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
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Muzzle brakes...
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="J E Custom" data-source="post: 1968472" data-attributes="member: 2736"><p>When I first became interested in muzzle brake design was many years ago. I am a veteran and did not like the abuse that service men were subjected to when shooting the 50 BMG. many claimed sinus problems after 20 to 30 rounds, the spotters had it worse.</p><p></p><p>When I bought mine I was told not to shoot it unless I had both ear plugs and ear muffs. Recoil was marginal but manageable. My goal was to reduce the noise, recoil and the signature. (If possible)</p><p></p><p>The first step was to shoot it without a brake (Bad idea) . here are the results</p><p>50 BMG Barrett M82 A1 </p><p>Rifle weight 33 pounds.</p><p>750 grain Hornady A max.</p><p>250 grains US 869 or 248 grains of H 50 BMG</p><p>Velocity 2944 ft/sec</p><p>Recoil without brake = 117 ft /lbs</p><p>With Barrett fish gill brake (Backwards angled ports) = 64.7 ft/lbs</p><p>With 5 port Assassin = 43.3 ft/lbs</p><p></p><p>The concussion problem was improved to a level allowing the use of ear plugs by them selves without them being blown out of your ears from the pressure wave to the sinuses (This actually happened to one of the shooters shooting without both the ear plugs and the ear muffs).</p><p></p><p>The flash signature was reduced to almost zero and the gas impact to the spotter was reduced significantly.</p><p></p><p>The 5 port Assassin has the same volume as the Barrett brake so there was no advantage in volume of ether type of brake. Maybe the Barrett brake is not as efficient as other angled port brakes, and although a 21 ft/lb improvement may not sound like much in percentages but considering that is the average recoil of a 30/06 I could tell/feel the difference.</p><p></p><p>To date I have not found an angle brake that would equal the Assassin with progressive ports or straight ports. Some have been within 4 or 5 ft/lbs but the blast effect rendered them unusable compared to other designs. </p><p></p><p>This information is arrived through testing and is the reason I believe it. In theory the angled ports should be better but with the bore hole in the Brake working against the ports, efficiency of the brake can more than offset any advantage it may have. </p><p></p><p>Just my experiences through testing <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite6" alt=":cool:" title="Cool :cool:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":cool:" /> </p><p></p><p>J E CUSTOM</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="J E Custom, post: 1968472, member: 2736"] When I first became interested in muzzle brake design was many years ago. I am a veteran and did not like the abuse that service men were subjected to when shooting the 50 BMG. many claimed sinus problems after 20 to 30 rounds, the spotters had it worse. When I bought mine I was told not to shoot it unless I had both ear plugs and ear muffs. Recoil was marginal but manageable. My goal was to reduce the noise, recoil and the signature. (If possible) The first step was to shoot it without a brake (Bad idea) . here are the results 50 BMG Barrett M82 A1 Rifle weight 33 pounds. 750 grain Hornady A max. 250 grains US 869 or 248 grains of H 50 BMG Velocity 2944 ft/sec Recoil without brake = 117 ft /lbs With Barrett fish gill brake (Backwards angled ports) = 64.7 ft/lbs With 5 port Assassin = 43.3 ft/lbs The concussion problem was improved to a level allowing the use of ear plugs by them selves without them being blown out of your ears from the pressure wave to the sinuses (This actually happened to one of the shooters shooting without both the ear plugs and the ear muffs). The flash signature was reduced to almost zero and the gas impact to the spotter was reduced significantly. The 5 port Assassin has the same volume as the Barrett brake so there was no advantage in volume of ether type of brake. Maybe the Barrett brake is not as efficient as other angled port brakes, and although a 21 ft/lb improvement may not sound like much in percentages but considering that is the average recoil of a 30/06 I could tell/feel the difference. To date I have not found an angle brake that would equal the Assassin with progressive ports or straight ports. Some have been within 4 or 5 ft/lbs but the blast effect rendered them unusable compared to other designs. This information is arrived through testing and is the reason I believe it. In theory the angled ports should be better but with the bore hole in the Brake working against the ports, efficiency of the brake can more than offset any advantage it may have. Just my experiences through testing :cool: J E CUSTOM [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Muzzle brakes...
Top