Posted: 3/18/2016 1:33:46 PM EDT
Has anyone aggressively lightened their slides? I have seen slides with small port holes but I am looking for something similar to this:
One cut along the top of the a la Glock 34 Style and a couple small rectangle cuts along the side. Obviously my MS Paint skills aren't Tier 1 but you get the idea. I dont assume there will be any structural risks to the slide by taking that much out but what kind of affect will that have on the cycling performance of the gun? My only experience with a lightened slide is with glocks and they ran without any issues. |
|
Quoted:
No experience to speak of but a respected source says its best to remove weight across the whole slide, not just the front. I think it would be hard to remove significant weight from the rear of the slide, relative to the front, but I understand the concept. It looks like freedom gunworks offers some of the more aggressive lightening that I have seen. Anyone have experience with them? |
|
Quoted:
I think it would be hard to remove significant weight from the rear of the slide, relative to the front, but I understand the concept. It looks like freedom gunworks offers some of the more aggressive lightening that I have seen. Anyone have experience with them? Quoted:
Quoted:
No experience to speak of but a respected source says its best to remove weight across the whole slide, not just the front. I think it would be hard to remove significant weight from the rear of the slide, relative to the front, but I understand the concept. It looks like freedom gunworks offers some of the more aggressive lightening that I have seen. Anyone have experience with them? I knew a few people who ran their "open" models in competition. Never had problems with them. |
|
Quoted:
Has anyone aggressively lightened their slides? I have seen slides with small port holes but I am looking for something similar to this: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v12/movingmountains/Picture2_zpsnptc3iue.jpg One cut along the top of the a la Glock 34 Style and a couple small rectangle cuts along the side. Obviously my MS Paint skills aren't Tier 1 but you get the idea. I dont assume there will be any structural risks to the slide by taking that much out but what kind of affect will that have on the cycling performance of the gun? My only experience with a lightened slide is with glocks and they ran without any issues. There are structural issues with taking weight out. Typically the slide will crack in the corner of the rectangular cuts that you are describing. You can get too light. What is the purpose of the gun? What caliber? The reason to lighten a slide is to make the gun easier to cycle with lighter ammunition. |
|
Quoted:
There are structural issues with taking weight out. Typically the slide will crack in the corner of the rectangular cuts that you are describing. You can get too light. What is the purpose of the gun? What caliber? The reason to lighten a slide is to make the gun easier to cycle with lighter ammunition. Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone aggressively lightened their slides? I have seen slides with small port holes but I am looking for something similar to this: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v12/movingmountains/Picture2_zpsnptc3iue.jpg One cut along the top of the a la Glock 34 Style and a couple small rectangle cuts along the side. Obviously my MS Paint skills aren't Tier 1 but you get the idea. I dont assume there will be any structural risks to the slide by taking that much out but what kind of affect will that have on the cycling performance of the gun? My only experience with a lightened slide is with glocks and they ran without any issues. There are structural issues with taking weight out. Typically the slide will crack in the corner of the rectangular cuts that you are describing. You can get too light. What is the purpose of the gun? What caliber? The reason to lighten a slide is to make the gun easier to cycle with lighter ammunition. and to reduce cyclic mass to keep the gun flatter during recoil. |
|
Quoted:
and to reduce cyclic mass to keep the gun flatter during recoil. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Has anyone aggressively lightened their slides? I have seen slides with small port holes but I am looking for something similar to this: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v12/movingmountains/Picture2_zpsnptc3iue.jpg One cut along the top of the a la Glock 34 Style and a couple small rectangle cuts along the side. Obviously my MS Paint skills aren't Tier 1 but you get the idea. I dont assume there will be any structural risks to the slide by taking that much out but what kind of affect will that have on the cycling performance of the gun? My only experience with a lightened slide is with glocks and they ran without any issues. There are structural issues with taking weight out. Typically the slide will crack in the corner of the rectangular cuts that you are describing. You can get too light. What is the purpose of the gun? What caliber? The reason to lighten a slide is to make the gun easier to cycle with lighter ammunition. and to reduce cyclic mass to keep the gun flatter during recoil. But you pay for it "in the hand" so to speak. You aren't reducing recoil (assuming same ammo), you're just changing the characteristics of the recoil. It'll be flatter, less flippy; and that will help you be on the sights faster. However, anecdotally speaking, when I did mine, it seemed to hit a little harder in the hand. Less comfy, but faster for me to get on the sights again. It seems to really reward a strong, solid grip even more now. Perhaps consider some cuts up front, whether glock style or more traditional lightening cuts, in addition to tri- topping it? If that's the kind of weight reduction you're after |
|
Yeah close. But I'm told by local dealers to expect to see those 6-9 months from now |
|
Quoted:
I can see it being harder in the hand as mass is reduced vel of the gun rear ward should be increased. Only even done it on a open gun so no real world data as the comp removes a lot of the movement of the gun.. Im not scientician but I think it is opposite of that. Yes, the slide may be moving faster rearward (though negligibly) its the reduced reciprocating mass that accounts for the lighter recoil. I am new to 2011's which is why I am looking for experience with lightened slides on these, but I can attest that there is a quite significant difference with a ZEV dragonfly glock 34 slide v. a OEM glock 34. I am not sure the amount of weight that ZEV removes from the slide but I assume since the 2011 is heavy, even a moderate amount of lightening will make a difference |
|
Quoted:
Im not scientician but I think it is opposite of that. Yes, the slide may be moving faster rearward (though negligibly) its the reduced reciprocating mass that accounts for the lighter recoil. I am new to 2011's which is why I am looking for experience with lightened slides on these, but I can attest that there is a quite significant difference with a ZEV dragonfly glock 34 slide v. a OEM glock 34. I am not sure the amount of weight that ZEV removes from the slide but I assume since the 2011 is heavy, even a moderate amount of lightening will make a difference Quoted:
Quoted:
I can see it being harder in the hand as mass is reduced vel of the gun rear ward should be increased. Only even done it on a open gun so no real world data as the comp removes a lot of the movement of the gun.. Im not scientician but I think it is opposite of that. Yes, the slide may be moving faster rearward (though negligibly) its the reduced reciprocating mass that accounts for the lighter recoil. I am new to 2011's which is why I am looking for experience with lightened slides on these, but I can attest that there is a quite significant difference with a ZEV dragonfly glock 34 slide v. a OEM glock 34. I am not sure the amount of weight that ZEV removes from the slide but I assume since the 2011 is heavy, even a moderate amount of lightening will make a difference I think we are all saying the same thing. How ArmyADub describes it is how everyone I knew who had a lightened slide done explained it. |