Muzzle Brake on a Big Bore

[ChrisG]

When the PHs sign up for the job or when any individual goes to the range, be it public or private, they need to expect being with braked rifles. Nowadays, they're a fact of life. As far as those that say "if you can't stand the recoil, don't shoot it", I say if you can't stand braked rifles or noise, maybe you should take up another hobby or build yourself a private range. Aside that, most of the PHs I hunted with are ALREADY DEAF!

Just for reference, here's a REAL MAN shooting a braked rifle without ear protection.
View attachment 294439

Lol the brake on THAT gun IS a necessity.

Unless there is some medical reason to
use one, they don't need to be on a hunting rifle. Discomfort isn't a legitimate reason in my opinion.

And to say that brakes are a fact of life is like saying "everyone uses herbicides nowadays... just suck it up and get used to it." Then your neighbor oversprays your lawn and flowerbed and kills everything... your statement shows me a lack of concientiousness toward other people... it's that attitude of "well this is how I do things and if it negatively affects you or causes you damage.. well I don't care about you, you're an inconvenience to me". That's what irritates me about brakes. It isn't that they're loud, it's that attitude of "you need to accommodate ME" never giving someone else's feelings (or in this case potential hearing damage) a thought.

 

[Mike Van Horn]

Every range l have been too hearing protection is mandatory. So what's the big deal
Really your PH is in business as a guide and can't find a set of hearing protection that works for him? If that's your job it should just be another tool that's necessary
I do agree that if your shooting with a brake it's your responsibility to tell everyone around you. But that's where it ends

 

[Hogpatrol]

Lol the brake on THAT gun IS a necessity.

Unless there is some medical reason to
use one, they don't need to be on a hunting rifle. Discomfort isn't a legitimate reason in my opinion.

And to say that brakes are a fact of life is like saying "everyone uses herbicides nowadays... just suck it up and get used to it." Then your neighbor oversprays your lawn and flowerbed and kills everything... your statement shows me a lack of concientiousness toward other people... it's that attitude of "well this is how I do things and if it negatively affects you or causes you damage.. well I don't care about you, you're an inconvenience to me". That's what irritates me about brakes. It isn't that they're loud, it's that attitude of "you need to accommodate ME" never giving someone else's feelings (or in this case potential hearing damage) a thought.

What a laughable baseless argument. "you need to accommodate me"? How about the other way around "I have to accommodate YOU"? Sounds like the entitlement attitude to me. Everyone else needs to cater to your needs, i.e. no loud noises. Sorry, bro. Brakes are a fact of life on the ranges. on hunts and including sanctioned matches. Sometimes you just have to put on your big boy pants and suck it up. Life isn't fair. I'm using a brake on my heavy recoilers. Just stand behind me. Don't want my business, I'll hunt with someone else. YMMV.
Aside that, admit it. You got hammered and you're still pissed.

 

[CoElkHunter]

When the PHs sign up for the job or when any individual goes to the range, be it public or private, they need to expect being with braked rifles. Nowadays, they're a fact of life. As far as those that say "if you can't stand the recoil, don't shoot it", I say if you can't stand braked rifles or noise, maybe you should take up another hobby or build yourself a private range. Aside that, most of the PHs I hunted with are ALREADY DEAF!

Just for reference, here's a REAL MAN shooting a braked rifle without ear protection.
View attachment 294439

I agree to an extent. I wouldn’t use a brake, but when I see all the hunting photos both here on AH and elsewhere, of hunters posing with their trophies with “braked” rifles in the photos, one has to wonder about how prevalent they really are? I wear Sonic ear valves on a string now WHENEVER I shoot or hunt anything anymore. Overtime and many years of trapshooting and dove hunting without hearing protection, my hearing isn’t very good (high pitched sounds). Surprisingly,I can still hear elk or deer walking through the woods, but can’t hear birds singing or the wing beats of a dove. Whatever your shooting, wear hearing protection or suffer the long term consequences like I did! Wish they had suppressors available back in my day.

 

[Newboomer]

I don't use brakes or cans on any of my rifles. I like to keep them clean without some ugly contraption spoiling the lines. If someone hangs one of those things on a fine multi thousand dollar rig, he has ruined the looks and value of it. There are recoil mitigating systems that don't detract from the good looks of a valuable piece. Try reduced loads to get accustomed to recoil while practicing. In the field you won't feel it or hear the shot, but still get your ears on.

I have the age old problem of not hearing so well. Comes from a lifetime of construction, logging and military service. Back then we didn't know what hearing protection was and now I suffer the consequences. I need hearing aids to hear anything in the field but they are a contradiction to shooting. Shoot with them or take them out and try to hear what's going on. Most times I use electronic muffs that intensify sound but cut out shots. Work real well.

Whatever it takes, protect those ears. Once hearing is damaged it doesn't come back.

 

[johnnyblues]

Every range l have been too hearing protection is mandatory. So what's the big deal
Really your PH is in business as a guide and can't find a set of hearing protection that works for him? If that's your job it should just be another tool that's necessary
I do agree that if your shooting with a brake it's your responsibility to tell everyone around you. But that's where it ends

That about sums it up for me. As I first stated this is a hot bed of a subject. Another hot bed is the “ if I can’t import my trophy I don’t want to hunt it”. Heated debate on that one too. Hey guys if a man feels more comfortable with a brake ( like myself) what’s the big deal? Agreed I have never remembered the recoil on any animal I’ve shot with ANY caliber in the field. I do however agree at the range in close proximity of someone shooting with a brake is not pleasant so I tell the range officer that I have a brake on my 375 prior to assigning a bench.

 

[PARA45]

When I go to the range I wear double hearing protection, regardless of what I'm shooting. Shooting a rifle without hearing protection, and with or without a break, will cause permanent hearing damage to the shooter as well as the person standing next to the shooter.

 

[CoElkHunter]

When I go to the range I wear double hearing protection, regardless of what I'm shooting. Shooting a rifle without hearing protection, and with or without a break, will cause permanent hearing damage to the shooter as well as the person standing next to the shooter.

Yes, I wear both the ear valves and muffs on the range. I wear the ear valves while hunting (even elk, deer and pronghorn) and my hearing ability of “low” pitched sounds isn’t affected. I guess I’m fortunate to have that hearing ability left.

 

[BeeMaa]

I knew this was going to be a good thread...

 

[Mike Van Horn]

I knew this was going to be a good thread...

With your popcorn

 

[fourfive8]

I agree to an extent. I wouldn’t use a brake, but when I see all the hunting photos both here on AH and elsewhere, of hunters posing with their trophies with “braked” rifles in the photos, one has to wonder about how prevalent they really are? I wear Sonic ear valves on a string now WHENEVER I shoot or hunt anything anymore. Overtime and many years of trapshooting and dove hunting without hearing protection, my hearing isn’t very good (high pitched sounds). Surprisingly,I can still hear elk or deer walking through the woods, but can’t hear birds singing or the wing beats of a dove. Whatever your shooting, wear hearing protection or suffer the long term consequences like I did! Wish they had suppressors available back in my day.

I think the "cans" you see on some rifles in many of the trophy pics are actually suppressors not brakes. While some suppressors can have a braking effect, their main function is suppressing the loud "crack" of the report. So just the opposite effect of a normal brake that diverts the gasses sideways and to the rear thus braking the rifle's recoil but increasing the "report" and blast to the side and rear.

 

[enysse]

I wish the costs for suppressors would go down. I see all these fancy muzzlebrakes on all these $3000 plus dollar hunting rifles on all the TV shows and go well “I’m sure there is little recoil” and they can hit a target “ a country mile away”.

This why I stay away from the “Big Bores”. I can shoot a 9.3x62 for a long time. But anything in .416 and above.... no way. And my light 300 Win Mag is a beast without a muzzlebrake.

Either you like or hate a muzzlebrake....there is no in between ground. I personally see value in them with hearing protection.

 

[johnnyblues]

When I go to the range I wear double hearing protection, regardless of what I'm shooting. Shooting a rifle without hearing protection, and with or without a break, will cause permanent hearing damage to the shooter as well as the person standing next to the shooter.

I too brother. Unfortunately I’ve caused permanent hearing damage to my left ear after my first safari in Africa, was so excited I never wore hearing protection. But it’s ok.... gives me good reason to tell my wife I didn’t hear her!

 

[BeeMaa]

I too brother. Unfortunately I’ve caused permanent hearing damage to my left ear after my first safari in Africa, was so excited I never wore hearing protection. But it’s ok.... gives me good reason to tell my wife I didn’t hear her!

Been telling that lie to my wife for more than 25 years...it's called "selective hearing".

 

[Wyatt Smith]

I’m only 22 and I’ve damaged my hearing enough I couldn’t join the army! Failed the test all 3 times. There will be no brakes on any of my rifles, I also dislike ported muzzles.

 

[Ridgewalker]

Best wishes to everyone and I hope for your sake you never suffer from severed rotator tendons nor retinas. It scared me enough that I’d rather only shoot small animals with a light recoiling cartridge if I couldn’t use my braked heavy rifle on DG.

Guess I’m lucky because so far my PHes and trackers have been very understanding and accepting of my shortcoming.

At my age I don’t have a year to waste recuperating from another surgery.

 

[Chago]

I laugh everytime I read these. The only argument I ever read against brakes is sound and the other is the typical manhood measuring "if you can't handle your rifle well go down to one you can handle".

I'm 6'3 235lbs. Military trained sniper/marksman. I don't own a rifle without a brake. Right down to small calibers like 6.5 creedmoor. I don't care how big and strong you think you are. No one on here can deny that they shoot a low recoiling rifle more accurate. No one on here can deny they can follow up faster with a low recoil rifle. Those two points are far more important then sound, or what your friends think about your manhood. As a matter of fact, the moron who shoots it non braked, and flinches and/or makes piss poor shots on animals is the one with the lack of manhood. If you have ever had to track a animal more then 10 yards. Go get a brake and become more accurate.

I brake even my small calibers that hardly have any recoil only because if it can have zero that's better then a little. Every edge I can get to make a precise shot is far more important to me. 6.5 creedmoor with a brake I can literally watch my bullet fly through the scope the entire flight. What do you think my follow up timing is?


As per sound. Every gun is loud, even without a brake. If your asking me suppressors vs brakes, then we can have a debate. Brake vs not suppressed makes no sense. They are both loud, and if pleasure shooting at the range, you should be wearing hearing protection. For that one hunting scenario shot. It isn't the end of the world when outdoors as the shooter. But I always have plugs around my neck. Just for the added safety.

The mentality for most forums nowadays is bigger caliber. Bigger caliber. This forum is full of massive calibers. Truth is, your making up for shitty shooting by getting a caliber that can knock over a tree in one shot. Most of you get it for "knockdown power". Knockdown power only means something if you made a bad shot. 22LR has enough kinetic energy to penetrate any animals hide and heart on planet earth. I chose a 300win mag not because of knockdown power. But because of velocity and high ballistic coefficient bullet selections. Those two equate to very flat shooting. Which is important to me for distance shooting. But when the bullet is placed correctly. I'll dirt nap a giraffe with it no problem.

 

[johnnyblues]

I laugh everytime I read these. The only argument I ever read against brakes is sound and the other is the typical manhood measuring "if you can't handle your rifle well go down to one you can handle".

I'm 6'3 235lbs. Military trained sniper/marksman. I don't own a rifle without a brake. Right down to small calibers like 6.5 creedmoor. I don't care how big and strong you think you are. No one on here can deny that they shoot a low recoiling rifle more accurate. No one on here can deny they can follow up faster with a low recoil rifle. Those two points are far more important then sound, or what your friends think about your manhood. As a matter of fact, the moron who shoots it non braked, and flinches and/or makes piss poor shots on animals is the one with the lack of manhood. If you have ever had to track a animal more then 10 yards. Go get a brake and become more accurate.

I brake even my small calibers that hardly have any recoil only because if it can have zero that's better then a little. Every edge I can get to make a precise shot is far more important to me. 6.5 creedmoor with a brake I can literally watch my bullet fly through the scope the entire flight. What do you think my follow up timing is?


As per sound. Every gun is loud, even without a brake. If your asking me suppressors vs brakes, then we can have a debate. Brake vs not suppressed makes no sense. They are both loud, and if pleasure shooting at the range, you should be wearing hearing protection. For that one hunting scenario shot. It isn't the end of the world when outdoors as the shooter. But I always have plugs around my neck. Just for the added safety.

The mentality for most forums nowadays is bigger caliber. Bigger caliber. This forum is full of massive calibers. Truth is, your making up for shitty shooting by getting a caliber that can knock over a tree in one shot. Most of you get it for "knockdown power". Knockdown power only means something if you made a bad shot. 22LR has enough kinetic energy to penetrate any animals hide and heart on planet earth. I chose a 300win mag not because of knockdown power. But because of velocity and high ballistic coefficient bullet selections. Those two equate to very flat shooting. Which is important to me for distance shooting. But when the bullet is placed correctly. I'll dirt nap a giraffe with it no problem.

Well said sir.

 

[IvW]

I laugh everytime I read these. The only argument I ever read against brakes is sound and the other is the typical manhood measuring "if you can't handle your rifle well go down to one you can handle".

I'm 6'3 235lbs. Military trained sniper/marksman. I don't own a rifle without a brake. Right down to small calibers like 6.5 creedmoor. I don't care how big and strong you think you are. No one on here can deny that they shoot a low recoiling rifle more accurate. No one on here can deny they can follow up faster with a low recoil rifle. Those two points are far more important then sound, or what your friends think about your manhood. As a matter of fact, the moron who shoots it non braked, and flinches and/or makes piss poor shots on animals is the one with the lack of manhood. If you have ever had to track a animal more then 10 yards. Go get a brake and become more accurate.

I brake even my small calibers that hardly have any recoil only because if it can have zero that's better then a little. Every edge I can get to make a precise shot is far more important to me. 6.5 creedmoor with a brake I can literally watch my bullet fly through the scope the entire flight. What do you think my follow up timing is?


As per sound. Every gun is loud, even without a brake. If your asking me suppressors vs brakes, then we can have a debate. Brake vs not suppressed makes no sense. They are both loud, and if pleasure shooting at the range, you should be wearing hearing protection. For that one hunting scenario shot. It isn't the end of the world when outdoors as the shooter. But I always have plugs around my neck. Just for the added safety.

The mentality for most forums nowadays is bigger caliber. Bigger caliber. This forum is full of massive calibers. Truth is, your making up for shitty shooting by getting a caliber that can knock over a tree in one shot. Most of you get it for "knockdown power". Knockdown power only means something if you made a bad shot. 22LR has enough kinetic energy to penetrate any animals hide and heart on planet earth. I chose a 300win mag not because of knockdown power. But because of velocity and high ballistic coefficient bullet selections. Those two equate to very flat shooting. Which is important to me for distance shooting. But when the bullet is placed correctly. I'll dirt nap a giraffe with it no problem.

We are discussing the merits for a Big bore rifle for hunting DG in Africa not sniping. Max practical hunting distance 100 meters.

What do you think my follow up timing is?

Why would that be important when you can hit a fly at 300 yards?

For DG hunting on a big bore in Africa a brake is a definite no no unless you plan on shooting them at extreme range which defeats the object....

 

[Red Leg]

I laugh everytime I read these. The only argument I ever read against brakes is sound and the other is the typical manhood measuring "if you can't handle your rifle well go down to one you can handle".

I'm 6'3 235lbs. Military trained sniper/marksman. I don't own a rifle without a brake. Right down to small calibers like 6.5 creedmoor. I don't care how big and strong you think you are. No one on here can deny that they shoot a low recoiling rifle more accurate. No one on here can deny they can follow up faster with a low recoil rifle. Those two points are far more important then sound, or what your friends think about your manhood. As a matter of fact, the moron who shoots it non braked, and flinches and/or makes piss poor shots on animals is the one with the lack of manhood. If you have ever had to track a animal more then 10 yards. Go get a brake and become more accurate.

I brake even my small calibers that hardly have any recoil only because if it can have zero that's better then a little. Every edge I can get to make a precise shot is far more important to me. 6.5 creedmoor with a brake I can literally watch my bullet fly through the scope the entire flight. What do you think my follow up timing is?


As per sound. Every gun is loud, even without a brake. If your asking me suppressors vs brakes, then we can have a debate. Brake vs not suppressed makes no sense. They are both loud, and if pleasure shooting at the range, you should be wearing hearing protection. For that one hunting scenario shot. It isn't the end of the world when outdoors as the shooter. But I always have plugs around my neck. Just for the added safety.

The mentality for most forums nowadays is bigger caliber. Bigger caliber. This forum is full of massive calibers. Truth is, your making up for shitty shooting by getting a caliber that can knock over a tree in one shot. Most of you get it for "knockdown power". Knockdown power only means something if you made a bad shot. 22LR has enough kinetic energy to penetrate any animals hide and heart on planet earth. I chose a 300win mag not because of knockdown power. But because of velocity and high ballistic coefficient bullet selections. Those two equate to very flat shooting. Which is important to me for distance shooting. But when the bullet is placed correctly. I'll dirt nap a giraffe with it no problem.

"your making up for shitty shooting by getting a caliber that can knock over a tree in one shot...." Seriously!?! Who do you think you talking about - exactly? I think that is great that you are a military trained sniper - thanks for your service. But you may be stunned to learn that there are a lot of folks with a bit of experience behind a rifle on this forum. Military and otherwise. An amazing number of them shoot large calibers at dangerous game and put a bullet exactly where it needs to go - time after time after time. And I have no clue what point you are trying to make about a giraffe - planning to snipe one with your trusty .300 at 400 meters?

And you would be hard pressed to find any experienced hunter on this sight remotely impressed with the idea of "knock down power" - whatever you think you mean by that. Anyone with any experience in hunting larger game is focused on penetration and wound channel.

And I can only speak for myself, but I have no idea what you are talking about with respect to shooting a lower recoiling rifle more accurately. Lower than what? Specifically. I'll shoot a cloverleaf with a .22lr or .404. So will most of the experienced big game hunters on this forum.

But to the main point, I hate being around muzzle brakes. That is a fact. They are also significantly louder than a conventional rifle. That is also a fact. They are particularly unpleasant on a range where everyone is side x side. That too is a fact. Clearly that is unimportant to many. Fortunately, I don't have to put up with that attitude now, because I have my own range. But I do feel bad for PH's and trackers who are in the business and have to grin and bear it.