bwortman

I am trying to decide between the savage 116 stainless steel with the muzzle break or without. I have not shot one with a muzzle break on. It is worth the extra money with regards to accuracy and reduced recoil?
The caliber I am going to buy is 7mm Mag

thanks for any advice

XTP

A muzzle brake itself does not increase accuracy or reduce recoil.What it does do is to help you stay on target by reducing muzzle jump.The trade-off is a dramatic increase in muzzle blast for the shooter.If you are the least bit sensitive to muzzle blast,a brake could actually cause you to flinch more at the shot,decreasing accuracy.I beleive the 116 is available with the on-off style of brake,so this could prove to be the best of both worlds...

AJ300MAG

XTP, I don't know what experience you have with muzzle brakes, but I can tell you they reduce "felt recoil". I can shoot my Weatherby .300 mag that is equipped with an Accubrake one handed off a benchrest without gripping the gun tightly (free recoil). I tried that with my .300 ultramag which didn't have a brake, took some skin off the side of my trigger finger from the checkering on the bolt handle. I'd say theres a big difference in recoil between the two rifles! Magnaporting reduces muzzle jump quite a bit, but isn't as effective on reducing recoil as a brake. I ended up putting a Vais muzzle brake on my ultramag, it tamed the recoil down to where you can shoot it comfortably from a benchrest, it isn't as loud for the shooter as the Accubrake is.

Hk45USP

I concur about the muzzle break. It does work to reduce "kick".

I own several guns with muzzle breaks on them. For instance, my Remington Model-7 in .308 with my new muzzle break on it, feels like a .22-250! It's really nice.

My Springfield M1-A in .308 with the new muzzle break on it, feels like a 28 gauge shotgun! With the break off, it feels like a light .308 (due to the semi auto mechanisim etc..)

My savage .30-06 without the muzzle break, shooting Federal's "High Energy" (HE) loads was killing my at the range after about 15 rounds. With the muzzle break, it feels like a nice .243. They work great.

Get the muzzle break. While at the range, you're going to wear hearing protection so the amplified nosie with a break doesn't mean anything. When in the field hunting, you're only going to shot 1-2, rounds, 3 tops if you're a bad shot. 1 or two rounds won't "kill" your ears. Plus with your adrenalin pumped up from seeing game, you wont even notice the sound after you pull the trigger. I never do. The breaks I believe also help keep to prevent more "wear & tear" on your guns, due to the gentler recoil produced as a result of the break on it.

XTP

AJ: The "felt recoil" you refer to is what I was trying to get at,but this is largely the effect of muzzle jump.The energy is the same to the shooter,but in a straighter line.The weight of the rifle or even the bullet can change that energy,but what you are perceiving is less vertical movement of the rifle.Not only have I fired both types of rifles,but have spoken to both military and target shooters on this subject in the past.

Don't get me wrong here,I'm not putting them down in any way what so ever,just giving my opinion......

Edited by - XTP on 03/05/2002 00:02:55

Edited by - XTP on 03/05/2002 05:35:38

frizzellr

XTP, I think you might be a bit misguided. The energy is not the same. Since part of the recoil is gases caused by the burning propellant exiting the muzzle in a straight line, thus resulting in the rifles backwards force, if you divert those gases to the side you lessen the backwards force. I have seen tests done that measured the effectiveness of muzzle brakes using all sorts of scientific gizmos. They do lessen recoil.

GordonGekko

bwortman, with a 7mm Mag. unless you are particularly recoil sensitive I wouldn't think it would be worth it to add the brake, I just don't think it kicks that hard.

Everybody else, I always thought the gases impacting the forward wall of the brake were what actually served to counter act recoil (not reducing absolute recoil but re-directing some of its energy) creating a slight forward counter thrust that acted against the reward thrust of the gases exiting the gun. This would explain why the "sherman tank" style brakes are generally regarded as the most effective at reducing recoil (more frontal surface area for the gas to come in contact with).

Gordon

Edited by - GordonGekko on 03/05/2002 09:02:48

Deleted User

[Deleted by Admins]

AJ300MAG

One of the things I find interesting are the different designs of muzzle brakes. On the Accumark, the holes are perpendicular to the bore. On the Vais brake, the holes are like the Accubrake, except the front of the brake also has holes that intersect with the holes on the sides and are drilled almost the full length of the brake. There isn't any expansion chamber on the Vais brake. I have a 7MM mag A-Bolt with a BOSS. On the boss the holes are angled foward (towards the muzzle) at aproxametly 30 degrees! You wolld assume that venting the gasses foward would add to the recoil, in all reality it works very effectively. Recoil of the A-Bolt is less than my .270. Had a kid at the range this summer with an AR50. Talk about a Sherman tank style brake. Our 100yrd range is covered with a roof and we have a concrete floor which the benches are on. Didn't have to sweep the sand of the firing line when he was finished!

Deleted User

[Deleted by Admins]