I am thinking of putting a muzzle brake on my Ruger MK77 Stainless .338 Win Mag......anybody have a good suggestions an which might be the best fit for me. I obviously want it to be stainless and match the contour of the barrel.

Thanks GHJ

I would suggest shooting a simmilar brake equipped rifle before you get one. Some guys love brakes, some hate them. I am in the hate column. I think the noise aspect makes it unsuitable for a hunting rifle. Many will disagree. My thinking is that you should be able to shoot an unbraked 338 if the stock fits and it has a decent pad. If you can't, get a 30-06.

Brakes can induce a flinch from the concussion effect. To me that is worse than the kick at inducing the flinch. If we were talking a 50 BMG I would agree the brake is necessary. For this smaller stuff it might be neat at the range, with hearing protection. In the field without It will trash your ears and God help your buddy who is to the side when you shoot. Once the word gets out you might find yourself a solo hunter.

It's a love or hate thing with brakes.

But from the 6 or so ones I have, either a Vias or a Holland brake work the best.

The VAIS brake is without a doubt the best brake. It is the only muzzle brake I know of that doesn't blast gas back into your face...and the front lens of your scope.

Well GooseHunterJrfor the last 24 years since I got out of the Colorado School of Trades Gunsmithing I have worked as a gunsmith. In that time I have installed breaks for about 17 of those years. I will categorically state here and now that I HATE them. I can not stand the noise and a hate the slap in the face that I get when the gun goes off. I tore out the rotor cuff in my right shoulder some years ago and switched my shooting to the left side. I then tore out the rotor cuff in my left shoulder falling out of a tree. So I just switched to a Blaser R93 chambered in 243 with a separate barrel for 223 to get away from the recoil. I hate breaks that much.
But lets be fair. I have been installing close to 60 breaks a year for 17 years. That’s over 1000 breaks so I’m outnumbered 1000 to one. On top of that I have only had a hand full of people come in and request that I cut a break off. Even fewer are guns that come in with other problems that have had the break screwed off.
As a gunsmith I must act as a bit of a salesman. I can’t call some one a whimp or a panty waste or they won’t come back. I personally tell them that some people can’t take recoil and maybe they should consider a lighter caliber. But I am clearly biased in this matter and breaks do have a place as it seams that the majority of people out there can handle the noise and the sever muzzle blast. Im just one of the oddballs that can’t: Rod Henrickson

The only rifle I own with a brake just happens to be a Ruger 77 Mk II .338WM. When I bought it it had an Answer Brake installed. It recoils about like a .270 and does not seem to be any louder than when I take the brake off to sight it in for a hunt.

Although I don't use brakes on my other guns, I think this one is nice because it is so unobtrusive in that it is the same diameter and taper as the barrel and it has very small holes. It is made here in Michigan by Answer Products, Davison, MI. Williams Gunsight (also in Davison) also sells and installs them. You may have seen their adds.

Geronimo

quote:

It recoils about like a .270 and does not seem to be any louder than when I take the brake off to sight it in for a hunt

I would expect that you were wearing hearing protection at all times when you have fired a braked rifle.I dare you to fire one shot with the brake installed without hearing protection.I am betting that your opinion will change if you do so.

One more vote for the Answer brake as effective and one of the better looking. (If a bunch of holes ringing your barrel can look good) I`ve one on a 7-08 and can`t tell if it`s louder or not while fireing it, but it has cut recoil notably.

I DO know they are a lot louder to others off to your sides and will cause a unshielded Pact M1 crony unit setting on your bench to give false readings from the blast. Personally I feel they direct blast at more of a 45* angle to the shooter and not straight back as some feel they do.

I experienced at close range the effects of the muzzle brake and will never forget it as long as I live. While Hunting the Cole Creek Ranch in 93 near Casper WY. My hunting partner crawled up next to me with his Kenny Jarrett built 7MM STW with the brake about three feet off my left ear. When it went off I thought I had been shot by a Sherman Tank and that is no exageration! As a result i have suffered hearing loss in my left ear. If a gun shows up in camp with a brake on it I refuse to hunt with that fellow.

