Nordic Corvette Comp Computer Simulation

[Therealkoop]

Are there any other more "uniquely" designed comps out there like the Seekins and Gas Hog?

No, not that thing that looks like a dragon.

[TonytheTiger]

Got me a gas hog on the way, courtesy of Mark's thanksgiving sale. I'm gonna do a bunch of comparison testing against the Miculek. Nothing too scientific but I'm pretty excited to see how it runs.

[buffalo chip]

That dragon head thing must work... it shoots flames out of its nose...

[Meat Target]

Hmm, you'll have to enlighten me as to what the obvious reasons are. If it's offending a particular forum contributor/muzzle brake designer, I'd like to think that any engineering type of guy would be open to seeing an honest analysis of a product, for better or worse. Although I could see any designer stepping in and stating that such an analysis doesn't necessarily equate to a whole lot in the real world and could vary greatly depending on the bio mechanics of the person using it.

My intent of posting the results of the computer simulations is to characterize the different compensators in respect to recoil reduction and downforce generated and not rank them as in which one is the best. But there are some that appear to think I am trying to do more than that so I really don’t want to start down that road.

A computer simulation could never predict how flat it will hold you barrel, there are too many variables including the fact that everyone holds the gun differently. What I believe that computer simulations do very well is predict how the compensator will react, that by its self isn’t much but when you combine it with building and testing changes to the compensator in the real world its very useful.

For example a compensator that works really well on a 18” barrel may have too much down force on a 16” barrel because the muzzle gas pressures are higher. From real world testing and comparing it to the simulation results I have been able to get a fairly good idea on how much down force would probably be too much for any load and barrel length combination.

Edited December 3, 2014 by Meat Target

[Meat Target]

Hmm, you'll have to enlighten me as to what the obvious reasons are. If it's offending a particular forum contributor/muzzle brake designer, I'd like to think that any engineering type of guy would be open to seeing an honest analysis of a product, for better or worse. Although I could see any designer stepping in and stating that such an analysis doesn't necessarily equate to a whole lot in the real world and could vary greatly depending on the bio mechanics of the person using it.

Delete - Double post

Edited December 3, 2014 by Meat Target

[TonytheTiger]

A lot of double taps on here today. Consider me enlightened, that's a perfectly understandable reason not to go down that road. I personally am just curious to see how comps work, not use your analysis to declare a winner to the great comp wars of the new millennium. That said, I'd still like to see the Gas Hog because as of tonight I'm the proud new owner of the fine device in question.

[Cyclic]

I'd love to see a couple of the silencer mount brakes and a couple regular muzzle brakes added in. A Griffin taper mount brake, PWS FSC556, AAC brake, and a Surefire MB556.

[mngunguy]

My intent of posting the results of the computer simulations is to characterize the different compensators in respect to recoil reduction and downforce generated and not rank them as in which one is the best. But there are some that appear to think I am trying to do more than that so I really don’t want to start down that road.

I think that very sentence alone is why the Gas Hog and Seekins have been brought up multiple times. They don't look like the rest but get pretty good marks from joes and pros alike.