Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28

Thread: source for large dia benchrest muzzle brakes ?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    151

    source for large dia benchrest muzzle brakes ?

    building a 600/1000 yard heavy with a 1.4+ dia straight bbl and am looking for a 30 cal brake.
    thanks

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    151
    i'll get even more specific. looking for large flat ports, not spirals of small round holes with no rear facing surface area.
    easy, right ??

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    10,971
    So what you seem to be saying is.... you have strong opinions about how a brake works and

    Therefore you want one minimum 1.4" tall by at least a couple inches wide

    And this means probably 5"-6" long to be proportional. Plus locker.

    so this means a 50BMG clamshell is "too small" for you.....

    And you want to "source it" instead of make it......

    Good Luck

    BTW having done this a lot of times, I will state with some alacrity that it will be worth your time to make the first one from 12L14 to test concept...... then if you really think you've changed the world step over to 304 SS and spend a week making the final product.....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Texas Panhandle
    Posts
    1,953
    You can get the Harrell’s Tactical brake in large diameters and various thread sizes.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    151
    al,
    1.4xx DIA X XXX LONG with 3 or so flat faced ports
    but yes I have a STRONG OPINION on the subject.
    what did your brake trials tell you ??
    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    So what you seem to be saying is.... you have strong opinions about how a brake works and

    Therefore you want one minimum 1.4" tall by at least a couple inches wide

    And this means probably 5"-6" long to be proportional. Plus locker.

    so this means a 50BMG clamshell is "too small" for you.....

    And you want to "source it" instead of make it......

    Good Luck

    BTW having done this a lot of times, I will state with some alacrity that it will be worth your time to make the first one from 12L14 to test concept...... then if you really think you've changed the world step over to 304 SS and spend a week making the final product.....

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    151
    yes I did not know that. they look good except for the funky 32 thread ?
    I have 24 on most of mine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Bryant View Post
    You can get the Harrell’s Tactical brake in large diameters and various thread sizes.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    10,971
    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    al,
    1.4xx DIA X XXX LONG with 3 or so flat faced ports
    but yes I have a STRONG OPINION on the subject.
    what did your brake trials tell you ??
    #1, Harrell's DO NOT make anything as large as 1.4", their largest is 1.375 nominal and round. And they make side-facing fish-gill brakes ONLY because the market wants it, not because they're "better."

    #2, "funky 32 thread???" I don't even know what this means... thread is thread. Except that I have blown some 32tpi's right off the barrel and sent them down the range when experimenting with the "expansion chamber" concept but that's completely irrelevant here.

    #3, I take your STRONG OPINION...call...and raise with FACTS. I built a recoil sled twenty yrs ago. I TEST this stuff. In the archives are some great threads, months long on the subject. Due in part to these discussions there are now at least 6 muzzle brake companies that own sleds and conduct tests and youtube them on the innernet. Speaking of which, I recently put up some footage showing "The World's Biggest Muzzle Brake" and explaining WHY it's the biggest and HOW brakes work. In simple fact brakes are known, quantifiable science......easily measured up for efficacy. I can look at a design, run some quick calcs and predict within 5% how effective it'll be. Effectiveness is not a matter of type, arrangement nor angle, it's a simple matter of square inches of impingement surface.....FACT..... easily testable, verifiable fact.


    One thing you'll notice, if you're the NOTICING sort as opposed to the OPINING sort is that you will not find a bland holey Harrell brake being tested on the innertube against any "new" or "better" design!!!

    Same like you won't find flu statistics in the news, EVER....

    And for exactly the same reasons....

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Surprise, AZ
    Posts
    259

    I've tested a few...

    First, on quantification. I am very much a fan of quantifying things. One of my favorite quotes is from Sir Kelvin (William Thompson):

    I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be.
    HOWEVER, numbers are meaningless without an understanding of their significance. If you don't understand what the numbers tell you, it's the same as not having numbers. Recoil statistics are a great case in point. You can find all kinds of recoil and recoil-reduction statistics (lies, damn lies, and statistics) on the web, but I have *never* seen them presented with sufficient information to make the stated numbers meaningful.

    Oh yeah, brakes. Al, I'm guessing you can tell, within a small window, how effective a brake can be, but it's not exclusively a matter of square surface of impingement area because the blast diminishes as it spreads across said surface so the more surface you add the less reduction you get per square inch added. The angle of the surface matters as well. No matter, because most shooters can't tell a difference, nor see different results on target for differences that seem relatively significant on paper.

    I agree with part of your sentiment though: it's a solved problem. Computational Fluid Dynamics can readily predict the performance of a brake with much more accuracy than the shooter will ever discern.

    So there are a huge number of brakes, with vastly different measured results, that for most people will be "identical" in a functional sense. I very much like a certain "shark gill" brake, which I found (numbers aside) to be as comfortable as the much larger Armalite / K&P clamshell brake with 2x+ impingement surface.

    And rows of holes can help with muzzle rise, but make a lousy brake.

