CRD muzzle device - any thoughts or experience with this system?
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O8-ju332HAA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=O8-ju332HAA
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O8-ju332HAA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=O8-ju332HAA
Your thoughts on the CRD muzzle device system
- Thread starter Tahoe333
- Start date
Looks interesting but I am more curious about how putting the CRD on affects the muzzle flash. Some of us actually work at night with NVGs and from what I can see in the video, it appears to have a pretty hellacious muzzle flash with the CRD in place. Granted it is on a 7.5" barreled weapon but without the CRD the muzzle flash on video appears to be less than when the CRD is in place. It might not be as bad on a longer barreled weapon but then you have the same problem seen with the Noveske PIG, a front/muzzle heavy gun. Hopefully someone will do a night time comparison video of it.
The thing that makes me laugh/shake my head with items like this and other gear is that the term " CQB" and "CQB distances" is thrown around freely these days. The fact of the matter is that very few people actually DO any real CQB training and shooting of live rounds in an actual CQB house as part of their day job, yet everyone is concerned about "CQB distances" when all their firing is done on a flat range. If muzzle over pressure in a house is a concern, run your can. The people that do this as a job are typically running SBR length weapons to start with and a can only adds a tad bit more length. I can see that this CRD could have some beneficial uses in very specific situations, most of which the average joe doesn't find them self in. About the only thing I see it being beneficial for the average joe is to not blast the hell out of the guys to his left/right with muzzle blast from a ridiculously short SBR and not going deaf when on the flat range.
The thing that makes me laugh/shake my head with items like this and other gear is that the term " CQB" and "CQB distances" is thrown around freely these days. The fact of the matter is that very few people actually DO any real CQB training and shooting of live rounds in an actual CQB house as part of their day job, yet everyone is concerned about "CQB distances" when all their firing is done on a flat range. If muzzle over pressure in a house is a concern, run your can. The people that do this as a job are typically running SBR length weapons to start with and a can only adds a tad bit more length. I can see that this CRD could have some beneficial uses in very specific situations, most of which the average joe doesn't find them self in. About the only thing I see it being beneficial for the average joe is to not blast the hell out of the guys to his left/right with muzzle blast from a ridiculously short SBR and not going deaf when on the flat range.
Yeah, I fail to see why you would spend money on this and not just get a silencer, then you get more benefits. Also, it is just directing the blast forward, not containing it. So in a small room, which most rooms where you will actually a weapon at someone are pretty small, all of the blast is still there. Even shooting a suppressed 5.56 in a small room will give you the "oomph" feeling. To use it in place of a small can for actual indoors firing is ludacris.
I tried to have something like this made for me back in 2003. For those that aren't willing to wait for treasonous criminals to approve their servile request with $200 fine attached, it could be a good solution to the issues mentioned in the video. They need to demo it on 16" guns, as I think many people would be interested, especially those that don't want muzzle weight from a can.
My point was that if you are actually involved in CQB, there is not wait or stamp. As for weight of a can, some are not noticeable, especially on a shorter barrel, which is what they will be on for someone who is getting involved in indoor firefights.
Roger, I've kicked in plenty of doors in other people's countries, and was using an M4A1 with a KAC QD suppressor as early as 1998 in PACOM as part of the original SOPMOD kit. Just because I have personally stomped through people's homes in Asia, the Middle East, and Central America with weapons and equipment appropriate for the occasion does not mean my free countrymen in America should be relegated to some lower status in their force protection posture, and I personally place the citizen higher on the priority list for these types of weapons and equipment.
If my kids and wife are in different rooms in the house when some recidivist scum-sucking vermin and his buddies kick through my front door, laying up and waiting in a corner is no longer a viable option for me and my family. Moving forward and aggressively reducing them to shattered carcasses on the floor with speed and extreme violence is my only concern at that point. SBR's with short suppressors and ammunition designed to not over-penetrate would be an optimum toolset for that array of solutions.
We are dealing with a burglary issue right now with the neighbor's house across the street, and my truck was tampered with over New Year's night/early morning. There have also been cases here where multiple attackers entered and attempted to exert violence on two different families. To date, both incidents were thwarted by the home owners with firearms. I don't plan on ruining that trend.
American civilians at home should have more access and more rights to using an SBR with a can than anybody else, since the individual citizen is in a higher position of priority in my book. That's the whole reason we signed away our lives, on behalf of our Countrymen. Without veering off onto too much of a debate about that, I don't see how cans and SBR's being used overseas is really relevant to this muzzle device.
I want a device that when coupled with a muzzle brake, does not present the typical peripheral blast signature issues, while adding the benefits that brakes bring to the table. I was thinking of it more in terms of being used outside, not for civilian CQB where I have to establish a do-not cross line in my home between me and my family, but if it helps with that as well, then that would be gravy.
I'm the last guy that wants an indoor gunfight, but I'm also the last guy you want to engage in an indoor gunfight with. To blanket American citizens as people who should be excluded from that type of training and weapon assortment profile comes off as a bit elitist to me. You never know what type of threat will roll through your front or back door these days, and we live in a relatively violent crime-free area. If I come off as a little sensitive to this, it's because I've had to really change my schedule lately to be more vigilant about keeping an eye on things, now that this burglary and apparent follow-up have happened in the past few days right under my nose.
Im trackin.
I don't mean for it to sound as if all of us shouldn't have cans and SBR's. Im no longer in the military because I was medically retired. However, I take my freedoms and the defense of my family seriously and use a 12" AR with a 4.5" titanium can for home defence. On the civilian side this device may have a place...not for me I'll use a can.
I was just referring to it for mil use.
I don't mean for it to sound as if all of us shouldn't have cans and SBR's. Im no longer in the military because I was medically retired. However, I take my freedoms and the defense of my family seriously and use a 12" AR with a 4.5" titanium can for home defence. On the civilian side this device may have a place...not for me I'll use a can.
I was just referring to it for mil use.
Roger, I see where you are coming from now. For .mil use it would make sense for line units, where Joe tentpeg and a defunct leadership climate can barely manage with the existing weapons that they have, and adding suppressors to that equation would result in baffle strikes and more deadlined weapons on the first trip to the range. Scout Platoons are the rare exception to this, along with DM's in a well-led Infantry unit.
A mitigated brake could really help with conventional units where they don't get anywhere near enough trigger time, as follow-up would be much easier for Joe to accomplish in his limited CQM training, where he isn't being taught good technique because his NCO's haven't been taught it either.
The Russians fielded the AK-74 with a brake decades ago, but hearing loss doesn't seem to be a concern for them. That AK-74 brake sucks to be next to in a practical infantry setting, whether behind cover or in the house.
A mitigated brake could really help with conventional units where they don't get anywhere near enough trigger time, as follow-up would be much easier for Joe to accomplish in his limited CQM training, where he isn't being taught good technique because his NCO's haven't been taught it either.
The Russians fielded the AK-74 with a brake decades ago, but hearing loss doesn't seem to be a concern for them. That AK-74 brake sucks to be next to in a practical infantry setting, whether behind cover or in the house.
Thats what I was thinking too.
The guy seemed to be switched on and not a mouth breather like a lot of the demo video's, but WTF.
Oh blackwater, enough said.
Looks like someone is trying to re-invent the wheel. While I see the uses in a device like that (one that is removable), it looks pretty close to the Noveske KX3.
The Noveske KX3 "Blast, Flash, Recoil & Back Pressure Enhancement Device" (words in quotations my own opinion) works in a similar fashion.
