Question about the "muzzle brakes"

[colorado]

I guess I'm in the "no brake" column. I can definitely see the point if you hunt alone and shoot something like a 300 or 375 RUM and long shots are the rule (maybe hunting elk cross canyon). I can also see using one for load development and then putting on the threaded cover for practice and hunting I can tell you a 338 RUM with a muzzle brake is about twice as loud if not more than my 500 Jeffery for the shooter and probably three to four times as loud to someone on the side. My feeling is if you need a brake, step down in caliber, most often you will shoot better doing so anyway. Not much in North America a 270 can't kill at any reasonable range except maybe the big bears.

 

[Mtgoat]

You see the shooter using a muzzle break is shielded from the direct report of the muzzle blast, the other around him or her are not.

I love muzzle brakes. They help me to be a better shooter. However, I am not shielded from the muzzle blast by any stretch of the imagination. I may not get it as bad as people to the side, but I do get it. I always use ear protection what shooting - esp with a brake. That is always except for one elk hunt. There were 3 of us. We watched a very nice bull for a long time as he worked his way closer and finally into range. Then I had to wait while he mated a cow and walked into some oak brush to smoke a cigarette afterwards. ;-) When he finally came back out, all us forgot about our ear protection. I can tell you that even as the shooter, it was PAINFUL. Three shots and every one of them felt like someone was hitting my left ear with a cupped hand. It's been over 3 years since that hunt and I definitely notice that I've lost some hearing in that ear. I find myself saying "Huh? What did you say?" a lot more than I used to. Even with my wife - but I guess that's normal.

 

[sestoppelman]

I love muzzle brakes. They help me to be a better shooter. However, I am not shielded from the muzzle blast by any stretch of the imagination. I may not get it as bad as people to the side, but I do get it. I always use ear protection what shooting - esp with a brake. That is always except for one elk hunt. There were 3 of us. We watched a very nice bull for a long time as he worked his way closer and finally into range. Then I had to wait while he mated a cow and walked into some oak brush to smoke a cigarette afterwards. ;-) When he finally came back out, all us forgot about our ear protection. I can tell you that even as the shooter, it was PAINFUL. Three shots and every one of them felt like someone was hitting my left ear with a cupped hand. It's been over 3 years since that hunt and I definitely notice that I've lost some hearing in that ear. I find myself saying "Huh? What did you say?" a lot more than I used to. Even with my wife - but I guess that's normal.

Not exactly a brilliant "ringing" endorsement if you ask me. Brakes suck, especially for other shooters.

 

[Mtgoat]

Not exactly a brilliant "ringing" endorsement if you ask me. Brakes suck, especially for other shooters.

I'm not trying to "sell" brakes as a solution, just sharing what I can from my limited knowledge/experience. That's one of the things that makes this site great.

 

[Big5]

. . . .Brakes suck, especially for other shooters.

+ 1

 

[bluey]

do you rekon this thread is going around in an endless circle .
im pretty sure we have all worked out that some of us like them and some of us don't .
we proberly should stop repeating our selves and leave it at that ,hey ........:deal:

 

[tarbe]

Nah bluey....we need to beat on it a little more.

I hate brakes. Don't want to be within 100 yards of one. And would never subject someone else to the punishment...whether at the range or in the field.


Tim

 

[bluey]

Nah bluey....we need to beat on it a little more.

I hate brakes. Don't want to be within 100 yards of one. And would never subject someone else to the punishment...whether at the range or in the field.


Tim

ha ha ha ha , does that feel better ,tim
or would like to vent some more mate ...........


and in the end , some will and others wont ,
those that do , will
and those that don't , wont
and that brings us another a full circle .
and nothings changed ............:beatingdeadhorse:

 

[Big5]

ha ha ha ha , does that feel better ,tim
or would like to vent some more mate ...........
and in the end , some will and others wont ,
those that do , will
and those that don't , wont
and that brings us another a full circle .
and nothings changed.

I suppose you're right, but in the end I remain wondering how the 19th and early 20th century hunters were able to effectively use firearms of all calibers without a muzzle brake, and yet there is a growing number of hunters today who cannot seem to tolerate the recoil of so much as a .270Win without one. How did the early ivory hunters whack and stack with the likes of the various big bore (both doubles and magazine rifles) without muzzle brakes and many of the plains game and deer hunters of today seem to need them? Were the early hunters just a more stout breed of men?

I don't know the answer, but my 'circle' always ends the same way; I see no need for brakes and I don't want to be around hunters who use them. To each his own.

 

[bluey]

I see no need for brakes and I don't want to be around hunters who use them. To each his own.[/FONT][/QUOTE]

and l havnt heard one person say you have to ........

 

[gillettehunter]

Part of the original questIon bothers me as it was not replied to. That was the question about suppressors. Suppressors also reduce recoil as well as noise. They are legal IF you get the federal paperwork. If you inherit them there is a process to apply for a permit to be allowed to own one. If I understand it correctly then it costs $600-$1000 and 6 months to get.
Next I'll comment on brakes. I didn't use one for 40 years and got my first one in the last 3 years. I jumped out of the truck and took a shot at a coyote 2 years ago. Ears rang for the rest of the day. I don't hunt with one on since then. For LONG range shooting they allow you to spot your own shots. Also tames the recoil significantly when you get shoulder problems. Loud is the disadvantage as noted by many before. Bruce

 

[colorado]

+ 1

Not to mention guides and trackers ...

 

[enysse]

ha ha ha ha , does that feel better ,tim
or would like to vent some more mate ...........
View attachment 26032

and in the end , some will and others wont ,
those that do , will
and those that don't , wont
and that brings us another a full circle .
and nothings changed ............:beatingdeadhorse:

And you told me you were not good at using a computer (lol)!

 

[hunting4sanity]

For me personally, I think brakes for range use are fine as long as EVERYONE has hearing protection at all times, for hunting I'll take the brake off. Now suppressors, I'm a big fan, there is definitely a cost and hassle factor to getting one, but they're great to shoot and be around. Suppressors aren't 'silent' and they stick out there quite a ways off your barrel, but I'm a believer in the suppressor camp.

 

[tarbe]

ha ha ha ha , does that feel better ,tim

You better believe it, mate! That was almost as good as a nice morning dump!

 

[bluey]

You better believe it, mate! That was almost as good as a nice morning dump!

ha ha ha so now you've cleared your throat is there anything new we can sapp out of this thread ....
or are muzzle breaks, still one shooting aid that no ones allowed to use ......

 

[bluey]

And you told me you were not good at using a computer (lol)!

its my newest trick eric .....

 

[Big5]

and l havnt heard one person say you have to ........

bluey, you're right, I agree with you completely.

As I said, to each his own. If you are one who feels the necessity to install a muzzle brake on everything you own from .22 rimfire on up as an aid in making you a better marksman and hunter, so be it. That's your decision and you don't need to justify it or call an end to the discussion.

However, your preference or necessity to rely on recoil reducing devices does not address the point of my previous post. That is; how were the hunters of the past able to regularly and 'effectively' use large caliber firearms, (including, but not limited to, 470NE, .500NE, 577NE, 600NE, 500 Jeffery, 505 Gibbs, etc) when hunters of today seem to be finding it increasingly more necessary to use muzzle brakes on even small and medium bore rifles? . . . seriously, I don't get it.

Again, I can only imagine that the hunters of old must have been a more stout breed of men. By today's standard those really must have been the days of 'wooden ships and iron men'. Or maybe, just maybe, it's a simple case of the hunters of old likely worked their way up to calibers they could shoot 'effectively' through the means of shooting experience, rather than just jumping in over their heads with firearms they couldn't properly handle.

Again, to each his own and good hunting to you . . . and please make sure we hunt in opposite directions so I'm not exposed to your ear shattering device. LOL

 

[bluey]

bluey, you're right, I agree with you completely.

As I said, to each his own. If you are one who feels the necessity to install a muzzle brake on everything you own from .22 rimfire on up as an aid in making you a better marksman and hunter, so be it. That's your decision and you don't need to justify it or call an end to the discussion.

However, your preference or necessity to rely on recoil reducing devices does not address the point of my previous post. That is; how were the hunters of the past able to regularly and 'effectively' use large caliber firearms, (including, but not limited to, 470NE, .500NE, 577NE, 600NE, 500 Jeffery, 505 Gibbs, etc) when hunters of today seem to be finding it increasingly more necessary to use muzzle brakes on even small and medium bore rifles? . . . seriously, I don't get it.

Again, I can only imagine that the hunters of old must have been a more stout breed of men. By today's standard those really must have been the days of 'wooden ships and iron men'. Or maybe, just maybe, it's a simple case of the hunters of old likely worked their way up to calibers they could shoot 'effectively' through the means of shooting experience, rather than just jumping in over their heads with firearms they couldn't properly handle.

Again, to each his own and good hunting to you . . . and please make sure we hunt in opposite directions so I'm not exposed to your ear shattering device. LOL

whats to say atleast some of the hunter of days gone by wouldn't of used a brake , or premimium ammo and powders .and any of the other aides we all use and take into the field .
for what its worth I have brakes on my stalking riffle and the couple l have set up for long range , them being , my 30.06 , 300 wm and my 300rum .
the only biggish calibre I own is a 375 HH and it isn't braked ,and I cant see it happening , admittedly from docs post on this thread about follow ups in close proximity of others and in thick cover .
and my ship is steel ,its the skipper that's made of wood :icecream:
I don't believe ive jumped into any calibre that I cant use efficiently .to me its so can gleam every asset available out my riffle......
you keep speaking for the old hunters ,when did they tell you this info ,............
the only difference between a hunter that uses a muzzle brake , and one that doesn't .
is that the one that does use a brake ,doesn't care if the other hunter doesn't .its their choice
good hunting to you ,mate .

 

[DOC-404]

you keep speaking for the old hunters ,when did they tell you this info ,......

..er, I guess that would be me..'cause, in case I haven't told you, I don't like them much.. :biggrin2: