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
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
MUZZLE BREAKS
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: 1978302" data-attributes="member: 2736"><p>Another question I get ask more often than not is why does the bore hole have to be .020 larger than the bullet diameter?</p><p></p><p>While testing different brake designs for performance I also tested bore diameters on known accurate rifles so minor differences could be seen between test so I could squeeze every once of recoil reduction out of the brake.</p><p></p><p>I started these test with a .005 bore and went to .030. Accuracy was effected by the .005 bore and changed after it began to foul. (The bore and ports became smaller with carbon build up. All i could deduct from this was that the bullet shock wave bounced of the baffles and struct the bullet as it passed through the brake. (Someone with more scientific skills can probable explain it better than me).</p><p></p><p>Next was to open the bore hole up to .010 and re run the test. Accuracy improved and carbon build up was less of a problem, but the brake showed signs of needing cleaning often.</p><p></p><p>.015 Results were much the same Recoil remained the same through .025 and started to diminish</p><p>at this point (.025 +)</p><p></p><p>So the most consistent performance with no loss in recoil reduction was between .015 and .025</p><p>and the best all round performance was the average of the two (.020 ) and the normal amount of carbon build up had no effect on the accuracy and recoil reduction, so .020 was chosen for the best bore diameter because it afforded the best accuracy and recoil reduction under normal use and cleaning.</p><p></p><p>A smaller bore diameter will work,as long as it is .015 and no smaller to allow for any misalignment, but requires more frequent cleaning an a .025 bore hole doesn't measurably increase recoil and doesn't need cleaning as often. .020 bore diameter gave the best results under all conditions if properly installed.</p><p></p><p>These results were tested using the same recoil device, the same rifle, cleaned between each 5 shot string, with the same ammo load and the same brake with progressive bore diameters and I feel they were very Representative of the effects of bore diameter sizes.</p><p></p><p>J E CUSTOM</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="J E Custom, post: 1978302, member: 2736"] Another question I get ask more often than not is why does the bore hole have to be .020 larger than the bullet diameter? While testing different brake designs for performance I also tested bore diameters on known accurate rifles so minor differences could be seen between test so I could squeeze every once of recoil reduction out of the brake. I started these test with a .005 bore and went to .030. Accuracy was effected by the .005 bore and changed after it began to foul. (The bore and ports became smaller with carbon build up. All i could deduct from this was that the bullet shock wave bounced of the baffles and struct the bullet as it passed through the brake. (Someone with more scientific skills can probable explain it better than me). Next was to open the bore hole up to .010 and re run the test. Accuracy improved and carbon build up was less of a problem, but the brake showed signs of needing cleaning often. .015 Results were much the same Recoil remained the same through .025 and started to diminish at this point (.025 +) So the most consistent performance with no loss in recoil reduction was between .015 and .025 and the best all round performance was the average of the two (.020 ) and the normal amount of carbon build up had no effect on the accuracy and recoil reduction, so .020 was chosen for the best bore diameter because it afforded the best accuracy and recoil reduction under normal use and cleaning. A smaller bore diameter will work,as long as it is .015 and no smaller to allow for any misalignment, but requires more frequent cleaning an a .025 bore hole doesn't measurably increase recoil and doesn't need cleaning as often. .020 bore diameter gave the best results under all conditions if properly installed. These results were tested using the same recoil device, the same rifle, cleaned between each 5 shot string, with the same ammo load and the same brake with progressive bore diameters and I feel they were very Representative of the effects of bore diameter sizes. J E CUSTOM [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
MUZZLE BREAKS
Top