• Home
    • About SA Hunters Home Page
      Who We Are
      Board and Excecutive Members
      Meet the Team
      Conservation Committee
      Hunting Committee
      Shooting Committee
      Inyathi Park Newsletters
      National Congress
      Social Media
      SA Hunters Shop
      Our Magazines
      HuntEx
      Commercial Offers to Member
      Our Youth
      FAQs
    • Membership Home Page
      Why become a member
      Membership Fees
      Membership Administration
      Mentorship - Make a Difference
      Commercial Offers to Members
      Liability Insurance
      Membership FAQs
    • Branches Home Page
      Find Branches on Google Maps
      Branch Information per Province
      Branch Matters and Accomplishments
      Branches FAQs
    • Firearms Home Page
      What We Offer
      Firearm Legislation
      Firearm Licence Applications
      Firearm Licence Renewals
      Competency
      Dedicated Status (Sport Shooting & Hunting)
      Motivations and Endorsements
      Firearm Licence Helpline
      Reloading
      Position on Lead Ammunition
      News and Resources
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      SA Hunters Shop
      SA Jagters-Hunters Winkel
      Firearm Licence FAQs
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    • Hunting Affairs Home Page
      Our Hunting Policy and Code
      Hunting Heritage
      Hunting Statistics
      Hunting Committee
      Hunting Licences and Proclamations
      Transport Permits Pigand Other Game Meat
      Accredited Hunting Destinations
      Hunters Education
      Professional Hunting
      Measuring Wildlife
      Game Meat
      Fishing
      Awards
      News and Resources
      Hunting FAQs
      SA Hunters Shop
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    • Shooting Home Page
      2024 Shooting Competitions
      Hunting-based Shooting
      Junior Shooting
      Shotgun Shooting
      Sport Shooting
      Multi-discipline Sport Shooting
      SA Precision Rifle Federation
      Fun Shoot
      News, Articles and Resources
      Shooting Ranges
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      Maintaining your Status
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      National Calendar
      Reloading
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      Shooting FAQs
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      Shooting Committee
      SA Hunters Shop
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    • Conservation Home Page
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      Conservation Initiatives
      Conservation Committee
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      Conservation News
      Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
      Support Conservation
      SA Hunters’ Policy and Position Statements
      Legislation and Policy Framework
      Responsible Use of Resources
      Position on Lead Ammunition
      Conservation FAQs
    • Photography Home Page
      Photography Competition Information
      Photography Competition Gallery
      Photography Club on Facebook
      Photography Club Gallery
      Photography FAQs
  • SA Hunters Shop

Vuurwapens toegerus met trompremme (“muzzle brakes”)

Gewysigde reël Januarie 2016: Die gebruik van trompremme (muzzle brakes) op vuurwapens word vanaf 1 Januarie 2016 kragtens die “SAJWV Universele Reëls by skietoefeninge” nie toegelaat op skietbane waar georganiseerde tak-, streek- of nasionale skietoefeninge/kompetisies deur takke van die SAJWV aangebied word nie.

Redes vir die besluit: Uit die navorsing is dit duidelik dat ‘n tromprem op ‘n geweer op skietbane waar skuts naby mekaar skiet ernstige probleme, beserings en blywende gehoorverlies kan veroorsaak. Naburige skuts in die omgewing van die skut waarvan die geweer met ‘n “muzzle break” toegerus is word blootgestel aan onaanvaarbare vlakke van klank, “muzzle blast” en selfs voorwerpe soos bv. sandkorrels, skrapnel, onverbrande kruit ens. wat beserings kan veroorsaak, word “teruggeblaas” na die skuts. Die aanhoorbare klank van die meeste trompremme is meer as tweemaal harder in vergelyking met dieselfde vuurwapen sonder ‘n tromprem. Die implikasies is dat standaard gehoorbeskerming meestal nie voldoende is om skuts se ore te beskerm nie.

Jagters het ‘n verantwoordelikheid en word versoek om bedagsaam en uiters versigtig te wees wanneer hulle jag met ‘n vuurwapen toegerus met ‘n tromprem en om te verseker dat gidse, jagmaats en ander omstanders nie onnodig blootgestel word aan die skadelike gevolge van ‘n tromprem op ‘n vuurwapen nie. ‘n Nalatige skoot naby ‘n persoon wat dit nie verwag nie en nie behoorlike oorbeskerming in plek het nie, kan onherstelbare skade aan onder andere die persoon se gehoor veroorsaak.

