To brake or not to brake... that is the question.

[f16jack]

F16jack, great summary. The only thing I would change is double protection can offer up to 50db of protection. There is a good test done by the Fort Collins police dept. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2002-0131-2898.pdf

the one thing not touched on yet, is that hearing protection varies greatly depending on how it worn. Tests show most people don’t wear it correctly and only get around 15db on average from foam ear plugs. This is with a plug that can test to 30+ when used correctly. I have verified this on myself with testing. Fully inserted 30+, pulled out 1/4” and protection drops significantly. Honestly a suppressor does so much more to protect our hearing it’s criminal that we can’t just go down to the store and buy one.

Thanks for the Fort Collins report. Very well done. it is surprising that they found that double protection added up to 20 dB more. Most studies state that a 2nd level only adds 5 dB. I agree with you that most folks don't wear protection properly, and that at the range or in the field actual dB reduction is often far less than the rating of the plugs or muffs.

 

[f16jack]

I spent most of Saturday at a fairly busy range. When I see an un-broke (braked?) rifle, it's an anomaly, not the other way around. I think everyone should double ear pro at a rifle or pistol range. I think calling "assault" by way of a rifle with a brake is a bit much. Having said that, everyone has their line. Mine is an SBR at an indoor range. Ill just leave if someone is shooting one of those.

While I agree the exposure of noise to others can be excessive, it seems to be less so on the shooter. So, im curious, is that "up to 14db increase" measured at the shooter or next to the shooter? Just in regards to that hunting shot when I'm all alone.

I like brakes, but they are loud. Some of the data in this thread has been eye opening. I was thinking about dipping my toe in the NFA waters, but now I think I'm definitely going to.

I may have been a little over the top with the "assault" comment. It reflects more my view of a society where we have obligations that extend beyond ourselves, and that if we inadvertantly cause harm to those around us we have failed to live up to our obligations. Then it is a question of inadvertant acceptable risk, an accident, gross negligence or intent. No one intends to harm other's hearing. But, if they are ignorant or just don't care then they have failed their societal obligations.

From another perspective, perhaps ranges should enforce double hearing protection for all participants. It's possible that down the road a range could be sued for only recommending single hearing protection, knowing that double is required to prevent harm. Perhaps individuals could take personal responsibility and simply use double protection on the knowledge that there might be muzzle brakes present. Back to the story i relayed above (the guy who let one loose at the deer). I had no way of knowing, as we sat there chatting, that he would arbitrarily without notice let loose a round. This is the point I should have called a personal injury attorney. If he gave me permanant hearing damage he has responsibility. Same thing happened to me antelope hunting once. Two of us were glassing some speed goats and I told my huntine partner to let me know before he shot so I could put on my ear muffs. Nope, as I sat looking through my binocs the same thing happened - a Magnum rifle only 4' to my left. I should have left the hunt then. How can someone be so irresponsible so as to harm others around them?

I agree that the noise may be far more to the side of a barrel vs. the shooter position. Anecdotally only. I've not looked for studies.

 

[Bluumoon]

Put a break on my lightweight rifle. Two seasons had quick shot opportunities, didn't get earplugs in. Now I have noticeable hearing loss.

Waiting for suppressor...

 

[Theringworm]

Growing up, rifles weren't commonly sold with breaks. I bought a SAKO Finnlight in 30.06 and shot that thing for the better part of 10-15 years before I would first buy a rifle with a muzzle break on it. Having a muzzle break wasn't the reason I bought it, as practicing at long range distance was. Fast forward to a couple of years ago. I had just done a thorough cleaning of all of commonly used rifles and wanted to go foul in the barrels so they would be ready for next season.

