How much does a suppressor limit felt recoil vs a standard muzzle break?

[madcalfe]

Radial brake all the way. It keeps the “can babies” away from me.

radial brakes are junk

 

[Cantharellus]

radial brakes are junk

We took the radial off of my buddies 6.5cm and put my Nomad Ti XC on there. It reduced the felt recoil more than the radial brake. He seemed sold on making the switch. Haha!

 

[Tx_6UM]

My experience with suppressors and brakes are limited to my 6.5 creed. I was running a little bastard on it before my scythe. Perceived recoil is significantly less with the suppressor, I’m guessing because of how much less noise/concussion there is.

 

[lintond]

My experience with suppressors and brakes are limited to my 6.5 creed. I was running a little bastard on it before my scythe. Perceived recoil is significantly less with the suppressor, I’m guessing because of how much less noise/concussion there is.

this! It’s more about perception than reality. I won’t shoot unsuppressed any more because the noise feels better. Feels like 50% but probably is 70% if you tested it in a machine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WannaBeRambo]

I think it's more a matter of the perception the recoil is less because of reduced muzzle blast.
Physics being what they are, the equal and opposite thing doesn't change.

Nope definitely NOT perception. A suppressor traps and slows down expanding gases so your shoulder is not getting 100% of the recoil impulse all at once.

Reduced muzzle blast is another benefit, but unrelated to recoil reduction.

All those who like muzzle brakes need to know the blast out of the rifle is not just the sound but a physical pressure wave too. On high power rifles The pressure wave from the brake will travel to the next shooter over and once it hits cheek and some other bones, is transmitted to delicate hair cells in the inner ear, causing damage. Earpro will not protect you from this hazard.
It's hard to separate the effects of the two, and there's not a lot of studies on pressure wave induced hearing damage, but it's a known issue. How much a factor is dependent on the brake design, caliber and proximity of the human to the direct impact of that shock wave. This is why I move away from brakes. Maybe good for the shooter, not so good for the next guy over.

 

[roadrunner]

Nope definitely NOT perception. A suppressor traps and slows down expanding gases so your shoulder is not getting 100% of the recoil impulse all at once.

Reduced muzzle blast is another benefit, but unrelated to recoil reduction.

All those who like muzzle brakes need to know the blast out of the rifle is not just the sound but a physical pressure wave too. On high power rifles The pressure wave from the brake will travel to the next shooter over and once it hits cheek and some other bones, is transmitted to delicate hair cells in the inner ear, causing damage. Earpro will not protect you from this hazard.
It's hard to separate the effects of the two, and there's not a lot of studies on pressure wave induced hearing damage, but it's a known issue. How much a factor is dependent on the brake design, caliber and proximity of the human to the direct impact of that shock wave. This is why I move away from brakes. Maybe good for the shooter, not so good for the next guy over.

You do realize the mystical pressure wave isn't linearly concentrated but is in reality a radial effect and you do NOT receive the full impact of it right?

The baffle effect of a suppressor cancels out this radial response and dissipates the effect.

A brake can follow the same principle, it just doesn't contain it to dissipate it.

This is why there is reduced recoil with both.

Simple physics really...

 

[Lawnboi]

Pretty decent change in felt recoil between these three. There’s a lot more to a suppressor when it comes to recoil than just having baffles.

 

[longrange13]

From my observation, if a good muzzle brake is cutting say 60% of recoil, a supressor is doing about 35-40%. Some suppressors are better than others. Suppressor, definitely has a longer recoil impulse.

 

[Southern Lights]

My experience is that a muzzle brake is maybe 1/2 but suppressor maybe 1/3rd less recoil.

However, the suppressor feels a lot less to me as you are not getting smashed with the dangerous levels of noise. Noise that even doing double plugs/muffs is still enough to damage your hearing.

Biggest difference though is when taking shots on animals the suppressor makes it so the animal often cannot tell where the shot originated and will often go in circles trying to find out what is happening. If you miss, make a bad shot, or are shooting multiples you have much better chances of a clean second or even third shot with the suppressor vs. brake or bare muzzle.

 

[Firestone]

.

 

[Firestone]

I have half a dozen suppressors including the new TB Magnus-k-rr which is their smallest can with a brake. It reduces recoil more than the R and S. It has noticeably more recoil than a brake on a 16 lbs. Creedmoor and 14 lbs. 65 PRC.

A brake has so much more recoil reduction and allows me to spot shots much easier.

Would you say the K rr is hearing safe on the prc.

 

[parshal]

I'll take a couple shots without hearing protection but I would not shoot a bunch without it like I will with my other cans. According the TB testing, it's not hearing safe.

 

[Firestone]

I'll take a couple shots without hearing protection but I would not shoot a bunch without it like I will with my other cans. According the TB testing, it's not hearing safe.

Copy

 

[Longrangr]

Here is a good video on suppressor recoil reduction:

 

[Pilsner]

Pretty decent change in felt recoil between these three. There’s a lot more to a suppressor when it comes to recoil than just having baffles.


View attachment 851910

What is the difference in noise at the ear between the suppressor with the brake and the ones without? Are they all hearing safe?

 

[Southern Lights]

No suppressor is hearing safe because they can't cut the sonic crack of the bullet which is quite loud (unless you shoot subsonic). If you are taking occasional shots hunting without hearing pro it's fine. But I wouldn't shoot routinely without ears on with any suppressor regardless of what the marketing graphs are showing.

I have mates that run with the brake attachment for matches. They are quieter than a brake alone for sure, but I'd definitely still wear hearing protection when running one.

 

[Lawnboi]

What is the difference in noise at the ear between the suppressor with the brake and the ones without? Are they all hearing safe?

Not hearing safe. The can with the brake is louder and shooting it without ear protection can go from painful to not that bad greatly dependent on surroundings. Because some of the gasses get pushed closer towards the shooter it’s especially loud in environments with a lot of objects to bounce the sound back to you.

I would not use the Magnus K RR without Earpro hunting.

I would happily use an ultra 7 without ear protection hunting.