Suppressor vs. Muzzle Brake

[rustyinbend]

I'm just getting into the really long distances, and I'm struggling with this one.

I've sort of "defaulted" to using a suppressor, as it seemed the easier and more civilized choice for noise and concussion. But I decided to mount a Gen-3 Little Bastard muzzle brake on a new rifle (Tikka 6.5-CM), and I have to admit that the ability to see my impacts and get back on target, improved by orders of magnitude. That said, the guy at the bench next to me certainly gave me a few nasty looks since the side concussion was, um, impressive.

I'm traveling to a long range class in April to shoot out to (hopefully) 2,000 yards ... and feeling like I should pull the ASR suppressor brake off my primary distance rifle (Masterpiece Arms 300-WMBA), skip the can, and get good with a good muzzle brake instead of using a can at this event. Need to make this decision in time to solidify and lock in my zero, and have good ballistics/velocity information.

Has anyone else gone gone through this conundrum and willing to share your thoughts?

Is impact visibility and recoil management more important that concussion avoidance and good range-manners?

 

[kthomas]

As someone that has shot mostly with a muzzle brake, I readily welcome the thought of shooting fully suppressed. I didn't realize how much I would enjoy it until I shot the 2018 quiet riot match, which is 100% suppressed.

Of course, the recoil impulse is different between the two. Suppressed being a slow dwell while a brake (or unbraked, bare muzzle) is a sharp/rapid impulse. With a brake, recoil is most efficiently mitigated and is over very quickly. That said, I don't believe shooting suppressed is that much of a hindrance, especially with the proper application of fundamentals.

If you are properly applying the fundamentals, you should still be spotting all of your impacts. The big upside to shooting suppressed is the mitigation of concussion. This is a big and often overlooked pro of shooting suppressed. Concussion has a huge effect on the body and mind, and even with adequate hearing protection, the concussion coming off of a brake can cause long term hearing damage.

Long story short, I never felt I was giving up much to a brake when shooting suppressed, after spending most of my shooting life shooting braked. Apply the fundamentals, and it's very easy to keep your rifle on target through the follow through. If your fundamentals are a little more on the "relaxed side" you may be penalized more with a suppressor. This is a fault of the shooter, not the equipment. Free recoilers will argue differently on this matter and argue for the sake of a brake.

My vote is to shoot suppressed. If you can't effectively spot your impacts shooting suppressed, you as the shooter are not doing your job behind the trigger correctly (comment not aimed at anyone specifically).

 

[Trek]

Great question, many sides to this approach... the good news - nothing is permanent, and you can select the option best suited to “your” situation. I’m on the other side of the previous post. I shoot a 308, 20” AI. While at the K&M comprehensive course in November, I struggled to see my impacts <600 yds. I was shooting suppressed among the various brakes on the line... no question, my mates to the left and right liked me... wasn’t always mutual. LOL. My takeaway... I need to see plate impact and look for the plate “twist” to adjust on the follow-up. Hearing protection can be mitigated (double up), but blind follow-up shoots are a loss. On Friday my APA Fat Bastard Gen 3 arrived, and this Spring I’ll be swapping out the Wilson Combat suppressor for a brake. Good luck with your course!

 

[b2lee]

(comment not aimed at anyone specifically).

/me puts down his cane and walks back to the porch....mumbling under my breath about 'back in my day'.

 

[reich10]

At extreme distances your bullet flight time should be enough for you to get back on target before impact with a can.

 

[rustyinbend]

At extreme distances your bullet flight time should be enough for you to get back on target before impact with a can.

Maybe it's just me, and my old (floater-filled) eyeballs ... but I've found it difficult to see impacts with a can on my long distance rifles. The one time I shot my new 6.5 Tikka with a muzzle brake, it was MUCH easier to see my impacts and get back on target.

 

[reich10]

Maybe it's just me, and my old (floater-filled) eyeballs ... but I've found it difficult to see impacts with a can on my long distance rifles. The one time I shot my new 6.5 Tikka with a muzzle brake, it was MUCH easier to see my impacts and get back on target.

I agree it is going to be easier to get on target with a brake but in my experience the difference is negligible at longer distances especially shooting prone. it also depends on your scope set up. If it’s cranked to 30x and your field of view is narrow it will be a lot more difficult. All that to say if you want the benefits of shooting a can there are ways to still spot impacts, especially at longer distances.

 

[Maxduty]

My suppressor has a brake. Best of both worlds.

 

[Sieg]

My Ruger SR762 was a pissed off mule with the OEM flash suppressor and no butt pad. The YHM QD Brake/Adapter toned the perceived recoil close to 20%, attaching the YHM Resonator can (shooting single feed/no gas) my perception was it 'may' have reduced even more. I thought the suppressor would defeat the effectiveness of the brake but my real world perception somewhat conflicts that.

The gun is actually enjoyable to shoot now and the majority of the time I can stay in the scope, though it's only a 3-9x40 Leupold.

Either way, a suppressor should be standard equipment like a mufflers on motorized vehicles. They are definitely environmentally responsible.

 

[rustyinbend]

Thanks for everyone's advice ... I really appreciate it. I'm going to throttle back the magnification on my next range trip to see if that helps me see my impacts, and enlist (draft) my son as a spotter to see whatever I can't. I'll stick with my Suppressor for now. I did buy a 30-cal "Little Bastard" and will install that on my 300 WM if I keep having trouble seeing my long-range impacts.

 

[rustyinbend]

UPDATE ... I've swapped back and forth a few times, and have decided that a good muzzle brake is WAY better for both seeing impacts, and mitigating recoil. A couple of weeks ago I got a new Barrett MRAD in 300 Win Mag, and shot it last week with the included Muzzle Brake. It shot really well - generally comfortable to shoot. This week, I pulled the brake, installed an ASR mount, and shot it today with my SilencerCo Chimera-300 suppressor. The difference was ... in a word ... "compelling". The beating on my shoulder without a brake was huge compared to last week. I just pulled the suppressor mount, and installed an APA Little Bastard muzzle brake that I'll use instead of suppressing. My decision was made primarily on recoil mitigation ... too big a difference to ignore, at least from my perspective (and my shoulder's).

 

[Steel head]

Lol.
I agree 100%

 

[wade2big]

If you have a suppressor and choose to shoot with a brake any other time besides a competition setting, I would think you are nuts. ?

Shoot what you like OP

 

[rustyinbend]

If you have a suppressor and choose to shoot with a brake any other time besides a competition setting, I would think you are nuts. ?

Shoot what you like OP

I am nuts. Shot side-by-side and the brake was a much more comfortable experience for me. The un-braked recoil on my MRAD 300 Win Mag was not fun. Can't speak to the experience of the guy on the bench next to me ... but ... his brake was obnoxious from the side as well.

 

[FisherT&C]

Surpressors are fine in the prone but awkward positional stuff gets more difficult to manage especially when your fighting a clock in a match. I would go surpressed for a class it will help create a more relaxed environment.

 

[pnorris]

Underneath my suppressor is a brake. That is the way to go. Best of both worlds.

 

[Steel head]

Underneath my suppressor is a brake. That is the way to go. Best of both worlds.

A break buried in a suppressor becomes a baffle and works nothing like a brake anymore.

 

[spife7980]

A break buried in a suppressor becomes a baffle and works nothing like a brake anymore.

I did notice an increase in recoil when I went from the asr brake in the can to the bare 419 adaptors. Recoil was obviously pretty low either way on a 6mm rat fart rifle but I it was at least to the level of detectable.

 

[Steel head]

I did notice an increase in recoil when I went from the asr brake in the can to the bare 419 adaptors. Recoil was obviously pretty low either way on a 6mm rat fart rifle but I it was at least to the level of detectable.

