Unknown Suppressors Updates

[Bluefish]

Is the 7prc a competition or straight range toy? If it's called "NHS" for a reason.......why ditch brake if you still need ear pro? I understand the competition and range side of things, as I still wear ear pro in those situation weather hearing safe can or not. But the whole point of a supressor is to not need ear pro hunting in my opinion.

Ear pro only offers so much protection. If a guns 170, a single protector only gets you to 140 ish, double gets you to 120 which is theoretically safe for 100 shots in a day. Adding a can that drops that 170 to 150, adds 900+ safe shots per day. So yes, it still matters.

 

[Formidilosus]

Is the 7prc a competition or straight range toy? If it's called "NHS" for a reason.......why ditch brake if you still need ear pro? I understand the competition and range side of things, as I still wear ear pro in those situation weather hearing safe can or not. But the whole point of a supressor is to not need ear pro hunting in my opinion.

A braked rifle is somewhere around 170-175 dB. It also has produces massive concussion that is only now starting to be realized how bad it is for you. With 170dB, you need more than 30dB reduction to fire one shot without “damage”. Plugs and muffs will get you to about 30-35dB of reduction. Therefor one cannot fire a brake rifle multiple times a day without some level of damage. That’s without even considering the concussive blast.


The NHS brings it down to 145-148dB, with almost no concussion. With double ear pro, that rifle is now 115-120dB and can be shot for an entire day without known effects, and no headaches.

 

[khuber84]

I understand the concussion side, 150+ rounds a day of fat bastard at a match, even with double earpro, left me very fatigued and foggy. I see brakes at the range now, I get as far down line as possible or I just leave.

 

[Bluumoon]

Physics aren’t my strong suit, but would an internal brake with gas flowing around suppression baffles and out the front work?

 

[Formidilosus]

Physics aren’t my strong suit, but would an internal brake with gas flowing around suppression baffles and out the front work?

Well, that’s functionally a flow through can. They kind of suck as suppressors and suck as brakes.

 

[ACHILLES]

Physics aren’t my strong suit, but would an internal brake with gas flowing around suppression baffles and out the front work?

A lot cans already have an internal brake that the can screws over. It’s pretty useless with the can on since the gas’s are still being redirected inside. Serves more as a blast baffle I think. Since I don’t know why anyone would pull their can off to shoot through the loud brake.

 

[Marbles]

Physics aren’t my strong suit, but would an internal brake with gas flowing around suppression baffles and out the front work?

No. Without getting too complicated, perhaps these examples will help explain it.

If you mount jet engine inside an unclosed box, will the box move forward when the engine is fired?

Or, think of it as grabbing your feet and trying to pick yourself up. Doesn't matter that I can deadlift more than my body weight, no matter how hard I try, nothing happens.

 

[Bluumoon]

No. Without getting too complicated, perhaps these examples will help explain it.

If you mount jet engine inside an unclosed box, will the box move forward when the engine is fired?

Or, think of it as grabbing your feet and trying to pick yourself up. Doesn't matter that I can deadlift more than my body weight, no matter how hard I try, nothing happens.

Makes sense what about the one on the left, assuming drawing on the right is currently how they work . Ports facing rear , a good portion of gas wouldn’t be “suppressed”, but slowed. I’m bored and stuck in place…

 

[Bluumoon]

Makes sense what about the one on the left, assuming drawing on the right is currently how they work . Ports facing rear , a good portion of gas wouldn’t be “suppressed”, but slowed. I’m bored and stuck in place…

Or forgive the preschool drawings… blast chamber into helical baffles, gas exiting reward.

 

[Marbles]

Makes sense what about the one on the left, assuming drawing on the right is currently how they work . Ports facing rear , a good portion of gas wouldn’t be “suppressed”, but slowed. I’m bored and stuck in place…

Not sure I understand the drawing on the left.

A suppressor can only mitigate the portion of the recoil from gas (charge weight on a recoil calculator). Better designs will do a better job.

A break actively redirects force, thus it can also cancel out the recoil from the bullet weight and velocity. The higher pressure the gas, the more effectively it can do this.

If you are having gas hit something attached to the gun, then the forces cancel out and the redirection doesn't occur and the only benefit is slowing down gas (like in a suppressor).

 

[Bluumoon]

Not sure I understand the drawing on the left.

A suppressor can only mitigate the portion of the recoil from gas (charge weight on a recoil calculator). Better designs will do a better job.

A break actively redirects force, thus it can also cancel out the recoil from the bullet weight and velocity. The higher pressure the gas, the more effectively it can do this.

If you are having gas hit something attached to the gun, then the forces cancel out and the redirection doesn't occur and the only benefit is slowing down gas (like in a suppressor).

Spliitting off gas in blast chamber for “muzzle brake” effect rather than at the end on the suppressor.

 

[Marbles]

Spliitting off gas in blast chamber for “muzzle brake” effect rather than at the end on the suppressor.

It would give higher gas velocity, so a more effective break, but less effective suppressor. Beyond than supposition, I don't know.