I said something similar years ago on this site. As more science comes out we're going to find these concussive brakes are contributing to TBI. Even Kahl mentioned it on a podcast the other day and the reason he switched to a can.I’ve shot one round through a Stringer and will say it was enough concussion for me not to try another round.
However, nowadays I recommend none of them. Not the DN5, CHAD, Stringer, Botnia and so on. If you have to use a brake, use the straighter ported ACE or Hawkins Updraft. I used the CHAD and was apart of the original preorder debacle and used it quite a bit. After 2 matches this year I felt like I had a concussion after 2 days of shooting and decided to move away from it.
For the health of the shooters and longevity of the sport I believe suppressors will start to dominate with brakes soon becoming a minority. Only one year of the PRS incentivizing suppressor use the number of suppressors have gone way up and companies like RecoilX make it even more enticing.
There’s nothing about constant concussion to a shooter that can be healthy for you.
Problem is none of the canned brakes are even close to the effectiveness of a modern brake. Your fundamentals have to be perfect and it's why guys like bushman can win with a ace despite it being a far inferior brake. So for people outside the top 30 or 50 shooters in the world the brake is a competitive advantage IMO. If someone was paying me to shoot for a living and I could spend everyday on the range it would probably work. For most of us with limited time and reps, it's going to be hard to overcome the limitations.
Last edited: