Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

AR comp/flash hider?


Recommended Posts

AR Comps Pt1

AR Comps Pt2

3 Gunners use all different comps.

You will find Fanboys for several of them.

The guys who win don't use the same one.

Read, test and decide for yourself.

Patrick

Some of us make our own too. :roflol:

I am guilty of the same my friend :cheers:

You can't leave me in a room with machine tools as I am sure to create swarf.

Patrick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna echo what Pat said. There isn't one comp that everyone uses or is that much better than all the rest.

Personally I really like the F2. For me it works great. In the very near future, I may be switching. (hint, hint)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've spent a bit of time working on comp design and evaluating the gas dynamics of some of the more popular ones. I designed one, that at least with state of the art gas dynamics models, is better than anything currently on the market, but I am not sure if I am going to make it or not. The difference between the "best" comp on the market and the "worst" (but fairly well represented) comp on the market is minimal. In the evaluation process of comps, it is clear that some designers have an elementary understanding of high pressure gas dynamics, others not so much, however, that does not necessarily factor into effectiveness in the comp. There are two major gas dynamics considerations, some comps focus on one and not the other, very few deal with both well. Some comps are just chunks of metal with holes drilled through and not much thought for the crown, carbon build-up, erosion or effectiveness.

I beleive that a person could take two identical off the shelf ARs and end up at about the same place if they put the best comp on one and a poor comp with a tuned buffer and gas system on the other. However, which gun do you want to shoot? Which costs more? How much more do you acutally get putting the "best" comp on the tuned gun? Gas volume of the load, barrel length, burn speed of the powder, mass of the reciprocating bolt, total gun weight, gas bled off through the gas block and momentum impulse of the load are all interconnected dynamics that can be tuned. One comp might be better on one rifle with a particular load than another and vice versa. The way the shooter holds the gun, upper body mass, desired rate of fire, the shooters eye and sighting system are other variables that will afect how the shooter "feels" and "sees" recoil. It would be inaccurate to say one is the best without defining the specific gun configuration, load and shooter variables. If you have a 10 pound gun that moves .3" at the muzzle or a 5 pound gun that moves .5" at the muzzle, which is faster to shoot at 25 yards, at 500 yards?

Nope, I did not answer the OPs question, but I hope I have presented a little food for thought when it comes to comp selection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've spent a bit of time working on comp design and evaluating the gas dynamics of some of the more popular ones. I designed one, that at least with state of the art gas dynamics models, is better than anything currently on the market, but I am not sure if I am going to make it or not. The difference between the "best" comp on the market and the "worst" (but fairly well represented) comp on the market is minimal. In the evaluation process of comps, it is clear that some designers have an elementary understanding of high pressure gas dynamics, others not so much, however, that does not necessarily factor into effectiveness in the comp. There are two major gas dynamics considerations, some comps focus on one and not the other, very few deal with both well. Some comps are just chunks of metal with holes drilled through and not much thought for the crown, carbon build-up, erosion or effectiveness.

I beleive that a person could take two identical off the shelf ARs and end up at about the same place if they put the best comp on one and a poor comp with a tuned buffer and gas system on the other. However, which gun do you want to shoot? Which costs more? How much more do you acutally get putting the "best" comp on the tuned gun? Gas volume of the load, barrel length, burn speed of the powder, mass of the reciprocating bolt, total gun weight, gas bled off through the gas block and momentum impulse of the load are all interconnected dynamics that can be tuned. One comp might be better on one rifle with a particular load than another and vice versa. The way the shooter holds the gun, upper body mass, desired rate of fire, the shooters eye and sighting system are other variables that will afect how the shooter "feels" and "sees" recoil. It would be inaccurate to say one is the best without defining the specific gun configuration, load and shooter variables. If you have a 10 pound gun that moves .3" at the muzzle or a 5 pound gun that moves .5" at the muzzle, which is faster to shoot at 25 yards, at 500 yards?

Nope, I did not answer the OPs question, but I hope I have presented a little food for thought when it comes to comp selection.

So Mark, besides your new design, which one would you use?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on very similar performance from all the major comps, I think you guys are missing a very important question.

Which one makes me look fast? :)

Thats easy....the one that makes everyone around you flinch the most, it will make everyone around you miss half of what you are doing and you will look very fast. :P

Seriously though, pick the (two or three chamber) comp that fits your budget/looks coolest and all will be fine. Practice helps even more. I would stay away from the single chamber designs, but that may just be me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously though, pick the (two or three chamber) comp that fits your budget/looks coolest and all will be fine. Practice helps even more. I would stay away from the single chamber designs, but that may just be me.

Just to make sure we are clear, there is a difference between a chamber, a port, a vent and a baffle. For instance, the Benny Hill rolling Thunder has ONE chamber with a port and three baffles. The Nordic has one chamber with three ports and one baffle. The older style JP had 2 baffles and 4 vents, the newer one adds a chamber. I'm not aware of any comps with three chambers and most of the good ones have only one chamber.

There are a few of the comps with three baffles, that if you cut off the last baffle, there is no perceived change in recoil reduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have an older AK Concepts (Now Primary Weapons Systems) DNTC comp on my long range gun, and while I like the performance of it, I know there are better out there. I like the looks of the Nordic Corvette and think that is the way I will go, since my barrel is Stainless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't have any FD modeling software....

...but have devised simple compensator test.

Theory: the most efficient comp's are the ones that divert the most gas to the sides/above i.e. 90 degrees to bullet travel.

Put up a regular IPSC target (the kind WITH A HEAD) on lath.

Hold the muzzle 2" (TWO INCHES) from the lower A/C line and fire 1 round.

My results:

M1 rifle .30-06 (baseline test???): cardboard was blown completely off of lath.

AK w/ factory comp 7.62X39: cardboard was ripped apart for about 12" dia. circle.

SCAR w/ BattleComp (1.0?).223: cardboard was ripped apart for about 8-10" dia. circle.

AR w/ JP BC comp .223: 22 caliber hole in target with a few powder grains around hole.

AR w/ Benny Hill RT comp .223: 22 caliber hole in target with a few powder grains around hole.

AR w/ A2 flash hider .223: cardboard was blown completely off of lath.

Try your favorite comp, send in the results and win VALUABLE PRIZES!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but have devised simple compensator test.

Theory: the most efficient comp's are the ones that divert the most gas to the sides/above i.e. 90 degrees to bullet travel.

That is definately a good back of the napkin test. I'd alter your theory a tad...the most effective comps for recoil reduction are the ones that have the smallest amount of gas leaving the front of the comp. I've found efficieny and effectiveness are not always the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, no one has said it yet, but the compensators (muzzle brakes) we are talking about are those for limited class and therefor, the size envelope is defined (i.e. 1" in diameter and 3" in length). The most effective comp will also be the most efficient within those size parameters.

For example, the Battlecomp vs. JP in my test: which was most efficient, and therefor most effective?

Now, try a JP "tank Brake" (open class and different size limitations) vs. various limited class comp's and you'll find efficient examples of each, but the bigger "tank brake" will be more effective.

Now go shoot up some targets in the name of research!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously though, pick the (two or three chamber) comp that fits your budget/looks coolest and all will be fine. Practice helps even more. I would stay away from the single chamber designs, but that may just be me.

Just to make sure we are clear, there is a difference between a chamber, a port, a vent and a baffle. For instance, the Benny Hill rolling Thunder has ONE chamber with a port and three baffles. The Nordic has one chamber with three ports and one baffle. The older style JP had 2 baffles and 4 vents, the newer one adds a chamber. I'm not aware of any comps with three chambers and most of the good ones have only one chamber.

There are a few of the comps with three baffles, that if you cut off the last baffle, there is no perceived change in recoil reduction.

Yeah, of course you are right. I am using chamber and baffle interchangably for ease of discription. :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have 4 comps and all seemed to still leave a little "high and right" muzzle rise. Talked to Benny Hill. He told me to drill a small hole just like the one on top of his comp on the right side. Did that. He also told me to take my dewalt to the range with small bits and start drilling the top hole until it quit going up, then the side hole until it quit going right. Did it and now it shoots flat. Pretty cool. Benny's Rolling Thunder has enough room behind the rear baffle to do that. You can also try "clocking" the comp to reduce and high right stuff. Helped for me, but not enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, of course you are right. I am using chamber and baffle interchangably for ease of discription. :cheers:

You are a smart dude, so I figured as much. Sometimes we forget that people read these forums who don't have a lot of time and exposure to various gear and ideas. Hope to see you at BRM3G. :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...