rem.xp100
Well-Known Member
Everyone seems to be hung up on the best recoil reduction but that is NOT what the OP asked for. He is looking for a compromise with noise and recoil.
Best middle ground brake...
- Thread starter Gibbshooter43
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Everyone seems to be hung up on the best recoil reduction but that is NOT what the OP asked for. He is looking for a compromise with noise and recoil.
jlvandersnick
Well-Known Member
To the OP.
I like the
EFAB Hybrid Muzzle Brake
precision armament
The reduction is on the mid to low side...45 to 50%.
However it is one of the lowest concussion and flash models made.
They make a range of models. Their high performance model claims 80% reduction, but you certainly will have higher concussion, decibels, and flash.
RE:"Please explain the reason for no or small and few top ports on bolt guns"
with semi auto, each consecutive shot is going to have a compounding affect...if you have muzzle rise, you are quickly pulled off target.
Yes, a perfectly balanced and centered recoil will get you back on target quicker with a bolt gun....but having to throw the bolt makes this less of an issue.
excellent testing and review at precision rifle blog
search for "muzzle brake ability to stay on target".
The review is a little old and there are some improved models on the market from several vendors. PRB likes the new APA NEW GEN III Little B.
This is very similar to the Precision Armament Hyper-tap.
I think both are cutting edge on total recoil reduction and staying on target.
However, you have high concussion with both. NO FREE LUNCH.
More important for accuracy in a bolt gun is not adding to unbalanced recoil forces on the barrel, causing barrel whip.
Hence the statements about symmetrical side port as a preference.
I like the
EFAB Hybrid Muzzle Brake
precision armament
The reduction is on the mid to low side...45 to 50%.
However it is one of the lowest concussion and flash models made.
They make a range of models. Their high performance model claims 80% reduction, but you certainly will have higher concussion, decibels, and flash.
RE:"Please explain the reason for no or small and few top ports on bolt guns"
with semi auto, each consecutive shot is going to have a compounding affect...if you have muzzle rise, you are quickly pulled off target.
Yes, a perfectly balanced and centered recoil will get you back on target quicker with a bolt gun....but having to throw the bolt makes this less of an issue.
excellent testing and review at precision rifle blog
search for "muzzle brake ability to stay on target".
The review is a little old and there are some improved models on the market from several vendors. PRB likes the new APA NEW GEN III Little B.
This is very similar to the Precision Armament Hyper-tap.
I think both are cutting edge on total recoil reduction and staying on target.
However, you have high concussion with both. NO FREE LUNCH.
More important for accuracy in a bolt gun is not adding to unbalanced recoil forces on the barrel, causing barrel whip.
Hence the statements about symmetrical side port as a preference.
Last edited:
entoptics
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2018
- Messages
- 846
Perhaps I'm missing something, but by the time the "unbalanced recoil forces" occur as a result of an asymmetrical break, isn't the bullet already well free of the barrel?
ATH
Well-Known Member
Heathen brake. 90 degree rear ports then the front two are angled. Much less concussion on the shooter than something like an APA. Recoil reduction reduction not as efficient but I run one on my 14lb 338 Edge.
You would think, but barrel harmonics(how it bends and whips while being fired) does indeed affect how the bullet exits....air in the barrel will be pushed out in front of the bullet...poorly designed ports will indeed add to bending force (and resulting end movement of barrel)
Memberberries
Well-Known Member
The silencerco anchor break on a harvester does exactly what you want. Other than that I have heard good things about the linear comps as far as reduced blast back at you and taking a little bit of the recoil down.
BallisticsGuy
Well-Known Member
Kinda taking a funny tack there bud. This is a matter of engineering for features. I'm an engineer so I think I have something to say on the topic. Engineers don't add features into stuff we're designing which is in excess of the goal of the end product.
So it would be a great deal more helpful to explain why someone would need top ports on a bolt gun brake? You don't go putting thrusters in any particular spot on a rocket ship unless you think you're sure to need them there. You don't add features to stop something doing something that it's not going to do. It's a waste of machining operations and is easily contraindicated. Actually, I find it a little amusing that the question needs asked. It seems obvious to me.
