Thinking about switching from a suppressor to a brake

RmeJu

Private
Minuteman
Apr 23, 2019
49
28
24
Never used a brake, but was considering making the switch for better recoil control and less heat build up (both a factor in a 7mm RM), but would miss the quiet shooting a slight speed bump and, well, I already have the can.

Anybody make the switch and never look back? Just go with what I've got? Other thoughts?
 

mercracing

Sergeant
Belligerents
Feb 9, 2013
1,426
328
189
Green Bay, WI
I’ve shot PRS with a can exclusively for 3ish years. I’m gonna try a brake next year, just to see how good I do with a little less length out front.
 

jcam

Online Training Member
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Aug 24, 2019
156
72
34
When I first realized that cans were legal to own, I had to get one! I always thought it was illegal, what an awakening. Now I can’t go shooting without a can. This is just my personal opinion but it seems more civilized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patriots1884

WATERWALKER

0311 SHELLBACK
Belligerents
Apr 19, 2014
918
449
69
Deep in the Lone Star
A friend told me a few years ago “Don’t start shooting suppressed! It’ll cost you money.” I don’t shoot anything w/ out a can anymore.

The brake will mitigate recoil a little better than the can. I have no issues spotting impacts w/ the can so that’s not an issue. I wear contacts & I can live w/ out the concussion & debris from a brake also.
 

Danger Mouse

Private
Minuteman
Sep 6, 2019
6
10
6
I live in a state where we cant get cans. Going to matches and seeing guys with cans and seeing the difference in concussion and sound etc has me super jealous. I cant imagine being allowed to have a suppressor and going to a brake instead

I'm down in new Zealand and I've never understood why some US states are so restrictive on suppressors.

Here uts treated almost as a health and safety deal. Hunters with dogs in particular love them. But even just normal deer hunters, frequently have them to protect their own hearing.

Is there a clear reason why they are so restrictive, or just do gooding (like how our current changes are going)
 

Fatherdeath

Bolt gun Noob
Minuteman
Sep 26, 2012
88
16
12
Arizona
www.instagram.com
The only way I’d go to a brake vs a can would be if I had to move around obstacles often or in confined areas. In carbine classes it’s nice because when I run my 11.5 with a brake it’s way faster the can does slow down target to target movements
 

Skookum

Theory of Devolution
Belligerents
May 6, 2017
1,914
2,207
119
I'm down in new Zealand and I've never understood why some US states are so restrictive on suppressors.

Here uts treated almost as a health and safety deal. Hunters with dogs in particular love them. But even just normal deer hunters, frequently have them to protect their own hearing.

Is there a clear reason why they are so restrictive, or just do gooding (like how our current changes are going)
When the National Firearms Act was written, the public perception (mostly from movies) was that suppressors were only used by poachers and assassins.
 

Skookum

Theory of Devolution
Belligerents
May 6, 2017
1,914
2,207
119
Never used a brake, but was considering making the switch for better recoil control and less heat build up (both a factor in a 7mm RM), but would miss the quiet shooting a slight speed bump and, well, I already have the can.

Anybody make the switch and never look back? Just go with what I've got? Other thoughts?
I guess I'm the odd man out, I have a suppressor and rarely shoot it. The sound suppression means nothing to me. I've been wearing foam inners with electronic muffs so long, that I don't think anything of it.

I don't like the weird drawn out recoil impulse from a can, and I don't like the extra length (mine is rated for 300 winmag and is 9" long).

Brakes have better recoil reduction, and I prefer the shorter recoil impulse. It is also my opinion that a brake also presents less potential for a negative effect on accuracy.

All of this pertains to longrange rifles, I think suppressors are perfectly suited to carbines for a variety of reasons
 

Huskydriver

You gotta want it....
Belligerents
Minuteman
Apr 17, 2018
1,697
1,951
119
SLC, Utah
I'm down in new Zealand and I've never understood why some US states are so restrictive on suppressors.

Here uts treated almost as a health and safety deal. Hunters with dogs in particular love them. But even just normal deer hunters, frequently have them to protect their own hearing.

Is there a clear reason why they are so restrictive, or just do gooding (like how our current changes are going)
Don't worry I'm sure you guys will all hand in those too when the ask for them soon... along with the rest of your weapons.
 

Huskydriver

You gotta want it....
Belligerents
Minuteman
Apr 17, 2018
1,697
1,951
119
SLC, Utah
I guess I'm the odd man out, I have a suppressor and rarely shoot it. The sound suppression means nothing to me. I've been wearing foam inners with electronic muffs so long, that I don't think anything of it.

I don't like the weird drawn out recoil impulse from a can, and I don't like the extra length (mine is rated for 300 winmag and is 9" long).

Brakes have better recoil reduction, and I prefer the shorter recoil impulse. It is also my opinion that a brake also presents less potential for a negative effect on accuracy.

