From Glock's website: "The GLOCK 19C Gen4 is equipped with integral barrel ports which optimize performance during rapid firing allowing the shooter to get back on target quicker. Additional benefits are reduced muzzle flip and felt recoil."
Every website I have seen regarding porting says that it reduces felt recoil. I know you can't believe everything you read on the 'net but that doesn't mean that everything you read is wrong.
Shooting Times posted an article in 2015 on its test results comparing barrel porting to compensators. It concluded, "The compensator was a little more effective than the ports at reducing muzzle rise, but they were very similar. The Glock ported barrel had 30 percent less muzzle rise, while the Rowland compensator reduced muzzle rise by 36 percent." Here's the link:
Recoil Reduction: Ports vs. Compensator - Shooting Times
It must be noted that this study also found that barrel porting resulted in lower velocities while the compensator caused cycling malfunctions due to weaker slide movement. Of course that doesn't mean that any one individual compensator or porting on a specific gun will have identical results; there are too many other variables. And a compensator's cycling issue can probably be dealt with by using different recoil springs whereas reduced bullet velocity can be resolved with lighter grain ammo. But still, to me, a cycling malfunction - or even the potential for one - is way more devastating than reduced bullet velocity, particularly within the relatively shorter effective range of a handgun. Only Superman is faster than a speeding bullet, which I assume includes a reduced-velocity shot from a ported barrel.
For me, the purpose is to improve accuracy and follow-up speed. If the Shooting Times test is even close, a 30 to 36 percent reduction in muzzle rise is enough to convince me to do something. However, a six percent difference isn't enough to persuade me to live with an extra hunk of metal hanging on the end of my gun with the associated probability of cycling malfunctions, finding correct alternate springs, or paying the extra cost of a threaded 5" barrel.
This is entirely subjective, but I think I'm leaning toward porting. It just seems to be more efficient, even if slightly less effective. Once done, I'll check back and report my own personal results.
