Shot the 19c today!!!!!! Doom and Gloom

[9mmdude]

I shot my 19c today for the first time. Guess what: No Flames, No spitting bullet pieces, No injury to myself or others. What I did have was:

Pure joy shooting Winchester 127+P+ with no muzzle rise and quick double and triple taps.

I have a 17C on order and also picked up a 22C and 23C. Anti-C people YOU ARE SO WRONG ON ALL POINTS!!!!!!!

I bought them to test them out and they are GREAT!!!!!

[89109]

Was it much louder?

[ab4ka]

If the cards fall right, I'll be bringing home a G24 tomorrow for my first compensated gun...that should be interesting:)

[glock_34_fanboy]

but try this at night,see if u can tripple tap accurately at night, i believe night shooting is what the anti-c people r refering to in their bashing of the c models.

[DannyR]

The C-models give off far less flash at night than a non-ported .357 magnum revolver.:cool:

[BUNIT9685]

If you're using the right carry ammo they will hardly flash as the powder used is meant not to flash. The flash is mostly from the target ammo.

[9mmdude]

Louder- I didn't notice it.

With a good carry load the powder should have less flash. As Danny R said about the .357 loads.........worry about those.

For any naysayer.......find someone who has a "C" model. You will shoot it and want one!

Good luck with your 24 ab4ka

[The_Gun_Guru]

I'm still wanting a 23 - MAYBE I'll get a 23c. We'll have to wait and see.

I'll try anything once, but I don't see what the big deal is. 9mm has no recoil anyway!:dunno:



TGG

[GLOCK_27]

I shot my 19c today for the first time. Guess what: alot of Flames, alot of spitting bullet pieces, and i injuried myself and others.....


i fixed that for you :)


i like the C GlOCKs the best

[skompier]

I've found that ANY flash is ammo dependent...not "C" model dependent. Aside from a dirty front sight, I really liked my 23C.

[9mmdude]

Glock 27.......That was good!

Gun Guru, shoot a regular 9mm with +p+ then the compensated model. You will see your time back on target is much quicker with the "c" model.

[Vespasian]

I'll bet you lose some velocity with the "c" models.

Tom

[mrnuke7571]

I'll bet you lose some velocity with the "c" models.

Tom

You sure do.. About 2% worth.

And glad another person has proven the anti-c crowd is a bunch of couch commandos.

My buddy and I both love our glock 19c's.

[Vespasian]

You sure do.. About 2% worth.

And glad another person has proven the anti-c crowd is a bunch of couch commandos.

My buddy and I both love our glock 19c's.

But standard G19s aren't hard to control, even with +P ammo. The "c" models seem like a solution without a problem.

Tom

[NYC Drew]

I have a bunch of C guns.

Please pardon my typing errors. The flames from shooting those guns singed my eyebrows and gave me 4th degree burns on both hands. I have a NIB G20C which I am afraid to shoot. Who knows what the 10mm round would do out of a compensated pistol!



'Drew
:cool:

[Mhiett]

The last three LEOs (one was an ArState Trooper) all carried "C"'s and had nothing but really really good things to say about their firearms.

[RAM_D]

ooo now i want to get a compensated barrel =]

[Vespasian]

You sure do.. About 2% worth.

And glad another person has proven the anti-c crowd is a bunch of couch commandos.

My buddy and I both love our glock 19c's.


It must be more than 2%: You're going from a 4-inch barrel to around a 3-1/2-inch barrel (the result of the compensation). Do you have chronograph tests?

Tom

[PopGlock]

I shot my 19c today for the first time. Guess what: No Flames, No spitting bullet pieces, No injury to myself or others. What I did have was:

Pure joy shooting Winchester 127+P+ with no muzzle rise and quick double and triple taps.

I have a 17C on order and also picked up a 22C and 23C. Anti-C people YOU ARE SO WRONG ON ALL POINTS!!!!!!!

I bought them to test them out and they are GREAT!!!!!

That's what I wanted to hear!!! :supergrin:

[PopGlock]

I'll bet you lose some velocity with the "c" models.

Tom

Not enough to worry about bro... http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=506401

[9mmdude]

If time permits I will make the attempt to try the 22c and 23c models on Saturday.

For all of the non-c believers try shooting a "c" model and then report back on your experience! "c" if you change your mind.

Drew: The "c" models replace eyebrow plucking

[GroovedG19]

Do the C boys cost more than the regular G's?

[GhillieGlock]

i never understood why people don't just buy a regular glock model and have it ported more towards the sides of the gun if the V flame bothers them.

[GooberPP]

i never understood why people don't just buy a regular glock model and have it ported more towards the sides of the gun if the V flame bothers them.

because if it's not ported up it won't hold down the muzzle rize

Speaking O' witch, I don't know anything about porting, but I know someone who has a compted 460 Rowland and there is no real muzzle rise.

[carbofan21]

i shot a g23 and a g23c side by side once, same ammo too. couldn't really tell much difference

[NYC Drew]

Do the C boys cost more than the regular G's?


Yes.


:cool:

[9mmdude]

only about 30 bucks more and well worth it!

[HiVelSword]

Well, hopefully you will never have to shoot in this position with a C model.

http://www.officer.com/article/photos/1179896852461_web-013-2.jpg

[alecat88]

I wanted a C model 19 but the clerk talked me out of it. :crying: I just got a plan 19

[NYC Drew]

Well, hopefully you will never have to shoot in this position with a C model.

http://www.officer.com/article/photos/1179896852461_web-013-2.jpg


The argument comes up every 3rd time there is a "C" thread.

Here are some things to ponder.

1. Shooting from a close retention postion, with the intended target close upon you, SIGNIFICANTLY increases the risk of your getting shot yourself.

2. Ever got hit by splatter from a 2" snubbie? Yeah, the BUG of choice for a lot of off duty (and some on duty) cops back in the good old days.

Statistically, the odds of what you are hypothesizing is significantly lower than being shot with your own gun. Does this mean we should leave our guns at home? No.

'Drew

[HiVelSword]

The argument comes up every 3rd time there is a "C" thread.

Statistically, the odds of what you are hypothesizing is significantly lower than being shot with your own gun. Does this mean we should leave our guns at home? No.

'Drew

I'd like to see these statistics please. Thanks.

[Glockadoodledoo]

Wouldn't "C" model Glocks be terrible for desert terrain with the sandstorms and all? Dirt getting all in your barrel and under your slide?

[mrnuke7571]

Dunno why people have such a hard-on against the 'C' models.

People that wonder 'why', try rapidfiring your non 'C' model gun as fast as you can pull the trigger at a target at least 7yards out. That's your brain.
Now imagine that group you did at 1/2 the size and even faster speed. That's your brain on 'C' models.

People that can't feel the difference between a 'C' model and a standard either have bad muscles in their hands or are lieing about even shooting a 'C' model.

Friends of mine at the range and myself can easily tell between a non ported gun and the same model in a ported version.

In a desert terrain it might be an issue if you leave it buried in the sand or leave it outside for days in sandstorms. Do any of you guys do this?

[mrnuke7571]

I'd like to see these statistics please. Thanks.


Who cares about statistics? If you're firing a snubnose at that position you're getting lead and flame in your face anyways, so whats the point?

Last I checked there were a HUGE number of people carrying those, and even more LEO's carrying them as BUG's.

[HiVelSword]

What I wanna know if C models are so great (not just talking about Glocks) then why don't they sell more? Why don't more people carry them? Why don't more LEO's use them?

Something tells me it's not because it's a best kept secret.

If I were going to port a Glock it'd be sent to Mag Na Port. Their porting is more efficient (Edit: my opinion) and does the same job.

About the only Glock C models I can give some respect to is the .40 and 10mm's as they actually benefit from them.

That and Mercury0_0's 20c just looks so damn badass.

[happyguy]

C models are for girls.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[HiVelSword]

Who cares about statistics? If you're firing a snubnose at that position you're getting lead and flame in your face anyways, so whats the point?

Last I checked there were a HUGE number of people carrying those, and even more LEO's carrying them as BUG's.

But we're not talking about snubnoses. If you carry a revo (ANY revo; read: cylinder gap) or a ported pistol then yes close to body shots are going to be a concern. But if you use a non ported pistol it's that much less so.

And um, I care about statistics. When somebody spouts about statistics I like to see them back it up.

[HiVelSword]

C models are for girls.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

:rofl:

[J1Z06]

I shot my 19c today for the first time. Guess what: No Flames, No spitting bullet pieces, No injury to myself or others. What I did have was:

Pure joy shooting Winchester 127+P+ with no muzzle rise and quick double and triple taps.

I have a 17C on order and also picked up a 22C and 23C. Anti-C people YOU ARE SO WRONG ON ALL POINTS!!!!!!!

I bought them to test them out and they are GREAT!!!!!Sounds like every time I bring mine to the range! Glad you're enjoying it.:supergrin:

[NYC Drew]

I'd like to see these statistics please. Thanks.

Well now you are going to have to do some work.


1. Since there are only a few specific positions where shooting from close retention would allow debris to get in your face - compared to just shooting in general, and since there are far more ways to lose custody of one's gun to a perp than being in a shooting as you have outlined and since there are also far more shooting positions one can be in where one accidentally shoots oneself...the logical deduction is clearly apparent.

It is more likely that one will shoot oneself with one's own gun than getting debris in the eye from a CQC shooting postion.

In fact, it is statistically MORE probable, that you would even shoot your self with your "C" gun, (or any other gun for that matter), than get debris in your eye from shooting your "C" gun under CQC scenarios.

Finally, actual data exists to support my position.

1. The number of reported CQC shootings in the position you have depicted are low, if they exist.

2. The # of people who have been shot with their own gun in a gun struggle or simply from NDs are in the hundreds over the past 15-20 years.

3. Admittedly, "C" guns constitute a very minute % of all handguns in circulation, so yes, the # are skewered in favor of my argument...but as I said before, the splatter from a 2" snubbie is way worse than a C gun (especially shooting hot loads :wow:) - I have shot, and shoot both under all types of scenarios.

Until you have actually done some of these things - please don't rely on pictures. Experience beats pictures all day, every day.


Respectfully,
'Drew

[NYC Drew]

...

And um, I care about statistics. When somebody spouts about statistics I like to see them back it up.


Fortunately for me, I know when to decipher when someone REALLY wants to know something, versus when they want to win an argument on the internet.:cool:

Your education is not my responsibility. I am not pointing my Glock 20C at your head and telling you to carry a compensated pistol. :)

Nor am I telling you to take my words as gospel. I am telling you, that if you stopped and put your argument in perspective, it really is a big non argument.

I can trot out, all day, day after day, reports of people shot with their guns - people who might in retrospect wish that day, they DID NOT have a gun, or that circumstances were slightly different that day.

I am yet to see/hear/read a single report of any one, anywhere, being in a CQC fight with a perp, using a compensated pistol, a regular pistol, or even a 2" snubbie, and even caring about splatter. At the most, the overriding concerns are to stop the threat and not shoot themselves in the process.

I'll be here all year, for when you have completed your assignment. :wavey:



'Drew

[HiVelSword]

Well now you are going to have to do some work.


1. Since there are only a few specific positions where shooting from close retention would allow debris to get in your face - compared to just shooting in general, and since there are far more ways to lose custody of one's gun to a perp than being in a shooting as you have outlined and since there are also far more shooting positions one can be in where one accidentally shoots oneself...the logical deduction is clearly apparent.

It is more likely that one will shoot oneself with one's own gun than getting debris in the eye from a CQC shooting postion.

In fact, it is statistically MORE probable, that you would even shoot your self with your "C" gun, (or any other gun for that matter), than get debris in your eye from shooting your "C" gun under CQC scenarios.

Finally, actual data exists to support my position.

1. The number of reported CQC shootings in the position you have depicted are low, if they exist.

2. The # of people who have been shot with their own gun in a gun struggle or simply from NDs are in the hundreds over the past 15-20 years.

3. Admittedly, "C" guns constitute a very minute % of all handguns in circulation, so yes, the # are skewered in favor of my argument...but as I said before, the splatter from a 2" snubbie is way worse than a C gun (especially shooting hot loads :wow:) - I have shot, and shoot both under all types of scenarios.

Until you have actually done some of these things - please don't rely on pictures. Experience beats pictures all day, every day.


Respectfully,
'Drew

Excuse me but the spouter gets to do the work. Why should I have to dig for the data? And if the actual data exists, show me.

Yeah, in a struggle. But if that trainer up above is shooting, I wouldn't call that a struggle.

So, I guess YOU are an expert? Are you saying that Farnam, Hackathorn, Clint Smith, Chuck Taylor, Awerbuck, Ayoob etc, etc are wasting peoples money by training close to body shots? I mean, afterall chances are you're going to get shot with your own pistol anyway.:upeyes:

Please.

[HiVelSword]

Fortunately for me, I know when to decipher when someone REALLY wants to know something, versus when they want to win an argument on the internet.:cool:

Your education is not my responsibility. I am not pointing my Glock 20C at your head and telling you to carry a compensated pistol. :)

Nor am I telling you to take my words as gospel. I am telling you, that if you stopped and put your argument in perspective, it really is a big non argument.

I can trot out, all day, day after day, reports of people shot with their guns - people who might in retrospect wish that day, they DID NOT have a gun, or that circumstances were slightly different that day.

I am yet to see/hear/read a single report of any one, anywhere, being in a CQC fight with a perp, using a compensated pistol, a regular pistol, or even a 2" snubbie, and even caring about splatter. At the most, the overriding concerns are to stop the threat and not shoot themselves in the process.

I'll be here all year, for when you have completed your assignment. :wavey:



'Drew
Nice way of saying "I can't really back up my claim" :wavey:

[9mmdude]

"Well, hopefully you will never have to shoot in this position with a C model"

And I am sure that in real life the training scenario will come to play just like the picture. Nice and staged and in perfect form. (not knocking training, but in the real world when you scrapple it does not come out the same)

[G36's Rule]

9mmdude,

Enjoy your "C" model. They are the best of both worlds. Get a non-comped barrel if carrying with it comped concerns you. Then you can switch back and forth.

These arguements against the "C" are repeated EVERY thread where "C's" are mentioned. They have no more validity now that ever.

Anyone who would carry a revolver for SD can shut up about "C" models...

[9mmdude]

I have 3 other 19's so the non-comped barrel is not an issue. I would not hesitate to carry the 19c. I just wish I would have found the "C" models long ago. That is the only thing bugging me.

[NYC Drew]

Nice way of saying "I can't really back up my claim" :wavey:

You're the one acting the jackass here friend.

I said "statistically". - hey, I even italicized it for the slow thinkers here. You missed that too huh?

Statistically, the chances of you being hit by a meteor while you are surfing are lower than by being shot at the range by another range patron.

Versus

The statistics show one is more likely to suffer smoking related issues later in life if one smoked a pack a day for twenty years.


See the difference? Nowhere did I purport to have statistics for my position. Careful analysis on your part however, would readily shed light on why my position is accurate. Again, you are simply trying to win an argument on the internet. It is possible you lack the skills for critical thinking, but again, this would not fall under the scope of any of my responsibilities.

'Drew

[HiVelSword]

You're the one acting the jackass here friend.

I said "statistically". - hey, I even italicized it for the slow thinkers here. You missed that too huh?

Statistically, the chances of you being hit by a meteor while you are surfing are lower than by being shot at the range by another range patron.

Versus

The statistics show one is more likely to suffer smoking related issues later in life if one smoked a pack a day for twenty years.


See the difference? Nowhere did I purport to have statistics for my position. Careful analysis on your part however, would readily shed light on why my position is accurate. Again, you are simply trying to win an argument on the internet. It is possible you lack the skills for critical thinking, but again, this would not fall under the scope of any of my responsibilities.

'Drew

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/statistically

[HiVelSword]

Your statement must be based on statistics. So you make them assuming there must be but yet you don't know how to obtain them.

Got it.

[HiVelSword]

"Well, hopefully you will never have to shoot in this position with a C model"

And I am sure that in real life the training scenario will come to play just like the picture. Nice and staged and in perfect form. (not knocking training, but in the real world when you scrapple it does not come out the same)

Then you are indeed knocking training.

[NYC Drew]

Your statement must be based on statistics. So you make them assuming there must be but yet you don't know how to obtain them.

Got it.


Again, you are trying to win an argument on the web. Best of luck to you with that. All you have to do is present me with the preponderance of existing data to support the claim you posted with your picture.

I, on the other hand, if I were inclined to do so (I am not :)) can provide to you more than 30 instances where police officers and people lawfully in possession of guns were shot with their own guns, either on their own, or during altercations in a fight for possession of the gun. I have only heard of one instance (2nd hand from J.P. - a forum member here) of a shooter getting debris in his eye from a C gun.

Unlike you, I don't post from an emotional perspective to win people over or to make friends. I simply posted a truth that you have a hard time accepting, and now you are screaming for "proof of statistics" to bolster your losing argument.

What else do you have?

'Drew
:cool:

[tampashooters]

Well, hopefully you will never have to shoot in this position with a C model.

http://www.officer.com/article/photos/1179896852461_web-013-2.jpg

A. Alive with some minor burns
or
B. Dead

I'll take option A

I love my 17c, I also keep a Spare Glock 17 Barrel when I don't want to shoot "C"...
http://inlinethumb02.webshots.com/43073/2095014010100259265S600x600Q85.jpg

[mrnuke7571]

A. Alive with some minor burns
or
B. Dead

I'll take option A

That pretty much sums it up THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE.

Thank you . :wavey:

People are too into what they read on the internet and are too close minded sometimes. It's like explaining to a 16th century peasant that there are more efficient ways to cultivate the land that by hand or an OX. He'll be like.. 'But why? It works fine this way". Some people JUST DON'T GET IT.

To the original poster. Sorry this got out of hand, but it usually comes when the model 'C' is talked about. People get their panties in a bunch over it because they are jealous that they did not think about getting one. HAHAHA. Enjoy the compensated glock, as we all are who actually own/shoot them.

[MJB]

For what it's worth, Ayoob does not dislike compensated pistols and owns some examples of same.

If you need to look it up check the latest edition of Combat Handgunnery.

[PlasticGuy]

http://www.officer.com/article/photos/1179896852461_web-013-2.jpg
All quality LE training and advanced private training will include contact range shooting. There is no other effective way of engaging an opponent within 5-7 feet that won't offer your handgun up to grabbing. It's not an "either or", and the debate between HiVel and Drew is just two sides of the same coin. Because many people are shot with their own guns (Drew's point), contact shooting skills are essential (HiVel's point), so ported handguns are not ideal for combat (accepted wisdom in military and LE).

If you don't agree, and feel that the slight decrease in split times is worth the risk in contact shooting, that's your call. However, if you ever get to the point where you're taking quality training classes from quality instructors in close quarters shooting, I think you'll lose your taste for ported handguns pretty quickly. I owned a C model Glock. I sold it because it was simply less than ideal for combat.

[PlasticGuy]

A. Alive with some minor burns
or
B. Dead
How about just using a non-ported pistol and being alive without the burns? :supergrin:

[9mmdude]

So all those who pack revolvers for CCW's should give them up? My GP100 shoots out a nasty flame!

Maybe I should invent a small fire extinguisher to mount where the tac light goes. It would server two purposes:

1. Stop the nasty flames from burning me.
2. Stop all of the global warming caused by my nasty flames.

:tongueout:

[lastevolution]

I have a 17C on order and also picked up a 22C and 23C. Anti-C people YOU ARE SO WRONG ON ALL POINTS!!!!!!!




Until you shoot from retention.

[9mmdude]

:upeyes:

[lastevolution]

I have a 17C on order and also picked up a 22C and 23C. Anti-C people YOU ARE SO WRONG ON ALL POINTS!!!!!!!




Until you shoot from retention.
It's bad enough without a compensated barrel; now you say the anti-compensated crowd is wrong on all points?

Fail.

I guess I'm one of the few people who actually trains and uses my weapon.

[Coogan]

The C argument will never go away. For some time there was the "blinding flash" argument. That was a failure as previously pointed out: other CCW sidearms produce more flash (i.e. .357 Mag).

As far as the C model not being for "comabt", I would agree. Keep in mind that "combat" and "gunfight" are two different things. Civilians and LEOs get into gunfights.

Close contact gunfights? Well, you better practice everyday. Just keep in mind that you're probably going to shoot yourself as well as the BG regardless of your training so the C model flash burn is of little concern.

I would have no issue using a C model for CCW.

[tampashooters]

Until you shoot from retention.
It's bad enough without a compensated barrel; now you say the anti-compensated crowd is wrong on all points?

Fail.

I guess I'm one of the few people who actually trains and uses my weapon.


It seems to me that you a one of the few people who don't train fully for all situations, and are scared of certain weapons.

now THAT was a BURN!

[9mmdude]

Sadly, I have never trained with any of my glocks. I am merely a key board warrior with my flame shooting C models.

:faint:

[PlasticGuy]

So all those who pack revolvers for CCW's should give them up?
No, you train to aim the top strap directly toward your face (rather than rolling the handgun outward like we do to keep the slide path clear on an auto). That will at least partially shield you from the blast coming out of the cylinder gap.

[PlasticGuy]

...Close contact gunfights? Well, you better practice everyday. Just keep in mind that you're probably going to shoot yourself as well as the BG regardless of your training so the C model flash burn is of little concern...
I'm not sure who taught you retention shooting, but I'd ask for a refund. If you're in danger of shooting yourself, your technique has some serious flaws.

And for the record, it's not the flash that will get you. It's the particulate matter (primarily unburned powder) getting in your eyes that you need to worry about.

[9mmdude]

If you face multiple goblins and engage them all like a true ninja warrior the last thing you need to worry about is small flakes in your eyes.

You could wear shooting glasses everywhere!

Have you shot a "C" model?

[HiVelSword]

For what it's worth, Ayoob does not dislike compensated pistols and owns some examples of same.

If you need to look it up check the latest edition of Combat Handgunnery.

Likes them. Doesn't mean he carries them. He very well might or maybe he's changed his mind but I've read more than a couple of articles in Combat Handguns where he doesn't condone the use of compensated pistols for defense.

[HiVelSword]

I'm not sure who taught you retention shooting, but I'd ask for a refund. If you're in danger of shooting yourself, your technique has some serious flaws.

And for the record, it's not the flash that will get you. It's the particulate matter (primarily unburned powder) getting in your eyes that you need to worry about.

Don't you know? Training doesn't matter. You're going to shoot yourself.

[HiVelSword]

No, you train to aim the top strap directly toward your face (rather than rolling the handgun outward like we do to keep the slide path clear on an auto). That will at least partially shield you from the blast coming out of the cylinder gap.

And it should also be mentioned that even though debris can escape the gap, it's much narrower than any porting. I personally have never owned a revolver with more than a .004 gap.

[HiVelSword]

Until you shoot from retention.
It's bad enough without a compensated barrel; now you say the anti-compensated crowd is wrong on all points?

Fail.

I guess I'm one of the few people who actually trains and uses my weapon.

Don't bother. They will never listen to dissenting viewpoints. Well, they might read them but immediately discount them.

[happyguy]

How about just using a non-ported pistol and being alive without the burns? :supergrin:

How about being dead because you couldn't make a followup shot because of the hot metal shavings in your eyes?

BTW, when you get a foriegn metal fragment in your eye the easiest and least invasive way to remove it is to use a magnet to pull it out. Unfortunately, that doesn't work with non-magnetic metals like brass and the alternative is to go in and dig it out. Thanks, but no thanks.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[happyguy]

Close contact gunfights? Well, you better practice everyday. Just keep in mind that you're probably going to shoot yourself as well as the BG regardless of your training so the C model flash burn is of little concern.


:freak:

What?

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[happyguy]

I bet you pro-C guys can't find a single quote by a single top tier trainer espousing the use of compensated pistols for self defense.

Care to prove me wrong?

Or do you guys know better that the folks that do this stuff for a living?

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[HiVelSword]

http://www.officer.com/article/photos/1179896852461_web-013-2.jpg
All quality LE training and advanced private training will include contact range shooting. There is no other effective way of engaging an opponent within 5-7 feet that won't offer your handgun up to grabbing. It's not an "either or", and the debate between HiVel and Drew is just two sides of the same coin. Because many people are shot with their own guns (Drew's point), contact shooting skills are essential (HiVel's point), so ported handguns are not ideal for combat (accepted wisdom in military and LE).

If you don't agree, and feel that the slight decrease in split times is worth the risk in contact shooting, that's your call. However, if you ever get to the point where you're taking quality training classes from quality instructors in close quarters shooting, I think you'll lose your taste for ported handguns pretty quickly. I owned a C model Glock. I sold it because it was simply less than ideal for combat.
Agreed! ^


For CCW

Clint Smith: non ported 1911 (sometimes Glock, sometimes S&W M21) Again, no porting

Chuck Taylor: non ported 1911. Non ported G17 and recently his carry gun of choice is a non ported 9mm XD

Ken Hackathorn: Beretta 92 but the vast majority of the time a non ported 1911.

Larry Vickers: 1911 or HK 45 (both non ported)

Ernest Langdon: Beretta 92 Elite, SIG 220 (both non-ported)

Somebody better let these guys in on the awesomeness of porting! And they call themselves "experts"! :upeyes:

[HiVelSword]

I bet you pro-C guys can't find a single quote by a single top tier trainer espousing the use of compensated pistols for self defense.

Care to prove me wrong?

Or do you guys no better that the folks that do this stuff for a living?

Regards,
Happyguy :)

Don't you know? All of those top tier trainers are idiots. When they discover porting, every one of them will smack themselves on the forehead, say "Duh!" and will wonder how they ever survived in the real world with a non ported pistol.

[happyguy]

"Well, hopefully you will never have to shoot in this position with a C model"

And I am sure that in real life the training scenario will come to play just like the picture. Nice and staged and in perfect form. (not knocking training, but in the real world when you scrapple it does not come out the same)

That is exactly why you should not use a C model. You have to expect the fight is simply NOT going to go according to plan and even though you would never fire your weapon in close proximity to your face in training, there is no way of predicting the twists and turns of a fight.

The fewer the holes that you have to worry about the bad stuff coming out of--the better.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[BUNIT9685]

I bet you pro-C guys can't find a single quote by a single top tier trainer espousing the use of compensated pistols for self defense.

Care to prove me wrong?

Or do you guys know better that the folks that do this stuff for a living?

Regards,
Happyguy :)

That's their opinion and we all have ours.

[BUNIT9685]

Don't bother. They will never listen to dissenting viewpoints. Well, they might read them but immediately discount them.


Thats funny because you've been exactly like that the whole thread.

[happyguy]

That's their opinion and we all have ours.



Well, their opinion is based on training and interacting with professional law enforcement and military on a daily basis.

But I'm sure you have equivalent credentials, don't you?

I find it hilarious that you guys think anyone will do anything but laugh at you when you act like you know better than this nations premier weapons trainers.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[MJB]

Likes them. Doesn't mean he carries them. He very well might or maybe he's changed his mind but I've read more than a couple of articles in Combat Handguns where he doesn't condone the use of compensated pistols for defense.

So I just went back and read what Mas had to say about compensated pistols. He likes the way they reduce muzzle jump and he has won competitions shooting them. He stated that Magnaport and Glock do a good job. He said that a lot of folks don't have CQCB skills in their repertoire and it doesn't bother them one bit to carry a compensated weapon.

I walk away from this read as he probably uses compensated pistols for competition and not SD. I also get that he thinks you should use what YOU are comfortable with shooting.

I can't carry by law so my 19C is fine for the range and home defense. If I am able to carry someday I'd probably get a G26.

Shoot and carry what you like, it's why they make different models.

[HiVelSword]

Thats funny because you've been exactly like that the whole thread.

Um, you mean I didn't get piled on by three or four posters when I mentioned close body shots?

[txgunguy]

For what its worth, I just made an "A" in my college statistics class. If anyone actually gives me the data sets for these hypothesis on C model glock burns vs. snub nose revolver burns, I can test them :wavey:

[PlasticGuy]

That's their opinion and we all have ours.
You have an opinion, but what is it founded on? The guys who have experience in LE and ccw training are universally opposed to ported handguns. Doesn't that tell you something?

[Cambo]

Why does anyone care if someone uses a "C" model for self defense? Are you going to be grading the defender on retention techniques? Do you really know if the defender will get burned? What if in the struggle, the ports face the offender's face and you shoot and it works to your advantage? I think I am going to promote my G17C to home defense gun, because I know for a fact it will bother some of you.

[Coogan]

I'm not sure who taught you retention shooting, but I'd ask for a refund. If you're in danger of shooting yourself, your technique has some serious flaws.

And for the record, it's not the flash that will get you. It's the particulate matter (primarily unburned powder) getting in your eyes that you need to worry about.

LOLZ! Have you ever had training? Seriously, if you have dude up in your space and you're pulling the trigger I just hope that luck is on your side. You can have all the training and great technique and perfect mindset, but reality has a way of negating them in a spilt second.

Thanks for clearing that up about the "particulate matter", I never had a clue that was the real danger. :upeyes:

[9mmdude]

After shooting my "c" model I have no fear in my ability to use it should the need arise and the ability of the "c" model to take care of business. Training scenarios and real world scenarios are vastly different.

Cambo, your 17c will serve you well, enjoy it.

[anubisgodofgods]

I had a G31C and the muzzel rise was reduced compaired to a non ported G31. The G31C was a good bit louder than the G31. I also fired the G31C in total darkness with SD ammo and the flash was minimal.

[PlasticGuy]

LOLZ! Have you ever had training? Seriously, if you have dude up in your space and you're pulling the trigger I just hope that luck is on your side. You can have all the training and great technique and perfect mindset, but reality has a way of negating them in a spilt second.

Thanks for clearing that up about the "particulate matter", I never had a clue that was the real danger. :upeyes:
I've had quite a bit of training, actually. I'm a certified instructor through the state police academy, and do CQB training pretty frequently. I'm also a Thunder Ranch graduate, and have been through several other classes and taught a whole lot of classes in the last several years. That's precisely why I know that ported handguns suck for retention shooting drills. And yes, I hope that luck is on my side. Luck never hurts when the bullets are flying.

I don't know it all. I never will. The more you know, the more you find out that you don't know. Go into a class thinking you have a pretty good knowledge base, and then have a one-on-one conversation with Clint Smith or Massad Ayoob. It is humbling. To the original question though, the more experienced the shooter, the more they don't like ported handguns and rifles with muzzle brakes for defense, in my experience. Has your experience been different than mine?

Oh, and you're welcome for the particulate matter thing.

[9mmdude]

".....the more experienced the shooter, the more they don't like ported handguns and rifles with muzzle brakes for defense, in my experience. Has your experience been different than mine?"

As a matter of fact it has. I have shot ported guns before. I didn't like them. I have been to Mas Ayoobs LFI class. I have been training for 25 years. When it came to the Glock "C" model it was different than the other ported guns because it worked. The V shaped venting system was a plus. I was and am very pleased with the Glock "C" model. You can not compare it to other ported guns. It is not the same.

[carbofan21]

Cambo
Why does anyone care if someone uses a "C" model for self defense? Are you going to be grading the defender on retention techniques? Do you really know if the defender will get burned? What if in the struggle, the ports face the offender's face and you shoot and it works to your advantage? I think I am going to promote my G17C to home defense gun, because I know for a fact it will bother some of you.

mmmkay

[NYC Drew]

HiVelSword,

For every caliber Glock chambers (9mm, .40S&W, 10mm, 45acp/gap, .357SIG), each of their guns does some things better than some.

Outside of budgetary constraints, people, and police depts use the guns they like. Let me break it down...

Some depts use the G17. Drawbacks? Some say 9mm has less power than .40S&W
Pluses? 17 rounds of 9mm, less recoil than 15rdsd of 40, and a smaller grip than the 13rd G21 in .45acp

Same thing can be said for frames. There is a PD here in NY that carries G26/G27 as their primary sidearm. Another dept issues G22. Smaller gun = smaller sight radius, reduced velocity.

Bigger gun (a la G35) = faster projectile (compared to G27), more rounds in the standard mag, longer sight radius...downside = slightly more combersome, heavier in the duty holster all day, etc.

Again, budget aside, PDs across the nation, and gun owners/gun carriers across the nation all understand that a G31 might do a better job of punching thru a windshield then putting a solid hit on the perp versus a 45acp round (example only)...they know that at the upper level, the SIG round can punch thru a level IIa vest, and even be problematic for conditioned IIIa vests...maybe I'm never gonna carry my G26 again because IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE that the gunfight I am going to be in, there will be eight perps, and the 12 rounds in my G26 may not be enough - especially since I might not have time to reload.


So, the reality is, there is no one handgun or caliber that you are going to strap on that will meet ALL of the criterias for a gunfight - which is why your rationale was stupid :). It would be stupid for me to argue that I would not carry a G17 as a LEO/non LEO because the round cannot punch thru a IIIa vest. Or that I would not carry a G17L because I might be more susceptible to a gun grab...or I would not carry a G18C because it is ported, or because it's gonna dump ammo like crazy.

I myself do not CCW a "C" gun. But just as I train with my G26, and have come to understand it's limitations and capabilities...and more important, my limitiations and handicaps, I train with this in mind. Same deal when I train with my G37, or my G35, or a G31C/G20C.


You have not provided a valid, sound argument as to why one should not carry a "C" gun. If we are to take your argument seriously, then we can all find some exclusionary reason to not carry a

G17, G17L G18, G19, G20, G21, G21SF, G22.....G39. Get the picture?

Reaching for one instance, where there has never been a case of someone shooting a C gun and having the gun cause visual interference is a piss poor position to argue from.

I could counter your argument and say that maybe, there are three perps, and if I hold my "C" gun just right, while I am engaged in CQC with BG#1, I shoot BG#2, and the debris from the ports hit BG #1 in the eyes, taking him out of the game.

See how stupid that is?

See you later. No hard feelings.

'Drew

[OverToad]

As I've stated on many of these "C" threads, I carry a Glock 22C on duty. I have fired it many times at night at the range and even with the ports pointing at my face and nothing but a tiny blue flame appears.

I grow tired of these "C" threads, but I have also noticed the sheeple that fell for the internet "C" myth are coming around. There are those that are still very uneducated on the "C" models like HiVelSword. I feel once she gets some experience with one, she will no longer be a sheeple.

[9mmdude]

".............I carry a Glock 22C on duty. I have fired it many times at night at the range and even with the ports pointing at my face and nothing but a tiny blue flame appears...."

How can that be? You mustn't have any eyebrows. Your night shooting surely must have suffered due to the blinding flash and the lighting of the sky.

[happyguy]

My experience shooting into a strong headwind is that some gun/ammo combinations spew enough crap out the muzzle that it can come back into your face and cause problems even from an uncompensated gun (the ammo was .45 acp Winchester Ranger).

I sure don't want that expelled directly toward my face under 35,000 psi.

And just because you can close your eyes and walk across the street nine times without being run over doesn't mean you won't get flattened on the tenth attempt.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[9mmdude]

So now "C" models are bad because of heavy winds? All of you southeast people................No "C" model usage in hurricanes!

Seriously: Was the compensated gun you were using a Glock "C" model or another type?

[mrnuke7571]

My experience shooting into a strong headwind is that some gun/ammo combinations spew enough crap out the muzzle that it can come back into your face and cause problems even from an uncompensated gun (the ammo was .45 acp Winchester Ranger).

I sure don't want that expelled directly toward my face under 35,000 psi.

And just because you can close your eyes and walk across the street nine times without being run over doesn't mean you won't get flattened on the tenth attempt.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

:rofl::rofl: Do you even listen to yourself? What were you shooting in a tornado with 80mph winds blowing towards you? :shocked:
Give it a f'ing break already. :dunno: All your 'internet-guru-information' has been tested and disproven by MANY people on Glocktalk. Or are you just writing this stuff to try to
start fights with people? I don't get it.

[happyguy]

:rofl::rofl: Do you even listen to yourself? What were you shooting in a tornado with 80mph winds blowing toward you? :shocked:
Give it a f'ing break already. :dunno: All your 'internet-guru-information' has been tested and disproven by MANY people on Glocktalk. Or are you just writing this stuff to try to
start fights with people? I don't get it.


Actually it was about an 8 mph head wind and I was shooting an older Smith and Wesson 1911 without shooting glasses. It is a fairly well known fact that the more flash suppressants you add to gun powder the more unburned crap will come out the muzzle. I didn't consider it a big problem at the time, the stuff just kind of floated back like dust, but I did wish I had the glasses.

It's also funny that a pathologist can determine if a gunshot wound was made from close range by the powder burns and gunpowder residue embedded in the skin but all that stuff that is coming out under 35,000 psi is just going bounce off your "C" shooters eyes. No problem for me, do what you wish.

If you want to argue and sling insults that's fine, but you'll have to do it without me. But that's why you joined this board right?

Edited to add: I have seen people standing next to revolver shooters get brass shavings in the face with sufficient force to penetrate the skin and cause them to bleed. It's a fact, that's why you wear shooting glasses on the firing line.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[NYC Drew]

My experience shooting into a strong headwind is that some gun/ammo combinations spew enough crap out the muzzle that it can come back into your face and cause problems even from an uncompensated gun (the ammo was .45 acp Winchester Ranger).

I sure don't want that expelled directly toward my face under 35,000 psi.

And just because you can close your eyes and walk across the street nine times without being run over doesn't mean you won't get flattened on the tenth attempt.

Regards,
Happyguy :)


Ok. But shooting a "C" gun...no one (except for J.P., in relating an incident that happened to a bud of his) has ever posted on GT about getting burnt at the range, or getting stuff in their eyes.

So, statistically:), your argument about crossing the street does not compare in any way shape or form.

On Glocktalk, I have read about


kabooms (mostly ammo failure)
self inflicted wounds while shooting (at least six instances)
self inflcted wounds while cleaning/practicing with unloaded guns
shooting houses/floors/TVs with unloaded guns
people getting hit, and sometimes hurt from riccochets
10mm guns :tbo: starting fires at the range backstop (it happened to me, and I posted it here)
slide rails breaking
trigger springs breaking
guns shooting really off left, or right
accidental discharges (hang fire, etc)
negligent discharges
magazine failures
people shooting 357SIG out of a 40S&W (read about this four times here, my instance excluded)
people who were supposed to get tazed, got shotetc etc.

So in the grand scheme of things, neither your, nor HiVelSword's argument can be substantiated with real world data, a hypothesis, or insight.

'Drew

[9mmdude]

Actually it was about an 8 mph head wind and I was shooting an older Smith and Wesson 1911 without shooting glasses. It is a fairly well known fact that the more flash suppressants you add to gun powder the more unburned crap will come out the muzzle. I didn't consider it a big problem at the time, the stuff just kind of floated back like dust, but I did wish I had the glasses.

It's also funny that a pathologist can determine if a gunshot wound was made from close range by the powder burns and gunpowder residue embedded in the skin but all that stuff that is coming out under 35,000 psi is just going bounce off your "C" shooters eyes. No problem for me, do what you wish.

If you want to argue and sling insults that's fine, but you'll have to do it without me. But that's why you joined this board right?

Regards,
Happyguy :)

Happyguy,

My argument is as follows: Shooting without shooting glasses is a big mistake. I have had many revolvers spew stuff back at me that stung. I have shot plate racks and had small pieces of lead come back and cut me.

Until you shoot a Glock "C" model you can not compare another compensated pistol against it. The gases are ported in a V in a very efficient manner.

Most of the vent gas in a C model is still going out of the muzzle. Comparing a pathologist report to using a "C" model is silly.

Your arguments are comparing apples and oranges.

[happyguy]

Ok. But shooting a "C" gun...no one (except for J.P., in relating an incident that happened to a bud of his) has ever posted on GT about getting burnt at the range, or getting stuff in their eyes.

So, statistically:), your argument about crossing the street does not compare in any way shape or form.

On Glocktalk, I have read about


kabooms (mostly ammo failure)
self inflicted wounds while shooting (at least six instances)
self inflcted wounds while cleaning/practicing with unloaded guns
shooting houses/floors/TVs with unloaded guns
people getting hit, and sometimes hurt from riccochets
10mm guns :tbo: starting fires at the range backstop (it happened to me, and I posted it here)
slide rails breaking
trigger springs breaking
guns shooting really off left, or right
accidental discharges (hang fire, etc)
negligent discharges
magazine failures
people shooting 357SIG out of a 40S&W (read about this four times here, my instance excluded)
people who were supposed to get tazed, got shotetc etc.

So in the grand scheme of things, neither your, nor HiVelSword's argument can be substantiated with real world data, a hypothesis, or insight.

'Drew


Drew,

I spent more that twenty years in LE which means I've put in a fair amount of time on the range, especially since I am also a gun enthusiast and go to the range on my own as well. There was also a four year period where I was a range officer so during that time I was helping to run the range during many qualifications.

Like I said in the post above, I have personally witnessed officers get struck in the face by brass shavings with sufficient force to cause injury. Yes these were revolvers we were shooting, but do you really want to take a chance with your eyesight?

Shooting glasses are mandatory on most ranges for good reason!

As far as statistics go, I don't have any. None. Nada. Zip.

But I would hate to see one of the good guys lose the sight in one or both eyes when it can easily be avoided.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[happyguy]

Happyguy,

My argument is as follows: Shooting without shooting glasses is a big mistake. I have had many revolvers spew stuff back at me that stung. I have shot plate racks and had small pieces of lead come back and cut me.

Until you shoot a Glock "C" model you can not compare another compensated pistol against it. The gases are ported in a V in a very efficient manner.

Most of the vent gas in a C model is still going out of the muzzle. Comparing a pathologist report to using a "C" model is silly.

Your arguments are comparing apples and oranges.

And my argument is that 35,000 psi is 35,000 psi regardless of whether it is coming out of a vent or out of the muzzle. I am willing to concede that when shooting at the range it is easy to control the direction of the muzzle and ensure that neither it nor the vents are pointed toward your face. :freak:

I will also concede that my experience with people getting hit by bullet fragments relates to revolvers and that the likelihood of "C" models expelling shavings out of the vents is probably less. (you don't have to worry about slightly misaligned cylinders)

But why take the chance? You only have two eyes and losing the sight in one or both of them is a REALLY BIG DEAL.

Edited to add: If the gasses weren't coming out of the vents at high pressure and high velocity, they wouldn't have any effect on recoil control. And the design and size of the ports ensures that the gasses escaping there are probably moving at higher velocity than those that escape from the muzzle.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[just a shooter]

Well now you are going to have to do some work.


1. Since there are only a few specific positions where shooting from close retention would allow debris to get in your face - compared to just shooting in general, and since there are far more ways to lose custody of one's gun to a perp than being in a shooting as you have outlined and since there are also far more shooting positions one can be in where one accidentally shoots oneself...the logical deduction is clearly apparent.

It is more likely that one will shoot oneself with one's own gun than getting debris in the eye from a CQC shooting postion.

In fact, it is statistically MORE probable, that you would even shoot your self with your "C" gun, (or any other gun for that matter), than get debris in your eye from shooting your "C" gun under CQC scenarios.

Finally, actual data exists to support my position.

1. The number of reported CQC shootings in the position you have depicted are low, if they exist.

2. The # of people who have been shot with their own gun in a gun struggle or simply from NDs are in the hundreds over the past 15-20 years.

3. Admittedly, "C" guns constitute a very minute % of all handguns in circulation, so yes, the # are skewered in favor of my argument...but as I said before, the splatter from a 2" snubbie is way worse than a C gun (especially shooting hot loads :wow:) - I have shot, and shoot both under all types of scenarios.

Until you have actually done some of these things - please don't rely on pictures. Experience beats pictures all day, every day.


Respectfully,
'Drew


why are you training to shoot yourself? :dunno:

[PlasticGuy]

Happyguy,

My argument is as follows: Shooting without shooting glasses is a big mistake. I have had many revolvers spew stuff back at me that stung. I have shot plate racks and had small pieces of lead come back and cut me.

Until you shoot a Glock "C" model you can not compare another compensated pistol against it. The gases are ported in a V in a very efficient manner.

