Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 72

Thread: Softening Recoil?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    238
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)

    Thanks everyone

    I really appreciate the support, have to take off and will check back here later. All is very helpful, thanks in advanced.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    14
    Feedback Score
    0
    Good Info Thank you

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Auburn AL
    Posts
    1,796
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by EzGoingKev View Post
    I have an A5 and a Battlecomp on my 6920. Shoots softer, no issues.
    +1 for A5 and Battlecomp.
    ^^ Read with southern accent !^^ and blame all grammatical errors on Alabama's public school system.
    Technique is nothing more than failed style. Cecil B DeMented
    "If you can't eat it or hump it, piss on it and walk away."-Dog
    Go where the food is.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    FL -Where it's summer 10.5 months out of the year
    Posts
    4,114
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jerhelo View Post
    Appreciate the insight. I run a Daniels climb mitigator on one of my rifles but everything else has a standard A2 flash hider. Not much difference in the climb mitigator, little but not much. I am thinking of going with a A5 buffer system and start there. Think that by the time I purchase multiple buffers it would get costly.
    Yeah, leave the gas block alone.

    If you don't want to grab a new muzzle device, take a look at the lmt enhanced carrier....but just the carrier. It serves the same end as an adjustable gas block and helps reduce recoil. I use it with the A5 system and there's no going back for me.

    Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
    "That thing looks about as enjoyable as a bowl of exploding dicks." - Magic_Salad0892

    "The body cannot go where the mind has not already been."

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    1,612
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    I forgot, I have LMT's enhanced carrier installed also.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    8,420
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by thopkins22 View Post
    ...In my experience, the compromise brakes don't really compromise on anything other than their ability to actually reduce recoil. They're going to be nearly as concussive for shooters in close proximity as true brakes...
    I have to disagree with this. I've encountered several "true brakes" mounted on barrels from SBR lengths to a full 20 inches. All have been significantly more concussive than the Battlecomp mounted on a 16 inch barrel. I grant that the BC isn't as efficient at reducing flash as an A2, but it's much better than a bare muzzle or brake. I can't say the BC reduces recoil but it does soften it significantly.

    I don't know about other "hybrid" devices, I've only experience with the BC and the Belgian combo device on an FAL
    INSIDE PLAN OF BOX
    1. ROAD-RUNNER LIFTS GLASS OF WATER- PULLING UP MATCH
    2. MATCH SCRATCHES ON MATCH-BOX
    3. MATCH LIGHTS FUSE TO TNT
    4. BOOM!
    5. HA-HA!!

    -WILE E. COYOTE, AUTHOR OF "EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO KNOW IN LIFE, I LEARNED FROM GOLDBERG & MURPHY"

    http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n289/SgtSongDog/AR%20Carbine/DSC_0114.jpg
    I am American

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,742
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MistWolf View Post
    I have to disagree with this. I've encountered several "true brakes" mounted on barrels from SBR lengths to a full 20 inches. All have been significantly more concussive than the Battlecomp mounted on a 16 inch barrel. I grant that the BC isn't as efficient at reducing flash as an A2, but it's much better than a bare muzzle or brake. I can't say the BC reduces recoil but it does soften it significantly.

    I don't know about other "hybrid" devices, I've only experience with the BC and the Belgian combo device on an FAL
    I think the Battlecomp does a pretty good job of reducing/softening/changing/whatever-ing recoil...not as good as a more aggressive brake though. There isn't as much concussion, but it's much closer to a muzzle brake concussion than an A2. Certainly the Battlecomp may qualify as best of breed here. I'm just not sure that the breed serves much purpose.

    I don't really want to take this thread off the tracks, but I guess my point is that recoil reducing muzzle devices and flash suppressing muzzle devices are pretty much mutually exclusive. The compromises wind up pretty damned close to either being brakes or being flash suppressors. Even the A2 is a little bit of a compromise away from being a true flash suppressor. The Battlecomp is much more compensator than the Vortex, but the A2 is much more suppressor than compensator. I'm not sure that depending on your needs the juice of a brake or the juice of a flash suppressor isn't worth the extra squeeze to get as compared to those sitting on the fence.

    Not totally fair as it's through a PVS14, but here is footage of a Surefire brake, a Battlecomp, and an A2 at night.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    College Station, Texas
    Posts
    1,539
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Heavier buffers or a carrier weight system will help smooth out your recoil impulses without monkeying with your muzzle device.

    heavybuffers.com is a good place to start.



  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    238
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    any experience with the Daniel Defense Climb Mitigator in comparison with the BC?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    238
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    Great info, thanks Sinister.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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