Folks, I own a regular 9mm Shield and the stock trigger and recoil is very tame, no complaints. But was thinking about the ported model. Will I definitely feel less recoil? Is it really noticable? I did read that ported models end up throwing hot gases and other particles towards the shooter, thus increasing chance of lead exposure etc..

I don't like ported guns, but especially wouldn't want one for up-close self defense where I might have to fire it close to my body.

I'm also troubled by what must be brighter, or at least higher, flash in a night-shooting situation.

Of course, I carry a snub revolver with flash from the cylinder-barrel gap.

I guess I'm just old-fashioned.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

I find the standard 9mm Shield with any practice or +P defense load to be controllable and accurate. Honestly, I have not fired the ported version, but see not need for it. YMMV.

If I was firing full bore .44 Mag or one of the "uber" Magnums out of a revolver or very hot loaded 10mm's out of a semi, I'd look at porting.

what is the advantage of porting on the function of the gun? (Sorry just asking handgun newb here)

It reduces muzzle flip, which the Shield doesn't really have much of.

It's like chrome wire spoke wheels on a Ford a Escort.

Unnecessary
(Some) Chics Dig It [CDI]
Harder to clean
May help reduce upward flip of muzzle on firing one handed at arm's length
Definitely a NO-NO for firing in "retention" position in self defense, unusual positions, or close to your face.
Shooters to the right and left of you at an open range will hate you as gas and noise blows toward them.

The S&W Performance Center does some pretty nice work upgrading their stock guns. Unfortunately, the Shield package does little to improve an already good mass produced gun. If there are parts of the stock gun you want to upgrade, you can do so easily. I don't recall reading on this forum of any group of owners who did/or desired this set of modifications. S&W just seems to have pulled it out of their armpit. However, it is very reasonably priced for some quirky upgrades.

Thank you for the response my friend. It seems like you would lose barrel pressure and the rounds would slow down. Not good for a reloader going from powder company specs. I started reloading right away when I started shooting handguns about a year ago. I have been shooting rifles for decades.

As a reloader myself, your observation that a short barrel with porting will have lower velocities makes sense--maybe 40-50 fps slower, which could be worth noting in a self defense situation.

I'll leave this hear for u new guys to try and grasp when it comes to ported barrels.

The give and take is the decrease in velocity as a result from the ports redirecting the pressure. The Shields barrel is already short for 9mm but not soo much that it kills it. By porting, u reduce the velocity which reduces the energy and makes HP ammo less likely to actually open.

My self defense weapon isnt worth losing that advantage. My 2 cents

Anyone notice they dont make a none safety version of the PC Shield. Thats because we all know they are waiting to sell u another weapon when the sells of these start to decrease.

I wonder if the pressure lost in the Cylinder/Barrel gap of revolvers is why most (if not all) revolver rounds use larger cartridges than their self loading Pistol counterparts.

BTW: Nice catch on the PC Shield only being available in a Thumbs Safety version.

No clue on the revolver caliber idea. But its a thought in the right direction im sure. Also, how many revolvers have u seen running a suppressor or better yet. How many have u seen with a ported barrel lol.

This ported barrel idea on short barrels, IMO is a gimmick. Its s&w trying to boost sales. Yet they are really taking away from the performance of the weapon. As far as the weapon being designed for CC and SD. HP ammo now days is what makes the 9mm worth carrying. Pretty much it makes it equivalent to carrying a .40. I just dont know why people would want to sacrifice this. I want as much out of my CC weapon as i can possibly get.

After the sales of the PC Shield start to twindle. I'll bet all of a sudden they introduce a PC Shield non-safety version. This is basically a repeat of the original shield idea. Sell something to the people. Make something else of the "something" and sell them another something (just with no safety)...Fast forward lets make a PC Shield, give the customers something new to Owwww and Ahhhh over. Ok now when the sales drop, lets give them a PC Shield non safety version. Does anyone see history repeating itself here?

I was practicing at the range yesterday when a guy pulled up in the stall next to me with his ported Performance Center fullsize M&P9. Yuck! That was not fun! I was getting all the blast from those ports.

I shoot at an old-school outdoor range. The pistol stalls are separated by open steel grid fences. Please be courteous to fellow shooters and don't take a ported pistol to a range that doesn't have solid barriers between the stalls.

As far as range time on it, I wear a lead mask so not worried about that, but as far as FPS lost, not sure it would make that much of a difference but then again most .357 velocity is on average 100fps faster than 9mm so a loss of 40 to 50fps could be significant. But the fact this model has an enhanced trigger and fiber optic sights almost makes it worth the extra dough.

Did you read the other PC Shield threads? It seems like people would have preferred it had night sights, rather than FOs.

The only thing I can think of is people been using them in IDPA I believe its Bug Class and the ported barrel gets them back on target faster. I shoot a 9 Pro L with a comp and it does help. Don

__________________
USN Retired/VN VET
M&P X5

People normally don't take the time and effort to educate themselves about things in general, like you mention the loss of 50 fps it doesn't have a significant impact on bullet performance. I invite anybody who has solid information to counter this otherwise.

Should I ask the guy next to me to be polite and stop shooting his 308?, if you thought that a ported 9mm was bad I don't know what to tell you. I been at indoor ranges next to S&W 500, 7.62x54R etc that is just part of business.

There's an issue with the ammo as well. I ran across a post about certain types of ammo that carry a warning label that states "not to be used on ported weapons" or words to that effect. Sure enough, I checked my inventory of CCI and Federal ammo and both carried the warning concerning ported barrels. I called CCI and Federal CS reps and both confirmed that the copper is thin and has a chance to shear off and be discharged through the ports. My LGS kindly allowed me to trade for a regular Shield since I hadn't put any rounds through the Performance Model. There is ammo out there that shoots fine in the Performance Model, I just didn't want the hassle of maintaining a mixed inventory of 9mm and the safety concerns were not worth the risk in my opinion. I'm very happy with the regular Shield!!

Valistar

I don't think the porting has much effect on the shield and question that move other than to market something different. Hey, it looks cool. I would rather see them drop some ounces off the orginal. Lighten the gun up a tad so its even easier to carry. For me at least its like carrying a brick at 23 oz loaded. I find myself carrying my CW9 more because its 5 oz lighter at least.

My solid education on bullet performance, in particular expansion and penetration, comes from working for Barnes Bullets for almost five years. Not only was there thorough R&D testing, but during every production run bullets were pulled from the machines and sent to the lab where they were loaded and test fired for bullet performance. If anything was out of spec, the machine was adjusted before completing the run. Barnes tested thousands of bullets a week.

Pistol bullets have relative narrow velocity ranges of desired performance. They are slow moving to begin with. The velocity at which a bullet is designed to begin expansion is critically important. The velocity at which full expansion is achieved with the desired penetration and maximum energy dump is also important for self defense.

To test the expansion of bullets pulled off the production lines quickly and cheaply at various velocities, Barnes would load a range of powder weights for test cartridges and shoot them into a vertical water tank. After decades of recording the results, Barnes had a very good understanding of the difference 50 fps. lower velocity could mean to a bullet's expansion and penetration. Barnes also performed thousands of gel block tests on their own and competitors' bullets.

When you start with a barrel that is 3.1" in length, and almost all ammunition testing is done from 5" barrels (full size guns) for velocity and expansion norms, you will get lower than advertised velocities. How much? Various tests have indicated in pistols that the variance is about 50 fps. per 1/2". Porting releases gasses before they are finished pushing on the back on the bullet, thus decreasing velocity up to another 50 fps.

So, if a 9mm bullet is designed to start expanding at 1000 fps and get full, expanded penetration at 1175-1250 fps., as is common, but instead leaves a ported Shield barrel at less than 900 fps., the likelihood that the bullet will perform as desired is reduced.

There are myriads of tests and photographs available on the internet that confirm the above.

There are new loadings available today that account for short barreled self defense weapons and have bullets that expand adequately at lower velocities--like 900 fps.--but they will generally not achieve the desired 12-14" of penetration. A slow bullet that expands bleeds energy quickly and runs out of steam. Heavier bullets, even when expanded, retain velocity better, and therefore will usually penetrate better than a lighter slow bullet. Weight retention is a key factor for penetration, more so even than velocity.

Barnes had a .38 spl. loading designed for 2" snubbies that deliver velocities substantially below the typical 5" barrel service revolvers from which .38 spl. ammo is usually tested. Because the bullet expanded and retained 100% of the weight of the all-copper bullet, penetration was adequate. This is not an increased velocity loading; it is an increased performance loading.

If you choose to believe that porting has little to no effect on bullet performance or velocity loss, you are entitled to that opinion. Those who have actually done the testing see different results.

Porting and comps are ILLEGAL in IDPA, all divisions, including BUG. If people are shooting them at your club's IDPA matches, they should be shooting as NOT FOR COMPETITION, which means no score.

__________________
Science plus Art

Perfect timing on this thread.

I am a huge Shield fan and have three 9mm Shields and on 45 Shields and I was seriously thinking of getting a ported version.

I will just stick with what I have.

I will tell you have I have tried to replace my shield for carry many times and never found anything better.

I shot with a guy who was using a ported shield and we both broke down our pistols to clean them. His barrel was filthy compared to mine and there was NO OIL whatsoever on the barrel as it looked like it was all gritty where the barrel bushing meets. Mine was considerably cleaner (regular shield). After seeing that I decided to keep my regular shield and just add the Apex trigger to it.....

