Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 6/5/2008 3:38:33 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/5/2008 4:03:34 AM EST by caver101]
As was discussed in the "1-4x optic thread" this is a follow up of the comp testing I said I was going to do (thanks to 00bullitt who told about this type of test).

First brake is a JP Tactical Comp:

The second brake is a modified colt post ban pin on comp. I took the comp off and drilled some holes in the top of it. Its the one my father is currently using.
You can not see it well, but its the 3rd from the right and is similar to the Miculek:


Both rifles shooting 55gn FMJ ammo at about the same velocity.

We did the test twice at point blank range on cardboard and the results were exactly the same both times. The JP comp left a triangular hole about the size of a dime. The home brew comp left a nice 223 size hole. I was shocked at the result and will post photos of the targets shortly when I get them uploaded.

I see a titan comp in my future........Hey VSP...how about a little discount for the HTF members??

ETA: guess what hole goes with what comp:
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 3:40:26 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/5/2008 3:44:39 AM EST by caver101]
Also, did not test or even look at flash suppression as it is not something I am worried about.

One more thing.
Something several of us noticed at the steel city match was the AAC M4 2000 mount at about 3-4yds knocked a target completely off the sticks that it was stapled too, LOL
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 5:32:03 AM EST
[Last Edit: 6/5/2008 5:36:07 AM EST by USSA-1]
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 10:23:57 AM EST
How far did the target blow back?
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 10:52:43 AM EST
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 11:04:59 AM EST
Bullet: the target moved further with my JP than with the modified colt. Several inches with mine and just a little less with the other. Kind of hard to be exact.

Book: in the other thread about 1-4x optics Bullet was talking about Eric's titan comp and how efficient it is. here it is in his words.

I have tested many of the comps on the market and own all but the TTi or JP Tank brake.
I have performed the cardboard test with all of them. They all failed in my opinion....including my AAC can. The Titan kind of surprised me. This all came about by accident to by the way. We were doing ECQB drills with my shorty AR and can. Contact shots were being made and targets were getting destroyed. I finished out the day running a few drills with my competition rifle and made a contact shot. I was kind of surprised the target did not move. Just a small black ring and a 22 caliber hole. That got me to thinking. I was like damn.....this thing must redirect all available gas to where it needs to go. So it became a basis of comparing comps. I also used several transition drills that required multiple hits on target at various distances and also some bench shooting as a determination but really like the cardboard contact test. BTW.....the cooley comp looks cool but is one of the poorest performers I have tested. The Miculek brake actually works better.

Here is a quick write up of my latest test with the Benny Hill Rolling Thunder comp that has been said to be the best comp out there.
Muzzle break thread with comparison write up

I should be keeping the Titan a secret,because I consider it quite an advantage but instead I preach to the world. You know Erik.....if you want to pay me.....I can be one them company whores.

Link Posted: 6/5/2008 11:05:40 AM EST
It shows the efficiency of redirected gasses in a comp. If the target does not move and only a small .223 hole are present......it is efficient. the amount the target moves shows there is still gas that can be redirected.
Damn Book......I thought you was smarter than that
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 11:14:31 AM EST
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 11:21:24 AM EST
When Erik kicks in a door......you get the 14" Nelly in your chest.
But no......comps are for 3 gun and gaming. Tactical situations get flash hiders and cans.

Book.......quit being such a hater
Link Posted: 6/5/2008 11:44:04 AM EST
I'm trying to understand this completely too...

Do you all mean that the more gas the comp can redirect, the more efficient it is controlling recoil and muzzle rise?

Is there any negative effect on velocity, the more effective a comp is a redirecting the gas? or has a bullet already used the energy from that gas to gain it's velocity by the time it reaches the muzzle?
Link Posted: 6/6/2008 1:52:25 AM EST
How about:

- Weigh the weapons individually with the compensators installed.

- Make some sort of an easy carriage to hold the weapons. It has to be able to hold the rifle firmly and repeatably.

- Add weight to the carriage with each individual weapon so that the weights of the carriage+weapon are all the same.

- This is the hard part: The carriage+weapon could be suspended on a wire (making a pendulum,) the weapon fired (somehow,) and the distance the carriage+weapon moves back (due to recoil) measured. Or, the carriage+weapon could be placed on a table that's abutted at its rear by a max-force recording (weight) scale. As long as the test set-ups are the same, and the process is repeatable, the result can be trusted. The answer will be nothing more than 'compensator A is better than compensator B,' but, the result would be trustworthy.

I used to be a bonified 'rocket scientist.' I designed a test stand for a rocket (3.6 million pounds thrust) and the test procedure and design just needs to be catered to testing impulse (recoil...heavy forces but short-lived, like hammer blows) instead of thrust. If all you want is 'which one is better,' the answer can be obtained with very high confidence with clever redneck-engineering.
Link Posted: 6/6/2008 2:55:36 AM EST
Its been done and while scientific and all its still negates how the comp feels. It gives you an idea but still negates operator feel which means alot. Patrick Kelley did an article for USPSA's Front sight magazine and used such a test. Of which the Benny Hill Rolling Thnder and SJC Titan comp were tied. I beg to differ greatly when it comes to feel and perceived sight track on target at speed. The Titan is a much more stable design with an operator behind it.
Link Posted: 6/6/2008 3:23:23 AM EST

Originally Posted By 00bullitt:
...snip... I beg to differ greatly when it comes to feel and perceived sight track on target at speed. The Titan is a much more stable design with an operator behind it.

This better 'feel' I'm guessing comes more from where the compensator's forces are being applied and by what amount than from simple recoil reduction. If this 'feel' could be defined then a test stand like a 3-axis thrust measuring stand is especially well suited for gathering data for optimizing a compensator for feel. That would be an incredibly fun project.

Link Posted: 6/6/2008 4:01:52 AM EST
Top Top