Originally Posted by
alx01
Gas port is important - I don't dispute that. What I find silly is that some people argue that, for example, a gas port 0.072 is better than 0.076. Why they argue that and what data points they have - absolutely nothing. Not only, that most folks haven't measured gas ports at all.
Then they start going into even deeper theoretical discussion of throwing into the equation things like all sort of ammo from handloads and steel case to M855A1, A5 or rifle setup, different springs, different buffer weights, what if they want to cut down barrel in the future. But it does not stop here, no. They also start postulating reliability with 6 different brands of suppressors (most, if not all, of them they don't own), etc. etc.
Matter of fact - most trusted brands will have proper sized ports. Even PSA will be fine, it might be on the larger side, but it will work fine for most people.
Here is an interesting point - there was a thread in the Technical Section here, where a member claimed that 2(or 3) different Mil-Spec BCGs produced a drastically different recoil characteristics in the same gun. More knowledgable members than I, accurately pointed out that was due to a different cam path on BCGs - which was later confirmed. How many people who like to theorize about recoil and minor gas port difference considered that fact? I suspect - very few, if any.
Gas port is important, but it does not alone define reliability, durability or recoil characteristics of the weapon. Saying that an AR with the gas port size 0.08 will beat itself to death vs 0.07 (or 0.074) is simply, absolutely, positively NOT TRUE. Suppressor might change variables, but then you start going into what brand and what kind of back pressure and etc. If you want to run a can - you might have to do a custom port size. Do your own testing with the barrel length, port size, and buffer setup you like and let us know - i'd be interested in what works for other members.