Lees Ron Thomson se boek “Mahohboh” waar hy ‘n ware jagstorie vertel oor die dramatiese effek van ‘n skoot uit ‘n jaggeweer toegerus met ‘n tromprem op ‘n jagmaat tydens ‘n noue ontkoming met gevaarlike wild….‘n Uittreksel van die storie os onder aan die artikel beskikbaar. 

Ek beklemtoon hieronder slegs uittreksels uit die artikels wat handel
oor die  navorsing wat op trompremme gedoen is en nooi u om die
skakels te volg om die volledige artikels te lees. Hierdie artikels word
geplaas met erkenning aan die outeurs daarvan:

Article 1: “Muzzle Brakes: Recoil reduction” by Cal Zant

However, in the section on muzzle devices from Dr. Carlucci’s textbook, Ballistics: Theory and Design of Guns and Ammunition, he reminds us “Best design practice is to divert gases to the sides of the weapon, because rearward diversion could affect an exposed gun crew.” During my tests, a manufacturer sent me a prototype of a muzzle brake with 45° baffles back toward the shooter. It provided outstanding recoil reduction (better than anything shown here), but while testing that brake, a friend helping me with the tests caught some shrapnel in his side. It penetrated 2 shirts and caused a wound deep enough to see flesh. I told the manufacturer I wouldn’t write about it, because I didn’t think it was safe. They were concerned as well, and haven’t release that prototype for sale.

The other downside of angled port designs is increased concussion/blast. All of the muzzle brakes are loud, but diverting gases rearward can increase the pressure shock wave at or near the shooter’s position. Some shooters would rather deal with the extra recoil than the increased concussion from that shock wave. So that is another thing to keep in mind. The sound test should give us insight into the pressure difference at the shooter’s position for each brake, so stay tuned for that.

There are clearly downsides to rearward deflection of gases, but it also has a measurable influence on recoil reduction. I don’t want to present this as “right or wrong.” It’s up to each shooter to strike the right balance for their application. I’m just trying to give a balanced and responsible presentation of all the facts to help you make an informed decision. 

Article 2: “Muzzle Brakes: Sound Test” by Cal Zant
 
Both OSHA and MIL-STD-1474E require hearing protection if sound pressure levels are 140 dB or more (for “impulse” noises like gunfire). However, hearing loss can occur from sounds as low as 85 decibels with long or repeated exposure. Noise-induced hearing loss is cumulative and permanent. Ear protection typically reduces noise by 16-30 dB, which you can find by looking at their Noise Reduction Rating (NRR). For example, the popular Howard Leight ear muffs have an NRR of 22 dB. That may not get you below that 140 mark without “doubling-up” by wearing ear plugs in addition to the muffs. If you’re using a brake, please protect your ears, and pass that message on to your shooting buddies.

If we just start at the top, you can see the OPS muzzle brake was the “quietest” of the batch. It says “+ 41%”, which means it’s still 41% louder than the same rifle without a brake.             

If you’ll remember, the OPS brake was also the worst performer when it came to recoil reduction … so I’m glad to see it wasn’t both ineffective and loud.

Most brakes hovered around 100%, which means they sound twice as loud as the rifle with a bare muzzle.

Finally, we have some brakes that were more than twice as loud. We see some familiar names at the bottom of this chart: APA Fat B* and Little B* Brakes, the Alamo Four Star Muzzle Brake, the Holland Radial Quick Discharge Muzzle Brake, and the Impact Precision Muzzle Brake. If you’ll remember, those were some of the best performers when it came to recoil reduction.

There seems to be a correlation between how loud a brake is, and how well it reduces recoil. Most “quieter” brakes aren’t good at reducing recoil, and most of the brakes that are great at reducing recoil are very loud.

FilenameSize
An Adobe Acrobat file Extract – Real life story about muzzle breaks – Ron Thomson22.24 KB

Share This Article

Share on whatsapp
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin

More Articles

error: Content is protected !!