Sako Finnlight 30.06 no break
28 Nosler with a break
300 Norma AI with a break

I started with the Norma, then the Nosler and lastly the .06. The first two were a pleasure to shoot as they have always been. No issues. When I got to the Sako, I figured it would be no different than the prior 15 years of hunting with it. Always an accurate and precise rifle. Never new it to be anything different. After that first shot it felt like Mike Tyson just punched me in the shoulder. A very violent rapid recoil. Significantly worse than the 2 other guns with breaks. Sure, it's weight is quite a bit less than the others, but man it was a punisher to shoot. Odd how all the years prior I didn't know any different and never questioned it nor distance myself from taking it hunting.

But I will tell you this, it rarely ever gets taken out of the safe now. I don't enjoy shooting it like I do my other rifles that have breaks on them. Just a simple fact. I have a 375H&H that isn't breaked as well, and I hate shooting it. It's the only gun that has scoped me. Recoil definitely makes a difference for me regarding the experience; however, it doesn't impact my ability to accurately shoot. I just know it will be less enjoyable. Not saying I won't shoot a rifle without a break, but the experience is definitely different.

As for the noise, that is not an issue. I don't care how loud it is to me as it isn't something that affects my shooting. I take every effort at the range to setup away from everyone. I am aware it is loud and the wash travels right back into the neighboring shooters face. I try and do all I can to avoid that. If that option isn’t available I’ll setup where I can. While annoying for now my new neighbor, there isn’t an alternative. I would love to shoot at a range with barriers between each shooter, but that doesn’t exist. Now when at the range, if someone chooses to come shoot next to me when there are open spots further away, it’s not now my fault because I am shooting a breaked rifle.

 

[jhm2023]

The brake with plugs argument doesn't really make sense to me. Plugs don't cover your mastoid or any other facial bones. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not passing a shot on an animal to take the time for myself and others to install plugs. Quality muffs probably weigh as much as a lightweight can. They only cons to a suppressor is length an weight, but the pros far outweigh those cons.

 

[wapitibob]

Adding elec muffs to 30db plugs will reduce sound by a bunch more than 5db.

 

[Thinkingman]

The brake with plugs argument doesn't really make sense to me. Plugs don't cover your mastoid or any other facial bones. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not passing a shot on an animal to take the time for myself and others to install plugs. Quality muffs probably weigh as much as a lightweight can. They only cons to a suppressor is length an weight, but the pros far outweigh those cons.

Move away from you at the range?
Classic.
My range is considering a separate area for braked rifles.
Even the RSOs don't want them around.

 

[atmat]

As for the noise, that is not an issue. I don't care how loud it is as it isn't something that affects my shooting. Nor do I care about the poor soul in line with my muzzle blast. They should be smart enough to not stand in it or move away from me at the range.

This is such an awful take: “Who cares about hearing damage and screw everyone else!”

 

[Theringworm]

This is such an awful take: “Who cares about hearing damage and screw everyone else!”

Quotation marks ("") are used when directly quoting someone. i.e. restating something someone else said. No where in my post did I say what you put in quotations. Do not put words in my mouth!

I'll enlighten your assumption about my statement since you appear to be triggered by it.

The noise of a muzzle break doesn't appear to impact my shot accuracy whatsoever. I wear electronic muffs if at the range and electronic earbuds or foam ear buds if in the field. I protect me ears. That would be no different if I didn't have a break. The exact same ear protection would be worn.

At the range, if I am the first one there, I set up wherever I want or in my preferred spot. If I arrive and others are at the range, I intentionally pick a location away from them. If someone comes after me and sets up right beside me, not my problem. That's his/her choice and I am not going to tell him to do otherwise.

When hunting, especially if it's a guided hunt, my guides always are aware I have a muzzle break as they have heard/seen it when sighting in rifles. I do remind them to not sit in the path of the muzzle blast and attempt to position myself so when I am taking a shot it's not going to affect them. But I can't control what they do.

 

[TagEater]

I have a 24in 7 RM with the srs 3 port brake on it and it is awesome! I have accepted that I need to let an animal walk before I shoot without hearing pro.

 

[jhm2023]

Move away from you at the range?
Classic.
My range is considering a separate area for braked rifles.
Even the RSOs don't want them around.

You're assuming I partake in public ranges. I don't spend money on suppressors to go indulge in shooting with all the heathens shooting the mud puddles with their cheap shotguns and ARs.

 

[atmat]

Quotation marks ("") are used when directly quoting someone. i.e. restating something someone else said. No where in my post did I say what you put in quotations. Do not put words in my mouth!

Lol. Did you really believe my use of quotations was for a direct quote of you, when immediately prior I included your full quote? C’mon man, that’s a childish argument.

I'll enlighten your assumption about my statement since you appear to be triggered by it.

I’m certainly not triggered by it. I called you on your statement, as has someone else.

The noise of a muzzle break doesn't appear to impact my shot accuracy whatsoever. I wear electronic muffs if at the range and electronic earbuds or foam ear buds if in the field. I protect me ears. That would be no different if I didn't have a break. The exact same ear protection would be worn.

At the range, if I am the first one there, I set up wherever I want or in my preferred spot. If I arrive and others are at the range, I intentionally pick a location away from them. If someone comes after me and sets up right beside me, not my problem. That's his/her choice and I am not going to tell him to do otherwise.

When hunting, especially if it's a guided hunt, my guides always are aware I have a muzzle break as they have heard/seen it when sighting in rifles. I do remind them to not sit in the path of the muzzle blast and attempt to position myself so when I am taking a shot it's not going to affect them. But I can't control what they do.

This is a significantly more well-articulated comment than your first one was, and is at least somewhat reasonable in comparison to your initial attitude. Your ear protection very likely isn’t enough on a braked rifle, but that’s been addressed elsewhere so I won’t beat the horse.

 

[Thinkingman]

You're assuming I partake in public ranges. I don't spend money on suppressors to go indulge in shooting with all the heathens shooting the mud puddles with their cheap shotguns and ARs.

No...I'm not.
I belong to a private range and the members and RSOs want the guys that have to have a brake moved to their own section and baffles installed to mitigate the blast.
Your post really doesn't make sense.

 

[f16jack]

Growing up, rifles weren't commonly sold with breaks. I bought a SAKO Finnlight in 30.06 and shot that thing for the better part of 10-15 years before I would first buy a rifle with a muzzle break on it. Having a muzzle break wasn't the reason I bought it, as practicing at long range distance was. Fast forward to a couple of years ago. I had just done a thorough cleaning of all of commonly used rifles and wanted to go foul in the barrels so they would be ready for next season.

Sako Finnlight 30.06 no break
28 Nosler with a break
300 Norma AI with a break

I started with the Norma, then the Nosler and lastly the .06. The first two were a pleasure to shoot as they have always been. No issues. When I got to the Sako, I figured it would be no different than the prior 15 years of hunting with it. Always an accurate and precise rifle. Never new it to be anything different. After that first shot it felt like Mike Tyson just punched me in the shoulder. A very violent rapid recoil. Significantly worse than the 2 other guns with breaks. Sure, it's weight is quite a bit less than the others, but man it was a punisher to shoot. Odd how all the years prior I didn't know any different and never questioned it nor distance myself from taking it hunting.

But I will tell you this, it rarely ever gets taken out of the safe now. I don't enjoy shooting it like I do my other rifles that have breaks on them. Just a simple fact. I have a 375H&H that isn't breaked as well, and I hate shooting it. It's the only gun that has scoped me. Recoil definitely makes a difference for me regarding the experience; however, it doesn't impact my ability to accurately shoot. I just know it will be less enjoyable. Not saying I won't shoot a rifle without a break, but the experience is definitely different.

As for the noise, that is not an issue. I don't care how loud it is as it isn't something that affects my shooting. Nor do I care about the poor soul in line with my muzzle blast. They should be smart enough to not stand in it or move away from me at the range.

