BC Gunsmiths to bore out a muzzle brake?

45CAT said:
stupid question. Wouldn’t it just be cheaper to buy a new brake
Click to expand...
Not a stupid question imo, but rather a well calculated thought out response and consideration too.
When on consides the time and effort to ship to after finding someone willing to do the job during a busy time of the season.
Dlask is in BC and easy to find via google and they have a G/S so just a phone call or an email away.
And before anyone claims they are negligent in replying poppy klock , they will get back to a customer in due time.
Tight Groups,
Rob
 
Thanks to those with helpful responses.

Purchase a new brake why didnt I think of that.

Kimber brakes are no longer readily available to purchase retail. 7/16x28 it's not something you can just pick up off the shelf in Canada. This aint a Tikka.
 
boxhitch said:
In theory, yes, also has more potential to negatively effect the bullet flight

different makes are different in over-bore, not like there is a scientific standard for best, or is there?
Click to expand...
Only if the shooter isn't cleaning the brake properly and not allowing excessive fouling to build up.

Brakes with "gills" are OK, as are brakes with holes drilled in patterns all around the circumference.

When I make brakes for my rifles, I prefer to keep the inside diameter with .002 clearance all around the bullet from the muzzle of the barrel to the muzzle of the brake.

I also prefer a simple, straight line of evenly spaced holes on each side of the brake, leaving approximately .250 solid before the holes start, and .500 at the muzzle solid.

IMHO, the expansion chamber creates issues with turbulence, not normally found without a brake, and it normally has a detrimental effect on accuracy.

I've had people come in with custom built brakes, with large expansion chambers, and only a small area at the muzzle cut close to the diameter of the bullet, with the inner lip of the brake built up with fouling, to the point the bullet was grazing it on its way past. This has always been proven to be extreme of course. The people involved didn't believe in cleaning their rifles regularly. It happens, but it's not the norm.

Some brakes have so much clearance, even at the muzzle, that they're likely only there for appearances.
 
bearhunter said:
That depends on the brake.

If the brake has a huge expansion chamber, a lot of the gasses push around and past the bullet before it leaves the muzzle of the brake.

If the bore of the brake has been properly done, there won't be an expansion chamber, and it will be much more effective.

RJ's fix wouldn't be wrong, for a brake with a large expansion chamber and with the proper drill diameter, but not so much for a brake without the expansion chamber.
Click to expand...
I've been making brakes with expansion chambers for forty years because I think they are more effective. The truth is, there is probably very little difference either way. The difference is more in how the gas is vented and when. In both scenarios, it is vented.
Someone mentioned the size for a 30 cal brake is .392. I guess that could be so if you like things on the sloppy side. That would be a good size for a 9.3mm. Bill
 
vancouverbc said:
I have a factory Kimber 223 brake and want a smith to bore it out to fit a 6.5 rifle for my daughter.
(Kimber factory 84M brake, Kimber Adirondack rifle - confirmed the specs on the brake eg same build as 308 brake other than bore diameter - same threads ect)
Any smiths able to take this on? Would pay generously for your time to do it.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Bits of peices in delta.

He did my sks brake and installed the hical mag adapted.

Priced really great too! 88 dollars for the threading of the Barrell and install of the muzzle brake.
 
guntech said:
When I make brakes for my rifles, I prefer to keep the inside diameter with .002 clearance all around the bullet from the muzzle of the barrel to the muzzle of the brake.

2 thou bullet clearance? A typo by chance? That's not near enough in my experience.
Click to expand...
My thoughts as well. That leaves zero wiggle room for any stacking tolerance. You've got two mating parts being joined together by threads. No matter how dialed in the barrel and brake are when they're threaded, there still has to be some clearance between the male and female threads. That little amount of required clearance between the threads will cause some falling out of concentricity. To me, that's just asking for a strike. If you're machining your own brakes why risk it? With all the time and effort put into doing custom one offs, what's giving it another .01" really going to sacrifice? It wouldn't even cross my mind to have .002 clearance on someone else's gun or a brake that might be passed off on the used market. I sure wouldn't want my name associated with it.
 
KyleSchenk said:
My thoughts as well. That leaves zero wiggle room for any stacking tolerance. You've got two mating parts being joined together by threads. No matter how dialed in the barrel and brake are when they're threaded, there still has to be some clearance between the male and female threads. That little amount of required clearance between the threads will cause some falling out of concentricity. To me, that's just asking for a strike. If you're machining your own brakes why risk it? With all the time and effort put into doing custom one offs, what's giving it another .01" really going to sacrifice? It wouldn't even cross my mind to have .002 clearance on someone else's gun or a brake that might be passed off on the used market. I sure wouldn't want my name associated with it.
Click to expand...
I found accuracy suffered if bullet clearance was under 10 thou... so I always gave it a bit more (20 thou). Brake performance did not suffer at 50 thou but why go that much if not needed. Some brakes have huge clearance. I think because of lack of precision in the barrel/brake fit. I always preferred to thread the barrel while dialed in a 4 jaw chcuk and spider... then thread the brake on and indexed... then bore the bullet clearance and checked with a two diameter spud.
 
guntech said:
I found accuracy suffered if bullet clearance was under 10 thou... so I always gave it a bit more (20 thou). Brake performance did not suffer at 50 thou but why go that much if not needed. Some brakes have huge clearance. I think because of lack of precision in the barrel/brake fit. I always preferred to thread the barrel while dialed in a 4 jaw chcuk and spider... then thread the brake on and indexed... then bore the bullet clearance and checked with a two diameter spud.
Click to expand...
I agree 💯 on your method. That is the best possible means of going about it. I was more referring to posts about the owner just supplying the brake to be opened up, possibly without providing barrel. That miniscule amount of clearance is simply a recipe for problems.

As for the excessive clearance on some brakes, yeah I think it's playing it on the safe side. There needs to be some allowance there for others work that you can not control the quaile of. And the input from the legal department lol.
 
If I had to open out a brake and did not have the barrel, I would chuck up a piece of scrap, and thread it to fit the brake. Mount the brake on the threaded spud, then bore it out. At least the bore of the brake would be coaxial with the threads.
 
Bill Leeper said:
I've been making brakes with expansion chambers for forty years because I think they are more effective. The truth is, there is probably very little difference either way. The difference is more in how the gas is vented and when. In both scenarios, it is vented.
Someone mentioned the size for a 30 cal brake is .392. I guess that could be so if you like things on the sloppy side. That would be a good size for a 9.3mm. Bill
Click to expand...
The bores on my 30cal brakes run .312 diameter from the barrel muzzle to the brake muzzle.

I notice a difference, but maybe that's just me.

I started making brakes this way to increase accuracy, and IMHO, it does that job well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom