Posted: 4/22/2003 3:07:28 PM EDT
|
what is the difference between a muzzle break and a flash hider that does the flash hiding job? [optimist]after the ban sunsets[/optimist], i'd like to try drilling holes into or cutting up the grenade launchers on my yugo sks rifles to convert them to flash hiders. possible? |
|
A flash suppressor will expell gasses and unburnt powder in such a way to make it invisible to all but someone directly in front of it. A muzzle break uses those same gasses directed to push forward on weapon, and minimize recoil. Edited because: Zaphod said so! (hider vs. suppressor) |
|
Suppressor. Flash SUPPRESSOR! [stick] The way it works is that as the bullet moes down the barrel, it pushes the air in front out it outward. As the gas exits the tip of the barrel, the vaccuum caused by the movement pulls in cooler air through the slots in the suppressor. The process continues as the bullet exits the barrel. The cooler air mixes with the gasses coming out of the barrel and cools them enough so that any unburned bowder remaining in the gasses does not ignite on contact with the outside air. As such, no flash. I've read that the Vortex suppressor is the best at this because in addition to pulling the air in directly, it spins it, thus increasing the amount of mixing going on. Unfortunately, its open-front design tends to snag on foliage. Edited to add: After re-reading my post, I wonder if I deserve a stick for missing the difference between a flash hider and a suppressor. Is there a difference? Is a flash hider just a shield as found on the M1 Carbine and the BAR? If so, STICK ME BABY! [:D] |
|
Well, usually a flash HIDER is usually conically shaped and hides the flash from the shooter so as not to mess up your eyes being used to the night. It does nothing to hide the flash from the one(s) you are shooting at. A good example is the flash hider on an M1 Carbine or the early flash hiders on the Garands before the T37 flash SUPPRESSOR. A flash SUPPRESSOR, such as an A2, the aformentioned T37, the Phantom, or the Vortex, actually draws in the air throught the slots, as mentioned by Zaphod, and actually suppresses the flash (not hiding it), thus reducing it's visibility to both the shooter and the shootee. Zaphod, is that a good enough explanation of the differences in answer to your question. A muzzle brake is not supposed to reduce the flash in any way and is also sized so as not to be able to slip a bayonet over it, even though a postban does not have a bayo lug. They had to do something to stop all those drive-by bayonettings. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: The vortex flash suppressor has 4 tines that vibrates when the weapon is fired, & this brakes up the flash signature 99.9%, or maybe a little more. You better keep searching, 'cause this [BS] isn't the truth. -Troy Is there one part that is [BS] or the entirety of the info? TS |
|
Well, I’ve heard it a little differently than explained by Zaphod, above (though pretty close). When the round is fired, the gunpowder produces a flammable gas that burns in the presence of the oxidizers in the gunpowder. As the round moves down the bore and toward the muzzle, these oxidizers get used up, which stops the burning of the gasses. These superheated gases exit the barrel muzzle right behind the bullet and are suddenly exposed to oxygen in the air. If the gases stay concentrated and superheated, they can re-ignite in the presence of this new oxygen, causing a flash. The purpose of a flash suppressor is to cool and dissipate these gases before they can re-ignite. FWIW - I haven’t a clue if the above is true or not! Also, I’d think the above wouldn’t be entirely accurate in a really short-barreled firearm. Technically, I guess, a flash hider simply hides the flash rather than reducing or eliminating it. |
|
Zaphod and 199 are essentially correct. A flash hider is a simple cone device designed to keep the brightest part of the flash sheilded from the shooter. A flash suppressor actually reduces or eliminates the flash signature. Flash suppressors have longitudinal slots that force a large percentage of the gasses out away from the front of the muzzle, causing the gasses to cool and dissipate before they can ignite. A good design won't leave enough hot gasses in front of the bore to ignite. The "swirl" forks on the Vortex do nothing to reduce the flash, nor do the similar internal machinings on the Phantom. They are there strictly to ensure that the force of the gasses hitting those surfaces serve to *tighten* the FS on the barrel by forcing the rotation in that direction. Earlier Vortex designs had straight forks (some models still do), and suppressed the flash just as well, but would vibrate loose over time. Open-forked designs suppress flash the best, as they dissipate the gasses better, BUT they tend to be weaker and catch on things, which is why the most commonly used designs have connecting rings in the front. The "tuning fork" stuff is [BS]. -Troy |
|
And I was using the terms interchangeably. I knew how the A2 FS/FH functioned but I never knew it had one specific correct terminology out of the named two. The solid inverted cone on early war rifles qualifies as a “flash hider” and the slotted A2 device on the M-16, AR-15 is a “flash-suppressor”? |
|
