Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Watch Out for Scammers!
We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!
what do you mean by effective? it works pretty well, just about as good as any other brake on a 223 ive experienced. It blows two blasts out sideways so prone work is good. I think if your asking cause you dont really plan on getting the suppressor than there are probably better ones out there, but the brake is an integral part of the overall suppressor design
I was asking because I was thinking of makeing somthing similar as a suppressor adapter. I make my own cans and rather than a normal thread on unit i was thinking of making my next can a bit smaller and I believe a break inside the can would help make it a but more efficient
One observation- The particles that do get through the aperture of the brake would probably produce nicer wear patterns on the blast baffle if it were even .400" further away from the planned .125" from Brake aperture spacing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Griffin Armament</div><div class="ubbcode-body">One observation- The particles that do get through the aperture of the brake would probably produce nicer wear patterns on the blast baffle if it were even .400" further away from the planned .125" from Brake aperture spacing. </div></div>
Ive been considering this and considering just using a flat blast baffle with a tiny cone and some radial holes thinking this may help lower the pressure some , making a flat baffle rather than a cone would add alot of volume to the blast chamber
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JJones75</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Ive been considering this and considering just using a flat blast baffle with a tiny cone and some radial holes thinking this may help lower the pressure some , making a flat baffle rather than a cone would add alot of volume to the blast chamber </div></div>
This sounds like a good idea. Pressure isn't a problem with 17-4, but the spacing is going to create extra erosion. The baffle style you mention should help move particles away from critical surfaces (the bore). This should also reduce FRP.