Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Night Vision NZ DPT


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 84
Like Tree62Likes

Thread: Suppressors - Am I missing something

  1. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    4,301
    For the A-tech, they said they spent 1.2 millions euros in R & D. That is a lot of money thrown at it. You d hope the brake think is really helping and is not just a commercial gimmick .

  2. #47
    Terminator Products Kiwi Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    6,687
    Quote Originally Posted by Puffin View Post
    Having recoil reduction figures-of-merit also in the mix would have been really interesting.
    Too hard to effectively measure & the results would be embarrassing for any of the X% claims from manufacturers about recoil reduction.

    Interestingly in the article they never said where they tested the suppressors, also some of the manufacturers weren't aware either until after the fact.
    Contact me for reloading components, brass, projectiles, powder, primers, etc

    http://terminatorproducts.co.nz/

    http://www.youtube.com/user/Terminat...?feature=guide

  3. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Home - mainland nz, actual - Auckland
    Posts
    5,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Cartman View Post
    They have these....

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    @Kiwi Greg , you reckon you could do this with one of your brakes and a suppressor?
    300CALMAN likes this.
    Please excuse spelling, as finger speed is sometimes behind brain spped........ Or maybe the other wayy.....

  4. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Otago
    Posts
    304
    Do you think a large part of the perceived reduction of recoil on a suppressed firearm might also be due to there being a big(ger) weight on the end of the muzzle, which would make a significant reduction in muzzle jump?

  5. #50
    Numzane Spudattack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Tauranga
    Posts
    2,990
    Quote Originally Posted by chalkeye View Post
    Do you think a large part of the perceived reduction of recoil on a suppressed firearm might also be due to there being a big(ger) weight on the end of the muzzle, which would make a significant reduction in muzzle jump?
    It is a factor, but only a small percentage of it.
    The main recoil reduction comes from slowing the expanding gasses and releasing them slowly reducing the rocket effect.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "Here's the deal I'm the best there is. Plain and simple. I wake up in the morning and I piss excellence."

  6. #51
    Member Puffin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Porirua
    Posts
    1,009
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg View Post
    Too hard to effectively measure...
    Really? You've put up a fair number of posts presenting assessments of recoil for brakes over the past few years. Surely something similar could be applied to suppressors? The low-friction recoiling sled approach, plus a lightweight accelerometer to capture the shape of the recoil impulse maybe? If some assessment of the repeatability of the testing could be demonstrated and give a handle on the uncertainty in the results there shouldn't be much reason for complaint... embarrassment as you say.

    Other than my gripe (unfounded it now looks like), about A-tec, I thought the suppressor review was just the sort of data-driven comparative testing that the magazines should be attempting on readers' behalf, so kudos to Rod & Rifle. Much more informative than the one-off product reviews often seen along the lines of... "the suppressor reduced the blast a lot.... it got hung up in tight bush less than my regular larger suppressor... " etc.

    From the review there seemed to be two clear product niches, perhaps best described as being occupied by DPT and Hardy Engineering respectively. Would it be fair to say that these currently appear to be best-in-class on the parameters covered in the article or have I got it completely wrong? Would adding in recoil reduction unseat these two brands? Is it possible to achieve a satisfactory compromise on all parameters in a single offering? The R&R article already presents a lot of data to consider.
    Last edited by Puffin; 27-09-2017 at 02:18 PM.

  7. #52
    Terminator Products Kiwi Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    6,687
    Quote Originally Posted by Puffin View Post
    Really? You've put up a fair number of posts presenting assessments of recoil for brakes over the past few years. Surely something similar could be applied to suppressors? The low-friction recoiling sled approach, plus a lightweight accelerometer to capture the shape of the recoil impulse maybe? If some assessment of the repeatability of the testing could be demonstrated and give a handle on the uncertainty in the results there shouldn't be much reason for complaint... embarrassment as you say.
    The problem being people are too emotive & don't "like" the results my sleds present as clear as they are......

    More testing is in order, I have a few ideas but they will have to wait as I'm way too busy preparing for the World Bench Rest Champs at the moment
    Contact me for reloading components, brass, projectiles, powder, primers, etc

    http://terminatorproducts.co.nz/

    http://www.youtube.com/user/Terminat...?feature=guide

  8. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    hokitika
    Posts
    1,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg View Post
    Too hard to effectively measure & the results would be embarrassing for any of the X% claims from manufacturers about recoil reduction.

    Interestingly in the article they never said where they tested the suppressors, also some of the manufacturers weren't aware either until after the fact.
    They claim it was an independent review yet it was done with hardys lab and no independent/mutual people present so the results could and may well be just what they want the public to see


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    veitnamcam, R93, BRADS and 1 others like this.
    Dont waste your time chasing every last fps, it doesnt matter in the real world, it wont make a difference, all it will do is cause head aches and frustrations. And dont listen to silly old cunts

  9. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Otago
    Posts
    304
    Quote Originally Posted by Puffin View Post
    The low-friction recoiling sled approach, plus a lightweight accelerometer to capture the shape of the recoil impulse maybe?
    You could strap a smart phone to the side of the rifle, 99% of them have accelerometers that should be capable of the job.
    It would be useful to see if there's any real data supporting the "slower recoil response" thing.

