Muzzle Brakes

A

A-Mac.50

New member
Hi,

I tried typing this question into google but didn't really find the answer I was looking for, I was hoping you guys could help me. With reading about muzzle brakes and the pros and cons of them it I'm a little confused. So my question is why dont the majority of both tactical and hunting rifles have muzzle breaks? With the apparent pros far out waying the cons which seem to be the kicking up of dust and a larger amount of sound revererated on the shooter. So even for a .223 or .306 wouldn't it be better to have a muzzle brake then no muzzle brake?

Thanks for the help,
 
Noise with a muzzle brake can be horrible. Had an AR-10 that was just too loud. The Browning BOSS system was quite rancid as well. :barf:
 
Advantages:

Recoil Reduction
Less Muzzle Climb

Disadvantages:
Added weight to the barrel
More sound is directed to the shooter
Blast from brake can kick up dirt
Snipers don't use brakes, so that they don't have large dust clouds to give away their positions.

My opinion would be that most rifles should have brakes on them. Not all brakes have all the disadvantages that I listed. Some direct the blast back and at an angle to reduce recoil and prevent the shooter from getting any of it.
 
Got a RRA brake on my ar15, love it. It came with the birdcage and it made a difference with muzzle lift, but it is loud and annoys people around, but worth it for quick shots.
 
is was

The Good

* Lowers the recoil level significantly
* Reduces muzzle jump
* Can watch the bullet's impact right through the scope
* You don't need a spotter to tell you where you hit
* Noise level at large distances, hundreds of yards, is decreased
* Downrange varmints hear a milder report

The Bad

* Extreme increase in noise level
* Ear protection mandatory
* Not recommend for hunting where ear protection is not used
* Pressure wave hits you in the face and might cause you to blink at first
* Some designs will kick up dust from the ground when prone
* Bad for neighbor shooters at the rifle range

Other Considerations

* Integral (not removable) Muzzle Brake makes barrel cleaning difficult
* Integral Muzzle Brake gives you no access to the muzzle crown
* Removable Muzzle Brake makes cleaning as easy as with a standard barrel
* Shooting with the Muzzle Brake removed will most likely change the Point of Impact
* For hunting without the Muzzle Brake the change in Point of Impact must be determined and compensated for
* Muzzle Brakes in general do not increase or decrease accuracy
Click to expand...
 
If you are going to be shooting prone with a brake, get one without ports on the bottom, to minimize the dust problem.
 
Not all brakes direct noise to the rear. Some direct it forward, to reduce the perceived impact on the ear, like when hunting. Brakes are tuned to be specific, too, ARP makes ones with screw in ports to adjust the amount of recoil reduction needed.

In the military, suppressors are used to reduce noise. They still don't silence a gun, the better ones let you hear the action cycling just as loudly as ever. Korea is now issuing suppressors to all their soldiers, expect the US to do so. It's specifically mentioned in the Improved Carbine trials.

Take that another step further: if you are running suppressed, the piston is the better way to go, as there is a reduced amount of gas expelled into the receiver. It doesn't eliminate it - once the bolt opens, the gas trapped in the barrel comes right past the brass. There is little that can be done about it, all self loading actions open the bolt with gas pressure on the case. Ejector swipes are clear evidence the pressure is too high.

If the Army is making suppressor use standard, then expect a piston design in the future. The muzzle brake will simply become a suppressor mount, and the point of suppressors being available to every combat soldier will then raise other issues. It'll be interesting to see if someone decides to leave them on fixed and unremovable.

Hmmm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top