Are there any muzzle brakes for, lets say the ar-15, that cancel

File: Table-All.jpg (271KB, 691x931px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 691x931px

>>32857775
No

Not exactly. There are some that overcompensate and push your barrel too far down and slightly forward. Most brakes do a pretty good job of getting rid of the 5.56 "recoil", but the gun will still move while shooting. That's just physics

>>32857784
How come there aren't any? I mean surely it is possible.

File: IMG_2880.gif (19KB, 475x143px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 475x143px

No. The AK-107 probably comes closest

>>32857789
If you manage to divert enough propellant gasses backwards wouldn't you be able to cancel out the recoil completely?

>>32857810
That just cancels out the bolt movement, like shooting a bolt action, you aren't actually reducing recoil at all, just felt recoil.

>>32857797
>I mean surely it is possible.
No, it's not.
The energy in the gas exiting the barrel can't counter the rearward force it takes to actually propel the bullet forward.

File: over 100%.png (17KB, 1093x322px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 1093x322px

This does

>>32857821
Isn't that the point?
If you can eliminate muzzle climb/recoil with an efficient brake, and counter the bolt movement, then in theory no impulse is delivered to the shooter

>>32857822
Recoilless rifles work by diverting propellant gasses although i guess there is less pressure at the muzzle.

>>32857831
Guess so, a brake will never be able to cancel out the impulse of the bullet accelerating in the barrel before meeting the muzzle brake.

>>32857784
9 inches of recoil?

How can anyone possibly shoot more than 1 bullet per second without being spun like a Katherine wheel?

>>32857822
You have ~25 grains of propellant pushing a ~60 grain bullet, assuming all propellant becomes gas you would have to divert all the propelling gas directly backwards at ~3 times the velocity of the bullet, with the velocity requirement increasing as you obviously have to divert it to the sides. You would need some fancy nozzle design to increase the velocity of the gases and it's just not practical

>>32857853
That's for a test sled, not a human (duh).

File: setup.png (435KB, 800x557px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 800x557px

>>32857825

>>32857853
It's referring to the distance backward the rifle traveled when fired without anyone holding it

>>32857784

Damn, I didn't realize the A2 was so useless. Are there any alternatives on this list that aren't really expensive or too tacticool looking?

>>32858165
The Strike Industries J Comp is about $30, and is 8th place on the list, with a 60.5% decrease in horizontal recoil from bare muzzle.

>>32858237

Cool, I'll look it up. Thanks for the hot tip, /k/omrad.

>>32858165
Birdcage is a flashhider first and foremost.

File: AR in the grasslands.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>32858165
The A2 is not a comp, it's a flash hider.

>>32858237
Second this. It's top-tier, especially for the price.

>>32858256

Fair point. I didn't even think about what something like the J Comp would do regarding muzzle flash. It's not like a 5.56 recoils that much after all.

It's interesting to note that the J Comp 2.0 also features muzzle climb compensation.

>>32857840
Recoilless rifles aren't even without recoil for that matter.

>>32857775
>Bullet/Shell

>>32857775
>100%
sure, send me a billion dollars in gold and I will send you one of my magic muzzle breakers

>>32857775
>ar-15
its TRASH.
Queen Mugi has spoken.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPkj5ayfwRs
PRAISE KALASHNIKOV

>>32858370
Artillery also use muzzle brakes.

>>32858237
Can confirm, jcomp it an awesome price to effect ratio. Just know that the blast does go out and back to the sides so don't settle up next to the guy trying to zero his hunting rifle.

>>32858435
harumph

>>32858324
This.

They reduce the felt recoil from "enough to rock a 40-ton tank backwards with each shot" to "something akin to shoulder-firing a 30mm GAU-8 round, or firing an M2 full retard".

It'll still shatter your shoulder if you tried to make a shoulder-fired one, but they're "tame" enough to mount on a tripod or in the back of a pickup truck.

also
>>32857775
>he wants to reduce the felt recoil on .223, a learning cartridge for women and children!

Maybe doing yoga in white pants or playing women's soccer and talking about how liberating it is to not have to worry about spillover or leakage in a feminine hygene product ad is more your speed, OP.

File: US_Special_Forces_soldier_fires_a_Carl_Gustav_rocket_during_a_training_exercise_conducted_in_Basrah_Iraq.jpg (590KB, 1050x703px) Image search: [Google]

590KB, 1050x703px

>>32858501
>you can't fire a recoilless rifle from the shoulder

You can reduce it by ~100% but not with muzzle brakes.

>>32858691
That would require weapon to eject everything back

>>32857797
it's not, you daft cunt.

>>32858501
>Can't shoulder-fire a recoilless rifle
What is the M1 bazooka

>>32857811
No because otherwise it wouldn't cycle.

>>32858324

>Recoilless rifles aren't even without recoil for that matter.

Are you retarded? Seriously?
There are recoilless rifles.

>>32859107
>you proved me wrong, therefore your photo is shopped
Not how it works moron.

>>32859164
Im pretty sure the retard one is you.
lrn2 physics

>>32859267
>lrn2 physics
lrn2 backblast, you idiot

>>32859267
>carl gustav shatters your shoulder, despite a myriad of hard evidence to the contrary, because in my mind that's the way physics must work
You're definitely a retard.

>>32857822
You can with excessive charge and light projectile. But these parameters are outside area guns normally operate.

>>32859327
I actually thought of that, but figured it wasn't worth mentioning.

>>32859327
Don't even need that.
The propellant is exiting at a much higher velocity. Equal the forces between gas going back and slower bullet going forward and you have recoilless operation.
There are some muzzle breaks out there that let .50 cals jump forwards when firing.

>>32859398
>breaks
brakes

>>32859267
It may not be 100% recoilless, but it's pretty close.
https://youtu.be/qsM8EtBZ-EQ

>>32859799
>b-but muh fissuks!

File: picatinny rail double sided clamp.jpg (8KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 300x300px

>>32857797
How come there aren't any? I mean surely it is possible.

It's literally physically not.

But if you really want to achieve a 100% recoilless AR, here's what you do:

Buy pic related clamp, then use it to attach a second AR-15 on top of your first one, facing backwards. Link the triggers so they both fire at the same time. Then give both agressive muzzle brakes that direct the gasses downwards to cancel the torques.

File: DMX.jpg (56KB, 462x546px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 462x546px

>>32859153
>What is the M1 bazooka
A rocket launcher?

Of all the examples you could have used, you picked on that isn't a recoilless rifle?

Why not the M18?
Why not the M67?
Why not the RPG-7? (though it does have a rocket motor in the projectile for sustaining velocity)
Why not the Carl Gustaf?
Why not the Armbrust?
Why not the AT-4?

my surefire socom makes my ar feel like a 22lr when I shoot it

File: w9sRxh.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

>>32857784

Wonder where the Lantac Dragon would fall on that list

>>32860018
>Link the triggers so they both fire at the same time.
Then the AFT shoots your dog for creating an illegal machine gun that fires multiple bullets with one trigger pull.

File: brake-performance.jpg (224KB, 800x1169px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 800x1169px

>>32860224
They did a part 2 that included it.

File: arsenal-double-barreled-1911.jpg (23KB, 600x425px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x425px

>>32860300
If what you were saying were accurate then this would be illegal and it's not, so please cease your shitposting

>>32860300
If they fire at the same time it's a volley gun, not a machine gun.
Faggot.

>>32860444
Muh J-comp continues to shine. Almost the same reduction as the Lantac for a 3rd of the price. Not to mention the J-comp actually has a decent amount of flash suppression and doesn't throw fireballs like the Lantac.

File: 20160823_152122-1-900x506.jpg (89KB, 900x506px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 900x506px

>>32857775
The reigning champ is the SJC Titan with just a cunt hair shy of 80% recoil reduction.

>>32857775
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-4/Newton-s-Third-Law

>>32860462
That thing has two triggers believe it or not.

>>32860822
I know, but they are pulled at the same time and cannot be pulled separately for obvious timing reasons.

>>32857784
any for the ak?

>>32860822
But it's legally a volley gun.

>>32857775

Just shoot thumb over bore like an operator

File: IMG_0239.jpg (2MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x1536px

>>32857775
supposedly this muzzle brake reduced recoil by 40%

>>32858165
>A2 flash hider is not a good muzzle brake or compensator

Wow really activates my almonds

>>32859252
And doesn't this eject all flames and stuff in back?

>>32857775
No. The gas would have to push against the barrel enough to counteract its own movement as well as the acceleration of the bullet. There would have to be some way to accelerate the gas backwards rather than just redirect it, which there is not, at least not in the size and amount we're looking at in a muzzle brake.

>>32861304
I hear the AK fighter brake is quite good

>>32857797
How about you go to school and get an engineering or physics degree so you can make one that negates 100% of the recoil faggot.

Pro tip: You cant because nothing is exact you stupid fuck.

>>32863489
No.... how stupid are you? Do you think that bullets still use black powder? Go look shit up every once in a while instead of asking dipshit questions.

File: IMG_0516.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>32860679
Ayy
I've got one of those on my competition rifle. It definitely feels good.

>>32857775
No but you can make a rifle with internals that will do that, one of the original designers of the AR did just that.

>>32864460
how loud is that thing?

>>32864319
The gas is already moving faster than the bullet.
If enough gas is going backwards recoil is zero.

>>32860444
Really makes me want to get an AFAB. Alright compensation with less concussion and flash.

>>32857775

Ive heard of 'brakes actually producing negative recoil (gun is pulled forward).

Not sure about the AR though.

>>32857797
You would damage the barrel and receiver as the barrel would be pulled forward while the lugs would pull backwards

>>32857821
That actually stops real recoil since the rifle doesnt actually continue backwards

felt recoil is only lowered by time or distance

A forward mass would cancel the inertia

>>32857797
Brakes help with muzzle flip but Newton can't be denied.
Equal and opposite is going into your shoulder.

>>32857775
>conservation of energy
You answered your own question just by posting that picture
Somebody didn't pay attention in physics
saged because this thread is idiotic

File: 7ffe7d10a2dac4d8b9f40c478aa5aab7b6de65d3a5cd7dc664c15b79f3867940.jpg (18KB, 224x400px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 224x400px

>>32857784
>amazon $16 3 port
>better than 60% of the list, at a fraction of the cost

all of my kek

>>32858165
The A2 is not a muzzle brake. It's a flash hider/compensator combo. It is necessary because the m4 has a tiny barrel with lots of muzzle flash. A muzzle brake also annoys people shooting next to you, which is bad for squads of soldiers. The ideal muzzle device is a suppressor, which reduces flash, noise, felt recoil and muzzle rise. The marines are switching to them as their standard muzzle device.

>bullet is fired out front
>heavy shell is ejected directly backwards at such a velocity that the momentum is net 0
Just get a heavy enough shell bro!

Best muzzle brake for reduction of recoil AND flash? Waiting before buying a supressor.

>>32857775
Lantac dragon

>>32866510
This is what I have. Can't seem to find it on Amazon now though.
>>32866571
>The marines are switching to them as their standard muzzle device.
No we're not. It's being tested though. 1 full BN is getting issued them I believe. Before it's only been snipers that has them.

reducing push back with 5.56 is not the important part. what is important is keeping muzzle movement to a minimum.

um tactical's rage does a pretty good job of it. it's a very 3 gun kind of brake but i'm sure you could use it in combat too.

(2m43s for shooting)

https://youtu.be/D9-Jume1p-g?t=2m43s

>>32857784
I bought the M4-72. It's extremely effective; it won two separate muzzle brake-offs. However, it is so fucking loud it makes shooting that rifle uncomfortable to the point where I've put 60 rounds through it in the last 8 months. I always seem to forget how unpleasant it is to shoot. It also blows a surprising amount of hot gas back into your face. I want to get rid of it for another brake that isn't so uncomfortable to shoot. Suggestions?

>>32867311
Ear muffs, dude. Use ear muffs.

>>32864448
Chill, I was just pretending to be retarted

>>32860444
>>32857784
Can confirm that while the M4-72 does indeed midigate a good amount of recoil. Shooting it with out eye pro can be unpleasant. Also I've shot it next to 308 that seemed quieter than.

File: 20170122_193901.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

>>32867311
Lantac dragon my man.

>>32867339
I wear ear pro... it's extremely loud.

>>32858266
The A2 is a compensator and a flash hider.

Compensators prevent the muzzle from rising.
Flash hiders hide flash.
Muzzle brakes prevent the muzzle pushing backwards, recoil felt on the shoulder.

The A2 prevents some muzzle rise and hides flash very effectively. If you don't believe me you can put the A2 on upside down and feel the increased muzzle rise.

>>32857797
fuck off

>>32857775
No brakes will eliminate 100% of the recoil because the BCG still has to go backwards, but here's a parts list to build a relatively reliable race gun with near ZERO recoil; it won't be cheap:

>SJC Titan Comp
>18" rifle gas barrel
>adjustable GB
>Whisky arms lightweight aluminum carrier
>JP SCS with 3 oz weight for reliability
The rest can be standard parts. A heavier barrel profile and heavier stock may soak up even more recoil but will be less handy.

See this guy's demo https://youtube.com/watch?v=eGU1voqrFvg

could it work on a bolt gun where there's no gas powered shit for the propellant gases to move?

>>32858237
>>32858266
>>32858275
Only issues with J comp is that it's a bit long and it's not very aesthetic. Otherwise it's not bad.

>>32871362
Bolt guns recoil harder because there's no spring to soak up some of the inertia. Unless it's super heavy compared to the caliber, like a 30 pound rifle firing 5.56.

>>32857784
Recoil is P = M*V = [mass][length]/[time]
Imperial: P: lbs-fps
SI (master race): P: kg*m/s

NONE OF THESE ARE INCHES!

File: 15941362_10212031190202214_7619084846593212722_n.jpg (126KB, 528x960px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 528x960px

>>32857775
Any good muzzle break for a PTR91?
My PTR91

File: XHP556FC-3T.jpg (60KB, 372x400px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 372x400px

All this talk about comps and no one mentions the Griffin flash comp. Shame. +1 points if its a taper mount flash comp

File: you lose!!!.gif (1MB, 300x165px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x165px

>>32872485
>break
It's a BRAKE. How do so many people not know this?

>>32873080
actually it's a flash hider

>>32873144
you were asking about a muzzle brake, not a flash hider

>>32871510
Search the muzzle brake article. They tell you the test parameters.