03-07-2023, 07:59 PM
Guys, I've got three muzzle devices back from the 3D plastic printer for review. Two are Gen2 upgrades to the Alpha (three-prong) and Bravo (three-prong but closed end) flash suppressors, and the third is the all-new Delta four-baffle muzzle brake.
The attached photo shows from left to right: Alpha, Bravo, and Delta.
These are all our UltraSlim design, with a total length of 2.25 that brings a 14.5 to a length of 16.1 and a diameter that allows a .750 gas block to slide over.
Our design philosophy is to do only what makes sense while having a minimalist, modern look not what everybody else is doing, not doing what's always been done.
For example, why do muzzle devices typically have a chunky .864 diameter? Cuz that's what they used on the M16. Why did they use that diameter on the M16? Cuz they specified a diameter large enough to fit the M7 bayonet!
(Bonus: Why do 5.56 barrels typically have a 1/2-28 muzzle thread size? Cuz that's what the M16 used. Why did the M16 use 1/2-28? Cuz the M16 had a pencil barrel with a diameter of .570 in front of the gas block journal that flared to .610 at the muzzle thread shoulder. Fast forward about 63 years later: If a 5.56 barrel isn't a pencil barrel, it should have beefier 5/8-24 muzzle threads.)
Anyway, if your use doesn't require the M7 bayonet, then why have a chunky, clunky muzzle device? Designs should make sense for the required use. Save bulk. Allow pin and welds. Keep the performance well, INCREASE the performance cuz test after test after test says a lengthened three-prong is best at reducing muzzle flash, followed closely by closed-end versions.
Anyway, which style of UltraSlim muzzle device do you prefer? Please vote and you can vote on more than one if you like 'em all!
The attached photo shows from left to right: Alpha, Bravo, and Delta.
These are all our UltraSlim design, with a total length of 2.25 that brings a 14.5 to a length of 16.1 and a diameter that allows a .750 gas block to slide over.
Our design philosophy is to do only what makes sense while having a minimalist, modern look not what everybody else is doing, not doing what's always been done.
For example, why do muzzle devices typically have a chunky .864 diameter? Cuz that's what they used on the M16. Why did they use that diameter on the M16? Cuz they specified a diameter large enough to fit the M7 bayonet!
(Bonus: Why do 5.56 barrels typically have a 1/2-28 muzzle thread size? Cuz that's what the M16 used. Why did the M16 use 1/2-28? Cuz the M16 had a pencil barrel with a diameter of .570 in front of the gas block journal that flared to .610 at the muzzle thread shoulder. Fast forward about 63 years later: If a 5.56 barrel isn't a pencil barrel, it should have beefier 5/8-24 muzzle threads.)
Anyway, if your use doesn't require the M7 bayonet, then why have a chunky, clunky muzzle device? Designs should make sense for the required use. Save bulk. Allow pin and welds. Keep the performance well, INCREASE the performance cuz test after test after test says a lengthened three-prong is best at reducing muzzle flash, followed closely by closed-end versions.
Anyway, which style of UltraSlim muzzle device do you prefer? Please vote and you can vote on more than one if you like 'em all!
:: 6.5 GRENDEL Deer and Targets :: 6mmARC Targets and Varmints and Deer :: 22 ARC Varmints and Targets
:: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::
:: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::