Clobbersauras
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Waaay out west.
I've been following a very interesting thread on another forum and thought I would post the most interesting part here. It encompasses some of the best civilian flash testing I've come across. I don't necessarily agree with all their methods, but it was very well done nonetheless. Recoil testing to follow.
This is copied with the permission of the original poster; Dave Merrill.
This is copied with the permission of the original poster; Dave Merrill.
Testing of muzzle devices, part one.
For the setup, each shot was made from a stationary camera (Nikon D60) with a remote trigger. The camera was initially set to ‘automatic’ for initial focus during daytime and then set to manual come dark so that there would be no focus delays with upcoming shots in the dark.
It was decided that a lead-sled was unneeded, since accuracy tests weren’t required; just muzzle flash.
A length-scale was located in-line with the barrel for each angle of shooting (the two angles were straight-ahead (15m downrange) and 90 degrees perpendicular to the barrel). In this manner, the size of muzzle blast could be accurately measured on two axis’s. Even while not a proper three-dimensional render, it does give us better insight than views from a single axis alone. However, it is notable that even photos taken from even a single axis, so long as the camera remains static, relative flash levels can be recorded.
Preface
A couple of points need to be stated right now, prior to showing any results:
-Not every product shown makes an explicit claim to be a flash-hider. A few of then only claim to be muzzle brakes or combination devices (though they were tested anyway) so results of flash-hiding should not be considered any sort of endorsement or lack thereof.
-All tests took place with the highest flash ammunition available (Federal XM-193) as shown by earlier tests. Low-flash ammunition (which you should be using, at least for defensive purposes) was explicitly not used.
-Every test was done with a registered 11.5” BCM SBR. A short barreled rifle produces a higher flash level (no kidding!) due to a larger amount of unburned powder leaving the barrel. The reasoning of the use of an SBR for this initial testing accompanied with high-flash ammunition, as opposed to the more common 14.5” or 16 barrel was three-fold:
-If anybody needs a good flash hider, it’s the owner of an SBR
-If a particular flash hider works well with a short barrel, it should certainly work with a, ‘full size’ rifle just as good if not better.
-Documenting and demonstrating levels of flash with an SBR should be easier to accomplish than with a full size rifle.
-Initially, every flash hider was cleansed the test but three rounds were spent through each prior to photography to ensure that each of them were equally fouled.
Types of Flash Hiders Tested
While not every muzzle device in circulation was tested, some of the more common and popular models were used in this test, they include:
-A2 flash hider (old $5 standby and control)
-Vortex by Smith Enterprises
-Vltor VC-1
-BattleComp 2.0
-Noveske KX3
-PWS FSC556
The Basic Setup
As previously mentioned, the DSLR used was a Nikon D60 with a remote trigger. The lens used was a 18-105mm Nikkor. The aperture was set to full-open f3.5 and the shutter was set to a full six seconds. In this way, all light possible would be accumulated and therefore the apex (peak) of the flash world was recorded by every shot. A Nikon ML-L3 remote trigger was used for all pictures taken.
A hand stop was affixed to the lower rail of the test rifle, which was indexed in the same place for every shot. As a secondary alignment measure, the lower rail was always butted up with the right edge of the rest and the same target sighted in for every shot. An inch scale was used in initial test photos and the camera muzzle position remained unchanged throughout all photos and testing.
All muzzle devices used were pre-fitted to the test barrel in order to achieve proper indexing for every shot taken.
Methodology
Since all camera and muzzle positions were in the same place, two different techniques of catching muzzle flash were employed. The first one was: The Raw Capture. This means that zero light aside from that of the rifles muzzle flash was recorded on the camera. The secondary form of capture also included the same camera settings (once again, f3.5 with a six second exposure) though the initial camera flash was followed by the known muzzle flash.
Because the camera was tripod mounted and did not move during photos, scale did not change at all. The camera flash photos were digitally combined with the ball photos to create amalgams of each shot taken (flash photos and extended exposure photos). Despite prior knowledge, overlaying duplicates of the muzzle flash did not enhance flash by any stretch.
Analysis
A to-scale 1” by 1” grid was created in Adobe Photoshop prior to the pictures taken. The same grid was resized to the scales which were inline with the bores for each picture so valid comparisons could be made. Barring scale, relative comparisons could be made to good effect.
Results
Firstly, let’s have a look at the inexpensive but tried and true
A2 Flash Hider
Noveske KX3 (the pig fire-breather AKA US Version of Bulgarian 4-piece flash hider):
BattleComp 2.0
Vltor VC-1
PWS
And now your like, “Where’s the Vortex?!!?” and I’m like, ‘yeah no kidding; we can’t take a pic of it either) Long story short, yeah…. So, Vortex won but here are some scaled pics of the others..
Scaled Results
A2
KX3
BattleComp
Vltor
PWS
