Heavy optics and reliability

[Default.mp3]

I guess a question I would have is, would it be realistic to cut enough from a slide to lighten the amount an ACRO P-2 might add? And how much of a detriment to reliability would such cuts create if it means completely opening up windows that might allow environmental debris? I know that's an academic concern even with something like a factory G34, which some folks seem happy to carry on duty, are there any documented cases of where it's been an actual realworld issue?

[mmc45414]

I guess a question I would have is, would it be realistic to cut enough from a slide to lighten the amount an ACRO P-2 might add? And how much of a detriment to reliability would such cuts create if it means completely opening up windows that might allow environmental debris? I know that's an academic concern even with something like a factory G34, which some folks seem happy to carry on duty, are there any documented cases of where it's been an actual realworld issue?

I have always thought the ball cuts that do not completely penetrate would make a lot of sense. But then slide cuts became a bling thing instead of function.
And the open G34 slide would probably not be an issue being carried in a urban duty role, but maybe more of a concern in a wilderness environment.
It seems to make sense that adding an optic would add mass, but we are talking about G19s, and G34s with optics tend to work. Is there any specification on comparing 19/34 slide weight? I would think the G34 slide would still be heavier, even with the big hole in it.

[JCN]

I have always thought the ball cuts that do not completely penetrate would make a lot of sense. But then slide cuts became a bling thing instead of function.
And the open G34 slide would probably not be an issue being carried in a urban duty role, but maybe more of a concern in a wilderness environment.
It seems to make sense that adding an optic would add mass, but we are talking about G19s, and G34s with optics tend to work. Is there any specification on comparing 19/34 slide weight? I would think the G34 slide would still be heavier, even with the big hole in it.

Depending on the generation, G34 RSA can be 17# while the G19 can be 18#.

Generally higher spring weights on short light slides with same ammo because physics.

Change the physics with a mailbox or a compensator and….

This is why going to a 15# or less is the smart play.

If you’re going to make a non-stock Glock run, you can’t just wish that physics don’t apply.

I first encountered this with a G34 with an SRO and stock RSA…

I had no issue with it shooting Syntech.

I handed it to a competent buddy and he promptly stove piped.

I handed it to a random range dude and he promptly stove piped.

I used my normal grip and perfect function but I realized less margin.

Basically if you don’t have the recoil control to do <0.20s splits on demand, you have enough energy leak in upward movement that saps energy from the slide going straight back.

You can clearly see it in slow motion video. Can’t cheat physics.

[Exiledviking]

Depending on the generation, G34 RSA can be 17# while the G19 can be 18#.

Generally higher spring weights on short light slides with same ammo because physics.

Change the physics with a mailbox or a compensator and….

This is why going to a 15# or less is the smart play.

If you’re going to make a non-stock Glock run, you can’t just wish that physics don’t apply.

I first encountered this with a G34 with an SRO and stock RSA…

I had no issue with it shooting Syntech.

I handed it to a competent buddy and he promptly stove piped.

I handed it to a random range dude and he promptly stove piped.

I used my normal grip and perfect function but I realized less margin.

Basically if you don’t have the recoil control to do <0.20s splits on demand, you have enough energy leak in upward movement that saps energy from the slide going straight back.

You can clearly see it in slow motion video. Can’t cheat physics.

I believe I've seen it mentioned before, but how would I go about getting a 15 lbs recoil spring in my gen 5 Glock 34?

[JCN]

I believe I've seen it mentioned before, but how would I go about getting a 15 lbs recoil spring in my gen 5 Glock 34?

$26.

https://ndzperformance.com/ndz-15lb-...-sst-g17-gl15/

[GJM]

I believe I've seen it mentioned before, but how would I go about getting a 15 lbs recoil spring in my gen 5 Glock 34?

https://tarantacticalinnovations.com...ck-9mm-40-cal/

[GJM]

We did more testing today. Conditions were high 40's, occasional drizzle and some light wind -- challenging weather to hold onto the gun as hard as you might like. On the other hand, realistic Alaska conditions. For testing, we used Lawman 124 and my wife shot support hand only.

First pistol my wife shot was an Sig 365 with a Macro lower and XL upper with an EPS Carry. No comp. It ran.

Second pistol was my wife's well shot in G4 19 MOS with a Mayhem comp and 509T. It ran.

Third pistol was a G4 19 with a direct milled 407CO and OEM barrel. It ran.

Fourth pistol was a G5 19 with an EPS and Mayhem comp. It ran.

Fifth pistol was a G47 with a 509T and OEM barrel. It ran.

It sure does look like, at least for my 118 pound wife, that the Acro is beyond the reliability envelope for shooting with one hand. The 509T is at the edge of the envelope. Lighter optics and Gen 4 pistols are more reliable, especially with a comp.

[JCN]

It sure does look like, at least for my 118 pound wife, that the Acro is beyond the reliability envelope for shooting with one hand. The 509T is at the edge of the envelope. Lighter optics and Gen 4 pistols are more reliable, especially with a comp.

You have to index that observation against the cycles of the recoil spring.

If the springs in the Gen 4 that you're testing are many rounds more cycled, it's not an apples to apples test.

You can't come to your conclusion without standardizing the freshness of the springs in the system.

If they are all the same age springs, carry on.

(You also have to standardize the lube and cleanliness amount as well in order to make such a statement as "gen 4 versus gen 5")

[CLaw]

There have been remarks on the grams about recent Gen recoil springs also crapping the bed early. I’d be interested in hearing if the results changed with a change in recoils spring.

We did more testing today. Conditions were high 40's, occasional drizzle and some light wind -- challenging weather to hold onto the gun as hard as you might like. On the other hand, realistic Alaska conditions. For testing, we used Lawman 124 and my wife shot support hand only.

First pistol my wife shot was an Sig 365 with a Macro lower and XL upper with an EPS Carry. No comp. It ran.

Second pistol was my wife's well shot in G4 19 MOS with a Mayhem comp and 509T. It ran.

Third pistol was a G4 19 with a direct milled 407CO and OEM barrel. It ran.

Fourth pistol was a G5 19 with an EPS and Mayhem comp. It ran.

Fifth pistol was a G47 with a 509T and OEM barrel. It ran.

It sure does look like, at least for my 118 pound wife, that the Acro is beyond the reliability envelope for shooting with one hand. The 509T is at the edge of the envelope. Lighter optics and Gen 4 pistols are more reliable, especially with a comp.

[JCN]

There have been remarks on the grams about recent Gen recoil springs also crapping the bed early. I’d be interested in hearing if the results changed with a change in recoils spring.

Generally it's the reverse unless you have an obvious coil break and binding.

Usually "break in" failures like FTE improve once the spring breaks in and you get even more margin as the spring loses some of its oomph.

Or you could just buy a 15# (or less) recoil spring....