All of this pertains to longrange rifles, I think suppressors are perfectly suited to carbines for a variety of reasons
Recoil impulse is a result of can design and the expansion gases for the cartridge being fired. I have felt some recoil impulses longer than others like you are stating but some are shorter.

I have one can that even feels like it pulls me forward slightly before recoiling back
 
Last edited:

Skookum

Theory of Devolution
Belligerents
May 6, 2017
1,914
2,207
119
Recoil impulse is a result of can design and the expansion gases for the cartridge being fired. I have felt some recoil impulses longer than others like you are stating but some are shorter.

I have one can that even feels like it pulls me forward slightly before recoiling back
Fair enough point on the recoil.

I'm building a 16" 308 out of parts I have laying around. Maybe I'll like it better on that one.
 

RmeJu

Private
Minuteman
Apr 23, 2019
49
28
24
Thanks for the replies guys. Seems like it's very much an open question as to whether a brake is worth it.
 

ddavis

Sergeant
Belligerents
May 26, 2011
1,060
91
154
Texas
I've shot both and I FEEL like I shoot better with a can, but I know if I made the switch to a brake permanently it wouldn't take long to get past the mental "loud noises and concussion." Brakes have considerably less recoil. Top PRS shooters almost always run brakes, and it's not because they don't own cans. Its a matter of whether you want that extra competitive advantage vs a pleasant day of shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 260284 and lash

Threadcutter308

Heffalumpian Wrangler
Belligerents
Feb 13, 2017
5,792
8,907
119
Camano Island, Washington
I'm down in new Zealand and I've never understood why some US states are so restrictive on suppressors.

Here uts treated almost as a health and safety deal. Hunters with dogs in particular love them. But even just normal deer hunters, frequently have them to protect their own hearing.

Is there a clear reason why they are so restrictive, or just do gooding (like how our current changes are going)
Stupid.
American.
Politics.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: 260284

spelunk

Gun Loving Redneck
Belligerents
Feb 19, 2010
586
97
34
Prosser, WA
Anybody make the switch and never look back? Just go with what I've got? Other thoughts?
I made the switch from can to brake, but then couldn't stop looking back! Yes it true the brake will manage recoil slightly better, but at the cost of an ungodly blast of concussion, noise, and dust. Im surprised more people don't mention the dust when shooting a brake, out west it gets all over your scope and action, sometime binding it up pretty bad. I have gone back to shooting all my PRS matches suppressed. I have shot and even won matches using both, but at the end of the day I've got a bigger smile and no headache when shooting suppressed. Also, before anyone else mentions it, I've seen Facebook warriors claim that suppressors reduce barrel life by 20%. I call bullshit! I've burned out barrels with both, and if there is any difference at all, its so small as to be completely inconsequential.
 

10000yards

Scammer / Banned
Banned !
Belligerents
Minuteman
May 9, 2019
212
171
49
Both devices will be hot and dirty. Personally I put quick attach mounts on all my rifles, but that does increase the cost and limit your selections in the future.

I regret buying any non-direct-thread cans, TBH. I have a couple rifles with pinned and welded brakes, rails I can never change.
 

gconnoyer

Terminal Lance
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Minuteman
Dec 19, 2017
231
140
49
30
St Louis, MO
It depends on what your use is.

I shot PRS with a 308 and suppressor last year. A muzzle brake probably would have been a lot more beneficial.
I shoot a 6Dasher now, and just got my can out of jail so I'll be using it next year because recoil is minimal and the flinch/blast from the brake hurts me more than a little recoil will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 260284 and spelunk

Danger Mouse

Private
Minuteman
Sep 6, 2019
6
10
6
I've shot both and I FEEL like I shoot better with a can, but I know if I made the switch to a brake permanently it wouldn't take long to get past the mental "loud noises and concussion." Brakes have considerably less recoil. Top PRS shooters almost always run brakes, and it's not because they don't own cans. Its a matter of whether you want that extra competitive advantage vs a pleasant day of shooting.

Interesting point. For someone like me where I wont be able to compete in competition all the time (small population), the suppressor makes more sense in that case.
 

achalmersman

Private
Minuteman
Jan 4, 2019
35
23
12
I'm down in new Zealand and I've never understood why some US states are so restrictive on suppressors.

Here uts treated almost as a health and safety deal. Hunters with dogs in particular love them. But even just normal deer hunters, frequently have them to protect their own hearing.

