Suppressor as a brake?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Buck13

Member
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
1,190
Location
Puget Sound Convergence Zone
It seems that since the suppressor slows the jet of gas from the muzzle, it should greatly reduce the effect of that jet on recoil (which supposedly is modest but noticeable).

I don't seem to see a lot of talk about this, maybe because I don't read about suppressors much. Since the can adds weight and length which would presumably also reduce muzzle flip, do people just not realize there are other things happening?

Asking for a friend. ;)
 
I have a sdn6 and a tirant 45. The tirant definitely reduces recoil on my 45 pistol. I think only some of that is due to added weight. I would guess 50 percent of the reduction is from the gases slowing down before exiting the can.

My sdn6 seems to have slightly less effect but i dont have as many rounds through that to compare.
 
It could be tested if the suppressor has an end cap and internals that can be removed. Here's how:

1) Control firing: the measure of the recoil forces on the rifle, with no suppressor attached.

2) Test with suppressor, using same ammunition and other variables as in the control scenario. The recoiling force will be less than in scenario (1) above.

3) For this last test all the internals of the suppressor would be removed and weighed. Then dense rubber bands would be wrapped around the outside of the suppressor main body, to bring it up to the weight of the fully assembled can. There would have to be some work done to establish where those bands were placed on the tube, so as to most closely emulate the weight distribution of the fully assembled can. You are essentially firing a round with only the outer body of the suppressor attached (no baffles and no end cap).

If the recoiling force as measured in experiment (3) is less than number (2) then you can bet the suppressor does indeed behave like a brake.
 
It definitely works on reducing recoil and noise.

My friend had his Ruger Precision 308 and the recoil felt like a 5.56 mm. When he took it off, I could definitely tell the difference. Then he placed it back on the barrel and it was back to being very pleasant.
 
On handguns, the suppressor weight is the majority factor, since even very lightweight cans are a 30% mass increase on a relatively heavy gun (12 oz can vs 38 oz 1911, for example). They also slow the cycling, though, and much of the felt recoil on a handgun can come from the slide "bottoming out" at the end of it's rearward travel. On rifles, the weight increase is less significant, but the higher uncorking pressure of rifles means more benefit is realized from redirection of the gasses. If the gasses are displaced in a manner rather perpendicular to the bore axis, whether vented to atmosphere or within a suppressor, you get a reduction in that thrust component.

In the end, I would say what's it matter which forces are doing what? Suppressors tend to reduce recoil on the order of 25-35%, which is about as much as any brake. Not our primary reason for using them, but a dang nice benefit.
 
On handguns, the suppressor weight is the majority factor, since even very lightweight cans are a 30% mass increase on a relatively heavy gun (12 oz can vs 38 oz 1911, for example). They also slow the cycling, though, and much of the felt recoil on a handgun can come from the slide "bottoming out" at the end of it's rearward travel. On rifles, the weight increase is less significant, but the higher uncorking pressure of rifles means more benefit is realized from redirection of the gasses. If the gasses are displaced in a manner rather perpendicular to the bore axis, whether vented to atmosphere or within a suppressor, you get a reduction in that thrust component.

In the end, I would say what's it matter which forces are doing what? Suppressors tend to reduce recoil on the order of 25-35%, which is about as much as any brake. Not our primary reason for using them, but a dang nice benefit.

My suppressor has only one purpose...........SSSHHHH! Compensators serve another purpose, to reduce muzzle flip, but only if they're designed properly. Ports at top-dead-center and then 45° to each side of the top row. Redirect all working gasses in an upward direction to gain quicker sequential target acquisition.
 
They will definitely reduce recoil appreciably, though usually less than a brake. Plus side is they dont give you all that nasty blast associated with brakes.

Yup! You are correct. I have found that even with .22 Long Rifle rounds, there is enough working gasses, and sort of, nasty blast, that can be physically used to counterfoil muzzle flip, if the ports are sized properly and positioned correctly. It's not like the gasses produced from say, a .38 Super round, but there are indeed expanding gasses going on to push the bullet out of the barrel. So, with some ingenuity, and along with some learning processes, muzzle flip can be reduced to a competitors advantage.
 
Saturday I saw a Barrett .50bmg semi-auto with a Barrett brand suppressor. The suppressor (being for a .50bmg) had a substantial break at the end of it. It was pretty neat looking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top