As you can see I hate MUZZLE BRAKES. The recoil of the 338 Win Mag really is not that bad. If a person wears a good set of muffs and ear plugs with them, you would be amazed how much recoil is reduced. The noise is the biggest culprit in perceived recoil and with practice it can be conquered. Kinda like a beating, you get used to it if you get one everyday. Recoil is what you perceive it to be. You can overcome it if you don't let it get you down. A good recoil pad and a straight stock will go a long way to mastering the beast.

I have a brake installed on my Rem 700 375 H&H LH from there Custom Shop. The rifle weighs about 7 1/2 pounds loaded. It kicked like a mule and the muzzle lift was terrible. I could handle the recoil on game but once while hunting in Africa I was told to shoot a particular warthog. I shot and the muzzle came up, I pulled back down while rechambering another round and there was the warthog still standing so I shot again. Next thing I knew I was being told what splendid shooting I just did on a pair of hogs. Point being the muzzle rise caused me to lose sight of everything. I added a brake after the hunt. I to dislike how a brake sends shockwaves around me and they are very loud. I make sure I wear ear plugs and muffs while range shooting. The noise has never been an issue while hunting. I recommend them. It reduced the muzzle flip and recoil on my rifle by about 50%.

GHJ

Seems you have already got a bunch of aswers to the question you pose.

I will add my bit in any event, I have a model 70 in .330 Dakota onto which a Gentry quiet brake has been added, recoil is negligible and compared to many brakes on the market, it is not at all bad to use in the field noise wise.

I think they are avaiable in polished and matt blue and also in stainless

I like the Shrewd brakes as offered by Brownell's (http://www.brownells.com). They come in a multitude of sizes, can be easily tapered or turned down to fit the barrel diameter, come in stainless or white moly and are only about $60 each. See them on Page 55 of Catalog 58 or go on-line, type shrewd muzzle brake into the product search field and see it now.

Damn i would not touch that Barret without hearing protection!

Cool video tough!

quote:

Originally posted by sako:
Damn i would not touch that Barret without hearing protection!

Cool video tough!

It's a Steyr... And I always wear plugs, I can't shoot prone with the muffs

quote:

Originally posted by Collins:
THIS is a brake!

Collins,

That ain't a brake - THIS IS A BRAKE:

Are you sure that thing isn't a silencer?

Gents,

Whimp or not, what is fact is that WITH a muzzle brake Your hearing WILL take damage at EVERY shot!!! EVEN wearing BOTH plugs and muffs!!!! This is a fact!!!! Without protection, as when hunting, your hearing takes so much damage that it is only a question of time before your ears are ringing CONSTANTLY!!!!

And, another fact, damaged hearing CAN NOT be repaired!!!!!

They really shoul be outlawed, because then only outlaws would have them - and that would serve them well.

If problems with recoil, use extra soft pads and mercury recoil redusers. Or, shoot a smaller caliber.

If you aren't currently using a past mag recoil shield for your shoulder, then get one. A hunting buddy was about to sell his new 338, until I told him to get a past pad, and now he shoots it off the bench with no problem.

I personally cannot abide the muzzle blast of a braked gun in the field. There are too many instances where I'll end up firing w/o hearing protection, and an unbraked rifle is already too loud, I won't do anything to increase the muzzleblast!

Unless you have neck or shoulder problems, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to fire an unbraked 338.

Call SG&Y and talk to Speedy!! I have his breaks on my 300 RUM and the 338 Lapua Ackley Improved which takes all of the bite out of that big boy. I fire formed 50 rounds of brass a couple of weekends ago and my shoulder was only a little sore! This is from a 9 pound rifle with the scope! Speedy builds my competition rifles and is one of the best “smiths†as well as in the BR HOF on the planet. I have won bets on people thinking that the break is not removable because the line is blended in so perfectly! My .02

quote:

Originally posted by D Humbarger:
Are you sure that thing isn't a silencer?

Say What?
Louder - I can't hear ya!

I can't stand muzzel brakes. Does your Ruger have the hard factory recoil pad? If so replace it with a Decelerator or similar pad before you butcher that rifle with a brake. Paul's advice regarding the PAST recoil pad is good advice as well. I've packed up and left the range many times before due to a shooter near me using a rilfe with a brake. As others have stated even with hearing protection you may sustain hearing damage when firing a rifle equipped with a brake.

May I comment as a physician about muzzle brakes causing hearing loss with use of both muffs and plugs together?

It is completely false, and not supported by any trials, patient data, or measurement of sound within the external auditory canal.