    GsT

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    70
    You might check Area419, he might have what your looking for.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    10,971
    Quote Originally Posted by GeneT View Post
    First, on quantification. .............
    rows of holes can help with muzzle rise, but make a lousy brake.

    GsT

    Gene, Gene ....... you NEED to make a recoil sled man! T'ain't hard, just strap a Caldwell lead sled to a hunk of plywood....

    The simple fact is..... the REASON none of them guys on the innertube will video their brake VS a Harrell (silly rows of holes) is because THE HARRELL'S BRAKE WILL WIN!

    Ain't NUTTIN' will beat a cylindrical "row of holes" brake when it comes to mitigating recoil. They do look like a turd on a stick, but to say they don't work???

    c'MON mon...

    Dude, you need a sled!

    LOL

    al

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    151
    PLEASE notice.
    you and I AGREE.
    large surface area(rear facing)
    hooley spiral round holes have very little rear facing surface area.
    the large brake is ROUND,,,the PORTS are not.
    what about the custom drawing/pic in this thread ? three port large flat rear facing ports ??

    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    #1, Harrell's DO NOT make anything as large as 1.4", their largest is 1.375 nominal and round. And they make side-facing fish-gill brakes ONLY because the market wants it, not because they're "better."

    #2, "funky 32 thread???" I don't even know what this means... thread is thread. Except that I have blown some 32tpi's right off the barrel and sent them down the range when experimenting with the "expansion chamber" concept but that's completely irrelevant here.

    #3, I take your STRONG OPINION...call...and raise with FACTS. I built a recoil sled twenty yrs ago. I TEST this stuff. In the archives are some great threads, months long on the subject. Due in part to these discussions there are now at least 6 muzzle brake companies that own sleds and conduct tests and youtube them on the innernet. Speaking of which, I recently put up some footage showing "The World's Biggest Muzzle Brake" and explaining WHY it's the biggest and HOW brakes work. In simple fact brakes are known, quantifiable science......easily measured up for efficacy. I can look at a design, run some quick calcs and predict within 5% how effective it'll be. Effectiveness is not a matter of type, arrangement nor angle, it's a simple matter of square inches of impingement surface.....FACT..... easily testable, verifiable fact.


    One thing you'll notice, if you're the NOTICING sort as opposed to the OPINING sort is that you will not find a bland holey Harrell brake being tested on the innertube against any "new" or "better" design!!!

    Same like you won't find flu statistics in the news, EVER....

    And for exactly the same reasons....

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    10,971
    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    what about the custom drawing/pic in this thread ? three port large flat rear facing ports ??
    I don't know what you're talking about.

    I haven't received any pics nor drawings.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    151
    al.
    are you saying the
    spiral rows of small holes is better than the 3 large port brakes from harrells ?

    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    Gene, Gene ....... you NEED to make a recoil sled man! T'ain't hard, just strap a Caldwell lead sled to a hunk of plywood....

    The simple fact is..... the REASON none of them guys on the innertube will video their brake VS a Harrell (silly rows of holes) is because THE HARRELL'S BRAKE WILL WIN!

    Ain't NUTTIN' will beat a cylindrical "row of holes" brake when it comes to mitigating recoil. They do look like a turd on a stick, but to say they don't work???

    c'MON mon...

    Dude, you need a sled!

    LOL

    al

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    washington.........STATE that is.
    Posts
    10,971
    Quote Originally Posted by rsmithsr View Post
    al.
    are you saying the
    spiral rows of small holes is better than the 3 large port brakes from harrells ?
    "Better" is a tough term for me..... Is cheesecake better than steak?

    There are two things driving muzzle brake efficiency, #1 is surface area and #2 is basically friction or "how long can the you HOLD the gas, letting it work.... But without allowing it to bounce back against itself....." via configuration.


    So, regarding #1, surface area. I think if you take the time to measure up a radial Harrell you'll find it to have more area than the side-discharge models.

    Regarding #2, "friction", this has to do with "force over time" which some will recognize as the formula which defines the term "impulse" which once you add the DISTANCE a thing is moved equals "work." In essence it's possible to change the RATE OF DISCHARGE which in turn spreads out or lengthens the impulse allowing it to act longer etc etc.....

    Tell ya' what..... It'll take me 20 minutes to type up my answer. INSTEAD, I'll let you waste 10 of your minutes on this vid and maybe it'll save time

    Disregard the first half but see whether or not you agree with the stuff that starts at about 9:30 into the vid

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btCAVVv2r6I

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Wilcox, PA
    Posts
    251

    check this out

    Quote Originally Posted by alinwa View Post
    So what you seem to be saying is.... you have strong opinions about how a brake works and

    Therefore you want one minimum 1.4" tall by at least a couple inches wide

    And this means probably 5"-6" long to be proportional. Plus locker.

    so this means a 50BMG clamshell is "too small" for you.....

    And you want to "source it" instead of make it......

    Good Luck

    BTW having done this a lot of times, I will state with some alacrity that it will be worth your time to make the first one from 12L14 to test concept...... then if you really think you've changed the world step over to 304 SS and spend a week making the final product.....
    use step drills for muzzel brake

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •