Heavy optics and reliability

[GJM]

Yesterday, when shooting support hand only, my wife experienced reliability problems with her G5 Glock 19. It is set up with an Acro, stock RSA, and Mayhem Syndicate barrel/comp. She was shooting American Eagle 115.

Today, we brought out a number of Glock 19 pistols with different optics to test, using heavier power factor Lawman 124 TMJ ammo. The Cliff notes version is the Acro/Mayhem Gen 4 and 5 19 pistols malfunctioned for her shooting one hand only, even with Lawman 124 ammo. Pistols equipped with a Holosun 509T and 407CO ran fine one hand only.

More surprising, yesterday I installed a Holosun 507 Comp on a G5 19 direct milled by Maple Leaf with a Mayhem, and experienced feeding issues shooting support hand only. My 507 Comp on a G47 without a comp runs fine one hand.

I get it that a comp potentially reduces reliability, especially with the stock RSA I want to run. However, using full power ammo like Lawman 124, I haven't experienced problems. It sure seems like a heavy optic like the Acro or even the new 507 Comp, when combined with a compensator, can push to the far edge of the reliability envelope.

[YVK]

You didn't unscrew the comp off the mayhem barrel and tried a few without?

[Erick Gelhaus]

The combination of multiple issues?

[EVP]

So the question to me seems: is a comp gun worth it for a defensive pistol?

I know the comp guns are currently popular but I cannot help but think they are not worth it on a defensive carry gun. Just my opinion of course.

[HCM]

So the question to me seems: is a comp gun worth it for a defensive pistol?

I know the comp guns are currently popular but I cannot help but think they are not worth it on a defensive carry gun. Just my opinion of course.

Depends.

IME comps run fine with +p/NATO ammo, even one handed.

With typical weak sauce 9mm ball, not so much.

[YVK]

So the question to me seems: is a comp gun worth it for a defensive pistol?

On guns like p365 comps increase reliability with the types of ammo that I prefer to run to compensate for a short barrel, and they improve control. Those micros are a bitch to control with 124 +P. This is why I use them even though I find the aftermarket comped barrel less accurate than OEM. I find that even guns as big as G26 get some control benefit with 124+P.

[1Rangemaster]

Although I understand the appeal of less muzzle flip via compensators, my question is, are comps a necessity or just nice to have? It may boil down to personal preference. But a couple of thoughts come to mind:
1) Compensators direct gas up, and in an entangled situation that could cause an issue for the operator by putting gas and debris into one’s face and eyes…and,
2)Sort of along the lines of “how good is good enough (?)”, are splits/rate of fire critical? Bolke, for example, talks about (if I understand correctly) limiting the rate of fire to be able to assess what is going on.
For ME, reliability is the first objective. If there is a component that affects that, I would have to seriously think it through. It could be an ammo issue, gun part or something else. And there is no doubt in my mind that @GJM s wife is a very competent shooter. So I think some of the combinations just don’t work, I.e., light bullet, extra weight of optic,etc.
I recall @GJM has worked at this several times over the years: 10 mm in G29s; heavy bullet .40 loads; he did a lot of work vetting 9mm penetrating loads, etc. Essentially due to his work, I’ve standardized on a Gen5 19 with an ACRO and ammo on the “heavy” side.YMMV

[GJM]

I think there is no one right answer. I have been using a Mayhem Syndicate comp and barrel with an optic (407CO) on my EDC G19 for a few years with complete reliability. I have also vetted the various 9mm field loads with a comp. My wife, my friends who have experimented, and I believe the comp allows the 19 to perform like a larger gun. It especially settles the dot on second shots and bill drill type shooting with heavy loads.

In the example of a bear attack, the shooting will be at close range to a single target (upper CNS) with heavy loads, and for that the comp is appealing. With hard cast, which is not my preferred field load, my testing with the 47 suggests that the comp'd 19 may even be more reliable than the OEM 47. (My theory is the heavy hard cast loads with the OEM barrel allow the gun to move more with the potential of touching the slide stop in recoil, just as I experienced with the G5 20 before installing a beaver tail.)

I plan to test done more by unscrewing the Mayhem comp, but it just may be that the Acro's weight causes the tipping point in the reliability envelope to be reached. Right now, I prefer the 509T to the Acro for a bunch of reasons for my sealed emitter use.

[1Rangemaster]

And the 509T comes in at 1.72 ounces. Interested in hearing on your continuing adjustments.
Thanks for the reports.

[GJM]

And the 509T comes in at 1.72 ounces. Interested in hearing on your continuing adjustments.
Thanks for the reports.

I was thinking about that as well, because it doesn't seem that large of a difference. I wonder if the Acro has much of its weight higher, and it could be a center of gravity issue as much as absolute weight?