Which .45 Shield would you buy, ported or not?

Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
662
Likes
53
Feedback: 8 / 0 / 0
Given a choice between the standard .45 Shield and the Performance Center ported version, which would you buy and why? Forget the price difference, just looking for thoughts on if the porting is an advantage in this size pistol and what people's experiences have been.

Thanks!
 
This is a pistol that should get more attention. I predict you will love it.

EDIT: I added the performance center Hi-Vis sights and loved it more.
 
Depends. Do you want this at night or in other low light conditions? Typical for a ported barrel:

14717040_10154712430135337_7584780699717801219_n.jpg


I have a G23c and it does this. Great range toy, fine for SD, but dat flash in low light...
 
I have both. I love the trigger and sights on the PC version, but hate the porting. The non-PC version is much better once you put good aftermarket sights on and have a competent smith work on the trigger.
 
Porting flash is only a problem depending on what type of ammo used. There are certain brands of self defense ammo that have flash reduced powder. Jerry Miculek swears by porting, for competition, and doesn't see an issue with it for self defense. If jerry likes a flat shooting gun, i do to.
i guess the only downside would be the concussion in an enclosed area, that would hurt.
 
I'd honestly like to know if someone could notice much of a difference in muzzle flip/recoil with the ported shield vs non-ported. It's already such a small lightweight gun, I just can't see a noticeable difference. Especially in a defensive scenario.

Porting does work well in magnum revolvers but for a polymer compact 45, I don't know....
 
I'd honestly like to know if someone could notice much of a difference in muzzle flip/recoil with the ported shield vs non-ported. It's already such a small lightweight gun, I just can't see a noticeable difference. Especially in a defensive scenario.

Porting does work well in magnum revolvers but for a polymer compact 45, I don't know....

^this. the pistols that benefit from porting are magnum revolvers where muzzle flip makes them border on un-shootable. examples are 454, 460, 500. in some cases 44 mag.

consider newton's 3rd law. the idea behind porting is to create an upward force. the strength will be dependent on 3 factors:

1) pressure of cartridge. higher pressure = more force

2) moment arm - that is, distance from point of rotation. thus putting ports farther away from the breech will create more downward force.

3) size of ports. this is obvious and somewhat irrelevant.

so consider a short 45acp pistol. it's a low pressure cartridge with a short barrel. a shield 45 falls in the category of pointless to port the barrel. now if someone likes the porting that's fine but from functional perspective it's retarded. i'm not even going to bother listing the disadvantages of porting for CCW. there are too many to start. i also own a shield 45 (and love the gun). for a 21 oz gun flinging 230gr pills, it shoots very soft.

--
 
Last edited:
^this. the pistols that benefit from porting are magnum revolvers where muzzle flip makes them border on un-shootable. examples are 454, 460, 500. in some cases 44 mag.

consider newton's 3rd law. the idea behind porting is to create an upward force. the strength will be dependent on 3 factors:

1) pressure of cartridge. higher pressure = more force

2) moment arm - that is, distance from point of rotation. thus putting ports farther away from the breech will create more downward force.

3) size of ports. this is obvious and somewhat irrelevant.

so consider a short 45acp pistol. it's a low pressure cartridge with a short barrel. a shield 45 falls in the category of pointless to port the barrel. now if someone likes the porting that's fine but from functional perspective it's retarded. i'm not even going to bother listing the disadvantages of porting for CCW. there are too many to start. i also own a shield 45 (and love the gun). for a 21 oz gun flinging 230gr pills, it shoots very soft.

--

Well leave muzzle flash off the list. Like I said before, There are brands of self defense ammo that reduce muzzle flash significantly.
45 may be a lower pressure than magnum rounds, but regardless, your letting off some gases whether you like it or not.
Yes, it will most likely not make a significant difference, pertaining to muzzle flip, and most likely you won't lose much velocity, for the same reasons, concussion indoors will certainly be Yuuuge. So I dont see it being an earth shatteringly big deal like you say for a ccw. If he has the money and wants to port it, I say go for it. In the event he needs to use it in defense situation, I dont see the gun being the object of worry. Porting issues are way over blown
 
First off thanks to everyone for their opinions.

The porting wasn't a selling point, it was just the gaining of the sights and trigger for a good price, and yes, probably given the option, I would prefer the better sights and trigger w/o the porting. But how bad is the porting really? One side says (and admittedly the picture was extremely cool) very bad, the other says by and large the problems are overstated. Anyone know of any good studies done on short barreled, lighter weight pistols? If the muzzle flash can be significantly reduced, that's something.

As for the concussion, I've another serious question: I assume firing the Shield indoors will screw your hearing, big time. Many say massive tinnitus to deafness. I've already got the tinnitus, and if a regular pistol is going to deafen me, what's the porting going to do, extra deafen me? This probably should be its own question, but any and all info is appreciated.
 
Longer engagement time? Enough to matter?

Bob

After all four participants had run the course the individual times were averaged together to form a better idea of how the average person’s night vision would be affected. The following chart represents those average times in a bar graph format. The vertical axis represents time, the horizontal axis breaks out the times between the type of barrel, and the colors represent the lighting conditions.

6.jpg


As shown in the graph, there is a definite difference in the engagement time between the types of revolvers.

Despite the muzzle flash of the non-ported and side-ported handguns being roughly equivalent, there is a noticeable increase in the time it takes to run the course in the dark over running it in the light with the side-ported gun—more of a difference than with the non-ported firearm. This suggests that the position of the muzzle flash may affect the shooter’s night vision.

The discrepancy in times is even larger with the top-ported barrel. However, as the pictures indicated, the top port did not actually produce a fireball in the shooter’s line of sight. Instead, the top-ported revolver produced a muzzle flash similar in size and location to the non-ported revolver—except much brighter. This suggests that a brighter flash—regardless of position—degrades the shooter’s night visionmore than any change in position.

TTAG Test: Do Ported Handgun Barrels Blind Night Shooters? - The Truth About Guns
 
Longer engagement time? Enough to matter?

Bob

After all four participants had run the course the individual times were averaged together to form a better idea of how the average person’s night vision would be affected. The following chart represents those average times in a bar graph format. The vertical axis represents time, the horizontal axis breaks out the times between the type of barrel, and the colors represent the lighting conditions.

6.jpg


As shown in the graph, there is a definite difference in the engagement time between the types of revolvers.

Despite the muzzle flash of the non-ported and side-ported handguns being roughly equivalent, there is a noticeable increase in the time it takes to run the course in the dark over running it in the light with the side-ported gun—more of a difference than with the non-ported firearm. This suggests that the position of the muzzle flash may affect the shooter’s night vision.

The discrepancy in times is even larger with the top-ported barrel. However, as the pictures indicated, the top port did not actually produce a fireball in the shooter’s line of sight. Instead, the top-ported revolver produced a muzzle flash similar in size and location to the non-ported revolver—except much brighter. This suggests that a brighter flash—regardless of position—degrades the shooter’s night visionmore than any change in position.

TTAG Test: Do Ported Handgun Barrels Blind Night Shooters? - The Truth About Guns


Sadly, they used one brand of ammo. Someone needs to tell them flash reducing defense ammo is available. I learned never to use Seller and Bellot in my ported home defense gun barrel, if i owned one.
 
Last edited:
Well leave muzzle flash off the list. Like I said before, There are brands of self defense ammo that reduce muzzle flash significantly.
45 may be a lower pressure than magnum rounds, but regardless, your letting off some gases whether you like it or not.
Yes, it will most likely not make a significant difference, pertaining to muzzle flip, and most likely you won't lose much velocity, for the same reasons, concussion indoors will certainly be Yuuuge. So I dont see it being an earth shatteringly big deal like you say for a ccw. If he has the money and wants to port it, I say go for it. In the event he needs to use it in defense situation, I dont see the gun being the object of worry. Porting issues are way over blown

Shoot close in defense drills at bad breath distances close to your body, and you will suddenly no longer think a ported handgun for an SD gun is a good idea.

-Mike
 
Unless i'm in a fire fight at the infamous O.K.Corral, im not going to worry about it too much for self defense. The odds of me using it in a self defense situation where im emptying mag after mag and cursing myself in between mags for having ported the barrel, is snails teeth. There are cops who have worked full careers without firing their weapon, Again, the issues aren't earth shattering, especially for how much the gun will be shot in a defense situation. I'm not saying its a great idea, but i'm also not saying its a must have. If someone wants to spend the money, so be it, let them. But i dont think its fair to say that its the worst possible waste of money and a life safety risk.
 
Unless i'm in a fire fight at the infamous O.K.Corral, im not going to worry about it too much for self defense. The odds of me using it in a self defense situation where im emptying mag after mag and cursing myself in between mags for having ported the barrel, is snails teeth. There are cops who have worked full careers without firing their weapon, Again, the issues aren't earth shattering, especially for how much the gun will be shot in a defense situation. I'm not saying its a great idea, but i'm also not saying its a must have. If someone wants to spend the money, so be it, let them. But i dont think its fair to say that its the worst possible waste of money and a life safety risk.

Lol fine, rationlize the bad choices away with Trashlogic(tm) if you want, but it still won't magically undo that status.
 
Well it's not as earth shattering as it's been made out to be in this thread, or im sure in many other threads across the interwebs.
 
I read the article about porting on revolvers, and am looking for one using semis. Sifting through the sometimes colorful thoughts is a blast, thanks everyone!

p.s. I'll post any info I find on hearing loss and ported weapons vs. regular, if I find any worth noting.
 
Back
Top Bottom