THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM BIG BORE FORUMS


Moderators: jeffeosso
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Muzzle Brakes/Scopes Login/Join
 
One of Us
posted
When using a muzzle brake on a big bore is there less force and inertia exerted on the scope same as your shoulder? Seems straightforward but would like input. Thanks
 
Posts: 27 | Registered: 08 March 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Grumulkin
posted Hide Post
Yes.
 
Posts: 2911 | Location: Ohio, U.S.A. | Registered: 31 March 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Yes, anything that softens or reduces the rearward thrust of the rifle in recoil should reduce tension on the scope. Issac Newton told me that...he was a big fan of muzzle brakes :-)
 
Posts: 20177 | Location: Very NW NJ up in the Mountains | Registered: 14 June 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
The two big jolts the scope gets are the first inch or two of bullet travel and then when the bullet exits the barrel.

However, the gas hits the side of the holes or slots in muzzle brake and that causes an almost instant reduction in the rifle velocity and as such impact the scope the opposite way.
 
Posts: 7046 | Location: Sydney Australia | Registered: 14 September 2015Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Cougarz
posted Hide Post
Wow, Newtonion physics and interior ballistics all in one thread! sofa lol


Roger
___________________________
I'm a trophy hunter - until something better comes along.

*we band of 45-70ers*
 
Posts: 2819 | Location: Washington (wetside) | Registered: 08 February 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of chuck375
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Biebs:
Yes, anything that softens or reduces the rearward thrust of the rifle in recoil should reduce tension on the scope. Issac Newton told me that...he was a big fan of muzzle brakes :-)


Though rumors are he was hard of hearing ...


Regards,

Chuck



"There's a saying in prize fighting, everyone's got a plan until they get hit"

Michael Douglas "The Ghost And The Darkness"
 
Posts: 4808 | Location: Colorado Springs | Registered: 01 January 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
The forward recoil when the gas pushes on the brake can be intense. Probably not in lower pressure cases like hunters tend to use but the long range hunting crowd with their huge brakes and huge calibers have broken scopes.
 
Posts: 956 | Location: PNW | Registered: 27 April 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of buffybr
posted Hide Post
I'm somewhere over 600 rounds through my .300 Weatherby and over 200 rounds through my .375 Rum. Both have KDF brakes and each is topped with Leopold scopes that are as good as new.


NRA Endowment Life Member
 
Posts: 1642 | Location: Boz Angeles, MT | Registered: 14 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I ve broken 3 S&B scopes on 375/Gibbs 505 rifles with muzzle brakes. Action and opposite reaction or cause and effect I don't know but I suspect violent recoil and then hard braking.
 
Posts: 485 | Registered: 16 April 2012Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Muzzle Brakes: A definitive NO!

Scopes: Maybe.
 
Posts: 10601 | Location: Houston, Texas | Registered: 26 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by buffybr:
I'm somewhere over 600 rounds through my .300 Weatherby and over 200 rounds through my .375 Rum. Both have KDF brakes and each is topped with Leopold scopes that are as good as new.


The KDF or Wby Accubrake does not have anywhere near the problems that brakes which direct the gas backwards (as opposed to right angle to the barrel) or brake with very wide slots.
 
Posts: 7046 | Location: Sydney Australia | Registered: 14 September 2015Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of MacD37
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michael McGuire:

The KDF or Wby Accubrake does not have anywhere near the problems that brakes which direct the gas backwards (as opposed to right angle to the barrel) or brake with very wide slots.


That is because brakes that do not cause reverse thrust do not do anything but make a rifle ugly!
................................................................. lol


....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1
DRSS Charter member
"If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982

Hands of Old Elmer Keith

 
Posts: 14634 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: 08 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of buffybr
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by MacD37:
quote:
Originally posted by Michael McGuire:

The KDF or Wby Accubrake does not have anywhere near the problems that brakes which direct the gas backwards (as opposed to right angle to the barrel) or brake with very wide slots.


That is because brakes that do not cause reverse thrust do not do anything but make a rifle ugly!
................................................................. lol

We all have our own ideas of what is ugly. Personally, I like the looks of a scoped bolt action rifle. Anything attached to the barrel (including iron sights) that is a greater diameter than the barrel, I think looks ugly.

Having shot my .375 RUM first without the KDF brake, then with the brake, there is a very noticeable reduction in felt recoil with the brake. I have only shot my .300 Weatherby with the KDF brake. I often (weekly) shoot both my .300 Wby and .308 Win at the same shooting session. Shooting both prone with a Harris bipod, the recoil of the .300 Weatherby actually feels less than the recoil of the .308 Win.


NRA Endowment Life Member
 
Posts: 1642 | Location: Boz Angeles, MT | Registered: 14 February 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of MacD37
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michael McGuire:


We all have our own ideas of what is ugly. Personally, I like the looks of a scoped bolt action rifle. Anything attached to the barrel (including iron sights) that is a greater diameter than the barrel, I think looks ugly.

Having shot my .375 RUM first without the KDF brake, then with the brake, there is a very noticeable reduction in felt recoil with the brake. I have only shot my .300 Weatherby with the KDF brake. I often (weekly) shoot both my .300 Wby and .308 Win at the same shooting session. Shooting both prone with a Harris bipod, the recoil of the .300 Weatherby actually feels less than the recoil of the .308 Win.


Michael, all legitimate reasons for your opinion on what is or isn’t ugly. As you say that is a personal thing. In that light , my comment about the brake being ugly was sort of tongue-in-cheek way of saying I see no need for a brake on a hunting rifle at all, especially in the chambering you mention.

Having said that the fitting of iron sights in addition to the scope on a HUNTING rifle depends on the animal the rifle will be used for, and where it will be used!

The chamberings you mention do not develop enough recoil to justify the extra noise IMO that comes along with a muzzle brake. However when shooting prone they could be a little uncomfortable I’m sure. I have a Mod 70 300 wby mag rifle with nothing but a 3-9X40 scope on it and no brake and it is a pussycat to shoot,even with hot handloads! That 300 Wby rifle is about the smallest hunting rifle I use except a little Mannlicher Shoenauer MCA 243 win rifle I use for deer.

I think this depends what you use the rifle for, but I rarely shoot prone with a hunting rifle, but I rarely hunt anything at a range that requires accuracy at more than 300 yds. At that distance a sitting with elbows on my knees is plenty steady for shot placement on things like deer, lopes and sheep.

The places where I hunt and the animals I hunt are in areas where there is rarely within 100 miles of a paved road and farther from a gun smith. These animals require very large bullets from rifles that DO develop very heavy recoil, but also require iron sights even if the rifle is fitted with a scope in good quick detach rings and bases, so the scope can be removed to use the irons.

The fact is up to an including a 600 nitro I see no need for a brake on a rifle for hunting but I do see a real need for good irons for a back-up for a broken scope or a need to get the scope out of the way for a “go into the weeds” with things like a wounded lion or cape buffalo in Africa, or into the willows with a wounded brown bear in Alaska.

..............................................................UGLY is in the eye of the beholder! Usefulness is dictated by need!
.................................................................... patriot


....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1
DRSS Charter member
"If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982

Hands of Old Elmer Keith

 
Posts: 14634 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: 08 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by MacD37:
quote:
Originally posted by Michael McGuire:


We all have our own ideas of what is ugly. Personally, I like the looks of a scoped bolt action rifle. Anything attached to the barrel (including iron sights) that is a greater diameter than the barrel, I think looks ugly.

Having shot my .375 RUM first without the KDF brake, then with the brake, there is a very noticeable reduction in felt recoil with the brake. I have only shot my .300 Weatherby with the KDF brake. I often (weekly) shoot both my .300 Wby and .308 Win at the same shooting session. Shooting both prone with a Harris bipod, the recoil of the .300 Weatherby actually feels less than the recoil of the .308 Win.


Michael, all legitimate reasons for your opinion on what is or isn’t ugly. As you say that is a personal thing. In that light , my comment about the brake being ugly was sort of tongue-in-cheek way of saying I see no need for a brake on a hunting rifle at all, especially in the chambering you mention.

Having said that the fitting of iron sights in addition to the scope on a HUNTING rifle depends on the animal the rifle will be used for, and where it will be used!

The chamberings you mention do not develop enough recoil to justify the extra noise IMO that comes along with a muzzle brake. However when shooting prone they could be a little uncomfortable I’m sure. I have a Mod 70 300 wby mag rifle with nothing but a 3-9X40 scope on it and no brake and it is a pussycat to shoot,even with hot handloads! That 300 Wby rifle is about the smallest hunting rifle I use except a little Mannlicher Shoenauer MCA 243 win rifle I use for deer.

I think this depends what you use the rifle for, but I rarely shoot prone with a hunting rifle, but I rarely hunt anything at a range that requires accuracy at more than 300 yds. At that distance a sitting with elbows on my knees is plenty steady for shot placement on things like deer, lopes and sheep.

The places where I hunt and the animals I hunt are in areas where there is rarely within 100 miles of a paved road and farther from a gun smith. These animals require very large bullets from rifles that DO develop very heavy recoil, but also require iron sights even if the rifle is fitted with a scope in good quick detach rings and bases, so the scope can be removed to use the irons.

The fact is up to an including a 600 nitro I see no need for a brake on a rifle for hunting but I do see a real need for good irons for a back-up for a broken scope or a need to get the scope out of the way for a “go into the weeds” with things like a wounded lion or cape buffalo in Africa, or into the willows with a wounded brown bear in Alaska.

..............................................................UGLY is in the eye of the beholder! Usefulness is dictated by need!
.................................................................... patriot


It was not me you quoted, try again Big Grin
 
Posts: 7046 | Location: Sydney Australia | Registered: 14 September 2015Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
A scope gets its hardest hit long before the bullet gets anywhere near the brake. Hitting a pillowy soft shoulder and coasting to a stop is the easiest thing your scope is ever going to do. If anything, the gas trying to push the rifle forward is a bigger jolt than the soft landing it was going to get.
 
Posts: 1928 | Location: Saskatchewan, Canada | Registered: 30 November 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of buffybr
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michael McGuire:
quote:
Originally posted by MacD37:
quote:
Originally posted by Michael McGuire:


We all have our own ideas of what is ugly. Personally, I like the looks of a scoped bolt action rifle. Anything attached to the barrel (including iron sights) that is a greater diameter than the barrel, I think looks ugly.

Having shot my .375 RUM first without the KDF brake, then with the brake, there is a very noticeable reduction in felt recoil with the brake. I have only shot my .300 Weatherby with the KDF brake. I often (weekly) shoot both my .300 Wby and .308 Win at the same shooting session. Shooting both prone with a Harris bipod, the recoil of the .300 Weatherby actually feels less than the recoil of the .308 Win.


Michael, all legitimate reasons for your opinion on what is or isn’t ugly. As you say that is a personal thing. In that light , my comment about the brake being ugly was sort of tongue-in-cheek way of saying I see no need for a brake on a hunting rifle at all, especially in the chambering you mention.

Having said that the fitting of iron sights in addition to the scope on a HUNTING rifle depends on the animal the rifle will be used for, and where it will be used!

The chamberings you mention do not develop enough recoil to justify the extra noise IMO that comes along with a muzzle brake. However when shooting prone they could be a little uncomfortable I’m sure. I have a Mod 70 300 wby mag rifle with nothing but a 3-9X40 scope on it and no brake and it is a pussycat to shoot,even with hot handloads! That 300 Wby rifle is about the smallest hunting rifle I use except a little Mannlicher Shoenauer MCA 243 win rifle I use for deer.

I think this depends what you use the rifle for, but I rarely shoot prone with a hunting rifle, but I rarely hunt anything at a range that requires accuracy at more than 300 yds. At that distance a sitting with elbows on my knees is plenty steady for shot placement on things like deer, lopes and sheep.

The places where I hunt and the animals I hunt are in areas where there is rarely within 100 miles of a paved road and farther from a gun smith. These animals require very large bullets from rifles that DO develop very heavy recoil, but also require iron sights even if the rifle is fitted with a scope in good quick detach rings and bases, so the scope can be removed to use the irons.

The fact is up to an including a 600 nitro I see no need for a brake on a rifle for hunting but I do see a real need for good irons for a back-up for a broken scope or a need to get the scope out of the way for a “go into the weeds” with things like a wounded lion or cape buffalo in Africa, or into the willows with a wounded brown bear in Alaska.

..............................................................UGLY is in the eye of the beholder! Usefulness is dictated by need!
.................................................................... patriot


It was not me you quoted, try again Big Grin

Mac,
Like Michael posted, it was me you quoted, not him.
You and I are obviously on opposite sides of the muzzle brake fence. Isn't it great that we live in a country that allows us to make that choice ourselves, and that we have a forum like this that allows us to discuss it. Although I am afraid that there are some on your side of the fence that wish to see them banned.

We agree that what is or is not ugly is a personal thing.

As for iron sights, I don't think all iron sights are ugly. Only iron sights on scoped, bolt action rifles. Smiler

All of my pistols have iron sights, and both of my Model 94 Winchesters have iron sights. In fact when I bought my second Model 94, I specifically wanted one with a hooded front sight.

My problem with iron sights, on any firearm, is that I can't see them clearly. Several years ago I had laser eye surgery that corrected my far vision to 20-20, but it made me dependent on reading glasses for everything closer than about 6' from me. Some say that my age might also have something to do with that. Frowner

As a result, If I want to see the iron sights of any rifle or pistol, I have to wear reading glasses, and then everything beyond about 10 ' is out of focus.

IMO, muzzle brakes are the best tool or modification available to reduce felt recoil and muzzle jump. Militaries around the world have known this for many years, only they use the term "flash suppressor" for their version of muzzle brakes. Serious rifle, pistol and shotgun competitors also know the value of muzzle brakes, and many of them will shoot braked or ported firearms, including .22 rimfire firearms.

I also agree that the addition of a muzzle brake or porting will increase the volume and direction of the muzzle noise. However, increasing powder charges increases noise volume with or without a muzzle brake.

I am not new to shooting. For at least 30 years I have shot 5,000 to 10,000 12 gauge shells per year in Trap and/or Skeet competitions and practice. But I don't like to be pounded with recoil.

I have shot competitions where we shot 500 12 gauge targets in a day, and came home tired, but not in pain or bruised from recoil. But the first day that I took my .375 RUM (without a brake) to the range, I quit shooting after only 6 shots because the recoil was just plain not fun. Continued shooting with that much recoil would have been a good way to develop a bad flinch.

A new stock that fits me, with a Limbsaver pad, an in-stock recoil reducer, and the KDF muzzle brake has allowed me to shoot that .375 RUM comfortably to make accurate shots on multiple African hunts for a variety of animals from Steenboks to Buffalo and at ranges up to 350 yards.

Shooting prone is my most accurate shooting position, and I have and will drop to prone any time that I can.

In my 50 years of big game hunting I have never broken a scope of have been in a situation where I needed to quickly remove a scope. But I have not yet hunted lion or Alaskan brown bear, and I have not had to "go into the weeds" after a wounded cape buffalo.

I think that I can count one hand the number of times that I have hunted more than 100 miles from a paved road. Maybe two or three fly-in hunts in Alaska and Canada, and probably my leopard hunt in northern Mozambique, but I doubt there is anywhere in the lower 48 where I could hunt more than 100 miles from a paved road.

I would hardly call a .300 Weatherby a pussycat, and I have absolutely no desire to shoot a 600 nitro or anything larger, but I also have never been in front of a charging buffalo or elephant.


NRA Endowment Life Member
 
Posts: 1642 | Location: Boz Angeles, MT | Registered: 14 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
As to appearance and brakes one rifle I reckon that looks fantastic is those Ryan Breeding rifles.
 
Posts: 7046 | Location: Sydney Australia | Registered: 14 September 2015Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
What Mac said.
 
Posts: 10601 | Location: Houston, Texas | Registered: 26 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
buffybr--

while I don't agree with every point, thank you for a well reasoned and lucid post. Most excellent.

Hope all is well in Bozeman, I went to MSU for a couple of years and still have family in the area.

Hope you have a mild winter-

beer


"The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain
TANSTAAFL

www.savannagems.com A unique way to own a piece of Africa.

DSC Life
NRA Life
 
Posts: 3386 | Location: Central Texas | Registered: 05 September 2013Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of MacD37
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by buffybr:



It was not me you quoted, try again Big Grin
Mac,
Like Michael posted, it was me you quoted, not him.
You and I are obviously on opposite sides of the muzzle brake fence. Isn't it great that we live in a country that allows us to make that choice ourselves, and that we have a forum like this that allows us to discuss it. Although I am afraid that there are some on your side of the fence that wish to see them banned.



Mistake noted!

It is true that we are definitely on opposite sides of the Brake issue, and you are very correct that it is wonderful to have a place like AR where these things can be discussed in a civil manor!

Out of about 100 firearms I own exactly two firearms with muzzle brakes! One is a 98 Mauser bolt rifle chambered for, of all things, a 30-06,that I took in as part of a trade for several rifles. I've never fired that rifle because it was stocked for a giant with a 17 inch pull stock, and I wanted it for the action to build a serious 375H&H chambered Britt style rifle but have never gotten around to doing it!

The other one is a Tompson Center pistol that I had the super 14, 41 Rem mag barrel re-chambered for the 411 JDJ and throated for a 400 gr bullet. The gun smith suggested he put a permanently attached muzzle brake installed to make the barrel 18 inches so the firearm could be legally used as a pistol or a rifle.

In this case the brake was justified for both to modify recoil, and satisfy the legality of the firearm as a short rifle.

Having said all that I find that most who move towards muzzle brakes are for the most part target shooters, or competition shooters of one type or another, where they shoot 50 times the rounds in a month than most hunters shoot in ten years.

I know what you mean about your eyesight being a handicap as I have developed Macular degeneration in my right eye and I am right handed. Now I am in the process of installing low powered illuminated scopes, and ghost ring irons on my big bore double, and bolt rifles. I can still shoot all my handguns because they all are fitted with night sights, and I can still see the light.

I'm in my 79th year of life and have been shooting from the age of six years, so my hearing is gone as well! Getting old is hell, and that limits more than shooting.

I have nothing against others using any type of firearm they choose, I certainly do!

...........................................................Good hunting and shooting! old


....Mac >>>===(x)===> MacD37, ...and DUGABOY1
DRSS Charter member
"If I die today, I've had a life well spent, for I've been to see the Elephant, and smelled the smoke of Africa!"~ME 1982

Hands of Old Elmer Keith

 
Posts: 14634 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: 08 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of jwp475
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Grumulkin:
Yes.


No absolutely not. A muzzle brake exerts both positive and negative G's on the scope. Many scopes are not designed for negative G's.


_____________________________________________________


A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
- Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 5077 | Location: USA | Registered: 11 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of jwp475
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by LR3:
I ve broken 3 S&B scopes on 375/Gibbs 505 rifles with muzzle brakes. Action and opposite reaction or cause and effect I don't know but I suspect violent recoil and then hard braking.


Muzzle brakes exert both positive and negative G's on the scope if the scope is not designed to handle the negative G's then it will not hold up with a brake.


_____________________________________________________


A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
- Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 5077 | Location: USA | Registered: 11 March 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
wow! is this one gone over the top...brakes will not hurt a scope or mounts, end of story and some folks get delusional..more and more folks are going to brakes every year an the tide has been in that direction for a number of years now..I see them more and more in camps, even with guides and outfitters. I still more nay sayers on AR than in the field...and that's fine with me. to each his own.

BUT you can ruin a good scope on a BB or pellet gun for the reasons listed above! no joke!


Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120

rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
 
Posts: 42321 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Brakes hurt my feelings and PH's and trackers ears more than anything else. I hate them. Never met a PH that liked them. Never found one to be necessary. I hesitate to use the word "wuss". But I just did.
 
Posts: 10601 | Location: Houston, Texas | Registered: 26 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of jwp475
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Atkinson:
wow! is this one gone over the top...brakes will not hurt a scope or mounts, end of story and some folks get delusional..more and more folks are going to brakes every year an the tide has been in that direction for a number of years now..I see them more and more in camps, even with guides and outfitters. I still more nay sayers on AR than in the field...and that's fine with me. to each his own.

BUT you can ruin a good scope on a BB or pellet gun for the reasons listed above! no joke! BUT you can ruin a good scope on a BB or pellet gun for the reasons listed above! no joke!




That's because BB guns imparts negative G's on the scope and do does a muzzle brake.


_____________________________________________________


A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
- Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 5077 | Location: USA | Registered: 11 March 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
That is correct, and most scope manufacturers make a scope suited for pellet guns, they make them backwards..

But I used that just as a whatever! in that a a muzzle brake does not ruin good scopes on a rifle...Recoil itself will ruin a good high dollar scope at times but only on the largest of calibers such as the 458 Lott and up, was my point.

Lavaca,
Been in the business a long time and never met a PH or guide that refused to hunt somebody with a muzzle brake, only those that claimed they wouldn't, but when it came down to losing the bucks, they bowed to the client..

If it improves a hunters ability to shoot well, Im all for it, I stick my fingers in my ears..beats the hell out of a long drawn out tracking job..

This is internet stuff only, its 2015 and every hunter in camp this year, some 30 some odd had brakes on stainless steel plastic stocked custom rifles...I'm not fond of SS, plastic stocks and so so on brakes but that's what todays hunter is all about, including the guides.


Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120

rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
 
Posts: 42321 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of jwp475
posted Hide Post
Sorry Ray, but the negative G's imparted by a muzzle brake can indeed damage a scope that us not made to absorb both positive and negative G forces.

Been through this with long range scopes since most Precission shooter use muzzle brakes. Therefore most tactile/longrange scope are made to absorb both positive and negative G's.


_____________________________________________________


A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
- Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 5077 | Location: USA | Registered: 11 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of jwp475
posted Hide Post
Watch the brake control the recoil but the stresses on the scope are amazing.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AZL7MN7ERRQ


_____________________________________________________


A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
- Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 5077 | Location: USA | Registered: 11 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
At age 76, the only rifle I own with a muzzle brake is a .300 H&H Improved, barrel by Bliss Titus, action work by Roy Dunlap, and stock by John Hearn (I think). The brake is integral with the barrel, so taking it off is not an option.

When I shoot big guns off the bench I use a Lead Sled, and I don't need one in the field. I only fired two shots prone in a total of eleven weeks in Africa, and they were with a .375 H&H shooting at an eland at about 250 yards. For that matter, I only took one shot sitting, at a zebra at about the same distance with a .300 H&H. I never noticed the recoil on either occasion. My "big" gun develops about 100 ft/lbs of free recoil, but I have never noticed it shooting at game.

That said, I do own a pistol with a muzzle brake, a Walther OSP in .22 short. The pistol is designed for the now defunct sport of Olympic Rapid Fire Pistol (Schnellfeuer Pistole), which in the final stage requires the shooter to fire one shot at each of five silhouette targets in a time limit of four seconds, starting with the pistol at a 45 degree angle with the ground and not raised until the target is turned facing the shooter. Any recoil at all is to be avoided in a situation like that.
 
Posts: 1748 | Registered: 27 March 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Still don't like them. Still don't/won't own one.
 
Posts: 10601 | Location: Houston, Texas | Registered: 26 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Own a "Lead Sled". Don't like it either. Won't use much and hate weighting it down. te
 
Posts: 10601 | Location: Houston, Texas | Registered: 26 December 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Lavaca,
I can respect that, I can take them or leave them, I do like them on the bench for testing, but cap them on a hunt..Your right the Lead sled is a stock buster with the big bores..After busting a double riflel stock and two fwt. Mausers, one a 9.5x62 and the other a .458 Lott. I figured it out!! homer I still have that sled for 30-06 and under or don't use the butt brace and lead weight and use it like an old time bench rest, rest.


Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120

rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
 
Posts: 42321 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Ray,

That's pretty much how I use my lead sled, if at all. On small rifles where it's not needed. I have used it on big bores, without weight at all or with minimal weight, but only when a lot of shooting was necessary, such as working up a load. But frankly, I haven't used it in years. Not even sure I could find it.

I find no redeeming qualities for a muzzle break. Don't own one, never have, never will.
 
Posts: 10601 | Location: Houston, Texas | Registered: 26 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I've got more than a few muzzle-brakes, but they are all on long range/ range toys and not general purpose hunting rifles. The main purpose is to aid in self spotting hits.

I'd rather take the hit on my shoulder than my ear-drums.
 
Posts: 1928 | Location: Saskatchewan, Canada | Registered: 30 November 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Ray,

Install a J&P muzzle brake on a 300/338/375 RUM or the likes from any other mfg and see how long your Leupold holds together. Majority of scopes are not designed to withstand the forward pulse generated by this brake.

Johnny Glueck currently produces the ONLY brake ever patented by George Vais and it has a chamber for the escaping air in-front of the bullet to push against with no ass-backwards little forward facing holes other than the bore.

It is a god send on my 300 and 338 RUM.

I have destroyed Leupolds on these two rifles with as little as 10 shots.

My Nightforce scopes have held up for thousands of rounds through 5 or 6 different rifles, with such brakes.

Andy B


We Band of Bubbas
N.R.A Life Member
TDR Cummins Power All The Way
Certified member of the Whompers Club
 
Posts: 2973 | Location: South Texas | Registered: 15 January 2008Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of JBrown
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Atkinson:
its 2015 and every hunter in camp this year, some 30 some odd had brakes on stainless steel plastic stocked custom rifles...


I am floored that 30 out of 30 hunters had SS rifles with muzzle brakes. That sure does not match what I am used to seeing!


Jason

"You're not hard-core, unless you live hard-core."
_______________________

Hunting in Africa is an adventure. The number of variables involved preclude the possibility of a perfect hunt. Some problems will arise. How you decide to handle them will determine how much you enjoy your hunt.

Just tell yourself, "it's all part of the adventure." Remember, if Robert Ruark had gotten upset every time problems with Harry
Selby's flat bed truck delayed the safari, Horn of the Hunter would have read like an indictment of Selby. But Ruark rolled with the punches, poured some gin, and enjoyed the adventure.

-Jason Brown
 
Posts: 6842 | Location: Nome, Alaska(formerly SW Wyoming) | Registered: 22 December 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of jwp475
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by drewhenrytnt:
Ray,

Install a J&P muzzle brake on a 300/338/375 RUM or the likes from any other mfg and see how long your Leupold holds together. Majority of scopes are not designed to withstand the forward pulse generated by this brake.

Johnny Glueck currently produces the ONLY brake ever patented by George Vais and it has a chamber for the escaping air in-front of the bullet to push against with no ass-backwards little forward facing holes other than the bore.

It is a god send on my 300 and 338 RUM.

I have destroyed Leupolds on these two rifles with as little as 10 shots.

My Nightforce scopes have held up for thousands of rounds through 5 or 6 different rifles, with such brakes.

Andy B


Unless the scope is designed and tested for negative G's the chances are great they will fail on a rifle with a brake. Nightforce NXS scopes are designed and tested to 1250 G's both positive and negative


_____________________________________________________


A 9mm may expand to a larger diameter, but a 45 ain't going to shrink

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.
- Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 5077 | Location: USA | Registered: 11 March 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
JWP,
YOur correct, I should have stated that it depends on the scope..Today we have the Leupold 2.5X compact and they moved the adjustment location to under the adjustments and recoil ceased to trash that scope..My post was too "include all" and I should have been specific..muzzle brakes have ruine many high dollar scopes on the biggest of the big bores, no doubt about that.


Ray Atkinson
Atkinson Hunting Adventures
10 Ward Lane,
Filer, Idaho, 83328
208-731-4120

rayatkinsonhunting@gmail.com
 
Posts: 42321 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia