Muzzlebreak?
- Thread starter IH8120
- Start date
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
GB, nice looking kit...
Any gill brake will do. The larger the cross section and length, the larger the redirection of gases which typically leads to greater recoil reduction.
But the brakes that reduce recoil the most, are the loudest to the shooter.
Jerry
Any gill brake will do. The larger the cross section and length, the larger the redirection of gases which typically leads to greater recoil reduction.
But the brakes that reduce recoil the most, are the loudest to the shooter.
Jerry
Clobbersauras
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Waaay out west.
Yes Gunboy does have some interesting products.
But Jerry, I've found that not all "gill" brakes are created equal. Larger baffle surface areas does not always equate to a better performing brake. Generally, if the brake is designed properly one does not get much added reduction in recoil after three baffles. The law of diminishing returns applies. A properly designed brake should be specific the the caliber of the rifle, anyone who tells you differently does not know what they are doing.
To be honest, IMO most of the brake manufacturers in Canada haven't applied any real science to their brake designs. The calculations needed are beyond the capabilities of most people. I've tried to learn this discipline and it is an exercise in frustration. Unless you have years of study and an understanding of the theory behind it you are just pissing in the wind. I'm not saying that the brakes manufacturers in Canada don't have effective products, but most of them came about them through trial and error, through testing and re-design, not science.
There is only one man on this board that I would trust to design a muzzle brake and truly know what he is doing.
But Jerry, I've found that not all "gill" brakes are created equal. Larger baffle surface areas does not always equate to a better performing brake. Generally, if the brake is designed properly one does not get much added reduction in recoil after three baffles. The law of diminishing returns applies. A properly designed brake should be specific the the caliber of the rifle, anyone who tells you differently does not know what they are doing.
To be honest, IMO most of the brake manufacturers in Canada haven't applied any real science to their brake designs. The calculations needed are beyond the capabilities of most people. I've tried to learn this discipline and it is an exercise in frustration. Unless you have years of study and an understanding of the theory behind it you are just pissing in the wind. I'm not saying that the brakes manufacturers in Canada don't have effective products, but most of them came about them through trial and error, through testing and re-design, not science.
There is only one man on this board that I would trust to design a muzzle brake and truly know what he is doing.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
Physics is physics.
Surface area helps.
I think when you look at most commercial brakes, their physical volume and geometry are very similar THUS the results are very similar.
2 or 22. If the volume and effective surface area is the same, the effect is the same.
Yep, we got some science up north too....
Jerry
Surface area helps.
I think when you look at most commercial brakes, their physical volume and geometry are very similar THUS the results are very similar.
2 or 22. If the volume and effective surface area is the same, the effect is the same.
Yep, we got some science up north too....
Jerry
Clobbersauras
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Waaay out west.
Jerry, you are vastly oversimplifying the matter.
But I've said my piece, merry Christmas to everyone in this thread!
But I've said my piece, merry Christmas to everyone in this thread!
I don't know where you are located, but ATRS (Alberta Tactical Rifle Supply) in Calgary make amazing brakes! I have owned several different designs of theirs and they are all outstanding! They keep looking for ways to improve their design, but they are really splitting hairs, so don't worry about anything they have ever produced.
The one they put on my 7mm Rem Mag (now a slightly older design of theirs) turned my recoil into vibration. It honestly had no recoil whatsoever, it just felt like the barrel vibrated with each shot.
I have another ATRS brake on a .338 Lapua AI (6000ft-lbs muzzle energy), and while I have never shot a .22-250, I suspect the recoil would be somewhat comparable.
The one they put on my 7mm Rem Mag (now a slightly older design of theirs) turned my recoil into vibration. It honestly had no recoil whatsoever, it just felt like the barrel vibrated with each shot.
I have another ATRS brake on a .338 Lapua AI (6000ft-lbs muzzle energy), and while I have never shot a .22-250, I suspect the recoil would be somewhat comparable.
Thank for the complement Jerry, you are right about that, after a few try out of what work and a few tweak, my brake work quite well now, the straight port model where the vent only port to the side can be tweak to work as good as the on with the vent tilt back, but with out addition of noise or shock!
Thanks for letting us know about another option (the DF 2000), but I’m not liking it. It directs gas in a full 360 degree pattern, so you will be kicking up a dust storm with every prone or kneeling shot. What had me interested was the fact that they advertise it as being less noisy than your average brake, but I don’t buy their claim – from their website:
“no noise increase, it's guaranteed !!”
Gotta call this one...
I don’t speak French, so I can’t understand the video, but it seems to show someone taking sound readings and saying, look, no increase, in fact it is quieter! The problem is that due to the extremely short duration of a gun shot you can not take measurements with just any old meter. You need highly specialized equipment which costs an arm and a leg. There equipment also needs to be in specific orientation and distance from the firearm and the ground. Theres a whole document written about how to do it right. For anyone who cares:
http://www.silencertests.com/docs/mil-std-1474d.pdf
“no noise increase, it's guaranteed !!”
Gotta call this one...
I don’t speak French, so I can’t understand the video, but it seems to show someone taking sound readings and saying, look, no increase, in fact it is quieter! The problem is that due to the extremely short duration of a gun shot you can not take measurements with just any old meter. You need highly specialized equipment which costs an arm and a leg. There equipment also needs to be in specific orientation and distance from the firearm and the ground. Theres a whole document written about how to do it right. For anyone who cares:
http://www.silencertests.com/docs/mil-std-1474d.pdf
Last edited:
You are correct, the volume does not change, only the direction it is projected. So I supose their statement is technically correct, but I do not like it because it is misleading. The statement about meters still holds true however.