Most of the vent gas in a C model is still going out of the muzzle. Comparing a pathologist report to using a "C" model is silly...
The reason the C models have less muzzle flip is because they vent gas and unburned powder up and out of the slide. Efficient or not, and V shaped or not, that's how they work. It can get under your glasses in training, and in the real world you probably won't have glasses at all. From 12-18 inches, it can suck. How much it sucks depends on caliber, the specific load you're shooting, the exact angle of the gun relative to your face, and a bit of luck. Some loads don't suck much. Others suck a lot. I know this, because I owned a C model myself and did a bit of CQB training with it. I sold mine, because of the exact issues we're discussing here.

Every post on here from a trainer or from guys who have taken a lot of training is opposed to the C models. Every big name professional trainer that has been talked about here won't carry a ported handgun. If you're absolutely determined to carry a ported handgun despite that, then that's just the way it is. However, there's no way to make it sound like a good idea to those of us with experience.

P.S. I still don't understand why Drew's "compelling argument" for using a C model is that he's planning on probably shooting himself anyway. I've got to be missing something in his logic.

[NYC Drew]

why are you training to shoot yourself? :dunno:

Where exactly, did I say this? Thru what convolutions did you twist your logic to arrive at that deduction?

:headscratch:

'Drew

[NYC Drew]

...

P.S. I still don't understand why Drew's "compelling argument" for using a C model is that he's planning on probably shooting himself anyway. I've got to be missing something in his logic.

I am at a loss how you arrived at that conclusion. I merely pointed out for every CQC struggle, there is a real chance of muzzling one's self, and shooting one self.

This was in response to HVS's picture post about not wanting to use a C gun because of a single shooting position.

For his argument, I could argue against using a G21 (not enough rounds, bullets not fast enough), grip too big.... or a G17 - not enough energy, projectiles too small, or a G22 - bullets will not punch thru many car frames and stop the bad guy...or a G20 - too much recoil, grip too big...or a 18C - ports, fires too many rounds in full auto mode - or a G26, small grip, reduced velocity, not enough rounds...or a G36 - see above for G21 - + decreased velocity, etc etc

Yet, there are PDs and non LE folks who every day, carry each of those guns (and many more) while understanding the limitations of the platform (caliber + handgun size).

There have been more reported instances where perps wore armor than anyone ever getting flash in their eyes.


....and your training and experience goes out the window once you start arguing without logic. To cite what the great trainers are using...well I was never too much of a mimic to begin with. The very best trainers are all saying that people should use whatever platform works for them, and train like heck with the platform they choose.

Do you disagree?

'Drew

[mrnuke7571]

Guys just give it up. Some of these 'internet-gurus' are just typing stuff to let themselves be heard. They have no valid argument just want to piss others off.
Not worth our hassle. Let them shoot their non ported guns and we'll shout ours happily, faster and better. We KNOW what we know, and they KNOW they don't know jack.:tongueout:
I've noticed a few trolls lately on the GT forums so just shrug it off. I'm at that point myself .Can't talk to a wall.

[HiVelSword]

Guys just give it up. Some of these 'internet-gurus' are just typing stuff to let themselves be heard. They have no valid argument just want to piss others off.
Not worth our hassle. Let them shoot their non ported guns and we'll shout ours happily, faster and better. We KNOW what we know, and they KNOW they don't know jack.:tongueout:
I've noticed a few trolls lately on the GT forums so just shrug it off. I'm at that point myself .Can't talk to a wall.

Yeah, Clint Smith, John Farnam, Louis Awerbuck, Larry Vickers, Ken Hackathorn, Chuck Taylor, Jim Grover, Bob Campbell etc.

Yeah, they don't know jack. :upeyes:

Yeah, you are SO much more knowledgeable than those guys. :rofl:

[HiVelSword]

" Originally Posted by Coogan View Post
LOLZ! Have you ever had training? Seriously, if you have dude up in your space and you're pulling the trigger I just hope that luck is on your side. You can have all the training and great technique and perfect mindset, but reality has a way of negating them in a spilt second.

Thanks for clearing that up about the "particulate matter", I never had a clue that was the real danger. "

I've had quite a bit of training, actually. I'm a certified instructor through the state police academy, and do CQB training pretty frequently. I'm also a Thunder Ranch graduate, and have been through several other classes and taught a whole lot of classes in the last several years. That's precisely why I know that ported handguns suck for retention shooting drills. And yes, I hope that luck is on my side. Luck never hurts when the bullets are flying.

I don't know it all. I never will. The more you know, the more you find out that you don't know. Go into a class thinking you have a pretty good knowledge base, and then have a one-on-one conversation with Clint Smith or Massad Ayoob. It is humbling. To the original question though, the more experienced the shooter, the more they don't like ported handguns and rifles with muzzle brakes for defense, in my experience. Has your experience been different than mine?

Oh, and you're welcome for the particulate matter thing.

:rofl: Coogan = Owned

[just a shooter]

Well now you are going to have to do some work.


1. Since there are only a few specific positions where shooting from close retention would allow debris to get in your face - compared to just shooting in general, and since there are far more ways to lose custody of one's gun to a perp than being in a shooting as you have outlined and since there are also far more shooting positions one can be in where one accidentally shoots oneself...the logical deduction is clearly apparent.

It is more likely that one will shoot oneself with one's own gun than getting debris in the eye from a CQC shooting postion.

In fact, it is statistically MORE probable, that you would even shoot your self with your "C" gun, (or any other gun for that matter), than get debris in your eye from shooting your "C" gun under CQC scenarios.

Finally, actual data exists to support my position.

1. The number of reported CQC shootings in the position you have depicted are low, if they exist.

2. The # of people who have been shot with their own gun in a gun struggle or simply from NDs are in the hundreds over the past 15-20 years.

3. Admittedly, "C" guns constitute a very minute % of all handguns in circulation, so yes, the # are skewered in favor of my argument...but as I said before, the splatter from a 2" snubbie is way worse than a C gun (especially shooting hot loads :wow:) - I have shot, and shoot both under all types of scenarios.

Until you have actually done some of these things - please don't rely on pictures. Experience beats pictures all day, every day.


Respectfully,
'Drew

I got it from here.

I train to shoot the bad guy and to retain my gun.

yes it happens fast, sometimes without warning, and there are no guarentees in anything.

but I train for both, and I shoot targets at contact range all the time, my muzzle blast tears the cardboard much worse than my rounds.

I believe that if I were so unfortunate to have to shoot from contact range the BG would have at least 1 round in his belly before the fight would be on for "my" gun.

[happyguy]

The very best trainers are all saying that people should use whatever platform works for them, and train like heck with the platform they choose.

Do you disagree?

'Drew

Yes I disagree. While the very best trainers may be saying that, they are doing so with a number of caveats.

None of them that I am aware of recommend that you carry a .25, or a highpoint, or raven, nor do they recommend carrying a ported pistol. You are taking their comments out of context.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[happyguy]

Guys just give it up. Some of these 'internet-gurus' are just typing stuff to let themselves be heard. They have no valid argument just want to piss others off.
Not worth our hassle. Let them shoot their non ported guns and we'll shout ours happily, faster and better. We KNOW what we know, and they KNOW they don't know jack.:tongueout:
I've noticed a few trolls lately on the GT forums so just shrug it off. I'm at that point myself .Can't talk to a wall.

I just saw the video of you making your smiley face avatar (nice shooting by the way).

Since you obviously have the capability of posting video of yourself on the internet you can easily put this whole argument to bed on your next trip to the range.

Simply videotape yourself holding your 19C next to your face with the ports pointed towards your eyes and pull the trigger. If you can do this (if you're dumb enough to do it you'll get what you deserve) and not sustain any injury I will recant everything I've said and apologize.

Otherwise we all know who the "internet guru" really is.

Disclaimer: I am not responsible for any injury that happens to this individual as myself and others have been very vocal about the dangers of the expelled gases from the ports of a Glock 19C.

What is it Forest Gump said? "Stupid is as stupid does." ?

Of course we all know we will never see that video, don't we? I mean, nobody's that stupid...are they?

Edited to add: It seems to me you guys should be able to find just one top level trainer to support your argument. They don't all agree on everything, though some things they all agree on.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[NYC Drew]

...


Simply videotape yourself holding your 19C next to your face with the ports pointed towards your eyes and pull the trigger. If you can do this (if you're dumb enough to do it you'll get what you deserve) and not sustain any injury I will recant everything I've said and apologize....

See, now we're back to falling back on stupid tricks where there is a paucity of facts and logic.

If I had a Level III or a Level IV vest, there is no way under the sun I would ever strap the thing on, and subject myself to even a GSW from a downloaded 9mm round.

Nor would I set back a .357SIG round intentionally, and fire that round.

Both of these things, as well as your idea, would be stupid - unless one was being paid a lot, for example to market vests, or casings, etc.

The fact that a platform, or cartridge or handgun has deficiencies in certain areas applies to all handguns. There is no perfect round, and there is no perfect gun being manufactured by any of the gun makers. Which is why there are so many choices on the market. At some point, training is required to bring the weapon and the warrior as one.

I would not attempt to, except under the most dire of circumstances, make a "high retention" shot as you prescribe against a bad guy - just as I would likely not push out my carbine in a CQC, if other options were available to me (unless I am using my carbine as a ram, etc)

Despite what you are touting from trainers, there are multiple PDs that use "C" guns (at least three gents from three different depts have posted in "C" threads)...and to my knowledge, there are "more than a few"of "special forces" PDs and military overseas, as well as more than a few SWAT operators right here in the USA whose primary sidearm is a Glock 18C.

So far, none of those operators have blinded themselves (could it be the balaclava and face goggles? :)) with their G18C's - or to be more precise, maybe they are not reporting it!

Your argument does not hold water. There are no statistics to substantiate your claim, and yet, the converse is true. There ARE statistics to demonstrate the "C" carriers are not blinding themselves (we would have heard...). That you cling to the single salient point of potentially getting debris in the eye in the event of one single possible shooting position? Laughable.

For those that say they have shot a "c" gun versus it's identical model non "c" counterpart, and are not able to differentiate between the levels of perceived recoil, or not seen a noticeable difference in split times? No offense, because I respect the experience and training of many here...there is always room for more training, to get "more better".

Doesn't mean I'm suggesting you go out and get a "C" gun. Doesn't mean I'm suggesting you train to move your splits down another 0.08 seconds :) ... I for one, am constantly weighing the value of additional training (time and cost), versus the real and perceived benefits (opportunity costs, impact training will have on my survivability, etc).

To each his own, of course, but please let us not be ignorant.

Respectfully,
'Drew

[happyguy]

To each his own, of course, but please let us not be ignorant.


Yes, please.

I take it that there will be no video demonstrating the safety of retention shooting with a C model forthcoming.

I thought not.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[NYC Drew]

Yes, please.

I take it that there will be no video demonstrating the safety of retention shooting with a C model forthcoming.

I thought not.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

:wavey:
I don't recall ever promising this. In fact, I have never posted a video of myself doing anything on the web, or for that matter, of myself doing anything with guns, so obviously, you have your idiots :tongueout: mixed up.

I suspect I too, will be waiting as long as you, for reports of any of the hundreds of officers in the USA who carry a "C" gun, blinding themselves while they are shooting suspects, etc.

I think you wait longer, because the law of averages does not favor the stupid. :)

'Drew

[BUNIT9685]

Yes, please.

I take it that there will be no video demonstrating the safety of retention shooting with a C model forthcoming.

I thought not.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

Sounds like we need to suggest another myth for mythbusters, they could do another gun myths show.

[PlasticGuy]

...To cite what the great trainers are using...well I was never too much of a mimic to begin with. The very best trainers are all saying that people should use whatever platform works for them, and train like heck with the platform they choose.

Do you disagree?

'Drew
Yes, I disagree. You're taking that statement and pushing it to it's extreme, and well beyond logic and reason.

I'm not saying that I copy what any particular famous instructor is using. If I am, I'm not aware of it. However, I am consistent with their lists of desireable characteristics. I won't carry a handgun loaded with snake shot unless it's snakes I'm worried about. I won't carry a .22lr pistol because they are commonly accepted to be less reliable in function and less effective terminally than larger calibers. I won't carry poor quality pocket pistols that have a reputation for reliability and durability issues. And I won't carry a ported handgun, because the muzzle blast is commonly known to be a potential hazard in retention shooting.

[PlasticGuy]

...I would not attempt to, except under the most dire of circumstances, make a "high retention" shot as you prescribe against a bad guy - just as I would likely not push out my carbine in a CQC, if other options were available to me (unless I am using my carbine as a ram, etc)

Despite what you are touting from trainers, there are multiple PDs that use "C" guns (at least three gents from three different depts have posted in "C" threads)...and to my knowledge, there are "more than a few"of "special forces" PDs and military overseas, as well as more than a few SWAT operators right here in the USA whose primary sidearm is a Glock 18C...
I wouldn't attempt to shoot anybody at all, "except under the most dire of circumstances", but if the dire circumstances happen really close I will be firing from a retention position and will be glad not to have a ported handgun.

I know there are a few smaller departments that issue "C" model glocks. I also know of a few that have issued 9mm fmj ammo in recent history (NYC subway police, for instance). That hardly makes it a smart choice.

[Coogan]

I've had quite a bit of training, actually. I'm a certified instructor through the state police academy, and do CQB training pretty frequently. I'm also a Thunder Ranch graduate, and have been through several other classes and taught a whole lot of classes in the last several years. That's precisely why I know that ported handguns suck for retention shooting drills. And yes, I hope that luck is on my side. Luck never hurts when the bullets are flying.

I don't know it all. I never will. The more you know, the more you find out that you don't know. Go into a class thinking you have a pretty good knowledge base, and then have a one-on-one conversation with Clint Smith or Massad Ayoob. It is humbling. To the original question though, the more experienced the shooter, the more they don't like ported handguns and rifles with muzzle brakes for defense, in my experience. Has your experience been different than mine?

Oh, and you're welcome for the particulate matter thing.

Yes, my experience has been different than yours - especially with rifles. I can only relate a situation - close contact shooting = if you can't see where your muzzle is pointing you don't know what you are shooting, until you shoot.

[Coogan]

" Originally Posted by Coogan View Post
LOLZ! Have you ever had training? Seriously, if you have dude up in your space and you're pulling the trigger I just hope that luck is on your side. You can have all the training and great technique and perfect mindset, but reality has a way of negating them in a spilt second.

Thanks for clearing that up about the "particulate matter", I never had a clue that was the real danger. "



:rofl: Coogan = Owned

I was? Wow, missed that one - thanks for clearing it up, old chap!

[HiVelSword]

I was? Wow, missed that one - thanks for clearing it up, old chap!

Even a blind man could see it but regardless, you are very welcome! :rofl:

[grecco]

I have a bunch of C guns.

Please pardon my typing errors. The flames from shooting those guns singed my eyebrows and gave me 4th degree burns on both hands.
'Drew
:cool:

Same thing happend to me,
just becareful when you pencil your new eyebrows in, you dont want the uncle leo (seinfeld) effect.

[NYC Drew]

Yes, I disagree. You're taking that statement and pushing it to it's extreme, and well beyond logic and reason.

I'm not saying that I copy what any particular famous instructor is using. If I am, I'm not aware of it. However, I am consistent with their lists of desirable characteristics. I won't carry a handgun loaded with snake shot unless it's snakes I'm worried about. I won't carry a .22lr pistol because they are commonly accepted to be less reliable in function and less effective terminally than larger calibers. I won't carry poor quality pocket pistols that have a reputation for reliability and durability issues. And I won't carry a ported handgun, because the muzzle blast is commonly known to be a potential hazard in retention shooting.


PlasticGuy,

Thank you for keeping the dialogue civil. I have likewise tried to stay on topic. There is something to learn from another's perspective everyday.

A few questions:


Are you aware of any USA (LE) SWAT teams using the G18C as the primary sidearm?
You say you "won't" carry a .22LR pistol, so I assume you are ruling out ".gov assassin" from your to do list :).
For someone who has consistently ...underscored the (almost non existent) issue of muzzle blast from a C gun (given that it only applies to one very specific, particular position), it is a very peculiar juxtaposing of ideas, since every single time a gunman (speaking broadly) discharges a non-suppressed handgun (or worse, rifle/shotgun), the damage to one's body (hearing) is immediate and usually irreversible.
When you shoot or instruct, what precautions do you demonstrate (if any) students to take if they are involved in a shooting? Or is it ok to routinely subject one's hearing to damage everytime one discharges a firearm, but it's not ok to carry a "C" gun due to the potential for damage to vision from shooting one unique, particular position?Genuinely curious :cool:


'Drew

[NYC Drew]

Of course, my use of the italicized "gunman" infers that I am talking about someone in a gunfight, not someone shooting at the range, so obviously I am not taking about ...shooting at the range, and when I refer to hearing damage, I am again not speaking of shooting under sterile, controlled shooting conditions.

'Drew

[JAMROCK]

Oh Holy Mary, Mother of Sweet Jesus - not this again.:wow:

HiVel, Happy and other No-C-For-Carry Guys...
Tell you guys what, It's clear you are all well-thinking, caring, compassionate men. Let's stop this travesty NOW! Dig deep into your pockets, borrow some money from friends, donate...er...ah...something
...anything...please...just all of you get together and buy all the "C"models off the shelves. You can and ship some of them down to me here in Ja, ship some to Drew in NY and some to 9mm where ever he is.

Just get them off the streets and into our foolish hands so we can burn and "particulate" ourselves into oblivion. Our eyebrows, hearing and most of our retinas are gone anyway!

Ps. I'd love to start with a 31C. Must be sweet eh, Drew?

Now, for Drew and all other "C" Guys....Shhhh. Keep quiet. Maybe sales of those dastardly "C" models will fall-off so badly that Dealers will be forced to get rid of them for little or nothing. C'mon guys, you aren't thinking!:rofl:

Stay safe.

[NYC Drew]

And kudos to you sir.

The 1st really memoriable, comprehensive "C" thread..


http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=506401


and here is a post from another LEO, his agency (TX) uses a "C" Glock...He may be from the same agency as Overtoad...

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9594363&postcount=142
we carry the 22c at work.i've shot maybe a 1000 rounds or so.i can't tell much difference.i don't really notice the flash,i must close my eyes at night.





As I've stated on many of these "C" threads, I carry a Glock 22C on duty. I have fired it many times at night at the range and even with the ports pointing at my face and nothing but a tiny blue flame appears.

I grow tired of these "C" threads, but I have also noticed the sheeple that fell for the internet "C" myth are coming around. There are those that are still very uneducated on the "C" models like HiVelSword. I feel once she gets some experience with one, she will no longer be a sheeple.

[HiVelSword]

Oh Holy Mary, Mother of Sweet Jesus - not this again.:wow:

HiVel, Happy and other No-C-For-Carry Guys...
Tell you guys what, It's clear you are all well-thinking, caring, compassionate men. Let's stop this travesty NOW! Dig deep into your pockets, borrow some money from friends, donate...er...ah...something
...anything...please...just all of you get together and buy all the "C"models off the shelves. You can and ship some of them down to me here in Ja, ship some to Drew in NY and some to 9mm where ever he is.

Just get them off the streets and into our foolish hands so we can burn and "particulate" ourselves into oblivion. Our eyebrows, hearing and most of our retinas are gone anyway!

Ps. I'd love to start with a 31C. Must be sweet eh, Drew?

Now, for Drew and all other "C" Guys....Shhhh. Keep quiet. Maybe sales of those dastardly "C" models will fall-off so badly that Dealers will be forced to get rid of them for little or nothing. C'mon guys, you aren't thinking!:rofl:

Stay safe.

Yeah, that "particulate" word is hilarious. But jsut in case you were confused, it was used by Coogan. Not myself.

But hey, you guys seem to know so much more than true experts. Perhaps you can start your own shooting school?

[NYC Drew]

...

But hey, you guys seem to know so much more than true experts. Perhaps you can start your own shooting school?

FYI,

"Jamrock" is in Jamaica.

I myself do not currently have the inclination or time to start a shooting school, but it is quite likely that in a few short years you will have heard of me,

I promise. :)

'Drew

[PlasticGuy]

Yes, my experience has been different than yours - especially with rifles. I can only relate a situation - close contact shooting = if you can't see where your muzzle is pointing you don't know what you are shooting, until you shoot.
Okay, then what technique do you use when shooting at a target at contact range? Do you use a standard Isco stance and hand the bad guy your pistol?

[PlasticGuy]

PlasticGuy,

Thank you for keeping the dialogue civil. I have likewise tried to stay on topic. There is something to learn from another's perspective everyday.

A few questions:


Are you aware of any USA (LE) SWAT teams using the G18C as the primary sidearm?
You say you "won't" carry a .22LR pistol, so I assume you are ruling out ".gov assassin" from your to do list :).
For someone who has consistently ...underscored the (almost non existent) issue of muzzle blast from a C gun (given that it only applies to one very specific, particular position), it is a very peculiar juxtaposing of ideas, since every single time a gunman (speaking broadly) discharges a non-suppressed handgun (or worse, rifle/shotgun), the damage to one's body (hearing) is immediate and usually irreversible.
When you shoot or instruct, what precautions do you demonstrate (if any) students to take if they are involved in a shooting? Or is it ok to routinely subject one's hearing to damage everytime one discharges a firearm, but it's not ok to carry a "C" gun due to the potential for damage to vision from shooting one unique, particular position?Genuinely curious :cool:


'Drew
I also appreciate your professionalism. When the name calling starts, I leave. That's why I don't spend time on AR15.com, except to search for specific bits of information and then leave. I won't even join over there. I just lurk and leave. To your points specifically:

1) No, I'm not aware of any US law enforcement entity that issues the Glock 18C as their standard sidearm. That doesn't mean there isn't one somewhere, but I've never heard of one in this country.

2) Cute :supergrin: No, I'm no cold blooded assassin.

3) Hearing damage from a gunfight is almost unavoidable in a country that doesn't generally allow suppressed weapons. Higher pressure cartridges make the problem worse, as to cylinder gaps on revolvers, ported barrels, and unorthodox shooting positions. It will happen though, and is just a matter of degree. If you can think of any way to avoid that, I'd be very interested in your plan.

4) While hearing is a concern, it's the bits of unburned powder that I see as the biggest potential problem. At least with my C model Glock that seemed to be the biggest issue in retention shooting. Hearing loss sucks, but losing 5% of my hearing in a gunfight is survivable. It's not a good thing, but I'd survive it. Temporary loss of vision could easily cost me my life if it happens during a gunfight and with my opponent inside of 7 feet.

[snaf2u]

I guess I don`t get it. If someone tells me they want to carry a comp gun I would tell them I didn`t agree with their choice but if that is what they want to do, have at it. I can`t see a circumstance where I would resort to name calling or suggest they were in some way stupid. I don`t disrespect people because their opinion differs from mine. Sometimes I even learn from it. I guess it`s just old age settin` in.:cheers:

[B&J Armory]

The flames from shooting those guns singed my eyebrows and gave me 4th degree burns on both hands. I have a NIB G20C which I am afraid to shoot. Who knows what the 10mm round would do out of a compensated pistol!



'Drew
:cool:
Sounds like you're scared...:wow: I'm not! I don't have a compensated model yet, but I'm adding a G20C to the family next!

[happyguy]

Plasticguy and HiVelSword,

When rational arguments are discounted and ignored it is time to move on.

Regards,
Happyguy :)

[NYC Drew]

Plastic guy,

There is one other scenario where carrying a "C" pistol is not suited for the application.

That of executive protection - especially for the fellows and ladies in the DSS/BDS in hot spots around the world.

Many times, the person riding shotgun really does have to live up to that name. In some instances, either driver or shotgun may have to shoot across the other at a target.

"C" gun in that scenario = really bad idea.

For those applications, I would be much more inclined towards a SBS carbine to start with (as shotgun, not driver).

I'm kinda disappointed this wasn't brought up ;), as this is, in my opinion, a more tangible and probable scenario where "C" guns would not fit the bill. Me personally? If I am driving, or riding shotgun, I would much prefer the operator of the firearm have the muzzle pushed out past my face, if the nature of the encounter allows, versus having the muzzle somewhat upstream of my face...but that's just me. :embarassed:


...and to address another point (where I mentioned "dire circumstances") , it has been my (limited) experience, that some shooting situations are more dire than others. As strange as this may sound, it is not every time that your index finger goes on the trigger that one's existence hangs in the balance. Obviously, a CQ struggle with you (me) & someone else immediately qualifies, particularly if you are open carrying. In my opinion, shooting at someone from 15yards, who is beating the crap out of someone else with a baseball bat is not a dire circumstance to my person.

'Drew

[mesteve2]

I have a ported shotgun 12ga. and shooting that from the hip with its 20" barrel will put stuff in your face.

I have had a ported Glock 19 and no problems I do not think a 9mm needs porting.

Had five I used for training. No problems. Not great for training because some students weak wrist them.

steve

[PlasticGuy]

Plastic guy,

There is one other scenario where carrying a "C" pistol is not suited for the application.

That of executive protection - especially for the fellows and ladies in the DSS/BDS in hot spots around the world.

Many times, the person riding shotgun really does have to live up to that name. In some instances, either driver or shotgun may have to shoot across the other at a target.

"C" gun in that scenario = really bad idea.

For those applications, I would be much more inclined towards a SBS carbine to start with (as shotgun, not driver).

I'm kinda disappointed this wasn't brought up ;), as this is, in my opinion, a more tangible and probable scenario where "C" guns would not fit the bill...
I agree. This is my primary reasoning for not liking brakes on rifles. Even in retention positions it is unlikely that a rifle with a brake would be a problem for the shooter, but his spotter/team members would have a rough day. I've experienced this several times in training on outdoor ranges, and once with a partner in a shoot house. It's unpleasant, even with hearing protection. I can't imagine how much it would suck inside a vehicle.

Another good question that hasn't been asked is how much speed people gain on something like an El Presidente by using a ported Glock vs. an otherwise identical non ported model. I suspect it's not much, but I've never seen anyone do a direct comparison with a group of shooters. That might answer the question of whether there's a tangible performance advantage. If there is, then there's something to argue about. If the difference is minimal, then it would strengthen the position that it's not worth the risks. Has anybody seen such a test?

[Coogan]

Yeah, that "particulate" word is hilarious. But jsut in case you were confused, it was used by Coogan. Not myself.

But hey, you guys seem to know so much more than true experts. Perhaps you can start your own shooting school?

HiVelSword = Pwned.

I never used the word particulate in my original posts. It was used by PlasticGuy which I quoted (both his original post and my reply).

[Coogan]

Okay, then what technique do you use when shooting at a target at contact range? Do you use a standard Isco stance and hand the bad guy your pistol?

:upeyes:

[PlasticGuy]

:upeyes:
I didn't think you'd have an answer, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. Apparently, I was right.