Compensated Handguns

[William B.]

I have always heard and read that if you fire a compensated handgun in a low-light situation it will ruin your night vision for a few seconds. I was in a gun shop yesterday and a gentleman told me that he has fired both compensated and uncompensated handguns in low-light and he didn't see a difference. I've never done it myself. What do those of you who have done it think?

[PRGGodfather]

It pretty much depends on how dark it is. The more ambient light, to include dusk or daylight shooting -- the less it will bother you. The darker it is; the more time your rods and cones will need to recover.

I shy away from them on defense guns. For hunting guns, go for it.

[Marcus L.]

There is a little more flash.

The primary problem with compensated pistols is that they vent hot gases straight up. So, as long as your pistol is extended out in front of you for shooting......it's all good. Bring it closer to your body for close quarters shooting and you can not only burn off your eye browns, you can put an eye out. There's a reason why you don't see compensated pistols in use by the military or police.

[ToddG]

People who blink when the gun discharges -- which is a big percentage of shooters, especially unpracticed and/or mediocre shooters -- don't notice it as much.

There are also variables related to ambient lighting, ammunition (how much flash the ammo has to begin with), comp design, etc.

The near-complete absence of compensated pistols in LE/mil circles is a good hint as to their overall usefulness beyond having fun and playing games, IMHO.

[William B.]

What you guys are telling is reinforcing my original opinion.


I shy away from them on defense guns. For hunting guns, go for it.

He was talking about a Glock 17C in a defensive/combat role :rolleyes:

[ToddG]

He was talking about a Glock 17C in a defensive/combat role :rolleyes:

Anyone who needs compensation to help control a G17 probably isn't qualified to be making recommendations about handguns.

[William B.]

Anyone who needs compensation to help control a G17 probably isn't qualified to be making recommendations about handguns.

Ha! Good point :D

[SWATcop556]

I was issued a Glock 31C for two years. Shot many thousands of rounds through it and about 30% was low light training. It was not my preference but not the worst thing in the world either. Not what I would recommend but I wasn't blind and unable to function when firing it either.

[threeheadeddog]

I think it is also worth pointing out where the compensators are actually affective. They are most effective with high pressure rounds that are quite peppy. It only makes sense that the rounds that produce the most blast/concussion are the ones who are most benifitted most by redirecting it.

For the most part your standard handgun rounds such as the .45 and 9mm just dont benifit as much from them. I would say that most people would be better off just learning propper recoil control. I have seen my fair share of glock C models shot and in every case I have personally witnessed the shooters were no faster and had no less muzzle rise than shooters who knew the modern method. In all cases I have seen they were actually worse. Now I have shot a couple of compensated xd's that people had at the range and while I couldnt tell much from shooting 5-10 rds I shot out of politeness I would imagine that it does help a little, but I wasnt impressed enough to go out and buy one.

FWIW I am not knocking the C models or saying that they recoil more. Just that it seems they are always in the hands of mediocre or worse shooters who would rather spend money to buy another handgun to "try" and get faster instead of just getting some proper training on how to do it themselves. Now obviously I am not talking about some of the very, very, VERY good IPSC guys who are shooting open running guns that can make the most of the comps.

[Buckaroo]

Why does everyone default to calling these "compensated" when they are ported weapons? Just because the Austrians used the wrong designation?

Maybe just my sore spot but it is worse than calling magazines "clips" IMO.

Porting might be okay for a hunting weapon but for the reasons stated above I would not have it on a self defense pistol.

Buckaroo

[sff70]

The C model glocks are ported, not compensated.

Compensators work by the plates in the comp, more so than any ports that may be in the comp. The gas moving forward pushes forward on the plates.

Standard handgun ammo does not work a comp or port effectively. If you want to work a comp in the most effective manner, you need to use ammunition that produces the larger volume of gas as possible. This is accomplished by using a large charge of a relatively slow burning powder.

For example, one of the loads for me 9mm major open gun is 7.7 grains of Ramshot silhouette with a 124 FMJ loaded to 1.170". Do not try this yourself, it's way, way, way over spec.

I've shot C model G17s, G22s, and G21s to see how they compare to the standards models and have found no perceptible difference or advantage in split times, muzzle flip, or recoil reduction.

Care must be used when you shoot from retention with ported guns, or if you shoot using a "braced contact" technique, or you can injure yourself.

I show people this by putting a piece of cardboard a few inches over the port and then shooting a few rounds. The cardboard is shredded.

In lowlight, stand down the firing line from the shooter while they shoot a non-ported pistol. Then watch while they shoot a ported pistol. You'll see that they light themselves up to others around them.

In a fight, this is a bad thing.

If you want fast splits and less flip, use good grip technique. This will produce the results you want, much more than will a ported gun.