ever shoot a bunch different of machineguns equipped with flash "suppressors" at night? imo, they merely redirect the burning gases to keep as much night vision destroying light away from the sight plane/shooter's eyes as possible. and didn't recent tests quantify a near zero reduction in lumens for rifle with and without flash suppressors? |
|
Quoted: ever shoot a bunch different of machineguns equipped with flash "suppressors" at night? imo, they merely redirect the burning gases to keep as much night vision destroying light away from the sight plane/shooter's eyes as possible. and didn't recent tests quantify a near zero reduction in lumens for rifle with and without flash suppressors? I think if the flash is supressed, as in nulled, directing gasses in a upward fasion is AOK as far as night vision equipment. With that I'll add that some are mindful enough to try to eliminiate dust or ground signature by not directing muzzle gasses at the ground, a problem in daylight conditions. |
| I've always thought the purpose of the slanted slots on the Vortex is simply to make the slots as long as possible without unnecessarily lengthen the flash supressor itself (more airflow, dissipation, etc), like sloped armor, when the slots are angled they offer more surface area. Just a thought. |
|
Years ago, when I was a kid we took My Mini-14 on a camping trip. We fired it at night and it was like a strobe light. A big bright ball of flame, bigger than a basketball emitted each time the Mini was fired. I ordered a Choate flash suppressor/front sight and on the next camping trip we were amazed. Almost zero flash, mush less than a paper match right before it blows out. [b]BIG DIFFERENCE.[/b] Recently I got to shoot a full auto 7.62NATO M-14 at night. I stood next to it as My friend fired it, that thing had almost no flash, even on rock & roll. |
|
Quoted: The solid inverted cone on early war rifles qualifies as a “flash hider” and the slotted A2 device on the M-16, AR-15 is a “flash-suppressor”? Correct. And, CampyBob, it IS true that flash suppressors lose some effectiveness as they heat up, and we KNOW that those BulletFest guns run red-hot! But there is a HUGE reduction in flash when using a well-designed flash suppressor. I've done the comparison at night in the woods with 16" and 20" rifles, one bare and the other with a Phantom. Huge fireball that illuminated a huge area from the plain muzzle, and barely anything from the Phantom. -Troy |
|
Anyone trying to guage the effectiveness of a flash supressor [:D] should try some Dallas Reloading Service FMJs out of a 16" AR post-ban compared to one with a A2FS. My beater DPMS upper will report a easily visable flame cloud in the Texas sunlight. Unreal, lots of combustable material leaving the muzzle! For some reason is much worse with that gun, even more than with a 16" post ban bushy with no break.....Or other's post-ban, no braked 16" ARs. I can't figure that one out. Must just be in my head. |
|
Quoted: Suppressor. Flash SUPPRESSOR! [stick] The way it works is that as the bullet moes down the barrel, it pushes the air in front out it outward... STICK ME BABY! [:D] I have heard of bullets moeing down innocent bystanders, endangered rhinos, etc, but never barrels. Sounds horrific. |
|
Quoted: When the round is fired, the gunpowder produces a flammable gas that burns in the presence of the oxidizers in the gunpowder. As the round moves down the bore and toward the muzzle, these oxidizers get used up, which stops the burning of the gasses. These superheated gases exit the barrel muzzle right behind the bullet and are suddenly exposed to oxygen in the air. If the gases stay concentrated and superheated, they can re-ignite in the presence of this new oxygen, causing a flash. So, by adding more oxidizer, you could completely burn the gas while it was still inside the barrel, resulting in "flashless" ammunition? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: When the round is fired, the gunpowder produces a flammable gas that burns in the presence of the oxidizers in the gunpowder. As the round moves down the bore and toward the muzzle, these oxidizers get used up, which stops the burning of the gasses. These superheated gases exit the barrel muzzle right behind the bullet and are suddenly exposed to oxygen in the air. If the gases stay concentrated and superheated, they can re-ignite in the presence of this new oxygen, causing a flash. So, by adding more oxidizer, you could completely burn the gas while it was still inside the barrel, resulting in "flashless" ammunition? If you're asking me, I assure you I’m already way over my head!! [image]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=11156[/image] I’d think more oxidizers would keep the gases burning, but maybe they’d still be burning when the bullet exited the muzzle - so you’d still get some flash. I suspect the vary barrel lengths of .223 rifles would also make it impossible to balance things just right. In reality, though, I haven’t a clue! [:D] |
|
Quoted: hell, does the awb even apply to C&R rifles? damn all these laws is gettin me confuzed yo AWB does not apply to C&R guns in ORIGINAL MILITARY config... Since the SKS has no pistol grip or detatchable mag, even if it DID have a FH it would still be legal... Esp the ones without bayo lugs (i.e. with the bayonet being part of the rifle, instead of mounting on a lug... |