carver or sjc comp

[noexcuses]

Which comp would you run for major 9mmm ? Have a g22 with LW conversion barrel and currently running a 5port sjc. Was planning on running minor loads but running nothing but major power. Have read and talked to a few about the 11 port sjc cracking issues. So the question is the 4 (10) port carver or the 11 port sjc?

[nahanshew89]

I talked to a guy at a local match this last sunday, 2/7/16, and he was running a Glock with the carver. I asked him what his thoughts were on this exact question. He said he's gone thru 4 comps and he likes the carver the best. He said after a fairly low round count, the SJC blew right off the end of the barrel! Told me it completely ruined his KKM barrel. Luckily for us, KKM is located in the area and he was able to pick one up directly from the factory and had already had the carver on hand. He said he'd been running it now for about a year and he really likes it.

ETA: He was also running the same setup, G22 with KKM conversion barrel, 9 Major.

Edited February 9, 2016 by nahanshew89

[taxil343]

I shot both before building an open Glock just a couple of months ago. To me the Carver was the clear winner in all aspects. It was much flatter shooting running both major and minor ammo out of similarly equipped guns from both manufacturers. The recoil impulse generated by the 9 major Carver gun I shot was quite muted when compared to the SJC. I do run an SJC mount and magwell which I love, I just prefer the Carver comp hands down. I actually have a Carver 4 port that I don't need if you're interested. I got a great deal on a 4 port/KKM combo on here but actually needed the 3 port as I was building a 9 minor gun. I can't say enough about Bobby Carver and his team. Their customer service is truly top notch

[Maximis228]

He said after a fairly low round count, the SJC blew right off the end of the barrel! Told me it completely ruined his KKM barrel.

Sounds like he didn't ream out the inside of the comp for alignment.

[Racinready300ex]

Carver seems more durable to me, my Sjc cracked with a low round count. I think that is fairly common, he will replace it once for you.

[Philip Dedmon]

Carver

[noexcuses]

I shot both before building an open Glock just a couple of months ago. To me the Carver was the clear winner in all aspects. It was much flatter shooting running both major and minor ammo out of similarly equipped guns from both manufacturers. The recoil impulse generated by the 9 major Carver gun I shot was quite muted when compared to the SJC. I do run an SJC mount and magwell which I love, I just prefer the Carver comp hands down. I actually have a Carver 4 port that I don't need if you're interested. I got a great deal on a 4 port/KKM combo on here but actually needed the 3 port as I was building a 9 minor gun. I can't say enough about Bobby Carver and his team. Their customer service is truly top notch

I have a lone wolf barrel so I need the 1/2x28 threaded comp, don't think that yours will work.

[taxil343]

You are correct. The comp I have is a 9/16x32.

[Savagesweat]

I'm surprised to see all the support for Carver's comp over SJC. Does it actually work better with major loads? With all the extra ports on SJC's major comp, I don't see how that wouldn't work better.

Or does SJC really have a bad reputation for their comps breaking? Carver and SJC both use aluminum for their comps, right?

[captain037]

Bobby Carver is top notch. I had this same conversation with him when building my Glock. I too built a 22 with kkm conversion barrel. Bobby said that while his comp is more efficient, the sjc is lighter. He recommended the sjc strictly for that reason. He said that with the added weight of the conversion barrel a heavier comp might interfere with barrel lock up and release.

I bought all my stuff from Bobby and you have to hand it to a guy that will do what's best for the customer even if it means recommending someone else's product. He made a life long customer out of me. My gun runs great by the way.

[Bkreutz]

I'm surprised to see all the support for Carver's comp over SJC. Does it actually work better with major loads? With all the extra ports on SJC's major comp, I don't see how that wouldn't work better.

Or does SJC really have a bad reputation for their comps breaking? Carver and SJC both use aluminum for their comps, right?

Logic and compensators don't mix . That being said, I have used both, personally I think the Carver works better, but then I got it first and put a lot of load development into it. I shot the SJC using the same load. Not sure how much that affects my judgement. The ports in the Carver and the SJC are different shapes so that will affect operation as well. Number of ports doesn't really tell the whole story about how well they work.

[noexcuses]

Sounds like i will give Bobby a call in the morning and see what he recommends.

