The only brake i've ever used was the Vais. I never noticed a difference in noise. It's built different than any other brake though.
My gunsmith told me I wouldn't notice any nose increase, but I figured he was just trying to make a sale. He was right.
Yea, I do agree I need to start wearing ear muffs before I shoot during hunting situations. I shoot almost every week at least once a day the whole year. I wear a inner custom plastic ear plug, additional to the ear muffs. The reason for it, my 300 RUM kicks so hard it separates the ear muffs from my ears!!! But I still luv her...lol
The BOSS adjustment is great! and does work to make your rifle more accurate. The muzzle brake for reduced recoil can be removed and replaced with a solid piece. The rifle keeps its accuracy, just recoils like a regular rifle with no added noise. My rifles came with both brakes inside the box.
Now that I sit here typing on my laptop, I do notice a slight constant ringing in my ears, darn probably got some damage.
In Texas they passed a low that made it legal to use a moderator/silencer/"can" while hunting.
This is how things are done in the UK and New Zealand, as well as most of Scandanavia.
I would like to see it eventually become legal globally.
We need to de-criminialize moderators though.
I'm mostly a hunter and not so much a target shooter. Many times you will only have seconds to get a shot off at game wich leaves no time for ear protection. I would never put a break on a hunting gun for that reason. They do make game ears wich allows u too still hear game but blocks out loud noises. Personaly, I'm not interested in another gadget but might work for some. I guess it all comes down to the primary use of the rifle.
Will never again own one. No reason to. More negatives than positives.
brakes put more stress on scopes.
If you can't handle the caliber/cartridge without a brake then it's too big for you in the first place!
get a recoil pad
get a synthetic stock
get a heavy gun
perhaps in a specific circumstance I'd consider it, but that's a 1% situation maybe, as of now, I'll never own another.
All my firearms are bought without breaks and I shoot it and decide if it needs a break or not. The guns I have breaks on are not too big for me! If you don't like them then don't use them but don't try to tell us that our guns are too big for us in the first place!
Even my 243 WSSM has a muzzle brake. Never seen a brake on a 22-250. A brake on a 22-250 might be too xtreme. I don't always use a brake on my guns, especially hunting, but mostly for paper I use them. Muzzle breaks are a plus to get the best shot group from different factory ammo and while testing new reloads. I don't see how you could make a case against muzzle breaks, especially when a CR can be used while hunting.
The calibur I shoot was picked for several reason, mostly for the big BC, velocity, down range energy. Well said BKC.
I have one gun with a MB on it, a .300 Wby. The ONLY disadvantage I can see is the increase in noise. Don't know where you got the statement that a MB puts more stress on a scope. Sure like to see the basis for this. IMHO MBs make a lot of sense on lightweight, heavy caliber magnum hunting rifles. It sure is a lot easier (at least for me) to do the range work developing good hunting loads. My other hunting rifles (.257 Wby Mag, 25-05, 30-06) don't have MBs and I would never consider them candidates for a MB as they really don't need one because the recoil is very manageable.
Originally Posted by HuskyMusky
I recently just braked my 300 WM. Recoil was a non-issue for me. But, whenever my wife draws a bull tag she will have a real elk rifle to take instead of a 6mm.
I was rolling a can around today and wishing for a brake on my .25/06, recoil is not a problem but it would have been much easier to spot for myself. The bottom of a soda can is a small target at 500 yards.