[Dberman]

So here's my follow-up.

I had the barrel and slide ported by MagNaPort. I have to say that MagNaPort is great. I sent them my barrel and slide; the pre-existing top slide ports need to be slightly enlarged to enable proper effect from the barrel ports. I shipped it out on a Thursday; got it back on my doorstep the following Wednesday, less than one week. Absolutely top notch customer service.

I ran about 300 rounds through the pistol yesterday. The barrel porting really works. Felt recoil is significantly reduced. Apart from being more comfortable to shoot, follow-up shots and quick firing were more accurate. Porting is definitely an effective modification.

I've been told by a friend of mine, a police officer who is a reliable source, that his training with a ported barrel caused night-blindness when shooting in the dark. There's a YouTube video by Jerry Miculek

where he demonstrates that flash blinding isn't an issue. Maybe the gun, the specific porting and/or the ammunition are variables that affect this but I won't be using my Q5 for defensive purposes so it shouldn't be an issue for me.

Overall, an effective modification.

 

[Dberman]

But I'm still gonna get my barrel ported.

 

[Dberman]

The amount of recoil reduction is linear to the how much lighter ones wallet has become.

Now that's funny. Maybe the direct proportionality to recoil reduction and wallet lightness is illusory; nothing happens as one's wallet becomes lighter. What the heck, I'll save time and money by going out and buying a .22 cal target pistol with a silencer. Or a BB gun!

 

[Dberman]

If porting and compensators have issues, where does the use of a recoil reduction system (steel guide rod and springs) come in? I haven't seen any research with empirical data on muzzle rise differences and felt recoil. Yesterday, I received and installed Springco's set-up, the one that comes with the white spring, so I have ordered a yellow spring (based in their recommendation). Haven't shot it yet.

Again, for accuracy and faster follow-up, would a recoil reduction system have the same 30 to 36 percent reduction in recoil?

 

[Dberman]

The gun is a 9mm Q5 Match. It's not really designed, intended or used for defensive purposes. The point of this exercise is to discuss systems to increase accuracy and improve the speed and accuracy of follow-up shots. When shooting a target. Still, anything that improves those two aspects of performance could only improve your chances in most SD scenarios. A drop of maybe 30 fps for a round traveling at 1,200 fps would still serve the purpose.

 

[Dberman]

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.