Muzzle Brake Use

BeeMaa said:

I understand the points you have made.
However you are still the client and they are still the guide.
The client is alway right.

Ask a PH or professional guide with no vested interest if they would prefer a client with or without a brake.

It's one thing for a PH to not have a problem with it and tolerate the situation.
Completely different as to what they may or may not prefer.

Click to expand...

Although a client and his/her needs should always be put first they are unfortunately not always right...

Mr. Zorg said:

Is it any different if like I did, the client offers electronic hearing protector for the PH to use if he chooses, before any booking is made, that the PH can keep as a bonus, with a reasonable (Sam's Club or equivalent) package of standard AAA batteries that the electronic hearing protection equipment uses?

If so, why?

If not, why?

Click to expand...

I believe you are being completely courteous and genuine in offfering hearing protection to the PH.
I also believe that there are perfectly good (mostly medical) reasons to have a brake.
If you discuss this with your PH while booking the hunt and they are OK with it, then it should be fine.
The reason being is that the "normal" is no brake so if you have a brake, give a heads up.
Also understand that some shooting scenarios that end with the barrel of the rifle being supported by the PH's shoulder are out.
As a result, you may be passing on a hard hunted trophy.

Asking a PH to change his normal, proven and trusted routine to include putting on muffs...
I would bet as soon as you leave the muffs end up in the trash.

It's not only the PH but EVERYONE around will be at risk when shooting a brake during hunting conditions. Trackers, PHs other hunters who are along, skinners, game scouts... all possible. Talking about the niceties of providing protection or due warning when shooting is one thing. The reality in the field will likely be something else. And all those people will likely risk their hearing because they are probably afraid of pi..s ing off the client who has a wad of gratuity cash in the wallet. Of all the people I see shooting the stupid gadgets at the range, it appears that very very few actually need them because of some real or perceived need or a real medical issue.

If the PH chooses to use, then discard, electronic hearing protection that's not something that would bother me outside the fact that someone else may make good use of technology (tracker, skinner, whoever . . .). To me it would be analogous to offering a rifle scope I bring that is discarded once I leave without even offering it to anyone else. The scope provides technological advantage over Eyeballs Mark 1 for various puposes, electronic hearing rotection offers instead, hearing conservation without sacrificing sound quality outside of extreme decibel level events.

As someone who spent several decades in high industrial noise environment, sometimes extreme short term noise equivalent of rifle shooting, and watched industrial safety culture emphasis on hearing conservation gain emphasis, I'd be hard pressed to understand the rationale of discarding what I would describe as Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) instead choosing to continue to choose to expose themselves to further scientifically proven protection to keep what they have, and / or have left. The "Que es mas macho?" attitude to hearing loss experienced due to industrial noise exposure as some sort of badge of a long veteran vs green tenderfoot was mostly eradicated by this point in my industry, as that attitude both retires out of the workforce, and bonus / penalty programs for industrial workplace safety have become commonplace from the top down. By the time my father retired, I could be in my bedroom at the opposite end of the house from the living room with my door closed, with my portable TV set to the same channel my father was watching in the living room, with zero volume on my TV and be the same as if the living room TV was off and I had my TV set to normal or slighly above my volume level.

One thing mentioned about using the shoulder of a PH as a rifle rest is certainly not something I would have thought of doing and with all the discussions about shooting off sticks here, not something I would have considered routine, whether a rifle is braked or not, annd whether any hearing protection is used or not. I've certainly seen WWII photographs of stalwart Wehrmacht macine gun teams with MG34 machine guns in 8X57JS caliber in the wheat fields of the former Soviet Union where the gunner is using the loader's shoulder for a rest. I can't imagine that being desireable but with human lives involved, needs must of the immediate absolutely outweigh long term effects.

So how common is it necessary for PH's to need to offer their shoulder as a rest for a client's rifle, and why wouldn't electronic hearing protection for the PH in such circumstances than no hearing protection, for any rifle?

I've posted here I was trained in the NRA Youth program in the 1970's using a sling for stabilization when shooting rifles, and still today that continues to allow me to specialize in skull (not head) annd neck CNS shots, never having had to track any game I've shot yet. In my case, why couldn't I continue to use a sling for stabilization vs requiring, much less tequesting, to use the shoulder of any other human being as a rest in circumstances where this is common practice currenty?

I want to learn and understand as much as possible before ever booking from folks who have been there, and / or currently working in Africa, I appreciate answers to what come across as tedious questions from me. Collapsing walls of a box is a much greater undertaking than bisecting a knot.

What is everyone talking about? Why is everyone so concerned about the PH ears? Do you think your unbraked rifle is quite? Have you ever held sticks for someone and had a gun fire inches from your head? It's deafening. With or without a brake. Stop acting like a braked rifle is deafening but your Rigby is silent. A PH is a professional hunter. They know what they are doing. They know if a rifle is loud I'll bring plugs. If not I won't. They also know that if wearing plugs is dangerous for a specific hunt. They will tell their client. They don't want to die being attacked by a lion just to avoid having to tell a hunter he can't use his brake.

You guys need a better argument for not using a brake. I'll assume my PH's are big boys and will do what's best for both of our safety. Regardless of what equipment the client wants to use. And if the PH doesn't have the balls to tell me not to use something that is dangerous. Then I shouldn't be hunting with this person in the first place.

Now someone get that gif of the horse being beaten again.

Well, on a more positive note, the droplets of ocular fluid trapped behind the retinal wall of my left eye are now about 20% of the size when first imaged in April 2019. Linear response with no reason to expect that to change going forward. So one more stanndard 4 month regimen of monthly injections, and repeateat imaging in May 2020, with expectations that'll allow me to close this episode for me.

As a plus, I've mastered focusing on one specific spot on the ceiling during eye injections that not only do I keep my eye so still that there are no side effects of me flinching and putting a side load on the needle, I'm not even vocalizing about how wierd it feels during the process.

Mr. Zorg said:

Well, on a more positive note, the droplets of ocular fluid trapped behind the retinal wall of my left eye are now about 20% of the size when first imaged in April 2019. Linear response with no reason to expect that to change going forward. So one more stanndard 4 month regimen of monthly injections, and repeateat imaging in May 2020, with expectations that'll allow me to close this episode for me.

As a plus, I've mastered focusing on one specific spot on the ceiling during eye injections that not only do I keep my eye so still that there are no side effects of me flinching and putting a side load on the needle, I'm not even vocalizing about how wierd it feels during the process.

Click to expand...

Positive progress is always good.
Yeah, it's weird having someone mess with your eye.
I've had several metal foreign objects removed from my eye over the years.
Fortunately with no negitive side effects.

Look at the exercise of staring at the ceiling as good brain training for proper trigger squeeze.
Mind control is what it's all about.
Cheers.

Mr. Zorg said:

One thing mentioned about using the shoulder of a PH as a rifle rest is certainly not something I would have thought of doing and with all the discussions about shooting off sticks here, not something I would have considered routine, whether a rifle is braked or not, annd whether any hearing protection is used or not.

Click to expand...

In fact, I have shot from trackers shoulder.
The situation was that shot had to be taken from under the bush, sitting position.
African sticks, to rest the rifle were not telescopic, could not be lowered, and for this reason were not usable.

So, as mutually agreed mostly by body language, the tracker sat in front of me, and I had a good rest on his shoulder.
Black wildebeest was 90 meters away, made a dead run for 80 to 100 meters, and fell down.

There are some field positions that can not be predicted.

Covered existentially, and everyone has their opinion. I’m on the “I like muzzle breaks “ team especially on the range. In the field I’ve never noticed or thought about it but then again the largest caliber I shoot is a 375. Manageable..

I will shoot a non braked rifle while hunting without hearing protection. I will not Take a braked rifle hunting for fear of not being able to get my plugs in before I shoot.
Also having read “American Sniper” Chris far preferred the 300 win mag with a suppressor to the braked 338 Lapua due to his hearing.
My hearing has been damaged, by many things, tractors, chainsaws, guns and all other farm related noises, to the point where I could not join the army. I carry a pair of ear plugs in my pocket at all times, and use them when I get the chance.
I will not own a braked rifle.

mark-hunter said:

In fact, I have shot from trackers shoulder.
The situation was that shot had to be taken from under the bush, sitting position.
African sticks, to rest the rifle were not telescopic, could not be lowered, and for this reason were not usable.

So, as mutually agreed mostly by body language, the tracker sat in front of me, and I had a good rest on his shoulder.
Black wildebeest was 90 meters away, made a dead run for 80 to 100 meters, and fell down.

There are some field positions that can not be predicted.

Click to expand...

I wasn't there so I can't directly comment but this just reinforces that I would stick to my training using a sling for stabilization in such a situation and not use sticks at all. Training with a sling was performed in what were then the four standard positions for rifle fire:

Prone
Sitting
Kneeling
Standing

I simply can't imagine asking someone else to be my rifle's rest, even if they offer it as part of the package. I suppose if there was really no other option, I'd insist the PH don the electronic hearing protection from my own head first, eschewing me having protection from that single exposure.

@BeeMa, thanks for the support.

I've already demonstrated to myself I retain good fundamentals of rifle marksmanship taking a spike whitetail buck and two feral hogs in 2019, all bang-flops (sling, no sticks or other rests). My dominant (scope use) eye was unaffected, I took all this game in January 2019 and April 2019 while recovering in my left eye. My prior more youthful expertise in skull (not head) and neck CNS shots remains after a 40-ish year hiatus.

What I've accomplished with this degree of focus during treatment is mastery overriding my amygdala, like folks who practice free diving (single breath-hold diving, current record is 702 feet) and US Coast Guard trainees go through with their hands restrained in confined water over their heads, but in a different dimension. Being completely focused while having a foreign object deliberately and willingly piercing my eye, and the sensations and vision of what the injected medication are, has been very, very different than having foreign objects accidentally introduced to my eye removed. YMMV

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala

Hopefully no one else here will need it, but if anyone else finds themself in such a situation as complication from a partial retinal tear event, the good news is they should also expect somilar results. Mine was the first case my eye surgeon had ever seen with such a complication. He's a retired US Army Dr and my guess is he's about 70 years old. He stressed there was no guarantee this course of treatment would be effective, that progress would be slow if it was effective, and it might only be partially effective.

Everyone on this board is at a greater risk for retinal detachment than general population as recoil from longarms is a known factor. Mine is a cautionary tale it can be a much bigger deal than is typical.

Wyatt Smith said:

I will shoot a non braked rifle while hunting without hearing protection. I will not Take a braked rifle hunting for fear of not being able to get my plugs in before I shoot.
Also having read “American Sniper” Chris far preferred the 300 win mag with a suppressor to the braked 338 Lapua due to his hearing.
My hearing has been damaged, by many things, tractors, chainsaws, guns and all other farm related noises, to the point where I could not join the army. I carry a pair of ear plugs in my pocket at all times, and use them when I get the chance.
I will not own a braked rifle.

Click to expand...

I have significant but far from crippling tinnitus as a permanent side effect from the chemotherapy regimen I undertook in 2016 & 2017 (it was a known risk and I have no regrets choosing to undergo chemotherapy). I'd certainly had my share of loud noise exposure before that (as I previously posted), but did a good job of conserving my hearing using appropriate hearing protection.

I find electronic hearing protection for me while hunting to be as sensible as eyeglasses and scoped rifles at this stage in my life. It's certainly not cost-prohibitive considering what the firearms and ammunition cost. The technology of electronic hearing protection doesn't require me, or any individual I can imagine, stop to don hearing protection before taking a shot. Electronic hearing protection is available both as earmuffs and in-ear designs.

https://www.walkersgameear.com

To each their own. The box is always tougher than the ancient knot

I have read a lot of comments about how it's bad for others around the shooter, like the PH, because it hurts their hearing. I'm sorry, but this makes no sense. It hurts regardless, break or no break, if you don't cover your ears.

On my first few deer and pronghorn hunts I did not think to bring hearing protection. In those cases where I had animals in my sights, it hurt like hell when I fired; my ears rang for several minutes, and we're talking 7mm Rem Mag, .30-06, and in the last case, .250 Savage. The latter wasn't bad, but still caused ringing.

Rule of thumb, if you hear ringing in your ears after a loud noise, you just lost a little of your hearing. That ringing indicates damage.

A few years ago, while at a shooting school going through a tactical pistol course, they had a company presenting their products, which were hearing aids, which incorporated sound protection when shooting. They offered free hearing test. I knew I had lost a little bit of hearing over the years, but the report they printed out for me specified the actual losses, in detail. Turns out certain levels were effected, especially in my left ear, and the most notable was precisely in the range of women's voices. (I thought, no wonder sometimes can't understand what my wife is saying!)

I took to bringing ear plugs on hunting, and I'm glad I did. While still loud, the ringing doesn't occur when I have solid plugs in my ears for the shot.

Now, we come to my point.

My hunter safety instructor from Colorado, who I've been best friends with for decades, said he never believed this claim was true. Neither did another hunter safety instructor buddy of ours out there. However, they finally decided to put this to the test. Some years ago they both had custom rifles built in .458 2-inch American. This is a wildcat derived from the .458 Winchester Magnum African DG cartridge. It is cut down from 2 1/2 inches to 2 inches, which reduces recoil and makes it perfect for grizzly/brown bear hunting. My friend had a muzzle break incorporated into the design while our mutual friend had exactly the same rifle built but without a muzzle break. Then they hit the range with a decibel meter.

They shot the same ammo, from rifles with the same barrel length, etc., from the same positions, varying from ahead, abreast, and behind the muzzle. Results? NO DIFFERENCE. This is just as they predicted. Both put out the same level of noise when comparing shots from the same positions.

I've seen slow motion video of shots. Once a bullet leaves the muzzle, a shock wave follows with visible blast heading in all directions at a 90 degree angle from the path of the around. This means sound is directed outward, perpendicular to the flight path of the bullet. The same happens with rifles with muzzle breaks. Of course, this is the case with breaks not designed to vent the gases to the rear. (Never saw one that was, as it would put the same right back into the face of the shooter -- not something you want to have happen.)

And here's the point. Everyone anywhere near the shooter should be covering their ears at the moment the shot is taken or have hearing protection on anyways. So, even if the PH is scoping the game at the time, they should be protected. In the overwhelming majority of cases, one is going to have the time to 'set up,' preparing to take the shot. I know I do so when I hunt. So, I don't understand the argument about muzzle breaks being a problem.

I have one rifle so equipped. It's my Browning A-bolt hunter in 7mm Remington Magnum. I learned real fast that gun was brutal on my shoulder. I'll admit it. I'm recoil sensitive. I guess I'm your average person because the pros consistently write that the .30-06 produces about as much recoil as the average person can take without serious flinching I'm okay with my .30-06, but could not bear the pain of sighting in my 7 mag. I bought a pin on shoulder pad for use at the range, but found it to be useless. Finally, my friend told me about a product called a KDF recoil reducer. It was a muzzle break, which gives the appears of a flash suppressor on a military rifle. While not good for the appearance of the gun, it worked miracles in reducing the mean kick that rifle had. Since then, it has subjected me to significantly less recoil than my .30-06. Turned it into a pussy cat.

That said, it is the loudest of any gun I've ever fired. But I haven't noticed any difference in the level of noise. And again, I no longer subject myself to shots without some kind of hearing protection on. I've always managed to have enough opportunity on hunts to reach down and put on my earplugs; I usually have around my neck (connected to a cord).

If there is something I'm missing the mark on, I'd like to hear from you. Tell me how this isn't the case, nor a practical solution.

@ILCAPO this summary below by Cal Zant from his precision rifle blog is a great resource for info on muzzle brakes. It is absolutely worth the 15-20 min of reading. You’ll probably end up reading his entire volume of writing. He writes from an engineer perspective and has multiple tests and results. Bottom line: a muzzle brake reduces recoil proportionally to the increase in muzzle blast direction (toward the shooter).

https://precisionrifleblog.com/2015/08/21/muzzle-brake-summary-of-field-test-results/

Consider getting a suppressor instead for any caliber up to 338. You get better recoil reduction and the obvious benefit of noise reduction.

Calibers over that, I'd say there are other ways to reduce recoil. I'm a big fan of the Evo-Shield recoil pad. Their system seems to reduce felt recoil by more than 50% (that's just my non-scientific assessment based off personal experience).

Evo-Shield:

The great debate continues.

Ridgewalker said:

Lots of people seem very negative on muzzle brakes. I understand that, but mine has allowed me to keep hunting. I was suffering from a torn retina. Scary thing if you have never had it. The Dr said if it severs completely, I would have 24 hours to get it reattached or I would go permanently blind.
I could just see myself in a foreign land in the bush going blind. I got a muzzle brake.
I have used it now in Africa and made my PH and trackers aware of it. They usually plugged their ears before I fired. If anyone was at the range when I was there, I let them know as well.
Things seem to be improving now, so I have purchased a second 375 H&H with no brake. I have been shooting it occasionally and am gaining confidence that I will not tear the retina again. It will probably be going with me the next time I take a rifle to Africa.

You have to do what you have to do for yourself, not for everyone else. If you need one, get it . Just let those around you be aware. JMO

Click to expand...

I had a detached retina 2 years ago and the Eye specialist told me shoot big rifles won’t be a problem. I’m back up to shooting my 470 NE with no problems.

I'm proposing a new way to hunt. Just stalk the animal to within shooting range, raise your gun, put the sights/crosshairs on the vital zone and yell BANG! Venues will have pre-stuffed animals with interchangeable heads in various positions for photos. That way no one's hearing will be marginalized and the no animals will be harmed.