Compensator rule.

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, Jim Watson said:

There are a lot of detail differences, a full bull IDPA CO is less tricked out than a USPSA Open.

 

The primary difference is just frame mounted optic, major PF and weight. And I guess capacity unless you live in NJ. 

 

Yeah, open guns have bigger comps and more ports. But that's a byproduct of the major power factor. 

[JRM83]

19 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

The primary difference is just frame mounted optic, major PF and weight. And I guess capacity unless you live in NJ. 

 

Yeah, open guns have bigger comps and more ports. But that's a byproduct of the major power factor. 

 

I've shot a lot of comped 9 major, but never a compensated minor gun. Do you think it makes a big enough difference that at the highest levels of IDPA competition guns without comps and/or ports are going to be non-competitive vs those with them?

[Racinready300ex]

2 minutes ago, JRM83 said:

 

I've shot a lot of comped 9 major, but never a compensated minor gun. Do you think it makes a big enough difference that at the highest levels of IDPA competition guns without comps and/or ports are going to be non-competitive vs those with them?

 

I don't really think the comp is a total game changer for IDPA but it does make the guns a little easier to shoot. I've not shot a ton through guns setup this way but a few top locals are moving toward ported and/or comped 2011's. They're going to be that much harder to beat now. 

 

You're kind of my area, you probably see Sczesny, Fiori, or Cantrell winning all the majors in the area. All have moved to ported and or comped 2011's.

[want2race]

1 hour ago, JRM83 said:

 

I've shot a lot of comped 9 major, but never a compensated minor gun. Do you think it makes a big enough difference that at the highest levels of IDPA competition guns without comps and/or ports are going to be non-competitive vs those with them?

 

It does make a difference even at 130pf.  It's not game changer level, but an advantage.   

[RangerTrace]

I run an XC and it's pretty darn flat.  But I shot a guys P a few weeks ago that had 6 or 8 barrel ports and it was MUCH flatter than my gun.  It felt about like a true open gun.

[JRM83]

15 minutes ago, RangerTrace said:

I run an XC and it's pretty darn flat.  But I shot a guys P a few weeks ago that had 6 or 8 barrel ports and it was MUCH flatter than my gun.  It felt about like a true open gun.

Well that's interesting. I picked up a Platypus as an IDPA gun (also just really wanted one) and was considering porting it. Comping just isn't an option on my gun, but ports are easy. 

[Racinready300ex]

28 minutes ago, RangerTrace said:

I run an XC and it's pretty darn flat.  But I shot a guys P a few weeks ago that had 6 or 8 barrel ports and it was MUCH flatter than my gun.  It felt about like a true open gun.

 

The XC is pretty baller, for IDPA. But, I think in my head at least it makes sense ports seem better. Minor guns don't have a ton of recoil, we don't really need the comp to take energy out of the slide. Ports won't help with the "softness" as much but if you stay flatter and can just smash pairs at longer distances it might be more of a benefit. 

[RangerTrace]

1 hour ago, JRM83 said:

Well that's interesting. I picked up a Platypus as an IDPA gun (also just really wanted one) and was considering porting it. Comping just isn't an option on my gun, but ports are easy. 

I'd port it for sure.  The only thing keeping me from spending the money to add ports to the XC is one of the head Smiths at Staccato says they sometimes cause jackets to peel, especially on plated bullets.  

[Jim Watson]

18 minutes ago, RangerTrace said:

The only thing keeping me from spending the money to add ports to the XC is one of the head Smiths at Staccato says they sometimes cause jackets to peel, especially on plated bullets.  

 

No doubt.  And I shoot more coated than plated, blowing paint out the ports or comp couldn't be good.

[JRM83]

2 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

The XC is pretty baller, for IDPA. But, I think in my head at least it makes sense ports seem better. Minor guns don't have a ton of recoil, we don't really need the comp to take energy out of the slide. Ports won't help with the "softness" as much but if you stay flatter and can just smash pairs at longer distances it might be more of a benefit. 

I agree with that as well. It's not a major gun where there's tons of gas to work the baffles on the comp. There's much less gas to use and ports *seem* like the would more efficiently direct the force where it needs to go. The next question is what port size and arrangement is best. 

[Racinready300ex]

27 minutes ago, JRM83 said:

I agree with that as well. It's not a major gun where there's tons of gas to work the baffles on the comp. There's much less gas to use and ports *seem* like the would more efficiently direct the force where it needs to go. The next question is what port size and arrangement is best. 

 

I think the MPA guns people are running in IDPA have a v8 style ports, but I don't know the size. I've been wondering the same thing. 

[want2race]

4x 45⁰ ports.  147gr @ 915fps in the pic.  It's pretty silly actually.  Effective even at minor pf.  This was the comp I posted on the previous page.   Baffle surface area is king.  Downside of porting is the velocity drop depending on location and amount.  Not a fan of holes on the lands either.   If that was my only option, I would incorporate the slide holes with the barrel ports to increase their effective length.  Just an idea.