Is there a clear reason why they are so restrictive, or just do gooding (like how our current changes are going)
Yea people think they are magic devices that hide all noise and murderers creep around shooting people in the midst of crowds yet nobody hears the gunshot...... it's the movies and poor education plain and simple.
 

dskoruppa

Shooter
Belligerents
Jun 4, 2014
388
31
34
Robstown, Tx
I just switched from a cab to a brake. I’m shooting in the PRS tactical division this year with my 223. I put it on then went straight to a “movers” class the next day. I found I liked the brake. But like the others said the noise is now there. I think for competitions I will mostly run a brake. Just easier to move around with. Plus, my cab is almost 20 yes old and made of steel, ie it’s heavy to lug around.
 

lash

Swamp Rat
Belligerents
Sep 28, 2012
4,821
3,404
219
60
Central Florida
... Also, before anyone else mentions it, I've seen Facebook warriors claim that suppressors reduce barrel life by 20%. I call bullshit! I've burned out barrels with both, and if there is any difference at all, its so small as to be completely inconsequential.
I agree with you. I’m willing to believe differently if presented with a white paper or other formal study that is based upon robust experimentation and significant statistical values. Otherwise, I’m inclined to believe what I’ve seen and experienced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spelunk

blbennett1288

de·plor·a·ble
Belligerents
Apr 24, 2017
1,594
950
119
Hoover, Alabama
I have gone back and forth a good bit over the past year, for one reason or another.

The only 2 real benefits from a muzzle brake are less length and reduced recoil making it easier to spot impacts and watch trace.

I prefer the recoil impulse from suppressors, but there is a slight muzzle rise from using them. Spotting impacts is more than doable it is just slightly harder with a suppressor than a brake. You don’t have to deal with all the dust and dirt kicked up, nor the concussion.

The more I shoot the more I use suppressors. Your neighbors will like you more also. I am kinda at a point now where I don’t think I’ll go back to brakes.
 

Guns&WhiteWater

Private
Belligerents
Feb 21, 2017
19
23
6
Ooltewah, TN
“Brakes have better recoil reduction, and I prefer the shorter recoil impulse. It is also my opinion that a brake also presents less potential for a negative effect on accuracy.”

They might present a greater potential for a negative effect on accuracy but I’ve only seen the groups in all four of my suppressed-ready rifles tighten up with my Ultra 7. I do agree about the drawn out recoil impulse. It wasn’t something that I had expected. But I think it’s well worth it, especially when shooting under a metal roof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash

blbennett1288

de·plor·a·ble
Belligerents
Apr 24, 2017
1,594
950
119
Hoover, Alabama
A brakes recoil impulse is like a kick, where as suppressors is more like a push.

Yes a brakes impulse is shorter but more severe. The suppressors is longer but significantly more tame.

I will take a suppressors recoil impulse any day over a muzzle brake.
 

Ruggedtouch

Online Training Member
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 4, 2014
171
90
34
I’m in one of the few states that doesn’t allow suppressors. I never shot suppressed until this year when I was able to rent a can at a precision rifle course. A really great experience shooting without being blasted by a brake from another shooter on the line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lash

lash

Swamp Rat
Belligerents
Sep 28, 2012
4,821
3,404
219
60
Central Florida
I have gone back and forth a good bit over the past year, for one reason or another.

The only 2 real benefits from a muzzle brake are less length and reduced recoil making it easier to spot impacts and watch trace.

I prefer the recoil impulse from suppressors, but there is a slight muzzle rise from using them. Spotting impacts is more than doable it is just slightly harder with a suppressor than a brake. You don’t have to deal with all the dust and dirt kicked up, nor the concussion.

The more I shoot the more I use suppressors. Your neighbors will like you more also. I am kinda at a point now where I don’t think I’ll go back to brakes.
During the year that I transitioned to suppressor, I also went back and forth a bit. Turns out that just messed me up more than anything. Once I committed to the suppressor, I’ve become much better at it and have zero issues spotting impacts, the rare miss 😜😎, and trace. Not being as seasoned and practiced as the good guys on here, I found that switching back and forth did neither option any good.

The difference between the suppressed and braked impulse takes a slight adjustment between, for me. Means that I need more practice, not that I didn’t already know that.
 

hlee

Sergeant
Belligerents
Jul 14, 2012
2,174
1,541
219
41
TX
People think cans burn barrels faster because they also think the only use for a can is to get it glowing red from mag dumps.
 

Ruggedtouch

Online Training Member
Online Training Access
Belligerents
Jan 4, 2014
171
90
34
Canless= barbarianism
Some cans, like the Silencerco Harvester, have integral brakes.
Ignorant, spineless liberal democrats with a majority in my state=Canless=Ignorant, spineless liberal democrats with a majority in my state.

Ask me how I really feel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gnochi

Aescobar17

Sergeant of the Hide
Belligerents
Minuteman
Dec 10, 2018
105
57
34
I pull the trigger on a rifle about once a year without a can. I immediately remember why I don’t pull the trigger on rifles without cans. I’ve watched quite a few animals walk while at the lease cause I don’t have a suppressed rifle handy. (I suppress everything. Buddy plays musical rifles with a single can. He leaves unsuppressed rifles everywhere.)
 

morganlamprecht

Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 5, 2013
1,213
1,259
219
I've seen Facebook warriors claim that suppressors reduce barrel life by 20%. I call bullshit! I've burned out barrels with both, and if there is any difference at all, its so small as to be completely inconsequential.
I agree with you. I’m willing to believe differently if presented with a white paper or other formal study that is based upon robust experimentation and significant statistical values. Otherwise, I’m inclined to believe what I’ve seen and experienced.
just so yall know one of the "facebook warriors" youre arguing with who made these claims was frank green (bartlein barrels) lol go head on tho
 

spelunk

Gun Loving Redneck
Belligerents
Feb 19, 2010
586
97
34
Prosser, WA
just so yall know one of the "facebook warriors" youre arguing with who made these claims was frank green (bartlein barrels) lol go head on tho
I know he originated the claim, I've seen it on Bartlein's site. But I'm not referring to him, I'm talking about all the people who pass around that info as fact, the same people who don't even use cans but keep regurgitating that info anyway. It was really bad here on the Northwest's PRS Facebook page. I just don't see it. I've burned several barrels using just brakes, and several 100% suppressed. Even a couple that were mixed. There is no way the cans are sacrifcing 20% barrel life. The barrel life variation I see is tiny, and its there between two barrels shot the same way sometimes. I'm not trying to say Frank Green doesn't know what he's talking about, in fact I really enjoy reading and learning what he has to offer. But until I see documented proof and procedures of how suppressors cost 20% of barrel life, I'm going to keep saying I just don't see it. Thats my EXPERIENCE, take it for what its worth.
 

morganlamprecht

Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 5, 2013
1,213
1,259
219
That’s fine, my bet is there ain’t many people who’ve ran shot 1 til retired with the same load and component lots across the board to know anything certain about their barrel lives
 

lash

Swamp Rat
Belligerents
Sep 28, 2012
4,821
3,404
219
60
Central Florida
That’s fine, my bet is there ain’t many people who’ve ran shot 1 til retired with the same load and component lots across the board to know anything certain about their barrel lives
You may be right, but I’m an exception to that assumption and have run the same load and components for over 8000 rounds and two barrels now. One barrel plain, with no brake, no anything except a thread protector. One barrel with nothing but a suppressor and the same load that burned out the other barrel. 136g Lapua Scenar Ls over 41.8g H4150.

The first barrel was good for over 4000 rounds. You do the math. This barrel was verified just 100 rounds ago. Same speed, same accuracy, same satisfaction.

I also have great respect for Frank Green and love Bartlein barrels. But my experience, limited as it is, begs the question for data to support the statement. I am nothing if not reasonable and am always learning something new. Show me the money and I’m on board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spelunk

B-P-UU

Full Member
Belligerents
Feb 13, 2017
748
328
69
A guy can make a case for brake vs. can for comps.. I run both and prefer a can but brakes have some benefits that have already been discussed.

Since the context of the question was hunting with a 7 rem mag, I don't think I'll ever shoot a hunting rifle again without a suppressor. Touch one off with a brake and no hearing pro and you will damage your hearing.
 

earthquake

SGT of Marines
Belligerents
Jul 30, 2009
1,797
326
189
Delaware, OH
I've only ever shot with brakes at matches. Last weekend I tried to use my suppressor. I'll be going back to brakes next weekend at the Grind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alicea8541

Killswitch Engage

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Dec 23, 2008
1,752
290
189
ohio
I wont ever shoot a match again unsuppressed. been running suppressed full on for 2 yrs in prs and for 5-6yr on kill guns. no fucking way I will go back to a brake period. I dgaf if its any percent less barrel life or it isn't. put new pipes on all the time anyhow
 

niteshooter

Private
Belligerents
Mar 28, 2014
127
50
34
Victoria, TX
Never used a brake, but was considering making the switch for better recoil control and less heat build up (both a factor in a 7mm RM), but would miss the quiet shooting a slight speed bump and, well, I already have the can.

Anybody make the switch and never look back? Just go with what I've got? Other thoughts?
What about something like a Surefire brake and fast attach suppressor. Both worlds until you find your preference.
 

WATERWALKER

0311 SHELLBACK
Belligerents
Apr 19, 2014
918
449
69
Deep in the Lone Star
I’m using SUREFIRE brakes & a can on a couple different weapons. It may not be the best brake on the planet for bolt guns, but it’s been more than adequate in my experience. Even shooting a 308 w/ the can (RC2) I have no problems seeing my impacts whether they be on steel or in the dirt.

I’ve also had no issues w/ the can affecting my zero or causing me to miss shots. There’s a lot of negative press w/ QD amounts, etc but I haven’t had any issues not related to my own mistakes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Huskydriver