Suppressor vs Brake

[Mopseydocks6014]

I've been casually following the PRS through facebook/instagram posts. There seems like a 50/50 distribution between suppressors and brakes with cans being a tad more popular at times. Is it a personal preference or are there other things behind the choices?

 

[Lunchbox27]

The two biggest things that stick out to me are mobility (in and out of tight spaces) as well as spotting your impacts/misses with recoil. My suppressor doesn't give me as much recoil reduction as my brake does.

 

[Beneviolence]

As lunchbox said, my omega (w/ the "suppressor brake") doesn't offer as much recoil reduction as just the QD brake I have under it, but the difference in how pleasant it is to shoot is worth it to me.

Increased POI shift from heat on thinner barrels may be motivation to not use a brake though.

 

[lte82]

A good brake reduces recoil more effectively than a suppressor, is lighter, and more compact. I own 8 cans but pretty much only use them for when I hunt or want to shoot without waking up the neighbors.

 

[Mopseydocks6014]

Those all make sense. Thanks.

 

[D_TROS]

Most important factor to me are 2 things - first is hearing not only your brake but other shooters for several hundred rounds over a weekend can give me a wicked headache. Several people, esp with large calibers/magnums opt away from brakes due to this. Also, if there is lots of shooting in lines like OK matches doing troop lines, they squad suppressors together. It REALLY sucks lying next to a brake for long periods.

For me I use a suppressor as much as possible but I usually use what is most fitting for the match. Lots of prone (easier to manage the different/longer) recoil impulse and team matches where communication is important Ill use a suppressor. Fast moving slow par time matches like NM and Cali (suppressors illegal), Ill use a brake.


Regards,
DT

 

[Petrov]

I prefer brakes, reduces recoil. Suppresors are nice but in NY that will earn me a gang rape in Reikers shower.