  10. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Central Otago
    Posts
    2,266
    4 bloody pages of theoretical bumph! The question was about internal muzzle brakes in suppressors. The answer is that all suppressors have a recoil reducing effect by virtue of their baffles providing an impingment surface to the muzzle gases, tending to put forward pressure in the suppresor. Over-barrel suppressors do have an effective muzzle brake system, which is the internal part that screws onto the barrel. This is a muzzle brake in basic design and is used to divert the muzzle gases into the rear part of the suppressor (where they expand and cool at a much lower pressure). The baffles in the front part play a much lesser role in reducing recoil as the gas pressures are much lower. The internal muzzle brake in over-barrel units is usually efficient enough to counteract the bolt cycling in semi-autos, requiring some tuning of the gas system for reliability. For the lesser informed, muzzle brakes work by trying to pull the firearm forward when the expanding muzzle gases strike the forward surfaces of of the vents. Vents in the top also help to counter muzzle rise in the same manner. That is all there is to it.

    There has been more psuedo-scientific garbage written (and claimed) about suppressors than you can shake a stick at. I have commercially designed and manufactured thousands of suppressors for all types of firearms since the early 1970's. Suppressors rely on only three factors for efficient operation; accurate alignment with the bore, an efficient (but simple) baffle design, and sufficient internal volume to contain most of the muzzle gases. Any claims outside of these parameters are dubious at best!
    shooternz and Cordite like this.

  11. #56
    Terminator Products Kiwi Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    6,687
    Quote Originally Posted by gundoc View Post
    For the lesser informed, muzzle brakes work by trying to pull the firearm forward when the expanding muzzle gases strike the forward surfaces of of the vents.
    Yes but if the gas can't instantly escape the ports into the atmosphere without hitting anything its effectiveness is lost.

    As witnessed by placing covers over brakes with or without airspace around them.
    Contact me for reloading components, brass, projectiles, powder, primers, etc

    http://terminatorproducts.co.nz/

    http://www.youtube.com/user/Terminat...?feature=guide

  12. #57
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Central Otago
    Posts
    2,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg View Post
    Yes but if the gas can't instantly escape the ports into the atmosphere without hitting anything its effectiveness is lost.

    As witnessed by placing covers over brakes with or without airspace around them.
    True, the efffect is lost to some extent (but far from completely) if the brake is enclosed, which is why over-barrel suppressors have the tube behind the brake to give the gases somewhere to go and expand.

  13. #58
    R93
    R93 is offline
    Member R93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Westland NZ
    Posts
    16,102
    I have a JP AR15 and recently bought an NEA carbine off a forum member with a Gunworks Maximus suppressor fitted.

    The JP is a heavy rifle with an 18" heavy contour barrel and I have an overbarrel suppressor that fits back to the gas block and in turn has a smaller diameter to fit thru the JP handgaurd.

    It is a few inches longer than the maximus.
    And about 1/2-3/4 the diameter.

    The NEA, surprisingly is noticeably quieter (with a shorter barrel) and seems to settle back faster than the JP when shooting fast or double tapping Ipsc targets.

    Just a quick observation with no tech data to back it up but it to me it seems that internals and size of a suppressor can make a difference.
    Both suppressors have integral breaks and same stock fitted.

    Without the suppressor and with the JP break fitted the JP shoots quicker again.


    Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
    Do what ya want! Ya will anyway.

  14. #59
    Terminator Products Kiwi Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    6,687
    Quote Originally Posted by gundoc View Post
    True, the efffect is lost to some extent (but far from completely) if the brake is enclosed, which is why over-barrel suppressors have the tube behind the brake to give the gases somewhere to go and expand.
    Yes as the gas comes back it hits the suppressor pushing it back negating its recoil reducing effect.

    This one is inside a magnum suppressor & has about 125mm behind it.

    Contact me for reloading components, brass, projectiles, powder, primers, etc

    http://terminatorproducts.co.nz/

    http://www.youtube.com/user/Terminat...?feature=guide

  15. #60
    Member Cordite's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NZ Mainland (Dunedin)
    Posts
    5,531
    Quote Originally Posted by gundoc View Post
    4 bloody pages of theoretical bumph! The question was about internal muzzle brakes in suppressors. The answer is that all suppressors have a recoil reducing effect by virtue of their baffles providing an impingment surface to the muzzle gases, tending to put forward pressure in the suppresor. .......

    ....There has been more psuedo-scientific garbage written (and claimed) about suppressors than you can shake a stick at. I have commercially designed and manufactured thousands of suppressors for all types of firearms since the early 1970's. Suppressors rely on only three factors for efficient operation; accurate alignment with the bore, an efficient (but simple) baffle design, and sufficient internal volume to contain most of the muzzle gases. Any claims outside of these parameters are dubious at best!
    @gundoc,

    With all respect for your conclusion which I can only agree with, you are harsh on other contributors, even arrogant... and in karmic fashion immediately plunge neck-deep into the bog of your version of Munchausen's pigtail self-lift.

    To paraphrase your first bit, when a car passenger kicks the dashboard the car pulls forward. We all know this is false. The explanation is that the passenger supports his back against his seat, so the effect of his forward blow against the dashboard is entirely cancelled by his rearward action against his seat as both objects are fixed to the car. It must be understood that the gun and silencer are attached to each other. They are a single unit; the silencer is part of the gun. A blow from a gun against itself (in the form of impingement of its gases against its own baffles) will not pull it forwards.

    Astronauts on a spacewalk similarly can not propel themselves through space by slapping their own butts.

    Name:  wind-blowing-.jpg
Views: 279
Size:  14.0 KB
    veitnamcam and gadgetman like this.
    An itch ... is ... a desire to scratch

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. MISSING DOGS
    By EeeBees in forum Trial, Pedigree and Bird Dogs
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 03-03-2015, 10:18 PM
  2. Missing Grizzly
    By Dundee in forum Outdoor Transport
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 29-11-2014, 04:56 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Welcome to NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums! We see you're new here, or arn't logged in. Create an account, and Login for full access including our FREE BUY and SELL section Register NOW!!