Heavy optics and reliability

[GJM]

Previously, I had mounted a new 507 Competition on a Maple Leaf direct milled G5 19 slide with a Mayhem comp, and experienced malfunctions with it shooting support hand only. The 507 Comp is a relatively large and heavy optic, so I replaced it with a 407CO. This morning, I zeroed the 407CO, then shot it support hand only. It ejected the brass vigorously, shooting with my normal support hand grip. I then decided to shoot it barely holding onto the pistol, support hand only. I was surprised that the brass ejected just as far as when I held the pistol with my normal grip.

Without saying anything, I had my wife repeat this. She started with her regular grip, then with a lighter grip, and finally with a barely holding the gun grip. In each instance, the brass ejected similarly. However, the brass only went about 60 percent of how far my cases ejected. YVK has a theory that the weight of your arm is a factor with a lightweight pistol like a Glock. At least this morning, how firmly you gripped didn't change how far the brass ejected with this particular pistol/optic/comp setup for us.

[JCN]

In each instance, the brass ejected similarly. However, the brass only went about 60 percent of how far my cases ejected. YVK has a theory that the weight of your arm is a factor with a lightweight pistol like a Glock. At least this morning, how firmly you gripped didn't change how far the brass ejected with this particular pistol/optic/comp setup for us.

Technically it’s mass versus weight, I think.

Because it’s the inertia that’s governing it rather than in the direction of gravity.

Just like a golf swing or a good kick, firming up and locking multiple joints together at impact gives you the mass of ALL the locked items together.

That’s how someone can punch above their weight.

It’s crucial for rapid recoil control mechanics as well.

[JCN]

Imagine you have a gun and instead of a hand you have a clamp.

Is it the tightness of the clamp that matters?

No, it’s what the clamp is attached to.

If the clamp is attached to a table that’s different than if the clamp is attached to a string.

It’s not the grip that matters as much as what the grip is attached to.

That’s why people are amazed that I tell them I only grip the gun as hard as shaking a 60 year old woman’s hand.

I don’t grip hard because I don’t have to. But the hand is firmly attached to the full weight of my locked body.

Which is where my recoil control comes from.

So in this case, grip is less important than passive recoil stance.

I’ll do the experiment on video, but I already know the answer.

If I shoot with same grip, but change the amount of joint locks… I can get the ejection distance to change.

Basically I’m changing the inertia of my system that resists the gun.

This is super important for lighter women like my wife. She has to get down into a fully aggressive and maximally locked stance to get the recoil control down sub-20. If she’s not working the mechanics, then the gun lifts so that she can’t.

When she doesn’t lock it’s the equivalent of punching with the hand rather than punching with the legs and hips…

[JCN]

This is an old excerpt from a teaching video I made about neutral press but it works to serve the same point.



Changing GRIP isn’t the variable to change to alter ejection.

Nobody calls it a limp grip malfunction.

It’s limp wristing because that’s part of the joint locking ergos.

If you see someone shooting 9mm and the gun rises noticeably (not just rotating, but is actually rising) then they’re not using good recoil control.

Here I’m using passive recoil control but barely hanging onto the grip.

You can see it doesn’t affect much. The bulk of the mechanics is in the arms and stance.

Really the only way to mitigate slide malfunctions in compromised positions is to use a Revo. They still have a place.

[G19Fan]

Imagine you have a gun and instead of a hand you have a clamp.

Is it the tightness of the clamp that matters?

No, it’s what the clamp is attached to.

If the clamp is attached to a table that’s different than if the clamp is attached to a string.

It’s not the grip that matters as much as what the grip is attached to.

That’s why people are amazed that I tell them I only grip the gun as hard as shaking a 60 year old woman’s hand.

I don’t grip hard because I don’t have to. But the hand is firmly attached to the full weight of my locked body.

Which is where my recoil control comes from.

So in this case, grip is less important than passive recoil stance.

I’ll do the experiment on video, but I already know the answer.

If I shoot with same grip, but change the amount of joint locks… I can get the ejection distance to change.

Basically I’m changing the inertia of my system that resists the gun.

This is super important for lighter women like my wife. She has to get down into a fully aggressive and maximally locked stance to get the recoil control down sub-20. If she’s not working the mechanics, then the gun lifts so that she can’t.

When she doesn’t lock it’s the equivalent of punching with the hand rather than punching with the legs and hips…

Fantastic writeup. I notice significantly better recoil control on a p356 when I am properly locked up body mechanic wise. Can hit sub .20 splits with accuracy.

[DaBigBR]

I'll admit to being a non-early-adopter. I'm always open to new tech, but based on my limited experience a comp isn't nearly as much of a performance advantage as a dot or a WML. Carry Optics disallows comps, and people shoot even light plastic guns pretty well.

A comp reduces muzzle flip, but as long as the gun returns consistently I'm skeptical about a meaningful difference in making good hits in a defensive scenario.

But why are comps not allowed in carry optics? Because they increase performance, not because they decrease reliability. I think the equation is much more complicated than how fast the gun returns. I agree that a non-comped/ported gun returns plenty fast, but less muzzle rise should mean better dot/sight tracking and less compounded error when the shooter gets their finger ahead of their brain, so to speak. It just becomes one more thing that might help keep the shooting more under control. A comp/ports may not be as much of an advantage as a dot or WML, but they're not mutually exclusive things and they're all things that somebody could argue you don't "need."

When I unscientifically compared a PMM comp to no-comp on my P07 carry gun, I definitely noticed a difference in muzzle flip. I didn't notice much--if any--difference in the hits on target. I felt like the comp shaved off at most 0.05s on predictive splits. For reactive shooting (e.g. practical accuracy drill at 0.3x splits), I actually had an easier time without the comp. That's likely due to my not being used to comps. I should try that PMM comp again.

I would agree that the overall improvement in splits is fairly minimal, but the longer the string the more I think you see the benefits. Less muzzle rise means less leverage against your grip. Less leverage against the grip should mean the grip stays together better and longer. You might be able to get away with some stuff you wouldn't.

There is also a decent video out there from the Tier 1 Concealed guys showing the performance of different comps and ports versus non-comped/ported guns. The differences in muzzle rise, as I recall, we're only a degree or two, but if you consider that that is 60-120 MOA, and then apply that to intermediate, but realistic pistol distances (let's say 10-25 yards), it's more significant than "1 to 2 degrees" sounds.

All just one guy's thoughts, but I am pretty deep down the comp and port rabbit hole and have been pretty happy with them in all forms.

[JCN]

There is also a decent video out there from the Tier 1 Concealed guys showing the performance of different comps and ports versus non-comped/ported guns. The differences in muzzle rise, as I recall, we're only a degree or two, but if you consider that that is 60-120 MOA, and then apply that to intermediate, but realistic pistol distances (let's say 10-25 yards), it's more significant than "1 to 2 degrees" sounds.

All just one guy's thoughts, but I am pretty deep down the comp and port rabbit hole and have been pretty happy with them in all forms.

Those are great points.

Also comps are allowed in IDPA CO as long as it fits in the box…

I’m experimenting with a threaded P01 barrel / slide on an SP01 frame with compensator…

[Erick Gelhaus]

Fwiw, shot an IDPA match today. 6 stages, somewhere on the far side of 125 but less than 150 rds. 5 1/2 stages were two-handed, 1/2 stage was SHO (9 shots).

Pistol was a M&P 2.0 9mm Compact with a 507Comp on it. No functioning issues noted.

Fwiw, I have not noted any functioning issues freestyle, SHO, or WHO when shooting a 4.25" or 4" with either version of the Acro. Never mind the Unity Atom Mount & a T1 on a G17 before.

[Sero Sed Serio]

Another WHO failure to extract malfunction with my training G19.5/509 today. Identical conditions to the last time: 115 gr. Magtech, towards the end of the session (total round count was 250, 200 through the G19), with only a few rounds left in the magazine. Same combo earlier in the session had no issues, so suspect shooter fatigue played a role.

Went ahead and pulled the trigger on another 509 for the nightstand G47. Had an ACRO in the cart a few days ago, but this thread combined with my WHO issues made me decide that increased weight could just be inviting problems.

[CLaw]

Figures that I’d read this thread right after mounting an Acro to a new G19 5e…