theading a sporter barrel?

[Roeder]

Not tying to start an argument, But I have a question.

Is your statement based of facts, or opinions about the safety issue. Like you I use to hate brakes
and did not use them at all for many reasons so after many years of shooting have changed my opinion in many things. (I found that Many of my opinions were just that, MY OPINION).

Every barrel failure that I have seen that was not caused by an object in the barrel Was a very
light weight barrel and the failure occurred in the groves where the barrel was the thinnest.

The brake failures have all been small tenon's with poor fitting threads and insufficient wall
thickness. Most things related to firearm safety have a 50% safety factor. So why should a muzzle brake install be any less important.

Of the thousands of rifles with small tenon threads and thin barrel walls How many are near failure
every time they are fired. Why some fail and others survive is a mystery and I will place my faith
in the designers that tell me a minimum wall of .140 to .150 is required.

You will never see a thin wall pipe in 15,000 to 20,000 pound service so why would a rifle barrel
with the potential of exceeding this be less important.

I am Like Edd, If I install a brake I will always use the biggest thread dia. that the barrel can use
(WHY NOT). But if it goes below the minimum wall recommended, I decline to do it.

Based on experience not opinion.

J E CUSTOM

I posted my personal opinion formed by my own experience and plenty of facts as I know them. I can list many examples of rifle and handgun OEM designs with wall thicknesses of much less than .150. A few: .063 (45 ACP barrel), .100 (.454 Casul cylinder wall), .085 (Ruger 44 mag barrel tenon). These are all examples of known barrel or actual chamber thicknesses in the case of the Casul cylinder and are exposed to either actual chamber pressure or much closer to it than way out at the end of a 24 inch or longer rifle barrel.

Hydraulic tubing is made of annealed 300 series stainless which has a much lower yield strength than heat treated 416. 1/2" hydraulic tubing with an .083 wall thickness is proof tested to over 10,000 psi. Not really a relevant comparison.

The safety margin for muzzle brake threads in just not comparable to the safety margin imposed for barrel fluting or sight attachment holes or average barrel thickness requirements. These are apples to oranges comparisons.

There is nothing whatsoever wrong with your self imposed thickness minimum standard, it just exceeds industry standards by a generous margin. Believe me, Industry designers are expected to design in at least a 50% safety margin.

 

[Deleted member 46119]

I just want to be clear. I personally hate brakes on hunting rifles due to the increased noise and blast especially when I am in the position of guide or spotter.

I use brakes extensively and I don't like the noise or redirection of blast wave. I warn spotters and guides but...

I ain't gonna stop using them.

As for brakes on sporter barrels, I'm not a GS or metals engineer, my 338/26-Nosler Weatherby #2 24" has a barrel OD brake on 5/8-28 threads. Yes I worried about how much metal was left. I've seen the results of brakes shot off. It's just enough. Material and recoil reduction. I shot it w/o hearing protection. Yuck.

 

[Rustystud]

Harrell's makes brakes with 9/16 (.5625') x 32 tpi. that could be fitted to a barrel starting out a.580" w/out issue. You would have to put a taper on it to make it look normal.
Nat Lambeth

 

[Texanjohn]

Check out Witt machines clamp on muzzle brake, solves the thin wall problem and won't break the bank