Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 5/7/2002 2:44:27 PM EST
I was looking at the brownells prices for a ar-15 muzzle break. JP RECOIL ElMINATOR or a Vandenberg ar muzzle brake are the two that I am interested in. Does anyone have one ?
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 4:46:40 PM EST
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 4:50:40 PM EST
It is a MUZZLE BRAKE, not "break"

Phantom is a flash suppressor, not a brake.

I dont like any brakes... they add tons of noise and shock to the shooter and those around him, and the .223 doesn't have that much recoil anyway.

For those that do like them, the Wilson Combat seems very popular and so is Kurt's Kustom brake. The AK style brake is loud, and the mini-y-comp is the loudest I have been around, with the most blast on those around.

Link Posted: 5/7/2002 5:41:32 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/7/2002 5:43:33 PM EST by SigBlueStar]
Sorry about the spelling. I should be more careful with the spell check. Thanks guys for the input.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 6:04:34 PM EST

I use the 3 port comp/brake from gunsmoke-inc.com. It works well for me.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 6:52:38 PM EST
I personally don't like brakes on .223 rifles. The gun doesn't kick. If you must I heard the levang is not as noisy. In my opinion it is like putting wheely bars on a yugo. They might fit but you really don't need em.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 7:20:00 PM EST
If you have to shoot quickly, then having muzzle brake helps. If you are just shooting from the bench one round at a time then you probably don't need it. I have experiences with Smith Enterprises Muzzle Brake and Fulton Armory "The Look" Muzzle Brake. I think the "The Look" MB works great but Smith Enterprises' MB didn't help at all.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 7:27:49 PM EST
My half a dozen rifles must be broken because they all kick with each shot. I think Newton summed it up pretty well with his three laws of motion. Something about for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction? Yeah that's the one. The action of the bullet leaving the rifle at a high velocity sends a counter reaction into the bolt, recoil spring and eventually into the shoulder stock and the shooter's shoulder. The AR is pretty well designed as the recoil tends to take place in a straight line reducing the tendancy of a rifle to flip upwards ... but the flip is still there a bit.

If you're shooting at a large target close up the muzzle flip isn't going to ammount to much. How ever if you're shooting at a target the size of a human at about 100 yards you'll find that a bare muzzle AR will flip the barrel almost completly off target with each shot. With the rifle covering the target it's nearly impossible to call shots or see impact. The proper way to hold the rifle requires that the support hand mearly cradle the handguards - this allows the rifle to rise with each recoil. (See Jim Crew's excellent primer on the carbine for great lessons in technique)

I find that the Armalite brake allows me to use a five power scope on a 20" rifle and keeps the crosshairs within about 2-4 inches of the bull with each shot allowing me to call and see each shot and to put more lead on target much much faster as the target doesn't disappear with each shot.

I have Smith brakes on two of my 18" rifles and they're not as effective as the Armalite IMHO.

I have an AK brake attached (welded) to a 14.5" barrel and though loud it's effective. Wearing proper hearing protection I hardly notice the difference. Those in attendance with cotton in their ears will suffer hearing damage. The AK brake does a good job of keeping a 3 power ACOG on target.

My pre-ban uppers wear a Phantom and a Vortex type suppressor which aren't legal to use on post-ban rifles. They're more to reduce the flash than the recoil. The Phantom is on an M-4 clone upper that wears a Comp ML.

None of these brakes angle the blast at 180 degrees back at the shooter but more back at a 150 degree angle blasting someone standing a couple feet along side the shooter.

None send the blast downwards into the dust to create a signature.

None of these brakes create noise but rather redirect some of it (noise/energy) away from the target and off to the sides.

If you really want to hear noise shoot and AR in a house.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 7:34:56 PM EST
Just finished shooting the 3-gun nationals and nearly half of the AR's had JP Enterprises' brakes/comps on them. At 300 yards you can see the bullet impact and you can put two shots in the A zone as fast as you can pull the trigger at 100 yards. www.jpar15.com
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 7:47:54 PM EST
I know it looks funny, but the AK-74 muzzle brake is VERY effective for the .223.

The Smith Arms brake works well, too.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 9:01:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By LngBchAR15:
If you have to shoot quickly, then having muzzle brake helps. If you are just shooting from the bench one round at a time then you probably don't need it. I have experiences with Smith Enterprises Muzzle Brake and Fulton Armory "The Look" Muzzle Brake. I think the "The Look" MB works great but Smith Enterprises' MB didn't help at all.

That's interesting ... I have a Smith brake and it is not ineffective. Unless you mean that it is ineffective when compared to "The Look" brake?
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 11:54:36 PM EST
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 6:34:56 AM EST
Muzzle brakes do not create any noise. They merely re-direct some of the existing noise. I have shot side by side with pre-bans with flash suppressors and post-bans with brakes. I always were hearing protection and I can not tell one bit of difference. I have two Wilson Combat brakes and LOVE them. Have one upper at Kurts getting one of his brakes right now. 5.56's dont have much recoil, but once you shoot one with a GOOD brake, you will definitely be able to tell the difference. With that said, I would still rather have a flash suppressor mainly because I cant stand someone saying I can have one just because of the way it looks!
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 7:26:19 AM EST
When I say the gun doesn't kick, I mean none that is worth mentioning. I mean a kid can shoot an AR because there is litlle recoil. What is that matter with people these days, peole complaining that .223 need reduced recoil? As far as hitting a man sized target, if it were really neede on a .223 then don't you think the military would use one. On a Barret .50 cal I can see a need for a brake but a .223, come on! On the mention of what is used in matches, that is an equipment race, most race guns are not practical field rifles. On the mention of them not creating more noise, yes they do create more noise for the shooter and bystanders. If they only redirected the noise then the noise going forward should be reduced by your theory. If you ever fire one indoors without hearing protection, the brake will make a noticable difference.
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 8:53:17 AM EST
I've been very happy with my Wilson. I couldn't stand the look of a castrated barrel. Works as advertised.
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 9:08:51 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/8/2002 9:14:14 AM EST by Hawkeye1]
I can think of lots of things the Military doesnt use that are good ideas. Just because the military doesnt use it doesnt mean it not good. As has been said, 5.56/.223's dont have much recoil. I just like the reduction that the brake gives. Feels like you are shooting a .22 LR. It protects the muzzle and crown, and it just dresses up the rifle a bit. Again, I always use hearing protection so I cant tell the difference at all. Brakes are simple pieces of steel, the are incapale of generating any sound. As for firing indoors, deaf is deaf. Dont think I would be able to tell a difference there either.
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 9:56:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By Dr-Dremel:
On the mention of what is used in matches, that is an equipment race, most race guns are not practical field rifles.

Just what is a "practical field rifle". Most of us are not active military or LE so the only way we can gauge our ability is a competition. My "race gun" gets used once a month going up aginst other rifles and shooters at matches. Going to the range just to shoot a group is not a test of gun or a shooters ability. As far as being practical, my gun gets used outdoors in all kinds of conditions, we shoot from 10 feet to 300 yards, shooting on the run, through ports and going prone and my gun always runs. To me nothing could be more practical. If all that is needed is a "practical field rifle" then why does the military buy all of the stuff they hang off of the rail systems?
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 11:03:34 AM EST
The military doesn't use brakes because they figure that flash suppression is more important than reduced recoil and muzzle flip. Whether or not they are correct, some of us have post-ban rifles and a choice between a bare muzzle or a brake. I am firmly in the "brake is better than plain" camp.

I doubt anyone here is claiming that the 223 kicks too much. They are just saying that brakes are worth the trouble when compared to a bare muzzle.
Top Top