to me since I find I can aquire the sights quicker with the S40 than with the M9 due to the slightly shorter sight radius. (Older eyes )

I've put about 750 rounds through it so far with no reliability issues at all and use it as a primary carry weapon and would not hesitate to reccomend it as a CCW.

Hope this helps you out....................................ns

 

[Zundfolge]

Back when I first got my M40 I had an opportunity to shoot it side by side with a friends G23.

The Glock was less accurate, recoil felt harsher with the same loads and the trigger was ... well a Glock

The more I shoot my S40, I find that I shoot it better then my M40. Recoil feels about the same (although I'm sure if there was some way to measure it the M40 would be slightly less just because its larger and heavier). And I notice no lack of accuracy.

So based on that I think you'll find the S40 a much better shooter then the G23.

 

[steveinaz]

I can make a comparison between the G22 and Steyr M40, if that helps. Recoil feels a little bit more stout with the M40, but........there is less muzzle rise. The M40 gives you more of a rearward push(recoil). I'm sure these observations transfer over to the G23/S40 scenario.