Yep. You are the guy at the range (or in the field) who gives the rest of us a bad name. The "I don't care about the poor soul." Yep, everyone else has the responsibility to get out of your way. Reflective of today's society.

 

[Formidilosus]

Yep. You are the guy at the range (or in the field) who gives the rest of us a bad name. The "I don't care about the poor soul." Yep, everyone else has the responsibility to get out of your way. Reflective of today's society.

While what he’s saying or doing may be rude, that’s actually correct. You, and you alone are responsible for your own well being.

Brakes suck, however it is not someone’s else’s job to protect my hearing. What you are exposing is antithetical to individual liberty. That you would sue someone because they shot an animal while hunting and didn’t tell you is insanity. It is not anyone else’s responsibility to protect you.

 

[Theringworm]

This is a significantly more well-articulated comment than your first one was, and is at least somewhat reasonable in comparison to your initial attitude. Your ear protection very likely isn’t enough on a braked rifle, but that’s been addressed elsewhere so I won’t beat the horse.

I’ll admit, I could have more clearly articulated my opinion in my initial post. It does make it sound like I don’t care. I care and do what I can control, to not impose on the surrounding shooters at the range. I’ll correct my true feelings and what I do. I appreciate you pointing out that it came across poorly. I’ll own that.

I’ll however still stand by my more thorough description in the second post. I do all I can to avoid shooting by anyone else when at the range as described above. I have had muzzle blast in my face, it’s no fun. But if someone comes after I have set up and shoots beside me, that‘s on them. If they don’t mind it, they‘ll stay and keep shooting. If they do mind then I guess they’ll relocate. I can’t control what they do and in this situation, and only this situation where they inserted themself Into a situation that now causes a problem for them, i cannot apologize for that.

 

[Thinkingman]

While what he’s saying or doing may be rude, that’s actually correct. You, and you alone are responsible for your own well being.

Brakes suck, however it is not someone’s else’s job to protect my hearing. What you are exposing is antithetical to individual liberty. That you would sue someone because they shot an animal while hunting and didn’t tell you is insanity. It is not anyone else’s responsibility to protect you.

I can't tell if you're serious or trolling.

I tried to explain that to the motorcyclist that took a spill in front of my car and rather than hit the brakes, I just drove over him in the road. He didn't comprehend that he, and he alone, is responsible for his own well-being.

 

[Formidilosus]

I can't tell if you're serious or trolling.

I tried to explain that to the motorcyclist that took a spill in front of my car and rather than hit the brakes, I just drove over him in the road. He didn't comprehend that he, and he alone, is responsible for his own well-being.

Using a strawman or poor analogy is not a way to communicate. What you just did is akin to saying you were shooting and someone tripped in front of you, and instead of ceasing to shoot, you shot them. It’s a poor analogy and it’s dumb. A better analogy is that you chose to go to a drag race, and they failed to inform you right before the cars took off, that they were about to take off- so your ears got hurt, and now you believe you should sue them. You went to the drag race. Races are loud, it is on you to wear hearing protection.


You go to a range or on a hunt there will be gunfire. Brakes are a fact of life. If you decide to go to a range and fail to account for brakes- that’s on you. There is a difference between someone being a dick; and saying someone is liable for “assualt”, “negligence”, or litigation because they fired a gun while on a range or while hunting an animal.

I am not a victim. I do not blame, or hold others legally liable for me not wearing ear pro while on a range or a hunt.

 

[Coopsdaddy]

Im not to concerned with the one maybe two shots in the field.Definitely want protection at the range.

 

[Bluefish]

Im not to concerned with the one maybe two shots in the field.Definitely want protection at the range.

Except for with a suppressor, you should be concerned with 1 or 2 shots. At 160+db high powered rifles damages hearing. You might not notice this year or next, but 10, 20 years down the road you will. Makes the cochlea fibers look like a blow down from a wind storm. No recovery from that. Short term your brain can compensate, but as you get older it can’t and the damage will show up.