Velocity comparison - ported vs non ported barrel

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 20 жов 2024
  • In this video we compare the velocity of TWO 9mm hollowpoints from two identical guns EXCEPT: One barrel is ported and one is not.
    The results are surprising, as I expected a much bigger difference.
    Both guns have a 4 5/8" barrels.
    All shooting done on our private range that is used for instruction and is insured. All shooting is completed by a certified instructor.
    PLEASE NOTE: the polymer 80 firearm is still being broken in, and sometimes doesn't go into battery. That is why you see me checking every time between shots with my thumb. Probably 2 of the 12 shots on camera it actually didn't go into battery.
    If you have questions, please let me know and leave them in the comments. I hope this helps someone. Your mileage may vary depending on barrel length.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 11

  • @dtcdtc8328
    @dtcdtc8328 5 місяців тому +1

    Thanks for this , had this question rattling around in me head . Appreciate your time and testing.

  • @AEsir2023
    @AEsir2023 2 місяці тому +1

    Not something I would put on a 9 mm but on a 10mm…

  • @Triangleremodel
    @Triangleremodel 9 місяців тому

    So on a Glock 33 (subcompact) which i own. Is a .357 sig, it has a 3.43" barrel.
    I was considering putting a 4.33" ported barrel on it to reduce recoil. Also give it a custom aesthetic look to it with the tip of the barrel exposed. It would seem that the extra barrel length would basically negate any increase in velocity due to the ported barrel offsetting it.

    • @murphyfirearmstraining3630
      @murphyfirearmstraining3630  9 місяців тому

      I think so, but it would also reduce muzzle flip. A win-win in my book

    • @SwampOperator
      @SwampOperator 9 місяців тому

      I'd imagine the extra length would make the velocity similar to that of the original non ported barrel. Maybe even a gain

  • @joegilbert7661
    @joegilbert7661 Рік тому +1

    So, the ported barrel fps is lower, but it should have less recoil because of that and that would allow faster 2nd shots. Good review.

    • @murphyfirearmstraining3630
      @murphyfirearmstraining3630  Рік тому

      I agree.
      I expected a bigger drop in fps. For the minimal loss, it definitely seems to be an advantage.

    • @riiddisbuk2496
      @riiddisbuk2496 Рік тому

      Does a ported barrel maintain the accuracy of a barrel length?
      For example; If I shot one Glock 34 Gen 5 non ported and one that is with a ported barrel, will they have the same accuracy?
      @@murphyfirearmstraining3630

    • @johnb.6468
      @johnb.6468 5 місяців тому

      What we don’t know is how much smaller the wound track is due to reduced ability of expansion

  • @thatoneguy454c
    @thatoneguy454c 10 місяців тому

    That velocity difference is substantial. That is absolutely enough difference to effect hollow point expansion. 59 fps is a big difference in ft lbs of energy. I would much rather have a compensated glock 19 than a ported 17. You are getting similar length, but more effect. Thays just my opinion though. Well other than the Ft lbs statement, that just math and physics.

    • @murphyfirearmstraining3630
      @murphyfirearmstraining3630  10 місяців тому

      20 - 30 ft lbs, 350 ft lbs vs 320. Is it a difference, sure.
      For expansion- If a round would expand from a short barrel (say 3 or 3.5 inches) then it would expand out of the ported barrel. If it would barely expand from the standard barrel then I agree it wouldn't open from the ported one.
      I think it depends on the ammo, and for some I agree it would make a difference. But if that's the case, that ammo wouldn't work in a sub compact either.