🧵 Radian Ramjet vs JTT Barrel (P365), Is the price difference actually justified?

[Dvrjon]

A compensator reducing muzzle flip isn’t an opinion, it’s measurable. Gas redirection reduces upward force on the muzzle. That’s not debatable, it’s basic physics.

Bottom line:
A good shooter with a compensator will outperform that same shooter without one. If your position is fthat performance gains don’t matter in a defensive tool, that’s a pretty strange hill to die on.

My simplistic take:

Compensators do reduce muzzle flip and can result in more competent shooting. I think that’s great for playing games on a closed range in daylight.

However, when one shifts to a defensive environment after dark, I believe compensators are a distinct liability. The re-direction of gases (even low-flash powder gases) directly into the sight picture does and will cause flash blindness. I don’t care how fast basic physics says you can return the muzzle to a target you can no longer see.

For those who would question this, I would ask why an anti-gun state would prohibit “flash suppressors”.

“Flash suppressor” means any device attached to the end of the barrel, that is designed, intended, or functions to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision.

The state doesn’t want us to have weapons which direct the muzzle flash away from our sight picture. That is simply because the re-directed muzzle flash clears our sight picture. The types of compensators about which we are discussing do precisely the opposite. They will direct the muzzle flash into our vision to suppress muzzle rise.

That will impair you for 2d and 3d shots.

For all day (including night time) self-defense, a non-compensated gun seems far more prudent.

 

[five.five-six]

My simplistic take:

Compensators do reduce muzzle flip and can result in more competent shooting. I think that’s great for playing games on a closed range in daylight.

However, when one shifts to a defensive environment after dark, I believe compensators are a distinct liability. The re-direction of gases (even low-flash powder gases) directly into the sight picture does and will cause flash blindness. I don’t care how fast basic physics says you can return the muzzle to a target you can no longer see.

For those who would question this, I would ask why an anti-gun state would prohibit “flash suppressors”.
The state doesn’t want us to have weapons which direct the muzzle flash away from our sight picture. That is simply because the re-directed muzzle flash clears our sight picture. The types of compensators about which we are discussing do precisely the opposite. They will direct the muzzle flash into our vision to suppress muzzle rise.

That will impair you for 2d and 3d shots.

For all day (including night time) self-defense, a non-compensated gun seems far more prudent.

Here's another one, try retention drills with a compensated gun. I did it once, I was wearing a white shirt. I had to complete the training with a different gun and had little bits of copper jacketing still working their way out of my left forearm over a year later.

I mean, I'd run the drill several times before someone mentioned to me that my arm was bleeding all over the place. It's not that big of a deal, it's not going to put you out of the fight.. I didn't even notice I was bleeding but that gun got retired from CCW duty and I really like it. It's a 2.5" Springfield V10 commander size.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

Wait, you think proper grip is "just gripping it harder" Then you really really need to learn how to shoot before you wast any money on gizmos.

Next I get to hear how you need to lighten your slide and some fancy spring because you are "waiting on lockup" for your next shot.

Get good at one handed shooting, weak handed shooting, one handed reloads, one handed weak handed reloads with fallow up shot. All of those things are infinitely more likely to save your life in a gunfight than a flippy muzzle reducer.

Also, before you go carrying a fancy flippy muzzle gizmo, be sure to shoot it in the dark with your SD ammo. some aren't that bad and others may make it really difficult to see for several seconds afterwards.

Probably couldn't have done it without a compensator... all that muzzle flipping n stuff

Wait a second, you think Jerry is shooting full power ammo and muscles it? Bro runs ammo with probably 1 grain of powder. Give me a MF break. You're really really reaching with this one.

You’re arguing against points I never made because it’s easier than addressing what I actually showed.

At no point did I say grip = “just grip harder.” That's your angle. What I did show is that with the same shooter, same grip, same conditions, muzzle rise is reduced with a comp. That’s the only variable being changed, and the result is measurable.

That’s called isolating variables. It’s how you evaluate performance instead of just telling stories on the internet, which is apparently your schtick.

You keep defaulting to “learn to shoot,” but that’s not an argument against mechanical advantage. It’s a deflection from the uninformed.

By that logic, none of this matters:

• Trigger quality
• Sight systems
• Ergonomics
• Weight distribution

Because hey… just “learn to shoot,” right?

Reality is: skill and equipment stack, they don’t cancel each other out.

And the irony here is you’re listing off one-handed shooting, weak-hand shooting, reloads, etc. all valid skills, but none of those are mutually exclusive with running a compensator. In fact, reducing muzzle flip makes those tasks easier to perform efficiently, not harder. You will absolutely be able to shoot better with a muzzle break one handed with a comp keeping your muzzle more flat, not sure how that seems to be escaping you?

On the flash point, finally, something somewhat legitimate:
Comps don't increase flash, they redirect it. The flash will be there with or without the comp. That’s a very small tradeoff, but just learn to deal with it right, isn't that your theme? Which is why you test your carry ammo. Same exact process as verifying reliability, point of impact, etc. Not exactly a groundbreaking concept. At no point has the flash being shifted slightly upwards disrupted my shooting. If you're so good like you claim, this should be a non-issue.

But again, that’s a small tradeoff discussion, not proof that comps are useless.

At the end of the day, this comes down to a simple question you keep avoiding:

If a device reduces muzzle rise and allows faster, more consistent follow-up shots with the same shooter…
how is that not an advantage?

You don’t have to run one. That’s fine.

But pretending the advantage doesn’t exist just makes it sound like you’ve never actually compared them side-by-side under controlled conditions or tried one at all for that matter.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

My simplistic take:

Compensators do reduce muzzle flip and can result in more competent shooting. I think that’s great for playing games on a closed range in daylight.

However, when one shifts to a defensive environment after dark, I believe compensators are a distinct liability. The re-direction of gases (even low-flash powder gases) directly into the sight picture does and will cause flash blindness. I don’t care how fast basic physics says you can return the muzzle to a target you can no longer see.

For those who would question this, I would ask why an anti-gun state would prohibit “flash suppressors”.
The state doesn’t want us to have weapons which direct the muzzle flash away from our sight picture. That is simply because the re-directed muzzle flash clears our sight picture. The types of compensators about which we are discussing do precisely the opposite. They will direct the muzzle flash into our vision to suppress muzzle rise.

That will impair you for 2d and 3d shots.

For all day (including night time) self-defense, a non-compensated gun seems far more prudent.

It sounds like you haven't shot with and without a comp at night. I have, extensively and it's no more blinding than the flash that already exits your muzzle normally, sure it's directed slightly up, not any more blinding.

Additionally if it's that dark you will likely be using a light, which could be weapon mounted or held in your hand, maybe both if you're a super tactical ninja warrior. That light, will largely negate the effects of the muzzle flash with or without a comp.

This is a silly excuse that folks seem to make about comps... because they heard it on the internet.

Here's another one, try retention drills with a compensated gun. I did it once, I was wearing a white shirt. I had to complete the training with a different gun and had little bits of copper jacketing still working their way out of my left forearm over a year later.

I mean, I'd run the drill several times before someone mentioned to me that my arm was bleeding all over the place. It's not that big of a deal, it's not going to put you out of the fight.. I didn't even notice I was bleeding but that gun got retired from CCW duty and I really like it. It's a 2.5" Springfield V10 commander size.

BRO, now you're just making up. Comps do not have this problem, maybe you're thinking of ports? Two completely different things here.

 

[Wolkenflieger]

Wait, you think proper grip is "just gripping it harder" Then you really really need to learn how to shoot before you wast any money on gizmos.

Next I get to hear how you need to lighten your slide and some fancy spring because you are "waiting on lockup" for your next shot.

Get good at one handed shooting, weak handed shooting, one handed reloads, one handed weak handed reloads with fallow up shot. All of those things are infinitely more likely to save your life in a gunfight than a flippy muzzle reducer.

Also, before you go carrying a fancy flippy muzzle gizmo, be sure to shoot it in the dark with your SD ammo. some aren't that bad and others may make it really difficult to see for several seconds afterwards.

Probably couldn't have done it without a compensator... all that muzzle flipping n stuff

Your arguments almost entirely a false dichotomy with strawman fallacies thrown in.

One can have modern tech convenience and training too. Otherwise, why are you not shooting muskets? Why drive modern cars or live in a modern house? Why are you wearing modern clothing versus skins you've made into clothes yourself?

You eschew technology and claim skill as if the two are opposed while ensconced in technology everywhere.

Technology plus skill wins, which is why our armies always get upgrades such as better guns, optics, drones, night vision, vision tracking, fly-by-wire, and so much more.

On balance, the ace in the P-51 Mustang is no match for the ace in the F-15. The difference is technology.

 

[Dvrjon]

It sounds like you haven't shot with and without a comp at night.

You’re wrong.

Have a nice evening.

 

[Dvrjon]

Wait a second, you think Jerry is shooting full power ammo and muscles it? Bro runs ammo with probably 1 grain of powder. Give me a MF break.

True. Additionally, his guns have been slicked down to short stroked, minimal trigger pulls or useful for much else. Not to take anything from the man, but his tools are an advantage.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

You’re wrong.

Have a nice evening.

Spectacular points you make there

Maybe if you just "learned to shoot" you wouldn't be blinded by the muzzle flash

I have astigmatism, in both eyes in a bad way and it is not blinding to me to shoot comps at night. If I don't have issues, those without astigmatism will have significantly less issues.

I'll be going camping again and doing a TON of night shooting in a few weeks. If somehow, you can see through my eyes, you must be something from a different world.

 

[five.five-six]

Your arguments almost entirely a false dichotomy with strawman fallacies thrown in.

One can have modern tech convenience and training too. Otherwise, why are you not shooting muskets? Why drive modern cars or live in a modern house? Why are you wearing modern clothing versus skins you've made into clothes yourself?

You eschew technology and claim skill as if the two are opposed while ensconced in technology everywhere.

Technology plus skill wins, which is why our armies always get upgrades such as better guns, optics, drones, night vision, vision tracking, fly-by-wire, and so much more.

On balance, the ace in the P-51 Mustang is no match for the ace in the F-15. The difference is technology.

what are you even talking about?

P51's and muskets?

never mind.

What is it that you expect a flippy gadget on the barrel of your gun to do for you? how much are you expecting to accelerate your followup shot?

Just from reading your posts I can guarantee you that you will see far more improvement dollar for dollar from a qualified instructor than a compensator will.

I don't even know how many compensated pistols I have, probably 4 or 5 but I can tell you I do have 2 glock 19's I've got 3 compensated barrels for them and 2 regular barrels and there's not this massive difference in them. they all shoot about the same. I can tell you that you may very well need to trade springs in and out on compensated barrels to get them to run, so buy a collection of wolf springs. several companies market sets of springs for glocks for tuning. perhaps you can find a kit for the P365.

 

[five.five-six]

Wait a second, you think Jerry is shooting full power ammo and muscles it? Bro runs ammo with probably 1 grain of powder. Give me a MF break. You're really really reaching with this one.

You’re arguing against points I never made because it’s easier than addressing what I actually showed.

At no point did I say grip = “just grip harder.” That's your angle. What I did show is that with the same shooter, same grip, same conditions, muzzle rise is reduced with a comp. That’s the only variable being changed, and the result is measurable.

That’s called isolating variables. It’s how you evaluate performance instead of just telling stories on the internet, which is apparently your schtick.

You keep defaulting to “learn to shoot,” but that’s not an argument against mechanical advantage. It’s a deflection from the uninformed.

By that logic, none of this matters:

• Trigger quality
• Sight systems
• Ergonomics
• Weight distribution

Because hey… just “learn to shoot,” right?

Reality is: skill and equipment stack, they don’t cancel each other out.

And the irony here is you’re listing off one-handed shooting, weak-hand shooting, reloads, etc. all valid skills, but none of those are mutually exclusive with running a compensator. In fact, reducing muzzle flip makes those tasks easier to perform efficiently, not harder. You will absolutely be able to shoot better with a muzzle break one handed with a comp keeping your muzzle more flat, not sure how that seems to be escaping you?

On the flash point, finally, something somewhat legitimate:
Comps don't increase flash, they redirect it. The flash will be there with or without the comp. That’s a very small tradeoff, but just learn to deal with it right, isn't that your theme? Which is why you test your carry ammo. Same exact process as verifying reliability, point of impact, etc. Not exactly a groundbreaking concept. At no point has the flash being shifted slightly upwards disrupted my shooting. If you're so good like you claim, this should be a non-issue.

But again, that’s a small tradeoff discussion, not proof that comps are useless.

At the end of the day, this comes down to a simple question you keep avoiding:

If a device reduces muzzle rise and allows faster, more consistent follow-up shots with the same shooter…
how is that not an advantage?

You don’t have to run one. That’s fine.

But pretending the advantage doesn’t exist just makes it sound like you’ve never actually compared them side-by-side under controlled conditions or tried one at all for that matter.

1 grain? LMAO

here's "bro" working out the kinks on a .44 mag Degal. It was having feed ramp issues. If memory serves the load was 240 grain JHPS with 20 grains of 2400. get out your ballistics calculator but "bro" is putting out about 3X the muzzle energy of a 124 grain 9mm and "bro" is ringing a 12" gong" 30 yards away in a private at Raahauge's. Also "bro" is just screwing around.


I'm not the best, not even close. I'm OK at best.

the problem is a F15 does you no good if you don't know how to fly. Do you know who modern fighter pilots study in fighter school? look it up. they study and use WWII and WWI tactics. Equipment is worthless if you don't know how to use it.

 

[five.five-six]

Wait a second, you think Jerry is shooting full power ammo and muscles it? Bro runs ammo with probably 1 grain of powder. Give me a MF break. You're really really reaching with this one.

You’re arguing against points I never made because it’s easier than addressing what I actually showed.

At no point did I say grip = “just grip harder.” That's your angle. What I did show is that with the same shooter, same grip, same conditions, muzzle rise is reduced with a comp. That’s the only variable being changed, and the result is measurable.

That’s called isolating variables. It’s how you evaluate performance instead of just telling stories on the internet, which is apparently your schtick.

You keep defaulting to “learn to shoot,” but that’s not an argument against mechanical advantage. It’s a deflection from the uninformed.

By that logic, none of this matters:

• Trigger quality
• Sight systems
• Ergonomics
• Weight distribution

Because hey… just “learn to shoot,” right?

Reality is: skill and equipment stack, they don’t cancel each other out.

And the irony here is you’re listing off one-handed shooting, weak-hand shooting, reloads, etc. all valid skills, but none of those are mutually exclusive with running a compensator. In fact, reducing muzzle flip makes those tasks easier to perform efficiently, not harder. You will absolutely be able to shoot better with a muzzle break one handed with a comp keeping your muzzle more flat, not sure how that seems to be escaping you?

On the flash point, finally, something somewhat legitimate:
Comps don't increase flash, they redirect it. The flash will be there with or without the comp. That’s a very small tradeoff, but just learn to deal with it right, isn't that your theme? Which is why you test your carry ammo. Same exact process as verifying reliability, point of impact, etc. Not exactly a groundbreaking concept. At no point has the flash being shifted slightly upwards disrupted my shooting. If you're so good like you claim, this should be a non-issue.

But again, that’s a small tradeoff discussion, not proof that comps are useless.

At the end of the day, this comes down to a simple question you keep avoiding:

If a device reduces muzzle rise and allows faster, more consistent follow-up shots with the same shooter…
how is that not an advantage?

You don’t have to run one. That’s fine.

But pretending the advantage doesn’t exist just makes it sound like you’ve never actually compared them side-by-side under controlled conditions or tried one at all for that matter.

To set a world record, Jerry probably had to hit a minimum PF of 124 but you'd load to 130 to avoid begin DQ'd. Standard factory 9mm generally falls between 130-140 +p may hit 150

 

[Dvrjon]

Spectacular points you make there

Maybe if you just "learned to shoot" you wouldn't be blinded by the muzzle flash

My point was explicit…your statement is wrong.
You have no clue as to what my shooting background is.

Now, moving on….

 

[Brandon Breeze]

1 grain? LMAO

here's "bro" working out the kinks on a .44 mag Degal. It was having feed ramp issues. If memory serves the load was 240 grain JHPS with 20 grains of 2400. get out your ballistics calculator but "bro" is putting out about 3X the muzzle energy of a 124 grain 9mm and "bro" is ringing a 12" gong" 30 yards away in a private at Raahauge's. Also "bro" is just screwing around.


I'm not the best, not even close. I'm OK at best.

the problem is a F15 does you no good if you don't know how to fly. Do you know who modern fighter pilots study in fighter school? look it up. they study and use WWII and WWI tactics. Equipment is worthless if you don't know how to use it.

The more you reply, the more you prove you have zero clue what you're talking about. You also keep deflecting from the entire point of this post for some reason. Compensators reduce muzzle flip. There's absolutely nothing even remotely arguable about that. If you can't feel the difference, well then I guess you're just superman, or you likely have comps. Judging by the fact that yours somehow shoot shrapnel from them and you have to change recoil springs? Sounds like you have some poorly made barrel weights, not like the modern comps we see now.

Stop wasting everyone's time with your nonsense. Nothing of what you have said proves anything.

Muzzle brakes reduce muzzle flip. No amount of training and "learning to shoot" will give you the advantage of physics, no matter how much you try to make it so, it will not be.

How about you make your own videos, rather than posting videos of an absolutely legendary shooter, who absolutely games his ammo loads to make them as light as possible, which just so happens to gain the same advantage of a muzzle break... reduced muzzle flip and reduced recoil.

Give it a rest.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

My point was explicit…your statement is wrong.
You have no clue as to what my shooting background is.

Now, moving on….

Doesn't matter what your shooting background is, if a comp blinds you when you're working in the darkness you need to look at what your background has taught you. If I was able to find out that turning on a light and navigating in the dark to see what I'm shooting at will negate the blinding affect of any muzzle flash then you can do this as well. I found this out while camping and shooting at night, I would have assumed that someone with a "background" might have run across this at some point.

My point still stands otherwise, I have astigmatism, both eyes and even without the light navigation the muzzle flash from a comp or without a comp provide the same amount of temporary vision reduction. If I can manage to work through that, your "background" should have taught you to as well.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

At this point you guys are arguing three completely different things to avoid the original point.

Let’s clean this up:

1) Core claim (the only thing this thread was about):
Compensators reduce muzzle flip and allow faster, more consistent follow-up shots.

Can you muscle it and get the same results? Maybe, but not everyone can. Yet everyone will benefit from the muzzle flip reduction of a compensator.

That is not an opinion. That is observable and measurable. I demonstrated it on video under controlled conditions as have many others. I would challenge you to make your own video proving any of these points you are bringing up. You can't debate, so you deflect.

Nothing either of you has said refutes that.

2) “Just learn to shoot” / training argument
No one is arguing against training. This is a false either/or you keep repeating.

Training and equipment are not mutually exclusive.
A trained shooter + better recoil control = better performance.

If your position is that equipment advantages don’t matter, then be consistent:

• Run irons only
• Stock triggers only
• No weapon lights
• No optics
• No modern gear whatsoever, as someone else mentioned, why are you shooting anything beyond a musket? Why stop there, go back to sticks and stones, just "learn to slingshot" and it will be just as effective as a modern semi-auto, right?

Otherwise you’re already accepting that gear can improve performance, you’re just drawing an arbitrary line at comps. Weird flex bro.

3) Night shooting / “flash blindness” claim

This keeps getting exaggerated into something it’s not.

• All guns produce muzzle flash
• Comps redirect it, they don’t magically create it
• In actual low-light use, a white light dominates your visual input and mitigates flash effects significantly

I’ve personally shot both side-by-side at night. The difference is not this catastrophic “you’re blind for seconds” scenario being described.

If that were true, compensated pistols wouldn’t exist in professional or competitive environments where performance actually matters.

4) Retention / injury anecdote

Now we’re just mixing up completely different things.

Ports ≠ comps.

Yes, ports can vent gas and shrapnel upward near the shooter and can be an issue in certain close-retention positions. That’s a known tradeoff. I'm not talking about ports here, I'm talking about comps.

That has nothing to do with a properly designed compensator on a typical defensive setup.

5) Reliability argument (finally something valid)

Yes, modifications can introduce variables. That’s why you test your setup.

Same applies to:

• Ammo selection
• Magazines
• Optics
• Anything you trust your life to

That’s not an argument against comps, that’s an argument for vetting your gear.

At the end of the day, all of this dancing around still avoids one simple question:

If a compensator reduces muzzle flip and allows a shooter to return to target faster with the same input…
how is that not an advantage?

You don’t have to value that advantage.
You don’t have to run one.

But pretending it doesn’t exist, while bringing up, one-handed reloads, and personal anecdotes, isn’t a serious point of debate..

 

[five.five-six]

The more you reply, the more you prove you have zero clue what you're talking about. You also keep deflecting from the entire point of this post for some reason. Compensators reduce muzzle flip. There's absolutely nothing even remotely arguable about that. If you can't feel the difference, well then I guess you're just superman, or you likely have comps. Judging by the fact that yours somehow shoot shrapnel from them and you have to change recoil springs? Sounds like you have some poorly made barrel weights, not like the modern comps we see now.

Stop wasting everyone's time with your nonsense. Nothing of what you have said proves anything.

Muzzle brakes reduce muzzle flip. No amount of training and "learning to shoot" will give you the advantage of physics, no matter how much you try to make it so, it will not be.

How about you make your own videos, rather than posting videos of an absolutely legendary shooter, who absolutely games his ammo loads to make them as light as possible, which just so happens to gain the same advantage of a muzzle break... reduced muzzle flip and reduced recoil.

Give it a rest.

You are basically an AI argument bot. you have earned a well deserved ignore. Simple trigonometry, how much down force is your muzzle flippy thing on the 3" fulcrum and what is the dwell time? watch my video, my .44mag barrel ain't moving that much and there's no comp on it and it's well over 2X the muzzle energy of a 9mm. all the gizmos on the planet won't help if you don't first learn how to shoot.


You could spend a billion $$ on gizmoes and it's all for not if you don't know how to shoot. Where as a competent shooter with a $100 C9 is a very formidable advisory. No amount of ad hominem attacks and saying "physics" will change that.


You are putting the cart before the horse.

 

[five.five-six]

Doesn't matter what your shooting background is, if a comp blinds you when you're working in the darkness you need to look at what your background has taught you. If I was able to find out that turning on a light and navigating in the dark to see what I'm shooting at will negate the blinding affect of any muzzle flash then you can do this as well. I found this out while camping and shooting at night, I would have assumed that someone with a "background" might have run across this at some point.

My point still stands otherwise, I have astigmatism, both eyes and even without the light navigation the muzzle flash from a comp or without a comp provide the same amount of temporary vision reduction. If I can manage to work through that, your "background" should have taught you to as well.

Your commitment to ignorance is commendable.

Bye


EDIT


I choose not to EDC optics because they get dirty. If you neglect to clean them all you see is fuzz, I perform manual labor for a living. I can render reflex site completely unusable in one afternoon. the small ones can be difficult to find in a stress situation where fine motor skills collapse and the big ones can be a real issue with defeating garments.


Weapon mounted light, to each their own. I'd rather less stuff attached to my gun. other people like them.

None of your gizmos are anything I haven't put 10's of thousands of rounds down range with.... well weapons lights perhaps a few thousand rounds.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

You are basically an AI argument bot. you have earned a well deserved ignore. Simple trigonometry, how much down force is your muzzle flippy thing on the 3" fulcrum and what is the dwell time? watch my video, my .44mag barrel ain't moving that much and there's no comp on it and it's well over 2X the muzzle energy of a 9mm. all the gizmos on the planet won't help if you don't first learn how to shoot.


You could spend a billion $$ on gizmoes and it's all for not if you don't know how to shoot. Where as a competent shooter with a $100 C9 is a very formidable advisory. No amount of ad hominem attacks and saying "physics" will change that.


You are putting the cart before the horse.

You do realize how comically large and heavy DEagles are... I have one in .357 Magnum which is a beast of a cartridge compared to most modern day semi-auto's, and it's like shooting a .22lr. Having a comically large handgun in .44 Magnum does the exact same thing as a Compensator, just in a different way. Not sure how you're not grasping the concept. Judging based on this video I'm not sure you've actually learned to shoot though.

I'll let you try that with my .44 Mag Snubby with some full power Buffalo Bore ammo, then we'll see how much your "learn to shoot" argument stands. How would that compare to the same ammo out of a 10" barrel .44 Magnum? You guessed it, less muzzle flip, less felt recoil. Hell, I'll let you shoot my Diamondback DB9 with plinking ammo, and we'll see how much your "learn to shoot" is able to control that little demon.

You keep talking about "learn to shoot". I know how to shoot, quite well actually. Knowing how to shoot has absolutely zero to do with the physics behind how a compensator works. You can deny it all you want, but just like your 4lb DEagle, comps reduce muzzle flip and felt recoil.

I'm not sure how you have gotten so lost in this conversation, I tried to bring it back on topic multiple times, but you seem to refuse to stay on topic and keep deflecting.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

Your commitment to ignorance is commendable.

Bye


EDIT


I choose not to EDC optics because they get dirty. If you neglect to clean them all you see is fuzz, I perform manual labor for a living. I can render reflex site completely unusable in one afternoon. the small ones can be difficult to find in a stress situation where fine motor skills collapse and the big ones can be a real issue with defeating garments.


Weapon mounted light, to each their own. I'd rather less stuff attached to my gun. other people like them.

None of your gizmos are anything I haven't put 10's of thousands of rounds down range with.... well weapons lights perhaps a few thousand rounds.

My commitment to FACTS is impeccable.

I don't let folks on the internet tell me what I have experienced in a controlled test environment, multiple times. If you are Delta Force, Seals, Rangers, SWAT etc. it doesn't change what I have seen with my own eyes. I'm not paid to do this video, nor am I sponsored by anyone, I do these to help the folks asking these questions.

Hell, I even took a slow-mo video to show you and it's not even debatable in any sense of the word. There are several folks who have put all of these comps in a ransom rest and proven the physics of comps work, it's not even able to be debated because it cannot be proven otherwise. I've had many other folks test comps right along side me, and the difference is mind blowing.

If you haven't shot a firearm with a Radian Ramjet, I would encourage you to. It is truly mind blowing, like shooting a .44 Magnum from a 4lb handgun.

Optics get dirty? C'mon man. Do you not drive your car because the window gets dirty? You know they make closed emitter in all shapes and sizes now, right? Problem solved.

You can't figure the new "gizmo's" out, we get it. No need to go on and on about it on my post, which is only about the Radian Ramjet vs. the Aim Surplus JTT. If you don't want to use them, totally fine with that, but there's no reason to make up a bunch of nonsense or repeat what you have heard on the internet in a poor attempt to debate against them.

 

[Wolkenflieger]

what are you even talking about?

P51's and muskets?

never mind.

What is it that you expect a flippy gadget on the barrel of your gun to do for you? how much are you expecting to accelerate your followup shot?

Just from reading your posts I can guarantee you that you will see far more improvement dollar for dollar from a qualified instructor than a compensator will.

I don't even know how many compensated pistols I have, probably 4 or 5 but I can tell you I do have 2 glock 19's I've got 3 compensated barrels for them and 2 regular barrels and there's not this massive difference in them. they all shoot about the same. I can tell you that you may very well need to trade springs in and out on compensated barrels to get them to run, so buy a collection of wolf springs. several companies market sets of springs for glocks for tuning. perhaps you can find a kit for the P365.

Again, false dichotomy. If you didn't understand the analogies then I see little point in debating you.

Simply put, skill and technology are not in conflict, despite your strawman fallacies and false dichotomies.