222 muzzle brake noise level

[harrygrey382]

Has anyone fired a BSA 222 with the factory muzzle brake (featherweight built in the 50s - is this called a Hunter or Royal)? Or even any 222/223 like rifle with a brake?

I’m looking at buying quite a nice original one and have always wanted an early CRF BSA. Wanting a 222 as my small rifle/teach the kids on and didn’t want something Loud (hence 222) but I’m thinking the brake may negate this. Problem is they’re incredibly rare here and it isn’t a bad price. Just how loud are they? I’m assuming there isn’t a legitimate way to block them? I guess I could lop it but that would be a shame and I’m not a fan of short barrels anyway. Rebarreling wouldn’t be even a medium term option.

What was BSA thinking putting a brake on a 222 anyway?

 

[DocRock]

I've never seen the rifle in question or any 222 rifle with a brake. I'm a 222 Rem fan, so my response is enabling. I have fired 223 rifles with brakes on them. I never understood the concept, since recoil is already negligible. But, if the rifle in question is a 20-22" barrel, it will be fine. 222 already has a little less bark than 223 and normal length barrel will help mitigate any blast.

 

[harrygrey382]

Thanks Doc, yeah it’s a 22” barrel - the original featherweight (I think predating the Winchester model). They all got brakes (well ported barrels) now matter what caliber, the standards got a 24” and no brake. Maybe it was to do with watching the strike? Either way, this one has one...

So how did you find the noise of a 223 with a brake?

 

[Jim Watson]

Nearly all ARs have muzzle brakes. They are not a lot louder to the shooter, the blast is mostly to the sides and up.
The BESA muzzle brakes are not common, only saw one hereabouts and it was a .30-06. A friend had a standard weight .222 without and it was an accurate little rifle.

 

[jmorris]

I have brakes on some of my rifles I always use custom plugs with them and often put muffs on over them as they are loud and I have a 30dB hearing loss.

If I want less recoil and noise I put a suppressor on the end instead. I don’t know exactly what you are talking about but if it’s more like a flash hider than an actual brake, it might not be too bad.

A quick google turned up something that looks like the old BOSS system in design. I have one of those and it will make it louder but there are other designs that are more effective at reducing recoil and making noise.

 

[ATLDave]

I have fired 223 rifles with brakes on them. I never understood the concept, since recoil is already negligible.

This is a common point of confusion, both in the service-caliber rifle context and regarding certain compensator-equipped handguns. The understandable confusion arises from not understanding what the muzzle brake or compensator is intended to address.

There are two kinetic elements (really vectors) of recoil.

• The first is the rearward movement of the gun. With shotguns and larger caliber rifles and big-bore revolvers, this component is significant, and can contribute to negative experiences for the shooter (pain or discomfort).
  • Muzzle breaks on, say, .50 caliber rifles are generally intended to reduce this element of recoil so as to spare the shooter's shoulder from bruising.
• The second is muzzle rise. Absent a compensator, this occurs with any firearms whose barrel is not directly in line with the center of physical support for the gun - in short, virtually all of them. Even .22lr's or 9mm service ammo, where the rearward component of recoil is, indeed, so small as to be inconsequential to almost all shooters.
  • Compensators/brakes on 5.56 AR's or USPSA open-division pistols or pistol caliber carbines are generally intended to reduce this element of recoil, not the rearward/pain-inducing element. The goal is not to make the gun more pleasant to shoot - it's to make the gun stay "flatter" or return to target with less manual input.

Why would someone want to use a brake/compensator to "flatten" the gun? There are two primary reasons:

• They are trying to reduce the time in between shots. This is generally why people put comps/brakes on non-magnum pistols (and some magnum pistols) and on semi-auto rifles/carbines. If you're playing a shooting sport where knocking a couple of hundredths off you split times is material, then a comp/brake can get the sights/dot back in the center of the target faster.
• They are shooting at distance with magnified optics and are trying to see their hits/splash/trace. If you are shooting a rifle at a distant target, and don't have a great spotter helping you, having the rifle recoil such that the target and surrounding area is not visible during recoil makes for a frustrating experience. If you can't see the bullet impact because the recoil has pushed the field of vision away from the impact, you'll be scratching your head in terms of adjusting your dope or wind call to get on-target.

This latter point seems about the only plausibly rational reason for having a brake on a .222.

As for how much louder it will be, it depends significantly on the brake in question.

 

[harrygrey382]

Good points - I’m sure you’re right about the seeing of strikes. So this is what the end of the barrel looks like

 

[someguy2800]

I've had a couple 223's with aggressive muzzle brakes. If you shoot indoors the concussion is unpleasant. Outdoors its not bad for the shooter if you have good ear muffs on, but its pretty bad for anyone next to you. I hunt coyotes with my 223 so I wanted to see what it would be like with no ear protection so I took a shot once with the muffs off and was rewarded with ringing ears for 2 days. I took it off after that.

I should have known better, my father in law has 70 or 80% hearing loss in one ear from shooting a 270 with a brake and no hearing protection. He only ever shot it while deer hunting so only ever took like 10 shots with it. The last season he had it he shot 4 deer with it in one day and never heard well out of that ear again. He sent it packing after that and after witnessing that I won't own one on a hunting rifle.

 

[someguy2800]

It is fun to shoot a 223 at the bench with the brake though, you can see the bullets strike even at 200 yards through the scope. Hearing protection is extremely important though.

 

[jmorris]

it's to make the gun stay "flatter" or return to target with less manual input.

It’s been a number of years but there was an article in the FrontSight magazine where they tested different brakes and their method was using a rifle with a laser on target and capturing the movement of the laser from POA when fired. It was pretty interesting “seeing” the difference between the different designs.

It hard to argue against how effective they are even with calibers that are not very powerful.