Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
Sounds like the writer must have read the press release....

I wonder how accurate the claim for recoil reduction can be though since there is no directional release of gas. Maybe it's just the weight?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Charlie Petty said:
Sounds like the writer must have read the press release....

I wonder how accurate the claim for recoil reduction can be though since there is no directional release of gas. Maybe it's just the weight?
Hmmm...y'know, it didn't give length, weight, rate of twist, the usual specs. Does kinda read like it was cribbed straight from a PIO's write up.

Glad to see the guys getting a rifle that falls between the .308 and the .50. Bet that one wasn't exactly low bid, though.

Charlie, I've kinda been looking at suppressors lately, and more than a few of the advertisements claim recoil reduction along with sound and flash reduction. They don't explain just how that is accomplished.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Irish, the baffles in a suppressor act exactly like a muzzle brake. Flat surface for the expanding gases to impact, thus drawing the gun slightly forward.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Ahhh, So! Thanks, Al. That is logical (which is why I didn't think of it.) :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
It seems to shoot well, looks hideous though. Kinda like a smashed-up crutch. Also, while it is Tacticool, I fail to see the utility of a Suppressor for a long-range weapon. At 800 meters, they'll be with Allah way before the sound of any report reaches their immediate AO and nobody will see the small puff of smoke at almost 1/2 mile. If they're close enough to worry about such things, they would be within range of the M4s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Lesse now about the suppressor:

Right now, the issue is Jihadists at long range, that isn't always the case, so get the can anyway. Now that you've got it, the can suppresses noise, dust kickup and flash, so the recipients of the greetings lose cues as to the location of the shooter. [You're assuming the opponent only has the Mk1Mod0 eyeball as an observation device, this is not always the case. Where it is, what a trained observer who knows their craft can do with said eyeball is startling.] It also allows the sniper to stay in place (maybe the only place he has a shot) past the one shot. Reducing recoil is also a good thing (esp. with magnams), possibly making a double doable if the survivors aren't the swiftest dudes in the AO.

So, the buds of Jamal the Jihadist know they're under fire, but the usual cues to the location of the shooter are missing. Another good thing from the shooters end is that if the hide is inside some structure or natural enclosure, the stunning muzzle blast isn't there. A muzzle blast in an enclosed area can become a physically punishing event.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
The suppressor fans all mention the recoil reduction of "cans." I've had some time with suppressed rifles, and a couple of decades with comps and brakes.

The best a suppressor does in recoil reduction is about as good as a mediocre comp does. Which is not negligible, but not spectacular. Which is to say: if you think a .300 win mag is going to kick like a .22 Hornet because it has a "can " on it is to believe almost anything. they take the sting out, they keep the muzzle rise and vibration down a bit, but that's it.

And the real benefits are the exact things a suppressor is made for: reduced noise, muzzle blast, dust signature, etc. If they didn't do a darned thing about recoil, they'd still be worthwhile additions to the kit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Thanks for the further information on recoil reduction. The only cans I have any experience worth considering were on weapons where the recoil wasn't much to begin with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
921 Posts
Al Thompson said:
Irish, the baffles in a suppressor act exactly like a muzzle brake. Flat surface for the expanding gases to impact, thus drawing the gun slightly forward.
Are you sure about that? It seems to me that the expansion of the gas within each baffle chamber will also push backwards as well - a muzzle brake directs gas to the side, sometimes backwards after hitting the flat surfaces, but in a closed suppressor the gas can't escape, so it will "bounce" (wrong term, I'm sure - the collisions aren't elastic) back and hit the front of the previous baffle, pushing backwards . . . the overall effect on recoil from this effect will be negligible.

I think the reason there's a reduction in recoil is that the suppressor contains the gas and allows it to expand and cool, reducing pressure. When the gas finally DOES leave the muzzle (of the suppressor) it's cooler, has lower pressure, and is moving at a substantially reduced velocity. (That's why it's not so loud.) Less velocity = less momentum = less recoil.

But it's still moving forwards, which is why I'd expect that a good brake (which CAN direct some of the gas backwards) would provide more recoil reduction than a suppressor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,940 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Tangentially related; does anyone here have any experience with Yankee Hill cans?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
Okay Bill, Pat, I can buy that. Just for the noise-reduction inside a building. A good Sniper would set-up at least four feet inside the room he's using for a hide. Of course, that alone would remove flash and dust from the equation and some of the directional vector of the noise. But, that doesn't take into account the shooter him/herself. Sorry, wasn't thinking deeply enough.

any really effective brake, like the brake on a Barrett light 50 for example, would be total madness inside a room or any enclosed area. The side noise would bounce around and brakes are loud!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
Retmsgt. said:
any really effective brake, like the brake on a Barrett light 50 for example, would be total madness inside a room or any enclosed area. The side noise would bounce around and brakes are loud!
FWIW: The new M107A1 configuration also comes with a detachable sound suppressor.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
Retmsgt. said:
Dan, does the brake come off for it? I would assume so.
No, the new four-baffle muzzle brake has a round profile, and serves as the mounting point for the sound suppressor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Retmsgt-you're forgetting the memorable effect flash can dispay at dusk/dawn and at night. Recall that night optics are part of the snipers kit these days. Getting back into a dark room helps, but if there are observers looking right at you and you didn't put up a scrim/screen, the flash in a dark room is a "Here be Sniper!" sign. Yeah, distance reduces the effect, but keep reading.

Also, while the target may be way off, Ali Al-Queda & Mukbar the Mujihidin may be sipping tea a whole lot closer, but out of sight (perhaps vertically) or not recognizable. They can run a whole lot faster with an AK & 2 mags than our folks can with all the gear deemed necessary these days.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
For what it's worth, I agree with Br'ers Sweeney and Moore. Better with the can than without.

NONE of the "modern" design sniper/counter-sniper/tactical marksman rifles are pretty in the conventional sense. BUT, they do offer unlimited adjustments for fitting the platform to just about any shooter, without permanently re-modeling the "stock" - since it ain't got one.

And does anybody else think the pistol grip looks like an old Pachmayr Gripper?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
I'm really surprised that the press release didn't mention another VERY big advantage... ear safety

the biggest thing I've shot with a can has been .308 both semi and bolt so I don't know how much good 32 dB would be in a 300WM but it sure ought to save some ears.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
I agree about the ear safety thing.

One thing that may contribute, besides a suppressor, is f they have done any monkeying about with the stock like in some of the more recent high end shotguns. The big gun makers have done several experiments to reduce felt recoil, so if any of them have merit I wouldn't be suprised if the folks in the service have checked those methods out as well.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top