Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Long Range Hunting No brake, no light rifle!

Today I discovered why you guys who dislike brakes like heavy rifles. My 7-.338RUM weighs less than 7 1/2 pounds. The brake was damaged so I took it off. Just to see how it would do for five shots at 100 yards, I gave it a try. I stopped at three. I was really pulling it into my shoulder with my trigger hand. The rifle shoved me back at least eight inches and maybe as far as ten inches. The group was almost okay at 15/16". Normally I hold my rifles like one would hold a BB gun. The velocity for the 132 grain Hammer Hunter Tipped was 3,600 feet per second. As soon as I can, there will be another brake installed.

Lol

Brakes cover many sins...

So, Newton's Laws finally made it to Grant's Pass.

My respect for non-brake shooters has definitely gone up. I forgot how fast 90 grains of powder pushes a rifle. I bet mathman could tell us the velocity of this rifle.

I have a Kimber 280 AI with Terminator brake that if shot without hearing protection would be a one and done. When time permits, it is getting screwed off and will be replaced with a suppressor.

Man, I have brakes or a suppressor on just about every rifle that I shoot. I also, always wear hearing protection when I hunt. I've never missed an opportunity at an animal because I was slipping plugs in my ears. Plain and simple, I just shoot better with them.

Last time I went to a public range was about 25 years ago, so, nope, I'm not "that guy" at the range. 😁

Last Sunday at the range there was a guy shooting a 338 Lapua fitted with a brake. The first couple of times he fired it rained mud dauber nests that fell from beneath the roof over the firing line.

i have a 338 Lapua with a brake and if my 338 Lapua rifle did not have a brake i would not want to ever shoot this rifle.

Yep on the hearing protection while hunting. Been that way for about thirty years.

Rich, I have a 340 that shoots mid 90's grains of RL26 and a 210 Partition, and it gets your attention.

LMAO

I’m getting to the point that if my suppressor won’t screw on the barrel I don’t want to shoot it. Kinda ruins you for naked barrels. Edk

The regs about suppressors are total bullshit.

The difference between the 7mm Rem Mag and the .340 is a whole world of recoil. That's what I was used to. A friend of mine brought me a .340 to work up a load. I looked in the book and picked a middle of the road load and walked out into the yard and casually fired the Nosler 210 grain bullet into the ground without putting the rifle up to my shoulder. What a shock. The bolt knob went into the web skin between the thumb and index finger! I sent it off to get a brake before I continued.

Use a freaking suppressor. Guys at the range will not hate you, you get sound and blast suppression as well, Also no one mentions it. Massive recoil reduction from the suppressor. Don’t get why so many resist this.

How 'bout the cost and the tax and the wait!! The guys at the range are already firing very loud toys. It's part of shooting.

I own a Thunderbeast 9. There is no way I want to add almost a pound to a rifle I spent thousands on to get light. It has a titanium action, a carbon barrel, and a custom carbon stock. Ready to go it is about 7 1/4 pounds. A brake is about five ounces.

Some guys go light so they can add a suppressor and not get the hell knocked out of them and their ears blown out. Edk

Exactly, on my third now and won't hunt without one. My vintage Win 70s don't get out of the safe much these days...

There are now magnum-rated cans out there in the 10-11oz range. I think it would be worth the extra 5oz over the brake in many instances for many users. I also just hate brakes.

I probably hunt 50/50 with naked vs. suppressed rifles, as I still have several that I don't intend to thread. The non-suppressed rifles don't see as many rounds fire each year as the quiet ones though.