[Savagesweat]

I'm surprised to see all the support for Carver's comp over SJC. Does it actually work better with major loads? With all the extra ports on SJC's major comp, I don't see how that wouldn't work better.

Or does SJC really have a bad reputation for their comps breaking? Carver and SJC both use aluminum for their comps, right?

Logic and compensators don't mix . That being said, I have used both, personally I think the Carver works better, but then I got it first and put a lot of load development into it. I shot the SJC using the same load. Not sure how much that affects my judgement. The ports in the Carver and the SJC are different shapes so that will affect operation as well. Number of ports doesn't really tell the whole story about how well they work.

So what's your load? What worked and what didn't work as well with the Carver comp? This sounds like a complicated fluid dynamics problem.

[noexcuses]

Called and talked to Bobby and will be ordering a 4port comp as that is the one he recommended. I asked him about his comp being to heavy with a g22 conversion barrel and he just chuckled and said no.

Thanks for all the feedback.

Stan

[Bkreutz]

I'm surprised to see all the support for Carver's comp over SJC. Does it actually work better with major loads? With all the extra ports on SJC's major comp, I don't see how that wouldn't work better.

Or does SJC really have a bad reputation for their comps breaking? Carver and SJC both use aluminum for their comps, right?

Logic and compensators don't mix . That being said, I have used both, personally I think the Carver works better, but then I got it first and put a lot of load development into it. I shot the SJC using the same load. Not sure how much that affects my judgement. The ports in the Carver and the SJC are different shapes so that will affect operation as well. Number of ports doesn't really tell the whole story about how well they work.

So what's your load? What worked and what didn't work as well with the Carver comp? This sounds like a complicated fluid dynamics problem.

It actually is a complicated fluid dynamics problem if you think about it. Air is still a fluid. But you have it reversed. I developed my load for the Carver comp and it worked very well (124 RN over 6.8 Autocomp for a 172 PF). I'm using the SJC at the moment and haven't gotten around to doing an updated load. I'm being subjective but the SJC doesn't "feel" as accurate or fast as the Carver (even though my match results haven't changed). I'm using the SJC because I was curious and I had some thread damage on the Carver (2 years of taking it on and off the barrel, must not have gotten the Loctite hot enough once ) When I first got the Carver, I modeled it in Solidworks and did some fluid dynamic studies on it (retirement hobby of mine, just can't give up everything of the "old" life) One of these days I'll do the same with the SJC just to see the difference. (or maybe not, sometimes that's too much of a reminder of "working days" )

[Savagesweat]

I'm surprised to see all the support for Carver's comp over SJC. Does it actually work better with major loads? With all the extra ports on SJC's major comp, I don't see how that wouldn't work better.

Or does SJC really have a bad reputation for their comps breaking? Carver and SJC both use aluminum for their comps, right?

Logic and compensators don't mix . That being said, I have used both, personally I think the Carver works better, but then I got it first and put a lot of load development into it. I shot the SJC using the same load. Not sure how much that affects my judgement. The ports in the Carver and the SJC are different shapes so that will affect operation as well. Number of ports doesn't really tell the whole story about how well they work.

So what's your load? What worked and what didn't work as well with the Carver comp? This sounds like a complicated fluid dynamics problem.

It actually is a complicated fluid dynamics problem if you think about it. Air is still a fluid. But you have it reversed. I developed my load for the Carver comp and it worked very well (124 RN over 6.8 Autocomp for a 172 PF). I'm using the SJC at the moment and haven't gotten around to doing an updated load. I'm being subjective but the SJC doesn't "feel" as accurate or fast as the Carver (even though my match results haven't changed). I'm using the SJC because I was curious and I had some thread damage on the Carver (2 years of taking it on and off the barrel, must not have gotten the Loctite hot enough once ) When I first got the Carver, I modeled it in Solidworks and did some fluid dynamic studies on it (retirement hobby of mine, just can't give up everything of the "old" life) One of these days I'll do the same with the SJC just to see the difference. (or maybe not, sometimes that's too much of a reminder of "working days" )

That's awesome. I have seen some CAD models and fluid simulations of rifle comps, but I don't think I've ever seen that kind of work done with a pistol comp. If you ever get around to comparing simulations of the Carver vs SJC comps, please make sure to post your work here. That would be incredibly interesting.