All common revolver rounds today are decedents of an original black powder loading. Black powder is bulky and low pressure, thus the need for the long cases. Loaded with [most] smokeless powders, there is very little case fill, as opposed to a 9mm (designed as a smokeless round) which is usually crammed full. When magnums came out, they lengthened the cases, so they would not chamber in their shorter counterparts' cylinders. That is why revolver rounds are "bigger;" they are mostly wasted space.

__________________
an actual conservative

I have both a standard Shield and a PC Shield. Does the porting make a difference in muzzle flip? Yes. Without doubt. Enough to make a critical difference? No, not in my opinion. It's still more about the Indian than the arrow. But, I love both of my Shields. I bought the PC version primarily because I found a great deal online, and actually paid less for it that I paid for my regular Shield. Both get carried on a regular basis. I do agree that on the PC version I would have preferred night sights to the FO. In fact, I changed mine to NS.

I own a PC shield 9mm that I found used after previous owner decided he didn't like it after 40-50 rounds. I'm sure I'd have been happy with non-ported version but with night sites and improved trigger for the same price as new standard model I went for it. So comfortable to carry I forget it's there. As far as a small loss of velocity, I carry it for what I would expect to be a close encounter of the worst kind which probably be measured in feet.

I own Shield 45 non ported..spoke with knowledgeable people prior to purchase about the ported model. All agreed that there really is no functional benefit and they all seem to think it was just marketing and "the cool factor". The other down is that the ported barrel really gums up the inside of your slide faster.

__________________
Hipcocked45

I have to respecfully disagree. I shot both versions and I purchased the ported 45 Shield and feel there is about a 15-20% reduction in muzzel flip and felt recoil. I would not have spent more money on the ported version if I did not notice a difference. I have a thread about my PC Shield 45. Either way you have to get what you want.

The evils of porting is like the lochness monster, a lot of people claim to have seen them but no one can prove it. As I have said before, most people who tell tall tales about porting have never touched a ported gun let alone trained with one. Way too many parrot commonly held misconceptions because some internet personality said so and they took it as gospel.

My department (and several other departments in the area) issued Glock "C" models for years and no one experienced a single issue with them. Not at night shoots, not during CQB training, not during tactical drills, not ever. Although I do agree you have to be judicious with your firearms maintenance, as you should with every gun you own.

I can definitely tell the difference in muzzle flip between my ported Shield and my non-ported Shields. But not near as much as I can tell between my Glock 23C and my Glock 23.

What's a lead mask ?? Have never heard that reference before ..

There is always a difference in muzzle flip with a ported pistol vs a non ported pistol of the same model. This can be measured from still frames in motion photography. The degree of flip decreases with a decrease in muzzle energy. 9mm is pretty tame compared to 357 magnum. The shooter may be more or less sensitive to this. I have owned a ported 9mm M&P CORE and a non ported 40 cal M&P CORE. After a 1000 rounds through each, I was pretty oblivious to differences in muzzle flip even though there had to be some. The ported 9mm however left significant powder residue all over the barrel and inside the slide. Not only that, it tended to bake on the barrel and wouldn't readily clean off without some extra work. This was not worth it to me and I sold it. I still have the 40. I have to admit there is the cool factor with porting and there nothing wrong with giving it a try. Not everyone's experience is the same.

My SIL had a glock .40 w/ a compensator (Correct term?) that he used for a while in USPSA. Muzzle stayed really flat so it was impressive. But it was all outdoors. Looking at a few youtube vids of a ported Shield and the comments here about others close by, including one's self in an SD situation, says to me there is very limited use. And then the extra cleaning. Ughh.

I have read with great interest the port/standard debate. I just purchased the PC Shield in 9mm as I do like the FO sights and the trigger seems to be much cleaner/brisk that the standard. I have not shot it yet. What about changing the barrel to a non ported one and leaving all else the same?

One of the reasons I've seen published for not using a standoff on the front of a self defense semi-auto is that for a very close shot, flesh and clothing can get entangled in the stand off and prevent the pistol from going into battery. A hard malfunction to clear quickly.

If that's really an issue, would a compensated barrel have the same problem?

Ported guns are loud. Just a warning. I found this out with a Springfield 45acp V10. Loud as in deafening. It did reduce the muzzle flip quite a bit, though but for me the trade off was not worth it.

I can't speak for other guns' noise levels but at my local indoor range i don't really notice a difference in sound level between my ported PC Shield in 9 and my regular full size MP 9. I use similar 115fmj ammo in both.

I've got a non ported shield & have thought about getting a ported 1 just for fun

Short answer is, you will NOT feel a significant difference in recoil / muzzle flip between the standard and the PC version. Not enough to make a difference in a defensive situation IMO.

I did an unscientific comparison between the two and wrote about it here. Ported Shield 9mm vs Shield 9mm

As far as shooting a ported gun from retention. Take a look at this video. Starts at about 2:00 in.

Ported M&P Performance Center Shield from Smith & Wesson - YouTube


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk