davewilson
Well-Known Member
Nate,don't want to sound argumentative but i just don't agree with most of what you said.all things being equal,your V slots will be a longer brake. there's no 2 ways about it.as far as that goes,you're wasting space with your design by not making the first hole a complete triangle instead of a V shaped slot.this would allow more gas to escape thus making the brake more efficient.the same goes for the last slot.could be cut so the bottom of the V would be a flat side, thus allowing more gas to escape.as far as what Barney wants do to with the smaller to larger holes.that seems counter-productive.so what if the first hole vents more gas.putting smaller holes in the beginning just makes it less efficient.i thought the idea was to vent as much gas as possible.
as far as hitting them more perpendicular,most of the benefit of recoil reduction, due to muzzle blast pushing on the baffles,comes after the bullet passes each baffle or all of them,not while the bullet is inside the brake.my way of thinking is a perpendicular to the bore baffle is more efficient at reducing recoil.
as far as hitting them more perpendicular,most of the benefit of recoil reduction, due to muzzle blast pushing on the baffles,comes after the bullet passes each baffle or all of them,not while the bullet is inside the brake.my way of thinking is a perpendicular to the bore baffle is more efficient at reducing recoil.