Ok, let's think about it using the single and simple axiom: Top ports control muzzle rise.
Muzzle rise is not an issue that bolt action guns have to manage. The muzzle is going all over the place during bolt cycling anyway and the fire control hand had to come off the fire control system to cycle the bolt so sight picture will not be preserved and a follow-up shot will require reacquisition of the target. Thus top ports serve ZERO purposes on a bolt action rifle.
Easy enough, if there's no reason to use them. Don't use them.
Now to the contraindications of top ports: It can break bedding up into kibble, it can crack stocks at the wrist and fore end and down force at the muzzle applies unnecessary bending loads to the barrel. The bending loads on the barrel can result in damage to optics which are mounted extremely close to the barrel. I've seen all of those things happen some of them to my own guns.
I never said a single thing about unbalanced squat. I said top ports don't go on bolt gun brakes. I didn't elucidate why in that post but I have in the response to jlvandertonguetwister above.
The answer to his question is a suppressor.rem.xp100 said:
We've already established quite clearly that he's asking for the infinite improbability drive if we limit the discussion to brakes. Asking for something that's imaginary because it's not really possible doesn't make it more likely to exist. And before someone dives in the with 'linear comps are quieter to the shooter' nonsense, splitting hairs over perception of real loudness when we're 20-40dB deep into "instantaneous permanent hearing damage which is cumulative" noise levels is not going to help anything or anyone and may end up being positively harmful by giving a false impression that perception of loudness has anything to do with a sound's potential to damage hearing. Professor Heeger at NYU has some quite nice publicly available lectures on the topic.
yeah, a bit much on a hunting rifle, hence why I like the EFAB muzzle brake
Yeah, it is a little bulbous, but nothing like a full silencer or outer shroud option.
Re silencer,
Yeah, it is an option...but some people just don't want to deal with the cost and lic.
Concussion and noise is mitigated by full length barrel vs. 16" seen on AR.
Again, the OP asked for balance...not the ultimate solution.
"instantaneous permanent hearing damage which is cumulative" noise levels is not going to help anything or anyone and may end up being positively harmful by giving a false impression that perception of loudness has anything to do with a sound's potential to damage hearing."
Wish silencers were cheap and unregulated...but as you say, we need to deal with reality.
RE
jlvandertonguetwister
He was responding to my post not yours. No reason to take so personal.
Yeah, it is an option...but some people just don't want to deal with the cost and lic.
Concussion and noise is mitigated by full length barrel vs. 16" seen on AR.
Again, the OP asked for balance...not the ultimate solution.
"instantaneous permanent hearing damage which is cumulative" noise levels is not going to help anything or anyone and may end up being positively harmful by giving a false impression that perception of loudness has anything to do with a sound's potential to damage hearing."
Wish silencers were cheap and unregulated...but as you say, we need to deal with reality.
RE
jlvandertonguetwister
He was responding to my post not yours. No reason to take so personal.
Last edited:
This reminds me of my first venture in using muzzle brake in 2003. At the time, it seems that design were all similar except the radial brakes (do not recommend this type). I went with Holland's QD 3-port (90 degrees) on my .300 WM and works like a champ. Felt recoil was comparable to .243s/.308s.
Today, there are plenty of effective and efficient design muzzle brakes that not only reduces felt recoil but also muzzle rise. Price varies depending on design and manufacturing build. Basically, it is ~$100 for the muzzle threading plus the cost of the muzzle brake. The self-indexing type is a big plus.
The best balance between recoil and blast can be subjective and there are plenty of tests out there. IIWY, because this is your first (not going to be your last) hands-on experience is best. Do you have friends that might be able to help you try a braked rifle?
Anyways, for your consideration, check out https://muzzlebrakesandmore.com/testing-videos
I do not have hands-on experience with this but here's another consideration http://www.grizzlygunworks.com/fake-silencer-2in1.html
I cannot remember who but there is a member (I think it's @Canhunter35 but not sure) that has been using this for a while a is very pleased with it. Hopefully he'll chime in.
Good luck!
Ed
Last edited:
