Muzzle breaks

[Maggot]

As regards the "not needing to take a quick follow up shot in this country", again, do your homework. I forget the figures but I know a stoppage in the Roberts cost me 30 points when I had a jam and dropped 6 shots, it was over in a blink, and there are phases in the Urban contact and a few others where you have a few seconds to get all 10 off in multiples of 4/3/3 so yes, rapid follow ups are a reality.

As it was me that this relates to, it seems to miss the point I was making and went on to further explain:

Or rather, we cannot make rapid follow up shots given that we need to manipulate the bolt or press a lever or some other such manipulation that has more effect to our firing position than the recoil.

Whilst I more than agree the use of MB's, and have stated as much in this thread, to be able to view the splash, or impact of the shot; follow-up shots whilst shouldering a rifle require much more input or change of position to manipulate the weapon to make ready for a follow up shot than the muzzle-brake can possibly justify, to my mind.

If I did not think a brake was an advantage it would be gone, and I guess the majority of the other CSR (Sorry) bods feel the same.

Again, as Vince said, we are all shooters so come and try....Bet you take it up

Again though this comes down to expectation and etiquette. If you're shooting CSR, you can pretty much expect MB's - The types of rifles most common in use (AR Varients) have bird cages as standard and people like to adapt to try and get an edge. Suppressors in this situation would be at a detriment due to the extra weight on the rifle.
Then there's also the common round used in CSR - 5.56/.223 - it's not as rambunctious as say a .308, with or without a muzzle break, so it's not as "in your face", I'd tend to steer clear of those shooting short .308's with muzzle breaks, if possible, even in CSR but maybe that's just me.

So there you go. If you have a problem with a brake using shooter, why not speak to them and agree some seperation? I normally move as far away as I can on a point and have only been moaned at once (It did ask for it, I was covering short siberia with dust). Most of us (certainly that shoot comps anyhow) dont add stuff for looks and will gladly remove things that get in the way.

Again, you seem to take into account etiquette and your surroundings. Can't disagree really.

Errr OK, so otherwise fine then.

I cant quite make out how the advantage of a brake pails due to the act of cycling the rifle, as I have pointed out elsewhere, a well sorted rifle should render this not much more difficult than a biathlon rifle. You dont move much and your head really does not need to move at all. A few fingers will come off the grip but thats about it.

The brake helps the follow through phase and/or arrests recoil/flip, coming from the ready alert to the standing on aim, and cycling the rifle are the same regardless of whether a brake is fitted or not.

I think the bottom line here is to be sensible. Personally I do notice a pronounced bark from the ARs fitted with brakes. It can get a bit wearing but I think common sense and a bit of tolerance goes a long way.

Hearing protection is common sense. Bisley is a bloody rifle range and has been for a very long time......there's a clue folks

[hitchphil]

Sound levels to the rear are above safe levels. Why should my kids, scouts or members hearing be damaged sitting in the back of the estate hatch at 600yds because somebody on a FP at Bisley is using one? This area is normally quite safe to chat & banter without ear defenders on, but not if somebody on a nearby FP is using a MB & no not all shooters use or can afford expensive electronic ones.
Range managers carry a duty of care to protect the health & safety of all users. If Mr S.Stimson is blatting away with a MB inflicting damage on other range users hearing he is creating a liability for the range owners & he should be removed to consider managing his own recoil or moved off & well out of the way too.

I'm sorry but this kind of talk is utter bolloxs and does nothing but create bad feeling between the various disciplines of our sport. That said I do agree on one point, RCO's do have a responsibility wards the health and safety of others whilst on the range and wearing adequate hearing protection is one of them. However, when I undertook my NRA RCO course I don't recall the part where it mentioned that we should give due consideration for those behind the firing point that wish to hear themselves speak without adequate hearing protection. If you on the range then wearing hearing protection is mandatory , end of.

Smack on Dave, and can I suggest that expensive electronic ear deffenders do not enhance the protection to the wearer, but they do allow filtered/buffered hearing in a noisy environment. I have stopped using mine in comps so that I cannot hear those behind the firing point who wont shut up. I use them so I can chat rather than bellw or run a FP more safely but sadly they are not fitted with automatic prat filters There are all manner of things that change the perceived sound levels at the ear, air temp, surrounding topography, even the relative position of cars parked behind the firing point. The fact is that while we all have "Rights" regarding our health and safety at the NSC, we also have "responsibilities" that we need to observe, one of which is wearing suitable sound protection. Moaning about brakes which are permitted, do not offset the requirement to make sure you are protected. Bit like walking into the road whilst messing with your phone.....due care and attention

So do you & Cad Monkey have the data to back up why you think this is bo...cks? er No - The plain facts are a 308 even a 223 generates ~150 Db near a normal muzzle (~0.5m behind it) vs a braked .357 190Db! & a 308 more - damage to hearing starts at 85Db. & what creates bad feelings between disciplines is when one inflicts unnecessary effects on another. Not when another does what its done for the last ~100 years with no ill effects on others.

Lane separation only protects adjacent shooters from debris & blast it does nothing for the people behind the next 2 lanes either side & for upto 40 foot that experience noise levels well above 90-100Db with a brake vs below 60Db with a Normal Muzzle (same as conversation levels). The area beyond the ditch 600 & 500 Bisley was safe to snooze chat discuss without ear defenders until mixed discipline firing & the at times totally inconsiderate use of MBs by a few individuals, & often in contravention to the range rules.

The Bisley range regs actually say: "In view of the potential permanent damage which can be caused to hearing, all persons involved in a shoot, or in close proximity when shooting is taking place, must wear hearing protection." that clearly does not imply the entire range. The key term is close proximity' & I & many others take that as the FP & just behind it. Not the car park!

Your perverted 'lojik' is the same bull put up by smokers against passive smoking effects on health - its not my responsibility to wear a suitable gas mask in public because people smoke & its not reasonable to expect people in the car park to have to wear ear defs because one person wishes to use a MB! the only bo...cks being exposed here is by you & Cad M. You have no right to inflict excessive & damaging noise on people well behind the FP & on butt 19@ 600 the residents in the houses behind. I do have the right to ask you to stop & i do do that, you & those that believe MBs are acceptable in mixed discipline shoots wont be the first people i have had removed from the FP for using them. The more it happens & the more people put up these arguments to justify using them the closer we get to a great number of people asking NRA for a formal ban. The more crap i read justifying the 'rights of MB users' the closer I get to a motion at AGM & General council.

Want to use them - book a target a butt away & pay for the empty lanes too please.

CSR events are as said very different, the non shooters are actively involved in safety / supervision on the FP there are few if any spectators or people waiting & because of falling forward its on a more remote butt - quite acceptable to me & others. Normal muzzle shoots have groups of people being coached, watching, waiting & an MB in this area is as acceptable as a fart in a lift.

I would like to see them banned from mixed discipline / general shooting regardless of the lane separation because they have real detrimental effects on peoples hearing & its not their responsibility to protect themselves well beyond the actual activity. In the wrong circumstances they are obtrusive & generate unnecessary noise. When i take my ear defs off well behind the ditch to fit my shooting hat & glasses why should i then run the risk of a MB sound wave during that - that makes my ears hiss for the next hour during my shoot? Does my mosin/No4/qualdlock do that to others there ? No.

Man up & manage your own recoil vs inflict it on everybody else around you!

[breacher]

For me this subject boils down to.......

Why make more noise / direct said noise towards the shooters either side of you unless it is ESSENTIAL.

If you REALLY need to manage recoil, you can do so using a sound moderator. If weight is an issue, you can easily offset the additional weight of a sound mod over a brake by lopping off a few inches of the barrel. Or go titanium ?

I tried a brake on my LMT in order to save weight but its uncomfortable to shoot and the weight difference is not really that noticeable.

Ask yourself - "Do I really need this brake ? Is the antisocial aspect really worth saving a couple of % of the total overall weight compared to the same rifle fitted with a sound moderator ? Am I gaining anything by making my firearm more noisy than it NEEDS to be ?

[TattooedGun]

Oooh, this is an exciting conversation.

I think it's worth reminding everyone that not all of us have the same experiences, interests and background, nor do we all shoot at the same range, and whilst a lot of this thread directly deals with shooting at Bisley, where there are a lot of lanes to choose from, and a lot of ranges to choose from, some of us shoot on MOD ranges, as and when we can get dates due to landmarc and therefore we do not have the luxury of moving or having separation lanes - from both sides of the debate, Braked or non-braked.

Some of us may never shoot on MOD or Bisley and use only commercial lanes, or land. We're a diverse bunch, and with that said, I don't think there's a one size fits all approach.

Each scenario should be judged on its own merit.

That said, Breacher makes a point that I would msotly agree with. Why make more noise when you absolutely don't need to make more noise.

There are genuine scenarios where they can be beneficial, there is no denying that, but there are other scenarios where they are nothing but a nuisance.

Slow-fire shared lane single-fire, individually marked shots being the main culprit, in my opinion.

[s.stimson]

If you REALLY need to manage recoil, you can do so using a sound moderator.

If you REALLY don't mind paying for additional variations, and If the feo REALLY dosen't decline the granting of them, and If you REALLY have the money to buy them, and ultimately If you REALLY want one fitted to your rifle; then yes you REALLY can manage recoil with a sound moderator (or you can use a muzzle brake)

[Zilberbak]

Are we really talking about banning things? Makes me think the anti-shooting lobby have managed in brainwashing some of us. Go down the route of measuring sound levels we will be banning firearms that are too noisy and shutting ranges for fear of upsetting the neighbours. Ye Gods, shooting is noisy? Who would have thought. Guesting with 50 Cal Club the weekend better tell them to keep it down a bit for fear of deafening the sheep!

Please note huge amounts of sarcasm intended!

Reminds me of an adjacent shooter complaining that the mini-mag I was using was too noisy, told him to take up golf!

[Airbrush]

Are we really talking about banning things? Makes me think the anti-shooting lobby have managed in brainwashing some of us. Go down the route of measuring sound levels we will be banning firearms that are too noisy and shutting ranges for fear of upsetting the neighbours. Ye Gods, shooting is noisy? Who would have thought. Guesting with 50 Cal Club the weekend better tell them to keep it down a bit for fear of deafening the sheep!

Please note huge amounts of sarcasm intended!

Reminds me of an adjacent shooter complaining that the mini-mag I was using was too noisy, told him to take up golf!

I tend to use 'knitting.'

[Cad Monkey]

Your perverted 'lojik' is the same bull put up by smokers against passive smoking effects on health - its not my responsibility to wear a suitable gas mask in public because people smoke & its not reasonable to expect people in the car park to have to wear ear defs because one person wishes to use a MB! the only bo...cks being exposed here is by you & Cad M. You have no right to inflict excessive & damaging noise on people well behind the FP & on butt 19@ 600 the residents in the houses behind. I do have the right to ask you to stop & i do do that, you & those that believe MBs are acceptable in mixed discipline shoots wont be the first people i have had removed from the FP for using them. The more it happens & the more people put up these arguments to justify using them the closer we get to a great number of people asking NRA for a formal ban. The more crap i read justifying the 'rights of MB users' the closer I get to a motion at AGM & General council.

Titchphil, you are a very angry man….have you ever considered taking up another sport, maybe something like golf would suit your better .

[Cad Monkey]

Your perverted 'lojik' is the same bull put up by smokers against passive smoking effects on health - its not my responsibility to wear a suitable gas mask in public because people smoke & its not reasonable to expect people in the car park to have to wear ear defs because one person wishes to use a MB! the only bo...cks being exposed here is by you & Cad M. You have no right to inflict excessive & damaging noise on people well behind the FP & on butt 19@ 600 the residents in the houses behind. I do have the right to ask you to stop & i do do that, you & those that believe MBs are acceptable in mixed discipline shoots wont be the first people i have had removed from the FP for using them. The more it happens & the more people put up these arguments to justify using them the closer we get to a great number of people asking NRA for a formal ban. The more crap i read justifying the 'rights of MB users' the closer I get to a motion at AGM & General council.

Titchphil, you are a very angry man….have you ever considered taking up another sport, maybe something like golf would suit your better .

sorry I meant Hitchphil......the 'T' is very close to the 'H' on the keyboard

[Maggot]

The loud crack you just heard was me losing the will to live.

Its quite simple. You cannot ban people from using brakes because you dont like it. Even if you funded a balance study I expect the outcome would be advice on extra hearing protection and possibly an enforcement on ear defence before you even set foot on the range.

IF you end up with your ears ringing because someone used a brake while you were to the rear of the firing point and were not wearing them, well I hope your hearing is OK, and I hope you learned a lesson from it. To not learn from our experiences is why Darwin's theories were flawed.

I have been caught out a few times myself, I expect everyone has and its bloody unpleasant, but to start wanting to ban people because we cannot modify our behavior to protect ourselves is...poor 'lojik'.

PS......Underwater basket weaving is more exciting than knitting and does not require expensive ear defenders....unlike free-fall donkey stuffing