Oct 27, 2012 4 min read

I was reminded last week of a project I took part in a long time ago. My friend, Bob, has little free time, so it didn’t surprise me when he asked me to sight in his new rifle. The gun was a Remington 700 chambered in the .300 Ultra Mag, and he was going to use it on a bear hunt. Bob was leaving and asked me to try to get the darned thing on the paper. I did accompish that much, but I sure didn’t enjoy the job. The darned thing kicked like a mule – more like 13 mules. My Sako .300 Winchester Mag suffers from the same malady. The older I get, the less I like heavy recoil and the more I believe that most Pennsylvania deer hunters are going afield with too much gun. I remember a project undertaken by a local testing lab about 20 years ago. It involved recoil and the use of muzzle brakes to reduce the backward thrust of big cartridges in light rifles. What we were looking for at the time was not based on judgement or opinion as much as it was fact. I was hired as a consultant and was to work with an engineer who knew little about firearms. I didn’t know it before starting, but the consultant was the person who had to do the shooting and put up with the punishment of repeated shots with large-caliber cartridges. I did 98 percent of the shooting, while the engineer gathered data. The rifle we used was a rebarreled F.N. action in .340 Weatherby that weighed about 7 1/2 pounds. The rifle hit hard on both ends. In fact, during the course of the two weeks, we destroyed three scopes. The rifle was to be shot with and without a muzzle brake so we could compare. We measured velocity, noise level and recoil. The accuracy had to be judgemental and the human factor had to be added to the equation. I learned a lot during those two weeks. Velocity and decible level were easy to check by using an Oehler chronograph. I was amazed to discover that the speed of the bullet was higher with the brake in place. It wasn’t much, but the brake definitely increased velocity. When you think about it, it’s a no-brainer. The brake acts like a barrrel extension. The real problem with a muzzle brake involves noise. When a brake is installed, the decible level more than doubles. A braked rifle is an ear ringer. Judging accuracy is more difficult. You can shoot a group with a brake and another without and compare the two, but other factors come into play – most of them human. Did the shooter pull a shot or flinch? After shooting around 100 groups, the we came to the conclusion that the rifle shot better with the brake. A statistician would want more numbers but it is still probability. Despite the opinion of a numbers guy, take my word that the rifle was more accurate with the brake. I have an opinion of why. The reason became apparent when reading the recoil. On the graph, it showed a less violent pattern. Without the brake, there were numerous spikes before and after the peak spike. Most of these were eliminated with the brake. In reality, the recoil was not only less, but was less violent. With that in mind, after shooting my friend’s big boomer, I think I will suggest that he have a muzzle brake installed. That will make the rifle more easy to shoot. Of course, I will also suggest some ear protection when shooting off the bench. n How can you allowed a deer infected with chronic wasting disease to escape and join with the wild deer herd? That is exactly what happened in Adams County, where an infected deer was found on a hobby farm. As the deer were being euthanized, one escaped into the woods. There should be a full investigation into what happened and perhaps a few heads should roll over this threat to a billion-dollar business. There is no excuse for such carelessness in this serious situation. George H. Block writes a Sunday Outdoors column for the Observer-Reporter.