Range friendly muzzle device?

CalG · Sep 3, 2016

time to time the folks at the gun club get together for some "shoot"of one sort or another.

I've recently move to "full bore" rounds , where most are shooting "softer" hand loads.
I need to move in that direction, but I'm not there yet.

Trying to be considerate to all the others on the firing line (yes there are those of the more sensible gender)
I would consider a muzzle device that optimizes the projection of acoustic energy away from the lateral projection and sends it down range. Sure it will come back eventually, but by then, ear muffs are enough.

I've got "muzzle brakes" that actually seem to amplify the near field acoustics (not good) as well as "flash hiders" that seem to do nothing. I am not looking for anything that takes a $200 stamp, but am interested in a commercial device that will be "socially acceptable" and thread on to a 5/8-24 spigot.

Suggestions?

gnadoc · Sep 4, 2016

Kaw Valley Precision 3cal Linear Comp-5/8x24-Black

These linear commentator thingies look interesting, and might even accomplish your goals.

jlrii · Sep 4, 2016

CalG said:
time to time the folks at the gun club get together for some "shoot"of one sort or another.

I've recently move to "full bore" rounds , where most are shooting "softer" hand loads.
I need to move in that direction, but I'm not there yet.

Trying to be considerate to all the others on the firing line (yes there are those of the more sensible gender)
I would consider a muzzle device that optimizes the projection of acoustic energy away from the lateral projection and sends it down range. Sure it will come back eventually, but by then, ear muffs are enough.

I've got "muzzle brakes" that actually seem to amplify the near field acoustics (not good) as well as "flash hiders" that seem to do nothing. I am not looking for anything that takes a $200 stamp, but am interested in a commercial device that will be "socially acceptable" and thread on to a 5/8-24 spigot.

Suggestions?

The Feds say ANYTHING that attaches to the firearm that reduces the report is considered a silencer. A stationary baffle like a 55 gallon drum lined with sound abosorbent material or a row of tires to shoot through is not.

Those "linear compensators" do say they do what you want though. I wonder if ATF has anything to say about "redirecting" the report.

JR

9100 · Sep 4, 2016

Muzzle brakes work by directing gas back toward the shooter and naturally will make the report louder. My country boy analysis of the Linear Comp is that it does the opposite, collecting the gas that blows out sideways when the bullet is still close to the muzzle and directs it forward. I would expect that to reduce the sound behind the muzzle and increase the recoil. The description implies that.

Bill

RWO · Sep 4, 2016

I don't buy it. How is it different from an ordinary muzzle? Discharging the muzzle blast through multiple smaller ports( I'm assuming it does) does nothing useful since the pressure wave fronts from all the ports and bore hole are in phase and will be additive down stream from the device. If the maker really wanted to prove that it works, he would have had it tested against a bare barrel with an impulse sound level meter and would publish the test data in his ads.

RWO

CalG · Sep 4, 2016

RWO said:
I don't buy it. How is it different from an ordinary muzzle? Discharging the muzzle blast through multiple smaller ports( I'm assuming it does) does nothing useful since the pressure wave fronts from all the ports and bore hole are in phase and will be additive down stream from the device. If the maker really wanted to prove that it works, he would have had it tested against a bare barrel with an impulse sound level meter and would publish the test data in his ads.

RWO

But with all that testing and proving, they would need to charge double the present $50 asking price ;-)

9100 · Sep 5, 2016

RWO said:
I don't buy it. How is it different from an ordinary muzzle? Discharging the muzzle blast through multiple smaller ports( I'm assuming it does) does nothing useful since the pressure wave fronts from all the ports and bore hole are in phase and will be additive down stream from the device. If the maker really wanted to prove that it works, he would have had it tested against a bare barrel with an impulse sound level meter and would publish the test data in his ads.

RWO

The flash from a rifle has a disk radially from the muzzle of high pressure gas blown out sideways from the gap between the muzzle and the bullet. As the bullet moves on, the gas continues straight on in the same direction it was moving inside the barrel, making a mores or less conical flash pointing forward. The side flash will send a considerable shock wave back toward the shooter. Catching it and sending it forward could reduce its effect.

Bill

P. S. Dredging up a memory from the 50s, I recall a test of a muzzle brake that had an accessory sleeve that would direct the blast back forward to reduce the sound to the shooter. A test showed that it did reduce the sound but the reduction in recoil was only by the amount that the same amount of weight hung on the barrel would produce. Turning the gases around negated the muzzle brake. I have no recollection of the name of the brake.

Spyderedge · Sep 5, 2016

Sounds like you need a forward blow compensator. It is like a muzzle brake but backwards, it throws the gasses forward reducing sound from the shooters perspective. It also increases felt recoil. They are common on ruger 10/22's

Sent from my XT1053 using Tapatalk

PoorMan · Sep 7, 2016

I don't see how a properly designed linear compensator could really increase recoil. Yes, the gas is forced forwards, but its forced to go forwards anyways, except through one hole instead of several. You would reduce recoil a very very miniscule amount if any, but I doubt increased recoil in most cases. Depending on how the compensator is designed, you could feel like you have increased recoil because it may force the gun to recoil straight back, instead of the barrel coming up, but the overall recoil of the system is likely the same. Id rather have straight back recoil than recoil that causes muzzle rise which is what some compensators do.

I dont remember all the equations, but increased ports should reduce pressure and velocity of gases coming out of barrel, but the volume should be the same. Its such a tiny amount of change due to the huge amounts of gas created, but if you make a compensator 2 feet wide, the recoil would be affected drastically I would think when compared to no compensator, but equally weighted gun. They way I see it is if you take a fire hose and turn it on with no nozzle, you can hold it fairly easy. If you pump the same volume but restrict it down, youll be leaning forward to hold it.

Sorry for the rant...to much caffeine

PoorMan · Sep 7, 2016

9100 said:
The flash from a rifle has a disk radially from the muzzle of high pressure gas blown out sideways from the gap between the muzzle and the bullet. As the bullet moves on, the gas continues straight on in the same direction it was moving inside the barrel, making a mores or less conical flash pointing forward. The side flash will send a considerable shock wave back toward the shooter. Catching it and sending it forward could reduce its effect.

Bill

P. S. Dredging up a memory from the 50s, I recall a test of a muzzle brake that had an accessory sleeve that would direct the blast back forward to reduce the sound to the shooter. A test showed that it did reduce the sound but the reduction in recoil was only by the amount that the same amount of weight hung on the barrel would produce. Turning the gases around negated the muzzle brake. I have no recollection of the name of the brake.

Ive seen the brake you talk of before. I always wondered if they actually worked or not. I guess I always figured you cant have the best of both worlds except by reducing the energy of gas which is effectively what a suppressor does. One way or another, your gonna get that energy whether you feel through recoil or sound. It can neither be gained nor lost, so therefore must be transformed.

JNieman · Sep 7, 2016

The best muzzle device a considerate shooter can own is a sound suppressor. Period.

jakefreese · Sep 7, 2016

Gotta go suppressor if you want recoil reduction and not blasting you neighbor. I shoot PRS matches, is about 75% brakes and 25% suppressors. It's all good on the normal calibers. Gets a bit noisy with the guys that are shooting over 50 grains of powder.

I have seen some of those shrouded brakes but I don't think they are effective at reducing recoil or being neighbor friendly.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

apoc_101 · Sep 7, 2016

First reply was on point, a Parallel/linear compensator will help, if a supressor is not an option (Like in Canada, where they are strictly prohibited)

Internally, the design consists of an opening ahead of the muzzle threads, a concentric clearance bore for the projectile, and a series of holes axially around the center bore to allow pressure to discharge from the opening behind that bore. The volume of that opening and the volume of axial vents is relative to the chambering... larger volume would be required to assist with the report of larger, more powerful chamberings.

72bwhite · Sep 7, 2016

There is a flash hider that kind of does what you want ,
that funny looking can with a funnel on the end one you see on
some short barreled aks

CalG · Sep 7, 2016

PoorMan said:
Ive seen the brake you talk of before. I always wondered if they actually worked or not. I guess I always figured you cant have the best of both worlds except by reducing the energy of gas which is effectively what a suppressor does. One way or another, your gonna get that energy whether you feel through recoil or sound. It can neither be gained nor lost, so therefore must be transformed.

I Suppose I could look for a tandem frequency doubler. The energy would come out ultra sonic. It would drive the dogs wild. ;-)

Forestgnome · Sep 7, 2016

I never could understand how making gun sounds at a gun range is inconsiderate. Acting in a safe manner is is the only consideration I expect at a range.

apoc_101 · Sep 8, 2016

72bwhite said:
There is a flash hider that kind of does what you want ,
that funny looking can with a funnel on the end one you see on
some short barreled aks

flash "cone", the ones for newer short AKs actually incorporate a choke chamber to provide better back pressure for cycling the weapon. Might affect the report signature a bit... I still think the best designs for tweaking the noise without a can are the paracomp style, however they are definitely "grey zone" since the "flash/noise moderators" for short AR/M4 pattern are of a similar design and they were classified as suppressors after all (in USA). So for a Canadian, still a grey option. I wish we could have full cans up here! silly law.

tobnpr · Sep 9, 2016

Damn if I can remember now who made it...
But I just sent back a customer's rifle where I'd threaded/fitted a "typical" side (3) and top ported brake- that also had male threads cut into the back end of the brake for an open ended "can" of sorts to be threaded over the brake. Supposedly to make it "range friendly", but only at slight loss in reduction of felt recoil.

partsproduction · Sep 17, 2016

A stationary baffle like a 55 gallon drum lined with sound abosorbent material or a row of tires to shoot through is not.

Long ago I read a popular mechanics magazine, maybe the 60's, they had one of those drawings of a wood box with lots of baffles inside for shooting in the basement, it sat on a table and the shooter sat with the rifle barrel inside the box shooting through a 4" diameter hole through all those baffles to cut noise.
I built a bullet trap for shooting in my shop, the house is close by and commonly I shoot .45 ACP and 10MM auto, which does make a little noise I guess. No rifle above 38 special.

Anyway I also made a plywood box with two baffles forward of the pistol rest, word from my wife is that she cannot hear shooting in the house when I shoot through that baffle box, whereas normally she hears it.

A while ago some hunting society here was trying to make a public range here in my valley, they hung up 10 car tires in a row to shoot through, and asked me for stainless steel chips to fill the tires inside so as to deaden the shock wave, because of city types living too close (We are far from any large city, population 4500).
All for naught though because they were sued or threatened suit by the city slickers, the closest lives 1/3 mile away, so the range never happened.

I bet the tires would have cut the pressure wave intensity down considerably. I seriously doubt they would have heard it that far away.

Best thing though is to go underground.

JNieman · Sep 19, 2016

Forestgnome said:
I never could understand how making gun sounds at a gun range is inconsiderate. Acting in a safe manner is is the only consideration I expect at a range.

Because there's a big difference between a .50BMG and a .22lr. Lots of semi-common larger bore rifles are still pretty bad.

Some guns exceed the general protection level afforded by your average shooters' ear pro, and they may not be prepared. It's not every day someone brings in a big bore higher powered rifle.

Especially if you're shooting indoors, it is absolutely uncomfortable to be in the room with some rifles, depending on range design. It's nice to take the edge off of it so you're not disturbing people around you.

If everyone on the line flinches or recoils when /you/ shoot, then yea, you're not being considerate. It's hard for someone to practice if they jump every time you touch one off.

Range friendly muzzle device?

Diamond

Aluminum

Hot Rolled

Diamond

Cast Iron

Diamond

Diamond

Titanium

Aluminum

Aluminum

Titanium

Hot Rolled

Hot Rolled

Titanium

Diamond

Stainless

Hot Rolled

Hot Rolled

Titanium

Titanium

Similar threads