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
Gunsmithing
broke my first rifle...
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="Hired Gun" data-source="post: 517586" data-attributes="member: 1290"><p>I would agree the first port being straight redirects the flow from the subsequent ports. I have been really studying some video's of brakes in action frame by frame and found that based on observation only that on baffle style brakes the first port relieves about 90% of the gasses. Second port gets 9%. The 3rd port about 1% and everything beyond that is just for looks. This started when I was looking for a place to make my brakes with more than 3 ports and they educated me on this. Ever notice most military brakes are usually 1 port and almost never more than 2 ports even up to artillery? I'm about to enter into testing with some angled 2 port designs that save weight and length yet as effective as comparable 3+ port brakes. It's basically like say for example a Holland Radial brake with the end port cut off. Beyond two ports seems to be a result of the uninformed demand by consumers who are suckers for , "more is better" mentality. </p><p></p><p>Using fluid flow testing I find that with the end of the brake plugged to simulate the bullet that fluid only flows from the very first row of ports and the last set before the plug. This is interesting as this occurs with baffle and brakes with holes all around. Even more interesting is no matter how much pressure I introduce that without a plug present most of the flow is directed out the first ports and the rest out the muzzle. Just how long is that bullet present on the brake anyway when the meaningful pressure is being vented?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hired Gun, post: 517586, member: 1290"] I would agree the first port being straight redirects the flow from the subsequent ports. I have been really studying some video’s of brakes in action frame by frame and found that based on observation only that on baffle style brakes the first port relieves about 90% of the gasses. Second port gets 9%. The 3rd port about 1% and everything beyond that is just for looks. This started when I was looking for a place to make my brakes with more than 3 ports and they educated me on this. Ever notice most military brakes are usually 1 port and almost never more than 2 ports even up to artillery? I'm about to enter into testing with some angled 2 port designs that save weight and length yet as effective as comparable 3+ port brakes. It's basically like say for example a Holland Radial brake with the end port cut off. Beyond two ports seems to be a result of the uninformed demand by consumers who are suckers for , “more is better” mentality. Using fluid flow testing I find that with the end of the brake plugged to simulate the bullet that fluid only flows from the very first row of ports and the last set before the plug. This is interesting as this occurs with baffle and brakes with holes all around. Even more interesting is no matter how much pressure I introduce that without a plug present most of the flow is directed out the first ports and the rest out the muzzle. Just how long is that bullet present on the brake anyway when the meaningful pressure is being vented? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Gunsmithing
broke my first rifle...
Top