308 & 338 Edge, brake & suppressor comparison test

I have heard it said & written heaps of times that suppressors reduce recoil heaps.....
From personal experience I though this was a little suss so I decided to have a play to see the difference.
This isn't a hi-tech super accurate to the last decimal place tekkie type test, but all the same they are pretty conclusive :)

The first video is just the 308 Montana with & without the suppressor, I left the brake at home....:oh noes:
Using Belmont remanufactured rounds not sure but they might be 130-150 grain projectiles.

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum007.jpg

I went back in the afternoon so took the brake with me this time.

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum021.jpg

Had to disturb another one of the locals earlier whilst testing the new Reloder 33 in the Edge :)

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum002.jpg

Here is a video of my Shorty 338 Edge, the 23.5" barrel still will push the 300s just over 2700 :cool:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum010.jpg

Interesting stuff :)

I think that Suppressors do reduce the physical recoil a little, they reduce the perceived recoil dramatically through noise reduction.

Some suppressors may be better than others at this.

Nice work Greg, I have always wondered why people add all that extra weight in the form of a suppressor! Then you need one for each rifle, just buy a pair of ANR ear defenders - one pair for every rifle.

I would like to try my Roedale break on your rig sometime. (M18 x 1.5)

Cheers

Craig

SO if you admit suppressors reduce recoil through noise reduction, then that suggests that using a break may actually increase perceived recoil?

watching the videos on my phone so small screen. it looked as though the rifle traveled similar distance with and without suppressor but it did looks though it moved slower with the suppressor. I suppose with the suppressor not being able to redirect gases against atmosphere it's not going to reduce recoil.the same as the brake. I wonder if the added weight reducing muzzle lift adds tks to the feeling of less recoil.

What you say sounds pretty logical HoriHunter

Greg, can you post the numbers pls, trying to save a bit of bandwidth at the moment (boss was working from home over Xmas), so no video....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildman

SO if you admit suppressors reduce recoil through noise reduction, then that suggests that using a break may actually increase perceived recoil?

---

If you fired the rifle with a very poor performimg brake without hearing protection, that may be the case, rather you than me though.....

The brake reduces so much more recoil than the suppressor that the physical recoil reduction would greatly out weigh the increase in perceived recoil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by horihunter

watching the videos on my phone so small screen. it looked as though the rifle traveled similar distance with and without suppressor but it did looks though it moved slower with the suppressor. I suppose with the suppressor not being able to redirect gases against atmosphere it's not going to reduce recoil.the same as the brake. I wonder if the added weight reducing muzzle lift adds tks to the feeling of less recoil.

---

The brake does appear to soften the recoil pulse quite abit, deffinately more sharp without :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kokako

Nice work Greg, I have always wondered why people add all that extra weight in the form of a suppressor! Then you need one for each rifle, just buy a pair of ANR ear defenders - one pair for every rifle.

I would like to try my Roedale break on your rig sometime. (M18 x 1.5)

Cheers

Craig

---

That one isn't my "proper" brake test rig, it is more of a visual one.

The "proper" one isn't very visual as it is a lot heavier & doesn't move much in comparision, very boring to watch ;)

That thread is a pain, would have to make an adapter, would be worth doing though, but then you might want a black T3 ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

If you fired the rifle with a very poor performimg brake without hearing protection, that may be the case, rather you than me though.....

The brake reduces so much more recoil than the suppressor that the physical recoil reduction would greatly out weigh the increase in perceived recoil.

---

Okay, but you still have a greater risk of losing your hearing unless you carry other ear protection with a break?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildman

Okay, but you still have a greater risk of losing your hearing unless you carry other ear protection with a break?

---

There is no two ways about it you need/have to have hearing protection with muzzle brakes, that & ground disturbance are their disadvantages.

Weight, size & massive recoil reduction, (with a great efficient brake) are their advantages.

I have tried using plugs years ago but they didn't work well enouigh for me unless I was out in the open with nothing around to bounce the noise back to me.

I use electronic earmuffs & recommend them to my clients.

They suck in the summer, not bad in the winter though :)

I'm not bagging suppressors here I'm just saying I don't think they reduce pyshical recoil any where near as much as people say they do.

All my little rifles have suppressors, 30-06imp down to .22 LR.

I think they have their limitations once you start to get into the magnum size cases.

Should do a test of all the major players in the suppresor world . What sort of can was that in the test?. I use a supressor on everything now call me a pussy but its just plain unpleasant fireing unmoderated rifles for me anyway.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CreepingDeath

Should do a test of all the major players in the suppresor world . What sort of can was that in the test?. I use a supressor on everything now call me a pussy but its just plain unpleasant fireing unmoderated rifles for me anyway.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

---

Both Gunworks, std on the 338 & Duralium on the 308.

A comparitive test would need to be done on a more techo rig than that one, as the diffrences would probably be fairly subtle between makes... maybe

Looks like gunworks to me.
That test is a very effective way for all to see the advantages of each.

Was absolutely gutted this morning, Horihunter and I went to the CHC handloaders this morn to do heaps of techie shit, like tall target test, box test etc. For me the highlight was the first test of Gregs T3 Terminator on my .338. . . F*^#k me, the range was burnt out ! (see my posts in 'Shooting' and 'Off Topic' )

Now grovelling to friends who might have a key for Deerstalkers !

:pissed off::omg::TT TT::dark mood::XD::oh noes:

Great thread Kiwi....

Not wanting to throw a spanner in said works, but.... I have a Gunworks suppressor - works wonders on the 308... though we also must consider the fact that Gunworks suppressors also accomodate an internal muzzle brake... Do all other suppressors do this as well, if we're looking at the recoil vs sound.. just throwing it out there.. again, I think its great to have someone walk the walk in this subject... :)

for some reason i cant see the 308 video, but i did see the edge one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bully

for some reason i cant see the 308 video, but i did see the edge one.

---

Yep not sure what the story is there, here they are again hopefully it works again :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

I have heard it said & written heaps of times that suppressors reduce recoil heaps.....

From personal experience I though this was a little suss so I decided to have a play to see the difference.
This isn't a hi-tech super accurate to the last decimal place tekkie type test, but all the same they are pretty conclusive :)

The first video is just the 308 Montana with & without the suppressor, I left the brake at home....:oh noes:
Using Belmont remanufactured rounds not sure but they might be 130-150 grain projectiles.

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum007.jpg

I went back in the afternoon so took the brake with me this time.

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum021.jpg

Had to disturb another one of the locals earlier whilst testing the new Reloder 33 in the Edge :)

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum002.jpg

Here is a video of my Shorty 338 Edge, the 23.5" barrel still will push the 300s just over 2700 :cool:

http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/...s65saum010.jpg

Interesting stuff :)

I think that Suppressors do reduce the physical recoil a little, they reduce the perceived recoil dramatically through noise reduction.

Some suppressors may be better than others at this.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nasty Factory Trigger

Great thread Kiwi....

Not wanting to throw a spanner in said works, but.... I have a Gunworks suppressor - works wonders on the 308... though we also must consider the fact that Gunworks suppressors also accomodate an internal muzzle brake... Do all other suppressors do this as well, if we're looking at the recoil vs sound.. just throwing it out there.. again, I think its great to have someone walk the walk in this subject... :)

---

Internal brake is a moot point, 3rd form physics will tell you recoil is a result of mass x velocity.
Mass is projectile mass and gas mass from powder burn.
A suppressor can slow VELOCITY of the gases by EXPANSION so LOWERING EXIT PRESSURE and reducing recoil to an extent,BUT all that gas still has to exit inline with the bullet! Energy can neither be created or destroyed only directed .

If it was possible (its not)to direct all gas out at 90 deg to the muzzel the only recoil would be as a result of the bullet(mass) being driven at X velocity

If you can direct that high pressure gas rearward it is going to start to counteract the mass of the projectile heading forward to an extent.
Simple really;)

Finding the optimum angle/portsize/no of ports in a brake (to suit the chambering) is not so simple;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

Internal brake is a moot point, 3rd form physics will tell you recoil is a result of mass x velocity.
Mass is projectile mass and gas mass from powder burn.
A suppressor can slow VELOCITY of the gases by EXPANSION so LOWERING EXIT PRESSURE and reducing recoil to an extent,BUT all that gas still has to exit inline with the bullet! Energy can neither be created or destroyed only directed .

If it was possible (its not)to direct all gas out at 90 deg to the muzzel the only recoil would be as a result of the bullet(mass) being driven at X velocity

If you can direct that high pressure gas rearward it is going to start to counteract the mass of the projectile heading forward to an extent.
Simple really;)

Finding the optimum angle/portsize/no of ports in a brake (to suit the chambering) is not so simple;)

---

Not just goodlooking;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

There is no two ways about it you need/have to have hearing protection with muzzle brakes, that & ground disturbance are their disadvantages.

Weight, size & massive recoil reduction, (with a great efficient brake) are their advantages.

I have tried using plugs years ago but they didn't work well enouigh for me unless I was out in the open with nothing around to bounce the noise back to me.

I use electronic earmuffs & recommend them to my clients.

They suck in the summer, not bad in the winter though :)

I'm not bagging suppressors here I'm just saying I don't think they reduce pyshical recoil any where near as much as people say they do.

All my little rifles have suppressors, 30-06imp down to .22 LR.

I think they have their limitations once you start to get into the magnum size cases.

---

Now how are we suppossed to take the piss out of a common scense logical post like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sneeze

Now how are we suppossed to take the piss out of a common scense logical post like that?

---

Sorry to disappoint :)

Had my second session with the 338 and T3 brake yesdy.

Even more impressed now, it really is a pussy to shoot. As I thought, with a bit more use, I'm retaining the sight picture right through the shot now, point of impact on steel or misses in the shit behind or to the sides( this is at 1000yds ). Fargin awesome, put the fun factor with the big gun to the top of the class :thumbsup::cool:


Also made the classic earmuff cock up, fired the first round after lunch with no muffs on, Shiiit that hurt:XD: my left ear ached for about 2 hours after. Not recommended :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redbang

Had my second session with the 338 and T3 brake yesdy.

Even more impressed now, it really is a pussy to shoot. As I thought, with a bit more use, I'm retaining the sight picture right through the shot now, point of impact on steel or misses in the shit behind or to the sides( this is at 1000yds ). Fargin awesome, put the fun factor with the big gun to the top of the class :thumbsup::cool:


Also made the classic earmuff cock up, fired the first round after lunch with no muffs on, Shiiit that hurt:XD: my left ear ached for about 2 hours after. Not recommended :(

---

Thanks Red.

I always use plugs & muffs when buggering about at the range or smoking steel/rocks.

Makes it difficult to talk to people but better than ringing ears :)