AR Sponsor
Posted: 10/29/2013 4:37:08 PM EDT
|
I have a small machine shop, and had a customer who had me making some muzzle brakes. Things went bust with him, but I still think there is a market there.
What are people looking for? The brake I was making before is very similar to the PWS FSC style, as I was given a brake (one without any logo), told it was his design, and asked to make it. So I did. Then I modified it per a different persons input. And asked some people about it. After I got the input, I went and drew up something on the computer today, a combination that would probably work very well to reduce muzzle rise and recoil (I make brakes for 7.62 and .308 also). And, after hearing that people want a bayonet to still fit, the computer imaged device will still allow a M7 bayonet to fit, where as the original does not. Is there any interest in something like this? Don't mind the fancy computer colors, it does that for contrast. http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x216/mlamarca/null_zpsc3560c61.jpg And these are what I started with. The one on the left is what I was asked to make originally, then we modified it with the tapered point, because I was told it looked "meaner", and meaner was better. http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x216/mlamarca/null_zps863cf94d.jpg So, do any of the three appeal to anyone? |
| What about a muzzle device that cork-screws the gases counter-clockwise? (I think this is correct due to a bullet rotates clockwise???) On another note, I am more for designs that are functional in design; which is what I also find looks good in regards of "looks". |
|
Quoted:
I have a small machine shop, and had a customer who had me making some muzzle brakes. Things went bust with him, but I still think there is a market there. What are people looking for? The brake I was making before is very similar to the PWS FSC style, as I was given a brake (one without any logo), told it was his design, and asked to make it. So I did. Then I modified it per a different persons input. And asked some people about it. After I got the input, I went and drew up something on the computer today, a combination that would probably work very well to reduce muzzle rise and recoil (I make brakes for 7.62 and .308 also). And, after hearing that people want a bayonet to still fit, the computer imaged device will still allow a M7 bayonet to fit, where as the original does not. Is there any interest in something like this? Don't mind the fancy computer colors, it does that for contrast. http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x216/mlamarca/null_zpsc3560c61.jpg And these are what I started with. The one on the left is what I was asked to make originally, then we modified it with the tapered point, because I was told it looked "meaner", and meaner was better. http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x216/mlamarca/null_zps863cf94d.jpg So, do any of the three appeal to anyone? Does the one on top (blue/white) have ports/slots on the bottom of the brake? What would be the weight and cost? |
|
Quoted:
Does the one on top (blue/white) have ports/slots on the bottom of the brake? What would be the weight and cost? No. The slots do not go all the way around. Prone/dust and muzzle rise could then be an issue. I am thinking this one will weigh in at about 4 ounces, and if it goes production, I would like to try to get street price to $60 or under. I won't know for sure until I get one made and tested. |
|
Quoted:
What about a muzzle device that cork-screws the gases counter-clockwise? (I think this is correct due to a bullet rotates clockwise???) On another note, I am more for designs that are functional in design; which is what I also find looks good in regards of "looks". Doing a counter rotating corkscrew would be a bit beyond my pay grade at this point. I will have to wait on that one. The two designs that are actual parts in the pictures do perform great in .308 and 7.62x39. In the 5.56 and 5.45, they do work, but since the recoil is so light to begin with, it is hard to really feel the difference. |
|
I made a prototype of the version I mocked up on the computer.
Any comments or opinions? http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x216/mlamarca/null_zps53da7de2.jpg http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x216/mlamarca/null_zps339fbfe4.jpg http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x216/mlamarca/null_zpsb8d214bc.jpg |
|
Quoted:
Those bottom ones sure look like PWS brakes. Quoted:
Those bottom ones sure look like PWS brakes. Quoted:
Well the following pictures looks like a blatant ripoff of PWS FSC comps... As I stated in the OP, I was given a non-logod "prototype" brake (by an 07FFL holder, and it was rough looking), told it was his design, and asked to make it. So I did. And once I found out it looked very similar to someone elses design, (and he stopped paying) I moved on to my own to try to distance myself from that. I don't want to be a "Wal-Mart", and just copy and go cheaper. So I now have a couple designs out there that I believe will work well. One is hitting the market later today, not for the AR platform though. Another is being test fired this weekend. It worked very well in the shop, with the air-blast fixture. Now for real world. |
AR Sponsor