Best AR Muzzle Brake?
- Thread starter chagasrod
- Start date
- Status
451 Detonics
Member
I am still fond of the old school AK type muzzle brake. It provides decent lift and recoil reduction, doesn't blow dust in prone usage, and I like the looks....
otomik
Member
The A2X is a slightly extended version of the standard A2 flash hider. The A2X flash hider is best for me because it doesn't cost much, it doesn't look messed up and when permanently attached brings the overall length of a 14.5 barrel to a 16in which saves a lot of paperwork. It's irrelevant for the most part but in case it is relevant it seems like a trusted design.
Last edited:
Hunterdad
Member
I don't run a break at all. Other than being really loud, I have zero complaints.
1stmarine
Member
I am not sure how one arrived to this conclusion. What sort of testing method and comparative analysis has been done.
From all the testing I have done in dozens of brakes this is one of the worse. It showed negative impact on the accuracy. The tolerances for the bullet passage are not correct and it is too heavy. On the break side performs ok but still average. In places where the break must be pinned it leaves you with no maintenance option if you have to replace the gas block.
Just watch out for the new fashions, they come and go.
1stmarine
Member
This one is a piston driven M4 with custom designed brake and my 10/22 kicks more than this. It doesn't show any negative impact in the accuracy and follow up shots are as easy as a 22LR even with M193, M855 and hotter loads....
The-Reaver
Member
My personal fav. Levang linear Comp.
If all you're concerned with is preventing recoil, there are plenty, as described. If anything, it makes my point - what's it going to be used for, which remains unanswered.
Considering the 5.56 has minimal recoil anyway, those needing to reduce it further are looking for tenths of a second in competitive shooting. Which works best in that sport can be deduced by being there. Internet recommendations are all over the map, by who owns what. Posters frequently have no clue what you need, they can't always be trusted to get the specifics of what you're doing - which hasn't been spelled out.
We've got what, over 15 recommendations? It's no better now than before. Back to square one with a more specific question - What Range, What Target?
Considering the 5.56 has minimal recoil anyway, those needing to reduce it further are looking for tenths of a second in competitive shooting. Which works best in that sport can be deduced by being there. Internet recommendations are all over the map, by who owns what. Posters frequently have no clue what you need, they can't always be trusted to get the specifics of what you're doing - which hasn't been spelled out.
We've got what, over 15 recommendations? It's no better now than before. Back to square one with a more specific question - What Range, What Target?
1stmarine
Member
The purpose of a system has no bearing over the performance of a muzzle brake.
A muzzle brake either performs as expected, better or worse, or it doesn't.
Also regardless of the performance as a break, the main objective is to make sure that it doesn't interfere with the innate accuracy of the system.
I found many brakes, even expensive ones, that do show a good reduction of recoil and climb but they also interfere with accuracy in several ways. At this point that break option must be discarded.
A muzzle brake either performs as expected, better or worse, or it doesn't.
Also regardless of the performance as a break, the main objective is to make sure that it doesn't interfere with the innate accuracy of the system.
I found many brakes, even expensive ones, that do show a good reduction of recoil and climb but they also interfere with accuracy in several ways. At this point that break option must be discarded.
I disagree. The purpose of the system has a large influence. If it's a 12" SBR that's intended as a suppressed device, compatibility with the one used is paramount. It also limits which can be used.
A hunting carbine that will be shot without ear protection means most reasonable users would prefer reducing the db impact on their ears. A side discharging brake (can we please use the correct spelling?) is tested and documented to increase the perceived impact on hearing, exactly the opposite of what might be desired. Linear compensators tend to direct the noise forward, reducing the perceived level of noise. The difference is enough to relate it as ringing your ears with one shot, vs. firing two or three before noticing any effect.
If it's a three gun competition rifle, rules enter into it, specifically allowing only certain types. You can't just screw on anything you like in some circles. In those cases, keeping the muzzle down and limiting delay on reacquiring the target means you can accept more recoil as long as the sights don't move. It's a tradeoff - and some will manage a lot of both.
Further, if it's LEO/MIL used for CQB or infra urban use, teams are specifically ruling out the use of side discharge brakes because their teammate may literally be stacked at the muzzle. Ear pro or not, getting hit with the blast when it should be avoided will interfere with tactics in a room to room search. Pros DON'T use side discharge brakes/comps in that application.
What you use the gun for has a direct bearing on EVERY part you put on it. Some don't affect the final application as much as others, but it nonetheless either supports the overall use, or it detracts from it.
Case in point, the multipronged "CQB" pain compliance models that have many sharp edges. They may function ok in street combat on a face to face basis, but for the range? You'll need an armored gun case to accept the thing, or take it off every time. And too bad it falls over and snags your shin, or somebody bumps into you on the way packing it in the car. You better have protection over it, or be ready to explain to an E-room doctor why your 9 year old needs 15 stitches.
What is the firearm going to do? It has every bearing on what brake/comp/flashhider you select, just like what stock, trigger, scope, forearm, or even caliber.
A hunting carbine that will be shot without ear protection means most reasonable users would prefer reducing the db impact on their ears. A side discharging brake (can we please use the correct spelling?) is tested and documented to increase the perceived impact on hearing, exactly the opposite of what might be desired. Linear compensators tend to direct the noise forward, reducing the perceived level of noise. The difference is enough to relate it as ringing your ears with one shot, vs. firing two or three before noticing any effect.
If it's a three gun competition rifle, rules enter into it, specifically allowing only certain types. You can't just screw on anything you like in some circles. In those cases, keeping the muzzle down and limiting delay on reacquiring the target means you can accept more recoil as long as the sights don't move. It's a tradeoff - and some will manage a lot of both.
Further, if it's LEO/MIL used for CQB or infra urban use, teams are specifically ruling out the use of side discharge brakes because their teammate may literally be stacked at the muzzle. Ear pro or not, getting hit with the blast when it should be avoided will interfere with tactics in a room to room search. Pros DON'T use side discharge brakes/comps in that application.
What you use the gun for has a direct bearing on EVERY part you put on it. Some don't affect the final application as much as others, but it nonetheless either supports the overall use, or it detracts from it.
Case in point, the multipronged "CQB" pain compliance models that have many sharp edges. They may function ok in street combat on a face to face basis, but for the range? You'll need an armored gun case to accept the thing, or take it off every time. And too bad it falls over and snags your shin, or somebody bumps into you on the way packing it in the car. You better have protection over it, or be ready to explain to an E-room doctor why your 9 year old needs 15 stitches.
What is the firearm going to do? It has every bearing on what brake/comp/flashhider you select, just like what stock, trigger, scope, forearm, or even caliber.
1stmarine
Member
The OP specifically asked for muzzle brake but I am not going to suggest what the purpose is, he/she only can explain that.
All that I am saying is to be careful with the muzzle brake as it can screw up the innate accuracy of the carbine and/or rifle.
I have tested dozens of them, big and small, long and short, ported one way and the other and found that while not specific porting design is better than the other there are several factors that one need to consider.
Cheers.
E.
All that I am saying is to be careful with the muzzle brake as it can screw up the innate accuracy of the carbine and/or rifle.
I have tested dozens of them, big and small, long and short, ported one way and the other and found that while not specific porting design is better than the other there are several factors that one need to consider.
Cheers.
E.
i applaud your willingness to actually test things, but i also completely disagree with your conclusions.
in addition to tirod's comments... i have no idea what innate accuracy you're talking about. we're not talking about benchrest here. we're talking about AR15s that you'd want a muzzle brake on. That implies dynamic shooting, where rapid follow up shots are more important than sub-MOA accuracy.
Realistically, i can't think of any purpose for an AR like that where holding the A-zone offhand at 50 yrds wouldn't be acceptable accuracy. (don't quote me, but i think that's around 2x3" so 4 MOA?)
so unless you're going to make the case that one of those brakes you tested pushed a 1 MOA AR15 into the 4+MOA range, I remain at a loss to understand your fixation on "innate accuracy"
in addition to tirod's comments... i have no idea what innate accuracy you're talking about. we're not talking about benchrest here. we're talking about AR15s that you'd want a muzzle brake on. That implies dynamic shooting, where rapid follow up shots are more important than sub-MOA accuracy.
Realistically, i can't think of any purpose for an AR like that where holding the A-zone offhand at 50 yrds wouldn't be acceptable accuracy. (don't quote me, but i think that's around 2x3" so 4 MOA?)
so unless you're going to make the case that one of those brakes you tested pushed a 1 MOA AR15 into the 4+MOA range, I remain at a loss to understand your fixation on "innate accuracy"
I have not seen this, but then that is just me. The shooting I do is mostly "tactical" in that I shoot off, over, and under barriers and from some really goofy stances. I have only gone out to 400m or so but I have been pleased with the results.
1stmarine
Member
Dynamic shooting or not, in some cases we are not talking about minute differences.
The accuracy potential might not mean much to you but it means a lot for a lot of people and that's why we like ARs, specially if a long shot is needed.
There is no fixation of any kind. I try things the best I can, if they work well, I use them, and if they don't, I discard them.
Then I provide some feedback about my experiences like everyone else.
The accuracy potential might not mean much to you but it means a lot for a lot of people and that's why we like ARs, specially if a long shot is needed.
There is no fixation of any kind. I try things the best I can, if they work well, I use them, and if they don't, I discard them.
Then I provide some feedback about my experiences like everyone else.
Last edited:
I've not seen it either, and I've tested quite a few muzzle brakes. To get one that screwed up the accuracy to a degree where it mattered - would indicate a faulty brake, IMHO. 3 gunners use all sorts of brakes to good effect...if the accuracy got screwed so much, they wouldn't use them, or they would only use one or two particular models. Now, individual brakes can and do change the point of impact - but once rezeroed, its not an issue.
- Status
