Huntnful
Well-Known Member
You also man!
Muzzle Breaks with style
- Thread starter A-Tip
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Bob Wright
Well-Known Member
I've installed 2. They work great but not pretty. But it's the low cost easy button, especially if you don't want the barrel permanently changed.
My current choices for hunting setups are the SRS TiPro3 and the Chub line if you want something short. Those SRS Chubs are suprisingly effective. A notch under the Pro3 but also shorter. I am planning on a second chub to go on the 6.5Max I am building. Should look good on the end of a 22" Bart CF sendro. Hoping to get it taper blended when my barrel is chambered. My 8.5lb ready to hunt 338 carries a TiPro3.
The PRS popularity and ELR has driven brake design quite a bit. Before that, 3 gun at its height helped fuel it. Its all led to design tech maturing to more effective brakes with lower concussive blast back at the shooter.
The PRS popularity and ELR has driven brake design quite a bit. Before that, 3 gun at its height helped fuel it. Its all led to design tech maturing to more effective brakes with lower concussive blast back at the shooter.
I did a quick test yesterday at the range. I have a Hawkins Ti 3 port brake on a 280AI and compared it to TBAC Ultra 7 from the bench. Spotting hits were not any easier with the brake at least for me. The brake actually knocked my Garmin Xero over. It was a covered range station and the concussion and ear splitting sound of the braked shot probably introduces more flinch IMO. The brake looks great and probably does reduce felt recoil, but that will probably be my last shot with it on the rifle unless I am shooting in a place that does not allow suppressors. Thinking back the $320 I spent on the brake and contour work was probably one of my worst decisions on the rifle build.
Luckyshot7
Well-Known Member
Bench or prone is not where brakes shine vs suppressors. Impacts are easier to see in general from a solid position
Where brakes shine over suppressors is less stable positions
Having said that, of the dozens of folks I know who have brakes and suppressors, all of them do use the suppressor for hunting
HuntnPack
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 2,051
My Ultimate Muzzle Brake with Style…….
Reduces felt recoil, no concussive blast, no obnoxious noise, able to spot impacts, big game & fellow shooter / hunter friendly, does not cause shooter to close eyes & flinch, not harmful to shooter eyes & brain. Etc.
And Very Stylish !!!
Reduces felt recoil, no concussive blast, no obnoxious noise, able to spot impacts, big game & fellow shooter / hunter friendly, does not cause shooter to close eyes & flinch, not harmful to shooter eyes & brain. Etc.
And Very Stylish !!!
In-Site Arms... Canadian.... excellent brakes and you pay in Canadian dollars....so no matter the price.... they're almost free!
or....MDT
or....MDTIn your opinion what's the advantage of hanging this thing off your barrel if it doesn't supress? Keep in mind the mass of us who care none about concussion or blast but are concerned with ultimate RECOIL REDUCTION. Is it safe to assume it doesn't tame recoil like an optimally designed brake? Essentially it's for the guys who care less about recoil reduction and more about their buddy's complaints? Just like a hybrid supressor/brake....seems it does neither good and does both averageMy Ultimate Muzzle Brake with Style…….
View attachment 589603
Reduces felt recoil, no concussive blast, no obnoxious noise, able to spot impacts, big game & fellow shooter / hunter friendly, does not cause shooter to close eyes & flinch, not harmful to shooter eyes & brain. Etc.
And Very Stylish !!!
Last edited:
HuntnPack
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2012
- Messages
- 2,051
I listed recoil reduction as a benefit as well as eliminating concussive blast which is a bigger problem than recoil. Recoil is managed with more than adding a brake. Also I don't hang anything off the end of my barrel. If your trying to do that with your suppressor, your doing it wrong. Thread it on.
get rid of the concussive effects of a brake & you'll be amazed on how you perceived recoil.
I'd dare say most shooters with brakes don't realize they are actually instinctively flinching & or blinking their eyes at the shot. It's a natural protective human response.
YMMV.
get rid of the concussive effects of a brake & you'll be amazed on how you perceived recoil.
I'd dare say most shooters with brakes don't realize they are actually instinctively flinching & or blinking their eyes at the shot. It's a natural protective human response.
YMMV.
Touche. So what does is do best? So try and take your own personal biased against brakes out of the equation (because you may flinch or blink, or whatever it is you could say other people do). If a guy is looking for the best RECOIL REDUCTION.....is this the correct unit to hang off his barrel or would he be better off with a brake....im not asking with biased. I'm curious if ditching my muzzle brake for this contraption would reduce RECOIL more than my brakes? Logic tells me no. It appears it does an average job at recoil reduction (compared to a brake)...which is not what we are looking for with regards to the best RECOIL REDUCTION
Last edited:
Area 419, Browning Recoil Hawg, APA little bastard are all good choices, so are radial ones. I am not opposed to a little recoil, but with a brake on I can shoot short mags and 30 Nosler all day long without a sore shoulder the next day. To we it is worth the extra noise and concussion. I do not shoot a lot at a public range though. Mostly private property.
Now if you can convince the d-bags running my state these are not the boogy man and make them legal. I would go buy one tomorrow if I could. We don't all live in "free" states, so we use what we got....My Ultimate Muzzle Brake with Style…….
View attachment 589603
Reduces felt recoil, no concussive blast, no obnoxious noise, able to spot impacts, big game & fellow shooter / hunter friendly, does not cause shooter to close eyes & flinch, not harmful to shooter eyes & brain. Etc.
And Very Stylish !!!
I was in the "I don't need a suppressor camp" for a long time. Recoil mitigation can be measured with various brakes. I'm sure the top level brakes will fare better in scientific measurements than a suppressor. However, the perceived recoil and the human response to the shot is where suppressors shine IMO. It was one thing where my stubbornness cost me more than $$$. My hearing is very poor now. I want to save what little I have left.
Understood, maybe I worded it incorrectly.
I have supressors and I have brakes. Take for instance my 300....
I can shoot it suppressed, it's quiet, no ear pro necessary (although I still use it). But its way less than desirable for recoil reduction....I don't care much for that.
I slap a brake on there, I can shoot it all i want... rifle shoots in the .3s all day. I'm effective with it, zero problems. Very enjoyable, spot hits, pull the trigger all I want. Pleasant. But I use ear pro. Definitions of "perceived recoil, muzzle blast...etc" are irrelevant. Zero issues, non issue, moot...plays no matter for my needs or desires out of a hunting rifle.
I'm trying to figure out how a device that neither suppresses nor reduces recoil as effectively as the most effective device available is a benefit for me. That's all.
As for being stubborn, I can agree there haha. But I don't subscribe to the idea that people need any device to protect them from their own ignorance. Just as the idea that guns don't kill people, suppressors don't save your ears. You are responsible for not protecting your ears. Essentially my suppressors are nothing more than overpriced ear pro. I can protect my ears without a $1000 piece of overpriced metal. Generally, my suppressors sit in the safe.
Last edited:
