When Glock did it with he 17L and the 24 it was for a specific engineering reason, to make the weight the same so they could use the same recoil system/assembly.
I think many companies are doing it just for looks. I prefer not having holes in my slide for both cosmetic reasons and dirt ingress reasons.
I also agree
Has anyone done a torture test with a ventilated slide vs not?
I’ve personally stayed away from this trend
It does look “cool “ though
I think there are plenty of other ways to reduce slide weight other than holes that allow debris ingress
Tritopping
Extended FCS
Deeper milling of grooves
Edc. Don’t carry with slide cuts.
It’s cool to have options and different design and looks to a pistol.
I’m sure if drop it in mud that could cause problem.
I like the idea of less reciprocating mass. Some cuts can look cool, but it seems too many are over-done. I would go with some moderate slide milling before cuts, but it’s not a large enough priority of mine. After all, glocks work great out of the box and why screw with that unless you’re getting bored?
Less access to the internals of my guns, the better. Never had an interest in holes in slides, cool factor or not. Always seemed like a potential avoidable problem in the making.
I find debris concerns in G34/35 cuts to be overestimated. Folks that are doing all the other cosmetic, sporting, slide lightening cuts tend to be messing with other parts of the gun too, so who knows how the gun will run.
Years ago in the early 2000s when I was like 20 years old or so I went to a local gun shop and saw a G34 in the display case. I didn’t know much about Glocks and was puzzled by the open topped slide, I knew that Glock had some ported barrel models and thought perhaps the cutout on the top of the G34’s slide had some sort of compensator function… except I noticed there were no corresponding ports cut into the top of the barrel itself.
So I asked the guy working the counter why that G34 had a cutout in the slide but no cutouts in the barrel and luckily, he set me straight…
He explained that the cutout in the G34/35 slides were so the barrel had room to expand as it heated up during firing.
Now I found myself in the unenviable position of knowing the guy had to be full of shit but not actually knowing the correct explanation with which I could refute his statement.
It’s still one of my favorite “gun shop idiocy” anecdotes.
The 92 has a falling locking block, rather than the Browning tilt-barrel design. I wonder if that plays any role in sensitivity to debris ingress from an open slide, along with how closely the slide conforms to the barrel. The G34’s cutout leaves a lot of extra room compared to how closely the 92’s slide conforms to the barrel:
That said, anyone have reliability issues with an rmr on a milled slide?
Did lightening it help? Im thinink adding front serrations would do it. Its one oz over stock wt- so i dont know if that could even matter.
I’ve been shooting a decent amount of M9 lately. Over the past few years I’ve seen an M9 go down at just about every shooting event I’ve been to, completely tying up the pistol. None of those pistols were excessively dirty, and most weren’t dirty at all.
I dont get this. A guy I know was having malfunctions every 3-4 rounds and starts cursing his dry-as-a-bone m9.
I sprayed some clp in the action and it had 0 issues for the next 400 so rounds. Its metal on metal and it moves- it needs lube.
I tend to go at least two thousand rounds between cleaning on the 92 platform, just adding lube before matches. It is a reliable platform, but people have agendas and opinions. Needs lube, though.
I also don’t like open slides on guns originally designed to have closed slides.
Never paid attention to it, don’t particularly care if companies make cut outs, lightning cuts, or drill random holes all over the place. Not my thing and I just stick to what I like.