Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
To Muzzle Brake or not to Muzzle Brake
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ken snyder" data-source="post: 449179" data-attributes="member: 26019"><p>I can put actual numbers and reason to it. The angles of the ports do make a difference, However the design is the most critical and design is a trade off. The 2 items of trade are recoil stopping effectiveness and the other is noise. I have tested brakes useing a recoil sled. From my personal but not the Gospel testing I found that about 25 - 30 percent reduction yields the best compromise between felt recoil and noise. But recoil reduction in itself as a percentage of reduction can not be used as an indication of how loud the brake is. The trick is to direct the shock wave as much as possible forward, while haveing as much of the energy from the gas oppose itself, about half of the recoil energy is from the charge weight and its escapeing velocity, the other half is from the bullet. Multi- chamber brakes can also act as a resonator and reduce the pictch as a high frequency ear splitter, The difference being about the same as haveing a whistle blown in your ear or ha eing someone shout in your ear. The good news is that maximum recoil stoppers are inexpsnsive, The bad news is the quiter brakes are not, and require the rifle to be sent to the patent holding manufacturer. -- I am not one of those people, I pay the same price as everybody else. I do not wear hearing protection while hunting and insist that the brake used will not leave me half deaf for 5 minutes after shooting.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ken snyder, post: 449179, member: 26019"] I can put actual numbers and reason to it. The angles of the ports do make a difference, However the design is the most critical and design is a trade off. The 2 items of trade are recoil stopping effectiveness and the other is noise. I have tested brakes useing a recoil sled. From my personal but not the Gospel testing I found that about 25 - 30 percent reduction yields the best compromise between felt recoil and noise. But recoil reduction in itself as a percentage of reduction can not be used as an indication of how loud the brake is. The trick is to direct the shock wave as much as possible forward, while haveing as much of the energy from the gas oppose itself, about half of the recoil energy is from the charge weight and its escapeing velocity, the other half is from the bullet. Multi- chamber brakes can also act as a resonator and reduce the pictch as a high frequency ear splitter, The difference being about the same as haveing a whistle blown in your ear or ha eing someone shout in your ear. The good news is that maximum recoil stoppers are inexpsnsive, The bad news is the quiter brakes are not, and require the rifle to be sent to the patent holding manufacturer. -- I am not one of those people, I pay the same price as everybody else. I do not wear hearing protection while hunting and insist that the brake used will not leave me half deaf for 5 minutes after shooting. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
To Muzzle Brake or not to Muzzle Brake
Top