It came from an article in a gun magazine, where the author decided that a muzzle brake produces X amount of decibels, muffs reduce Y amount of dB, and plugs reduce Z amount of dB's.
He did the math, and came up with X- (Y+Z)= noise to ears.

Wrong.

Decibels are actually a measurement of energy, and muffs and plugs reduce the amount of energy reaching your ears (not a finite number like 30 dB each).

In other words, muffs reduce the energy reaching the external auditory canal to a certain number, and because it is a log scale, that smaller number is reduced even further by the plugs.

I have shot quite a few weapons with muzzle brakes, and I take great pains to protect my hearing and sight. You will have no damage to your ears with the use of muffs and plugs together with any muzzle brake on any legal rifle.

I use plugs and muffs together even when shooing rimfires.

Garrett

Boss Hoss, who is this speedy guy? Butch

Decibels are measuments of energy. However they are logrithmic. To multiply effects that are products logs are added. What is wrong with the math ?.
Good luck!

quote:

Originally posted by N. Garrett:
May I comment as a physician about muzzle brakes causing hearing loss with use of both muffs and plugs together?

It is completely false, and not supported by any trials, patient data, or measurement of sound within the external auditory canal.

It came from an article in a gun magazine, where the author decided that a muzzle brake produces X amount of decibels, muffs reduce Y amount of dB, and plugs reduce Z amount of dB's.
He did the math, and came up with X- (Y+Z)= noise to ears.

Wrong.

Decibels are actually a measurement of energy, and muffs and plugs reduce the amount of energy reaching your ears (not a finite number like 30 dB each).

In other words, muffs reduce the energy reaching the external auditory canal to a certain number, and because it is a log scale, that smaller number is reduced even further by the plugs.

I have shot quite a few weapons with muzzle brakes, and I take great pains to protect my hearing and sight. You will have no damage to your ears with the use of muffs and plugs together with any muzzle brake on any legal rifle.

I use plugs and muffs together even when shooing rimfires.

Garrett

So you claim, wich is your right. I dissagree, wich is my right. In any case, everyone agree that a ported rifle will damage your hearing far more than unported if not protected. One does not wear protection wile hunting, and can acidentliy forget it at the range. The chances of damaging your hearing is far higher when shooting a ported gun than without.

A brake should be an abomination to any physician.

The reason you can't use simple subtraction for the combined effects of ear muffs and plugs is that neither one actually reduces sound a fixed amount.

The relative reduction in volume is greater for louder noise than softer sounds. So, muffs might only reduce the sound of persons voice by a few dB's, whereas a loud sound (say 120 dB's) might be reduced 40 dB's.

When the reduced volume (reduced by the muffs) hits the plugs, it is further reduced by plugs.
If the volume is still high (say 90 dB), the reduction will be greater than if it is 75 dB.
The reduction of volume by each device is not fixed, but relative to the energy that strikes it.
Moreover, the plugs further reduce airpressure fluctuations (excursions of the typmpanic membrane) within the external auditory canal, and prevent permanent injury to the ossicles and hair cells.

It's funny that people fixate on the sound levels with muzzle brakes. The medical literature documents permanent hearing loss with the single exposure to an ordinary rifle report (such as a .223). When was the last time you heard someone say: "we shouldn't shoot guns because they can hurt our ears".

Yeah, muzzle brakes can cause hearing loss. Wear muffs and plugs (or at least plugs) and it won't.

Garrett

quote:

Originally posted by N. Garrett:

Yeah, muzzle brakes can cause hearing loss. Wear muffs and plugs (or at least plugs) and it won't.

Garrett

Can I humbly ask, do you hunt with plugs?

I feel the need to get in here. I recently underwent extensive back surgery. Was in hosp. for 20 days post op. The surgeon as well as our family dr. said no shooting any rifle with recoil, no shotguns etc.Both know that I have some big bore rifles. When I was fit enough to go to the shop I built a muzzle brake for my Weatherby 300 Alaskan. Nothing fancy, I copied one in a picture.I also made a thread cover cap. Took a whole day at the lathe and mill.I loaded a few 150gr. bullets and tried them. Almost no felt recoil. Then shot some 168 gr. Barnes triple shock full power loads. Easily tolerated from the bench. The blast blew dirt and leaves around but easily tolerated with muffs. The shockwave generated was fierce but not harmful to myself.Anyone beside the muzzle would get a blast. My wife noted that the noise seemed louder (in the house) This was my first encounter with a brake and I may put one on my 460 G+A for bench shooting.Mark

I hunt with plugs when shooting a shotgun.

I don't hunt with plugs when shooting a rifle.

Garrett

All my shooting from the bench is with Hog Killers molded ear plugs and Muffs. Hunting I use muffs that allow you to hear until you fire the gun. I hope to have Hog Killer make me some molded plugs with the amplifier in them at The Swap Meet at Shilens Nov.19th.These will be used for hunting. Butch

For those that have physical problems that preclude them from shooting heavily recoiling rifles, then a muzzle break certainly makes sense to allow them to continue shooting.

I have shot braked rifles and no doubt they work, and the muzzle blast to the shooter isn't that bad. That said, I have had folks with muzzlebraked rifles shoot next to me, and I don't care for the experience in the least. Once a guy with a 30-378 set up next to me, and I elected to stand well back from the bench and chat with friends instead of shooting, as the blast was so bad it fealt like a concussion grenade was going off with each shot, and that more than distracts from my concentration

There is another option as well, use lighter bullets and load down to mild levels. I've yet to have a problem with getting decent accuracy at reduced levels from a variety of rifles I've done so with.

stop bickering and just buy this brake
http://www.brockmansrifles.com/mbrake.asp
it turns off when you are hunting so you don't have to damage your hearing when your hunting.. if you still don't like brakes don't buy one. Iam sure everyone here has fired a rifle while hunting without hearing protection now I am no doctor but I am sure that does more damage than shootin with a brake and protection. I added this brake to my 7mm stw and it works great

I'm building a long range varmint gun in 6.5-284 and it will have a removable brake. I use the brake when I want to see bullet hits at long range and I always use plugs and muffs when I shoot varmints.
I'll remove the brake when I shoot it with game bullets for antelope etc.

You might consider Magna-Port.
I have had 300 Mags with a KDF brake. VERY effective, but VERY loud. It makes a 300 mag kick about like a 243.
However I now have a Magna-Port 300 Mag bbl for my Blaser R93. It makes it much more plesant to shoot and does not sem any louder in the field to me. Makes the 300 Mag about like a 308.
I just got a Magna-Port bbl for the 375 H&H. I will shoot it this weekend, and report back.

quote:

Originally posted by dartfreak8:
stop bickering and just buy this brake, it turns off when you are hunting so you don't have to damage your hearing when your hunting..

This line of reasoning has always puzzled me. If the muzzle brake is doing it's job, then wouldn't removing it to go hunting, or, "turning it off" change the point of impact?

Garrett, You are confused between active sound reducers which have the non linear response, and
passive devices (plugs, muffs ect.).
Good luck!

Hawkins,

No, I'm not, and you can test it yourself.

Look on the package of a pair of muffs. Most will have notation of something like "Will reduce sound by 30 dB's".

Now, slip them on.
If you listen carefully, you can still make out (faintly) conversation around you.
Yet if it had actually reduced the sound of normal (human) conversation by 30 dB's, it would have fallen below the thresold of auditory perception.

Passive hearing protectors cause the greatest reduction in sound (in numerical units) the louder the sound is.

The amount they reduce sound (in decibels) is dependent on the volume of the sound, and is not linear, although it is predictable.

Garrett

quote:

Originally posted by malm:

quote:

Originally posted by dartfreak8:
stop bickering and just buy this brake, it turns off when you are hunting so you don't have to damage your hearing when your hunting..

This line of reasoning has always puzzled me. If the muzzle brake is doing it's job, then wouldn't removing it to go hunting, or, "turning it off" change the point of impact?

the web page says it doesn't and I have tested it out to 200yrds with no change of impact

quote:

Originally posted by dartfreak8:

quote:

Originally posted by malm:

quote:

Originally posted by dartfreak8:
stop bickering and just buy this brake, it turns off when you are hunting so you don't have to damage your hearing when your hunting..

This line of reasoning has always puzzled me. If the muzzle brake is doing it's job, then wouldn't removing it to go hunting, or, "turning it off" change the point of impact?

the web page says it doesn't and I have tested it out to 200yrds with no change of impact

Huh? Putting a weight on the tip of your barrel will not change POI????