That’s pretty interesting

Some weird pressure wave upsetting dampening of the gas?
Brake being an inefficient baffle?

 

[spife7980]

I assume that the brake in a can works in just the same manner as a brake outside of the can in that it catches the gases moving forward (pushing rearward) and pulls the rifle forward.
Its just then got a longer dwell time with some space ahead of the brakes forward pull thats still keeping pressure constrained and pushing backwards mitigating some of the recoil reduction and dragging it out over a longer time period.
But Im not nasa so I can only say that "I could notice it when I was looking for it"

 

[Snuby642]

That's some long distances.

I would shoot whichever muzzle devise that gives the best accuracy.

Some of my guns shoot better with a can and some don't.

 

[pnorris]

I did not notice much increase in recoil when I put the can over the brake. It was extremely slight if anything.

 

[dski]

Definitely less recoil with a large brake. That said, I mostly shoot prone and don't shoot competitions. I pretty much only shoot longer distances, 500-2000. I prefer a can in pretty much every situation. I always have plenty of time to get back on target to spot. The sound concussion of shooting 100+ rounds in a day is just too much for me with the brake. Thankfully, all of my shooting buddies have converted as well!

I use silencerco omegas and hybrids with the asr brake and the anchor brake on the end. Use them mostly on 6.5 creed, 28 nosler and 338 Lapua. Very happy with the performance.

 

[madppcs]

When shooting prone or by myself I use a suppressor. Im starting to dislike the added weight at the end of my barrels. When friends come over to my range, most dont have suppressors. So I have to wear ear pro anyways. And im starting to 2nd guess suppression while hunting also. Im sure its just me getting older and Im getting tired of carrying around accessories that only add weight, and give marginal advantage when shooting multiple animals like hogs. When I hunt, I VERY rarely fire only a single shot on hogs or coyotes. So the remaining animals are running away anyways. So the suppressor is kinda pointless.

Im headed towards keeping things light and simple.

 

[rustyinbend]

I continue testing, and am currently still undecided. I put two APA Gen-3 Fat Bastards on my Barrett MRAD barrels (300-WM and 338-L), and I have a Gen-3 Little Bastard on a Tikka T3x TAC A1 (6.5-CM). Concussion is impressive ... but recoil and target re-acquisition are awesome, especially on the MRAD. That said, after a few rounds, I get used to the concussion and noise, and stop flinching or closing my eyes in anticipation. Put 4 shots through the same hole at 100 yards with the MRAD (300-WM barrel) running the APA Fat Bastard on Friday (photo below). Still using my SC Chimera-300 suppressor on two other rifles (MPA 300-WM and LWRCI 6.5-CM) and enjoying the peace and quiet but not liking the recoil on the MPA 300-WM. LWRCI is a piston-driven gas gun so recoil is minimal either way. With the APA Fat Bastard, my 338 Lapua MRAD has almost no recoil ... it's an awesome brake for big bore guns.

My Chimera-300 suppressor is standard equipment on a bunch of gas-guns I use for shorter distances (223's, 300-BLK's, 224 Valkyrie, 6.5 Grendel). They all have ASR brakes for easy on/off. Same with a few sub-guns I always shoot suppressed (SIG MPX (9mm), SIG Rattler (300-BLK), and LWRCI SMG-45).

(Yes ... I know ... I have too many guns ... you sound like my wife.)

Another consideration in the "Brake vs. Suppressor" debate really has to be "cleaning". Everything gets way dirtier way faster with a suppressor, especially the chambers, bolt carrier groups, and lowers/triggers on gas guns. I can see how carbon rings and throat buildup could be a problem much earlier with suppressors. It makes me wonder if suppressors actually decrease barrel life expectancy due to all that back-pressure and rearward carbon.

Anybody know whether that's the case, or not?

For me, this is still an unsolved riddle shrouded in nuance, paradox, trade-offs, personal preference, and continued testing.

So far, I've learned that the answer is ... there's no clear answer.