Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anti-Torque Muzzle Brake

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Anti-Torque Muzzle Brake

    Wanted to run this by you guys to get an opinion.
    Ever heard or seen one? I have heard discussions about them but have not laid eyes on one. Exit ports are supposed to be drilled to counter act the bullet active torque as it exits the barrel.
    I would be interested in making one and experimenting if it is feasible but don't need to waste the time or material if it has already been tried.

  • #2
    Interesting idea but I'm not sure its worth the effort. I base that on shooting a .475 Linbugh 5.5" that would torque roll so bad the gun would come up sideways, (no muzzle break) and a .500 S&W that just comes back and up, the S&W break is basically just shark gills.
    Ignorance is curable through education.

    Comment


    • #3
      There are claims by some brake makers that their brake aids further in redicing recoil by directing the gasses slightly to the rear, instead of out the sides. The gas escape is so fast, and is over so quickly, I doubt there is any directional effect. Torque included.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by rws
        There are claims by some brake makers that their brake aids further in redicing recoil by directing the gasses slightly to the rear, instead of out the sides. The gas escape is so fast, and is over so quickly, I doubt there is any directional effect. Torque included.
        So you're saying there's no thrust produced from the propellant gasses?

        Look at a .50 BMG muzzle brake and tell me why the louvers are directed backwards then. It's not for accuracy because the same caliber is used with plain barrels on many other weapon systems with the same long range effectiveness.

        Most of the recoil of a gun is the thrust from the charge. Dissipating that force into another vector reduces felt recoil and can eliminate muzzle flip entirely.

        Some brakes (they're brakes, not breaks) have angled slots on them to induce turbulence into the gas that's exiting, but that has nothing to do with controlling torque - it's to help cool off the gasses and burn up the additional powder quickly to reduce flash.

        Comment


        • #5
          A 50 BMG is an animal of it's own. In normal type cartridges, once the gas releases, it's over. I don't think the volume of gas from a normal cartridge will make a noticeable change of direction.

          Comment


          • #6
            rws, to be less than blunt, BS!
            Exhaust gasses account for what ever the weight of the powder charge is at around 4700 FPS as a portion of the the recoil of the cartridge. If they are redirected backward it can be a substantial change in the perceived recoil.

            standard recoil calculation:

            free recoil=

            (weight of the bullet X muzzle velocity + 4700 X weight of powder charge)squared
            _____________________________________________

            64.348 X weight of gun in pounds


            with this formula you can figure free recoil of any gun/load combo per Lyman manual 46th ed.
            Ignorance is curable through education.

            Comment


            • #7
              I have made brakes with 20 deg. slanted towards the rear but I don't have an accurate way to determine if it actually made a difference in felt recoil. I will say that it would blow your cap off if it wasn't on tight and that was on a 6x284 shooting 105 AMax's. You definitely have a hard time keeping your eyes open to see your hits but I may have been able to if I had been wearing safety glasses like you are supposed to.

              There was a guy that went by S1 on longrangehunting.com a few years back that was experimenting with anti-torque brakes but I don't remember if he ever actually followed through with the idea.

              Comment


              • #8
                They can be made, but the problem is timing the brake holes to counter the rotational forces of the "torque".

                It's much easier to make a muzzlebrake that deflects a portion of the cartridge gases rearward at the muzzle. Flash hiders are a different animal all together, using tapered holes to cool the gases so they don't have a flame at the endo of the barrel.

                Interesting idea, but would be difficult to accomplish. You would need the barrel it's to be installed on to be able to "time" it properly.
                Mark

                I haven't always been a nurse.........

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Rusty Marlin
                  rws, to be less than blunt, BS!
                  Exhaust gasses account for what ever the weight of the powder charge is at around 4700 FPS as a portion of the the recoil of the cartridge. If they are redirected backward it can be a substantial change in the perceived recoil.

                  standard recoil calculation:

                  free recoil=

                  (weight of the bullet X muzzle velocity + 4700 X weight of powder charge)squared
                  _____________________________________________

                  64.348 X weight of gun in pounds


                  with this formula you can figure free recoil of any gun/load combo per Lyman manual 46th ed.

                  Disagree if you will, but I would like to see DEFINITIVE proof you can noticeably reduce felt recoil with directing gasses to the rear as apposed to out the side. Again, I am talking about "normal" type rifle cartridges here, not 50's. Do brakes work at reducing recoil, yes. I have tried and made many different brakes from small varmint rounds to 300Win Mags on 1K guns. Go to any 1K benchrest match and you'll see many types. Most all of them vent perpendicular. Those that try different things, as being talked about here, can't really say they work better or not.

                  Most often, it's more bragging rights to the maker of the ability to make something different. When the rubber meats the road, there is no definitive advantage.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rws
                    Do brakes work at reducing recoil, yes. I have tried and made many different brakes from small varmint rounds to 300Win Mags on 1K guns. Go to any 1K benchrest match and you'll see many types. Most all of them vent perpendicular.
                    Purely from a point of Physics if you agree that directing the blast at 90 degrees reduces the recoil then you must also admit that forward release was a part of the recoil in the first place and thus logically any rearward deflection should impart a forward impulse to the gun further reducing recoil?
                    Regards,
                    Nick
                    If you benefit from the Dunning-Kruger Effect you may not even know it ;-)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      This is what I had in mind. Suggestions?

                      I sketched this one with front ports only. I drill and countersink each hole with the next row on a 60 deg. helix.
                      I think they look better that way. Regardless you get the idea.



                      Looking from the threaded end with holes protruded for clarity.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I shoot Very high power handguns and I don't see where counteracting the rotation of the bullet is of any value.
                        The bullet is imparting the twist at the instant that the bullet is moving and the break would counter act the twist when the bullet is gone.
                        Your wrist must counter act the twist the same shot to shot and day to day in order to make a break that will work prefectly all the time.
                        Breaks are just a pain in the @$#& for anyone else on the range. (Noise).
                        As for the breaks on comp rifles, it's the mass at the end of the barrel just like the boss system. You tune the mass to the frequency to null out the barrel whip.
                        On race pistols it's to reduce the rise of the gun for a quicker fallow-up shot.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I have a Kimber Montana in .325WSM that I had R.W. Hart install his muzzle brake onto it, gun doesn't recoil much and instead for twisting up and right it pushed down and a bit left. you can watch the bullet impact most of the time, that's with a 200 grain bullet going out at just over 2850 fps.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by mcskipper
                            I shoot Very high power handguns and I don't see where counteracting the rotation of the bullet is of any value.
                            The bullet is imparting the twist at the instant that the bullet is moving and the break would counter act the twist when the bullet is gone.
                            Your wrist must counter act the twist the same shot to shot and day to day in order to make a break that will work prefectly all the time.
                            Breaks are just a pain in the @$#& for anyone else on the range. (Noise).
                            As for the breaks on comp rifles, it's the mass at the end of the barrel just like the boss system. You tune the mass to the frequency to null out the barrel whip.
                            On race pistols it's to reduce the rise of the gun for a quicker fallow-up shot.
                            The fact that the twist is imparted when the bullet starts moving doesn't mean counteracting the twist with a break wouldn't have any effect. The same thing applies to a standard muzzle brake. Recoil begins at the instant the bullet starts moving, yet perceived recoil is greatly reduced by a muzzle brake. That's why "perceived" is always used, as attempts to measure the recoil reduction don't show the entire motion vs. time curve. Also I don't see where timing for reducing twist reaction comes into play at all. What would you be timing? It's just a rotating version of recoil.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Some of these arguments are so laughable it's hard to take them seriously.

                              Yes, recoil does start the moment the charge is ignited. That puny little <400 grain (I'm being generous intentionally) bullet is exerting exactly that much force against the 6lb+ (being minimalist intentionally as well) gun prior to the high pressure gas expansion being uncorked as the bullet leaves the barrel and turning the nearly sealed barrel into a bottle rocket against your shoulder. Sure, there's always some blow-by, and the bullet accellerating down the barrel is also creating thrust rearward, but not enough to be of consequence.

                              So that brings us to practical implications of Newton's second law being applied here: what does that gnat pushing the elephant equate to related to felt recoil? NOT MUCH.

                              If you want to refute this, then start citing examples of where suppressed recoil operated weapons cycle better with suppressors (often they won't cycle at all), or how the lower pressure ammunition kicks the same as the high velocity stuff (if bullet weight is equal in both cases, then it would be true if recoil was based on the bullets resistance to accelleration). You can't, because that's not how this stuff works.

                              A .30-30 kicks less than a .30-06 for precisely the reason that there's less pressure behind it than the bigger cartridge and thus less thrust once that bullet has passed. PERIOD

                              Sheesh. Take a physics class already before you pretend to be rocket scientists on the internet.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X