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
Least effective 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="65WSM" data-source="post: 2393614" data-attributes="member: 9551"><p>I own several "self timing" brakes, including from APA and Area 419, two Eric Cortina tuning brakes. All muzzle brakes are a compromise. Either you have great recoil reduction or some reduction with less noise to the shooter. The total amount of escaping gas from the muzzle remains the same, no matter what kind of brake, or none at all. The shape of the baffle (s), number of baffles, the size of the hole compared to the bullet and bore, size of the chambers (s) and ports all determine how much shock is delivered to the muzzle (bounce) and the direction of travel of the muzzle. The solution is a parabola. (Personal conversation with engineer who designs muzzle devices for an arms company). To avoid muzzle bounce, a smaller amount of gas should be discharged laterally in the first chamber, more in the second, in each successive chamber more and more. The last chamber of the brake, should be the largest in volume and have the tightest hole in the baffle (at the muzzle). If you have anything else, it is sub-optimum for muzzle bounce. </p><p></p><p>Reduction in recoil is determined by the direction of the release of gas. If gas is released back toward the shooters ears, it pulls the rifle forward to mitigate recoil. If the gas is released perpendicular, to the front, away from the shooters ears, it doesn't do much for recoil reduction. Again, recoil reduction is a compromise with noise. Muzzle bounce (shock) doesn't have to be. How much ear protection are you willing to wear or recoil punishment tolerate?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="65WSM, post: 2393614, member: 9551"] I own several "self timing" brakes, including from APA and Area 419, two Eric Cortina tuning brakes. All muzzle brakes are a compromise. Either you have great recoil reduction or some reduction with less noise to the shooter. The total amount of escaping gas from the muzzle remains the same, no matter what kind of brake, or none at all. The shape of the baffle (s), number of baffles, the size of the hole compared to the bullet and bore, size of the chambers (s) and ports all determine how much shock is delivered to the muzzle (bounce) and the direction of travel of the muzzle. The solution is a parabola. (Personal conversation with engineer who designs muzzle devices for an arms company). To avoid muzzle bounce, a smaller amount of gas should be discharged laterally in the first chamber, more in the second, in each successive chamber more and more. The last chamber of the brake, should be the largest in volume and have the tightest hole in the baffle (at the muzzle). If you have anything else, it is sub-optimum for muzzle bounce. Reduction in recoil is determined by the direction of the release of gas. If gas is released back toward the shooters ears, it pulls the rifle forward to mitigate recoil. If the gas is released perpendicular, to the front, away from the shooters ears, it doesn't do much for recoil reduction. Again, recoil reduction is a compromise with noise. Muzzle bounce (shock) doesn't have to be. How much ear protection are you willing to wear or recoil punishment tolerate? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Least effective brake
Top