DogmaDog Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I read Patrick Kelley's article about compensators in the Nov/Dec issue of Front Sight with great interest. Thanks for putting in all that hard work to make an objective comparison! Couple of questions occurred to me: 1) Did you test the stock A2 compensator, to see how it fares against the others. I'd be curious to know how it does. 2) You mentioned the Neth compensator was designed for low blast, and showed it was correspondingly less good at reducing recoil than other brakes...but does it actually produce low blast? It's great to have someone do some real testing, and explain what they mean when they say "49% reduction in recoil". Thanks again, DogmaDog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 That was a good article! Good job Pat. I had a friend who wanted a comp and couldn't decide so I let him read that article. Instead of buy buying a JP/Coolie like mine he'll save some bucks and get the Miculek... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek45 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I hate it when everybody but me gets there new "Front Sight". Guess my mailman's not done with it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Marques Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Read the article as well. When I saw TTI's comp on top, I remembered talking to John Setlin back in 2000 and him telling me of tests he performed in designing his comp-I guess he had some pretty good tests!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtm Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 When I did these tests I did it from a hanging rifle. Pat's contraption is much better for measuring marks on paper. NOTE I am NOT knocking Pats tests, but turnig the comp 90 degrees doesn't realy show the "down thrust" of the comp. The center of gravity of an AR is quite a bit different than the side to side pivot point when mounted 90 degrees to thrust of the comp. Pat's test is still the best quantified, but I found that a free hanging rifle responded a bit differently than what is shown in the tests. Can I prove it??: Not a chance! I think any of the top brakes work great, but for a free hanging rifle the $%%^%$%# comp is still the best! KURTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogmaDog Posted October 26, 2007 Author Share Posted October 26, 2007 (edited) Yeah, the result is partly determined by how you set up the experiment, and there could be some strange artifacts in Patrick's results. I just like that he really actually explained what he did, and the results he got. We see so many claims of "38% reduced recoil" or "perceived recoil reduced by 62%", with no explanation of how the number was derived. I like that Pat said, no kidding, with X brake installed, the rifle on the cart rolled backwards 5" instead of 10", without the brake installed. I can make sense of that, even if I'm not, ultimately, shooting my rifle on a cart, or turned 90 degrees. What I'd really like to know is how the A2 muzzle device performs. Suppose it produced 40% reduction in rearward movement. For $5, and much less blast, it might be a sweet deal. I don't think so, but I'm curious. If I recall from one of Kurt's posts, his test placed the comps in order: Hill, Cooley, Miculek from most effective, to least, but didn't quantify that. DogmaDog Edited October 26, 2007 by DogmaDog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtm Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 I free hung the rifle from 2 points, wrist of the stock and half way down the hand guards of a full length free float tube. I placed a marker at the bayonet lug and had it in contact with a sheet of paper. I just looked for the flatest line on recoil. I triggered it with a cammera trip, and yes I found the Rolling Thunder to be the best with the Miculek and Cooley in order but not by much and the last two were almost Identical. Did I measure by how much...no. I figured the straightest line was the best, but that isn't neccessarily so. I find it interesting that Pat and I both came up with the rolling thunder as the #1 down force/ straightest line as it kind of indicates we are both on the same track. I never tried an A2 flash hider, nor a plain barrel, my test was more of a compairison test with no base line. I know, bad science, maybe a plain barrel is better than any comp, I don't know. I do know that I like the Rolling Thunder the best ( with a SJC a very close second) and if I could I would switch My CR02 iron sight rifle over to a Roller/SJC I would. KURTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry White Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 (edited) I guess it all depends on what you want the comp to do. If you want to tame the massive recoil of the mouse rifle you need this one or that one. I personaly just want the rifle to stay flat and on target, so I guess I will stay with the Rolling Thunder.-------------Larry Edited October 26, 2007 by lkytx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek45 Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 What I'd really like to know is how the A2 muzzle device performs. Suppose it produced 40% reduction in rearward movement. For $5, and much less blast, it might be a sweet deal. I don't think so, but I'm curious.DogmaDog If you're refering to the M16A2 muzzle device, it's designed to suppress flash, and kick up less dust than the A1 did. It does a fine job for that, but I can't feel ANY reduction in recoil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripod Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 I would like to comp a DPMS 308 with 18 inch barrel. Would the results of Pat's tests produce the same findings with the larger calibur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny hill Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 My 308 comp does about like the 223 comp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markm Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 I think Front Sight thinks I'm still in LA,,,,, maybe I'll get it before the next one comes out! BTW I love my Rolling Thunder comp! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucas Posted October 27, 2007 Share Posted October 27, 2007 I would of liked to see the Quiet comp in the test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 (edited) Great article Patrick! You spent some serious time and thought in creating the sleds for testing. I have a TTi comp. It's very good, but it seemed like it make my 20" barrel actually dip in recoil (over compensation?). I've not tried it on my 18" or 16" barrels. I'd like to try the SJC and Benny's comp. Edited October 28, 2007 by chp5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leozinho Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 2) You mentioned the Neth compensator was designed for low blast, and showed it was correspondingly less good at reducing recoil than other brakes...but does it actually produce low blast?DogmaDog I have the Neth compensator with flash hider (called the FSC556). I don't have a lot of experience with compensators, but to me there seems to be a very noticeable decrease in the blast to the sides with the Neth comp than with a Miculek comp. I bought this comp because of the claims to be less harsh (and because it is the only comp I know of that incorporates a flash hider), and I think it works as advertised. My experience is that the Neth comp produces more recoil than the Miculek, but that recoil is directed almost straight back into the shoulder. The dot of my scope seems to shudder and vibrate more than it lifts. So while there's still considerable recoil, I can manage it. I haven't seen the Front Sight article, but it appears that it didn't measure muzzle rise, right? I theorize this might skew the results against the Neth comp. Thread drift: Having said that all of that, the flash hider may not work well enough to use the comp with night vision. The flash whited out my night vision once, which is why it isn't on my rifle now until I can shoot it again at night and see it if happens again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtm Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 For any night vision devices the Vortecs flash suppressor is the ONLY way to go, unless you have a true suppressor which is a hell of a break also. The Vortecs doesn't dampen ANYTHING as to regurads to break effect, but it DOES kill flash. A sound suppressor does both, but they can be hard to come by. KURTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobob Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 This one looks interesting, if you're interested in a combo comp/flash suppressor. http://www.brownells.com/aspx/NS/store/pro...114&s=50764 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tverho Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 " A sound suppressor does both, but they can be hard to come by." KURTM Depends on where you live. Hereabouts sound suppressors are a lot easier to get by than most nice comps. Some years ago here in Finland there was even talk about making them mandatory for hunting because of noise pollution concerns. A sound suppressor has some drawbacks: - the smaller and more efficient it is, the more it heats up - serious mirage problems with more than 3-5 shots fired in rapid succession - it blows some of the crud back into your action for more cleaning - if gun cleaning is neglected, use of a suppressor corrodes the barrel a lot faster - they weigh a lot, making for less balanced rifles if barrel is not cut accordingly - in larger calibers using short barrels (eg 338 LapMag) slow powders can blow them up:) (unburned powder ignites explosively inside the suppressor) But they can be fun as well and I like to keep my hearing. t tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtm Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 All your points are well taken Tommi, and thankfully I live in a place that is easy to get them also, however the post was in conjunction with night vision devices and depending on the use the volume of fire at night is less than at a match where we are running and gunning. I hope to see you this coming year. Any word on when the Nordics will be? Kurt Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tverho Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 KurtM: Yeah, the thread was about suppressing muzzle blast or something:) I thought to add some more consideration to suppressors. I forgot one more bad thing: suppressors stay hot for a long time thereby giving a big thermal signal. Makes maybe no difference for you if you are fighting 3rd world insurgents in far away places but as we still train for WW3 we have to give it consideration. Lately our big and friendly neighbour is investing increasing oil and gas revenues on getting strong again. I have no clue so far where and when the rifle nordics will be held. I hope I can participate. I'd like to fly to the US for 3gun as well but a new kid (scheduled for march 08) and a freshly bought home keep me busy and poor:) Cheers, Tommi Verho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRUBL Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 (edited) OK.....question time. I see where the recoil redcution is quoted as 56%, 61%. etc........and that muzzle rise is listed from best to worst. That being said, a person can only see which comp did the best. However, what are the hard numbers?? How best is the best?? Do I have to take the comp off I have now and get the best one?? Or does is the one I have reduce recoil by 6# and the best one by 6.1#, and is the rise on mine 3" and the best one is 2.8"?? I like what I saw, the only thing is the rating seems subjective without the hard numbers. I bet Pat has those numbers.....can you let us know them?? I realize that my rifle is a different configuration than the one used in the test, but the relative results should pass on to the indivual rifle. Now.....if, as I suspect, that the hard numbers show a somewhat insignificant difference. Then the only things that really will matter are A) price and B)product support C)sport support D)cool factor(if you can't shoot good.....look good shooting!!) Tim Edited November 1, 2007 by TRUBL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.E. Kelley Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Tim............ Please re-read the article. Somewhere within you will find. Reference downforce: "I can only submit a ranking" "The difference between comps was subtle indeed" Respectfully Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtm Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Mr. Kelly, please don't take my comments as sharp shooting your work! It was a great article! I also found the differences to be small, and I never started with a base line, so like I said "bad science!" The thing that we can NEVER duplicate is the shooter,s interface with the carbine/rifle. This was graphically pointed out to me at the DPMS match when we were shooting different rifles after the match. I shot one rifle with I thought the very best set up and it was plain FLAT and NO recoil. Sight didn't even leave the A zone at 50 yards! Handed the same rifle , same ammo, to another very accomplished shooter ( read top ten at all matches and many times MUCH better! ) and that rifle bounced around like a pogo stick. I shot his rifle and I found it liked to drop and go left, BUT it worked for him. I think what we have found is that there is a good amount of comps to try and your article has quantified the attributes of each, now the shooter needs to find out which ones reflect thier interface with the rifle....bottom line, try as many as you can before you decide. I know I will let most anyone try my rifles, as long as thier ammo hasn't blown up thier rifle Tommi, Congratulations on your second! You might want to try to have him before, or after March, as that is the month I was born in and it just wouldn't be right for your child to be that closely associated with a miscreatent such as myself! P.S. suppressors don't work well for suppressive fire as the friendly neighbors don't know they are being shot at! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.E. Kelley Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Thank you Kurt!!! I value your help, opinion and feedback. You got to the meat of the matter! The brake is just part of the package. After hours of testing and spending WAY more money than I hoped to recover via the article, I had to conclude that while quantifiable differences were present and accounted for, they do not tell the whole story. Much of what I "could" have related would be subjective and only MY opinion. Just like your findings with the other "big dawgs", we want a rifle to respond in a matter that gives us the visual feedback WE want. That response is not the same for everyone. Even with identical guns and ammo. Patrick Oh yea......it is Kell "E" y That "E" is important as it distinguishes me from the Irish horse theives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRUBL Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Damn my speed reading!!!!.......Got it. TY Pat!!! Good thing I don't speed read the rules, eh??? Kurt....absolutely correct!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now