the 40 does have more recoil, but it's not something you can't overcome with practice.
the best way I can describe it would be "snappy"
I like it due to the round's greater frontal area and the gun's ability to fire a heavier slug at higher velocities than the 9mm.
with the .40 USP you can buy and install a .357 sig barrel and you now have 1 pistol with the ability to fire two different calibers. Same slide, same mag...
And if I'm not mistaken the USP series of pistols was built from the ground up for the .40- just FYI
For departments to change chosen pistol calibers there must be evidence of increased stopping power and improved performance. How would you justify the high cost of outfitting every LEO in the dept. with a new pistol otherwise?
cons:
.40 rounds are going to be more expensive than 9mm, but not prohibitively so.
reduced capacity by a couple rounds compared to the 9mm. (not sure exactly, somebody can provide exact figures).
as I said earlier, recoil is increased (not unmanageable)
I'm a little biased, I own both, but prefer the .40 to the 9mm. JMO