Shotgun Barrel Porting Help Or Not?

[Palmetto-Pride]

Does a ported barrel shot gun really help keep the barrel down.

[zippy13]

You've just opened shooting's Pandora's Box. I'll say porting does reduce recoil and muzzle lift. I can even explain how the laws physics apply. (Yes, my guns are ported. Yes, some organizations prohibit porting on comp guns because it's an unfair advantage.) But, there will be someone else, with the opposite opinion who will have just as much data to support his position. We just went round-and-round on this topic no too long ago, and most of us aren't quite ready for another round. Have you checked the archives?

[Palmetto-Pride]

No I didn't check the archives......did I open a AR-15 vs AK-47 debate sorry I have just recently gotten back into the shotgun sports after a long spell with rifles.......

[noyes]

Shells are your friend. No matter which type barrel you use. Practice, practice, practice and Practice some more.

[noyes]

Gun fit is also your friend.

[mete]

We checked this once with a very good shooter at a sporting clays shoot. He had two identical guns , one ported and one unported. He could notice NO difference and we could see NO difference. However this involved light target loads !!
The distinction is important if you understand how porting works. Target rounds - NO difference Field loads especially magnum loads will show a difference.

[zippy13]

Palmetto-Pride

One of the arguments against the effectiveness of shotgun porting is that it works with rifles and pistols, but with a shotgun's lower working pressures it doesn't do enough to justify the expense.

[Palmetto-Pride]

Thanks for all the replies so far. I have a ported and a non ported semi auto and I can't tell the difference for myself I just wanted to see what others experience have been.

[Bones]

To test the porting, just cover the ports with "masking tape", and see what happens..... Nothing happened on the guns I tried this on...

[BigJimP]

+1 on what Zippy said ......yes it helps a lot in my opinion. I wouldn't own a 12 or 20ga that wasn't ported that I was going to shoot in competition especially...

[RoscoeC]

Thanks for all the replies so far. I have a ported and a non ported semi auto and I can't tell the difference for myself I just wanted to see what others experience have been.

That's my experience too. I just bought a Browning Cynergy Classic with 30" PORTED barrels. Sunday, I shot 2 rounds of skeet with 6 other shooters in the squad. Not one single word about how loud my gun was. Is it effective? I'm not sure. I don't notice any difference, but that doesn't mean it's not there.

My thoughts are that I would not spend money on porting, nor would I let its absence or presence dissuade me from buying a gun.

[zippy13]

Originally Posted by Bones

To test the porting, just cover the ports with "masking tape", and see what happens..... Nothing happened on the guns I tried this on…

Did you expect the tape to blow-off, or the muzzle jump to drastically change? The jets from the vented gas aren't sufficient to burst masking tape. So what. This doesn't correlate with porting being ineffective. If I stated that I'd sealed my tailpipes with masking tape and my cars wouldn't start, what conclusions would you draw, if any? Would you want more info, like know how much tape I'd used or something about the cars?

Had you'd run a series of classic pendulum tests with various porting configurations and various loadings, then your data would be of interest. Anecdotal reports, like the masking tape study, just add to the confusion and misunderstandings.

[mete]

If you burn up all the powder before the shot leaves the barrel [target loads] porting does nothing. It's only loads that burn some of the powder outside the barrel where porting helps. Light recoil loads such as Remington's have fast powder that burns completely inside the barrel ! It's all a matter of physics !!!

[noyes]

Who makes shotguns that shoot those 3 1/2" shells with ported barrels ? Browning ? Remington ? Beretta ? Winchester ? etc.

[zippy13]

Who makes shotguns that shoot those 3 1/2" shells with ported barrels ? Browning ? Remington ? Beretta ? Winchester ? etc.

How about Mossberg? Here's what they say about their 3-1/2" super mag:

All 835® Ulti-Mag® smooth bore barrels are overbored to 10 gauge bore dimensions, reducing recoil and producing exceptionally uniform patterns from both light and heavy shot charges. Working in tandem with the performance-enhancing overbored barrels, strategic placement of eaght ports on each side of the 835® barrel direct gasses upward and outward to not only reduce felt recoil, but to minimize muzzle jump for quick second shot recovery.

[hoppes-no9]

Did you expect the tape to blow-off, or the muzzle jump to drastically change? The jets from the vented gas aren't sufficient to burst masking tape. So what. This doesn't correlate with porting being ineffective.

For porting on a firearm to be effective, it must exhaust enough gas (usually upward) to create a "jet" effect, driving the barrel downward and thereby counteracting muzzle jump. This requires HIGH pressures. On rifles and handguns (30K to 65K psi, maintained over longer time) porting can be very effective, and also very loud.

BUT, porting on a shotgun is 100% pure marketing BS, due to low operating pressures (12K peak psi or so -- and MUCH less by the time the wad reaches the ports).

Think about it -- if the ports aren't blowing off the tape, they sure can't be creating much downward force, can they?

What I find particularly funny is ported choke tubes, which take a stupid idea to its illogical extreme, putting the ports even farther out from the chamber and therefore at the point at which they experience the lowest pressure and do the least good.

If I stated that I'd sealed my tailpipes with masking tape and my cars wouldn't start, what conclusions would you draw, if any?

Stupid analogy, not even relevant.

A tailpipe vents gasses at relatively low pressure. That's why the pipe is several inches in diameter, to allow enough flow for the engine to "exhale".

[zippy13]

Thanks for your input hoppes-no9, it's nice to have some fresh views on the topic.

hoppes-no9 remarked:
For porting on a firearm to be effective, it must exhaust enough gas (usually upward) to create a "jet" effect, driving the barrel downward and thereby counteracting muzzle jump.

The "jet" effect isn't necessary to reduce muzzle jump. Remember muzzle jump is the result of the couple caused by the gun's eccentricity between action and reaction. Any reduction in the initial action will reduce muzzle rise. Therefore, any porting that reduces the total muzzle energy (via jet or open vent) will reduce muzzle rise. The upper mounted "jet" holes are relatively new to the porting process. I have an O/U with Tula chokes and classic side slit port vents that does an admirable job of reducing kick and muzzle rise.

porting on a shotgun is 100% pure marketing BS, due to low operating pressures.

Yes, shotgun pressures are lower than rifles and pistols, but the event duration is longer. You can't go by pressure alone, time is a significant factor. Is Mossberg's claim (see posting #15) fraudulent?

Think about it -- if the ports aren't blowing off the tape, they sure can't be creating much downward force, can they?

How much is "much"? -- in previous treads on this topic it's been generally stipulated that the downward force resulting form the "jet" action isn't "very much" -- the differences are subtle. As I previously noted, muzzle jump can be reduced without your "jet" effect. Just because the tape isn't burst doesn't mean the ports can't alter recoil to some degree, although less than you'd be happy with. Many who say they notice no difference are casual shot gunners who don't maintain accurate averages and have no way of evaluating slight differences in their performance.

If I stated that I'd sealed my tailpipes with masking tape and my cars wouldn't start, what conclusions would you draw, if any?

Stupid analogy, not even relevant.

It wasn't an analogy, but an example of the absurd. As with the taped barrel, no data was provided to permit a reasonable evaluation. You'd be stupid to draw a conclusion.

[hoppes-no9]

zippy13,

Most of your points are well-taken.

I particularly agree that redirecting gasses outward (in any direction, not just up) will reduce muzzle jump by reducing overall muzzle energy, whether by reducing the velocity of the shot, the mass of the gasses exiting the muzzle, whatever.

If that is the only goal (and one does not intend to take advantage of upward-pointing "jets") why not save some money and shoot lighter loads? Most people serious enough about their game to consider porting have access to light factory loads, or load their own.

Regardless, I still contend that unless you have blown off the masking tape in your hypothetical situation, you have not redirected ANY gasses, and therefore cannot have ANY effect on muzzle jump. How can this be otherwise?


Edit to add: IMO, of all the things that matter in competitive target shooting, porting (in an attempt to reduce recoil/muzzle jump) is very low on the list. Much more important are things like gun fit, technique, gun fit, mental preparation, gun fit, vision, and gun fit. In that order.

[zippy13]

hoppes-no9,

Great minds think alike!

If that is the only goal (and one does not intend to take advantage of upward-pointing "jets") why not save some money and shoot lighter loads? Most people serious enough about their game to consider porting have access to light factory loads, or load their own.

Yep, too true, but as it happens, the "jet" porting fad occurred before the present lite and super-lite load fad.

Regardless, I still contend that unless you have blown off the masking tape in your hypothetical situation, you have not redirected ANY gasses, and therefore cannot have ANY effect on muzzle jump. How can this be otherwise?

Agreed. My point was that the pressure may no be sufficient to blow off the tape; but, with the tape gone it could contribute to the energy reduction. We don't know if Bones placed a small bit of tape over the holes, or wrapped the barrel with few turns, ergo my concern over a lack of data and the subsequent tailpipe example.

Edit to add: IMO, of all the things that matter in competitive target shooting, porting (in an attempt to reduce recoil/muzzle jump) is very low on the list. Much more important are things like gun fit, technique, gun fit, mental preparation, gun fit, vision, and gun fit. In that order.

Correct, but after all that has been done, the comp shooter may be looking for additional ways to possibly improve his scores, no matter how low on the list. Years ago, I was sucked in and shelled out over over $100 for special shooting shoes.

Long after my Shoot Boots were retired, three of us AA types were practicing skeet with a rookie shooting last. I happened to notice the three of us were wearing CostCo's inexpensive Court Classics and the newbie wore an expensive name-brand pair. The three of us came off station 8 clean. The rookie missed one or two targets and commented that he needed a lot more practice and wanted to know if there were any secrets. I pointed to his feet, and with a straight face commented, "You've got the wrong shoes." He looked at our matching CostCos and thought I was serious until the others started laughing.

[oneounceload]

Late to this discussion (eating a bushel of oysters took a few days)

Does porting help in muzzle jump? I'd say a little. Does it help in recoil? (This is where Zippy/Big Jim and I disagree - I say no.

Does it increase muzzle blast to your ears and those on either side of you? Absolutely.

The top tier sporting guns - Perazzi, Kreighoff, Blazer, Beretta, Fabbri and nauseum typically do not offer it as standard. There must be a reason........

That said, if a gun I want has it, I'll deal with it. Would I spend extra $$$ to have it done, either from the factory or from the likes of Magnaport or Briley? Not a chance

Come and get me Zippy!.......

[XD Gunner]

The top tier sporting guns - Perazzi, Kreighoff, Blazer, Beretta, Fabbri and nauseum typically do not offer it as standard. There must be a reason........

It costs more, just like any other embellishment. Regardless of how top tier these guns are, the manufacturers are still trying to save money so that they can under price one another in hopes to sell more guns.

It's not because it does or does not enhance performance.

[namlot1979]

The more I read these post the more I realize how in over my head I am in here. You fellas sure know a ton of "smart people" info...psi's, physics diagrams and combustion ratios...I would just buy a box of shells and shoot till I learned how I liked it

[crghss]

Here we go again.

One thing I will say is that when I use to shoot trap with a 1100 rem using 1 1/8 oz loads. I had very little barrel jump/flip/ whatever, I would see clay being pulverized. Porting would have been useless, IMHO, since there was nothing to "correct". Shot skeet with 1 oz 16 ga double bbl. So really no need for porting.....except when both barrels started going off....well thats another story.

Secondly, some people confuse porting with muzzle brakes. As I understand it porting puts downward pressure on the barrel where muzzle brake releases pressure to reduce recoil which reduces muzzles flip.

[oneounceload]

It costs more, just like any other embellishment. Regardless of how top tier these guns are, the manufacturers are still trying to save money so that they can under price one another in hopes to sell more guns.

It's not because it does or does not enhance performance

Those makers do not just do something to a gun unless it enhances the performance expectations.

While mental expectations of the shooter may make porting help one's game in the recoil department, recoil is a calculated equation with basic numbers to compare. Simply put, heavy gun with light load means less recoil, whether or not there are holes in the barrel.

Folks who compete at the top levels would only want something like porting if it truly worked to some verifiable and substantial degree. As I said, if a particular shooter BELIEVES it works, then it will work for him whether it really does or not.

[Shawn Dodson]

...the event duration is longer...

Depending on how far the ports are located from the muzzle the retrojet "duration" is between 1/8000 - 1/4000 second.