3D-Printed Walker Defense Research NERO 9 PCC Compensator on CMMG Delayed Blowback AR15 Upper

Wonder how it works with submachine guns? I'd think it could hold up, but I'm wondering if the internal structure might cake up with carbon if you put quite a few rounds through it.

Appreciate brief on how 3D printing technology can be used to prove out science.
PS – Perhaps 3D printing will drive the next WWSD build.

8:48 I heard another interesting theory about recoil on blow back firearms and I'd like to hear your opinion on it. This theory states, that unlocked blowback firearms have less total projectile-recoil impact because they accelerate two masses. Firth the bullet is driven forwards and creates a counter reaction, but the rearwards driven bolt is also creating a counter reaction, both these reaction will counter each other to a certain degree. Locked bolt firearms with only the bullet reacting got more recoil and the most recoil can be observed by blow forward firearms, because they are tent to accelerate two masses forwards the bullet and the barrel with camber. To prove this, an example of a swinging barrel was given loaded in the middle with two projectiles of equal weight and a power charge in the center. If lit the charge would propel both projectiles in opposite directions, both would creating recoil but the barrel would stand still. In reality a lot of block back firearms got a lot of perceived Feld recoil, because of their high bolt velocity and the tendency of bad shock absorbing the moment the fast bolt hit the frame of the gun.

4:09 I once read, a theory that the gases push a muzzle break forward is not hundred percent correct. According to this analyses the gases do push against the muzzle break surfaces but this force is transmitted from the break to the barrel, from the barrel to the trunnion or barrel extension and from the trunnion to the breach. It should be like Baron Münchhausen trying to pull himself out of the swamp by pulling on his own hair, a closed system of forces. Only the first conical shaped stream of high velocity gases passing the bullet can transmit force to the break that will push it forwards. As soon as the breaks chambers are filled with gas it only works by preventing the gas to escape forwards and therefore transmit gas-recoil to the firearm. This theory could be tested by using a chamber break and one with just a holes with equal size and minimal forward surfaces.

Does he make different calibers? Say, for a 20" 6.5 grendel AR?

BTR — that ridiculous brake and silly Gun-Fu gamer boi arm and hand position still won't help your poor shooting performance, no matter what you try to do or how much money you love to waste —

I can't believe I just watched a 20 minute vid on a muzzle break

Don’t think I didn’t catch that Little Britain reference :^)

You cannot machine it . But you can cast it as an investment casting ( lost wax) .
I understand that with 3-D printing you can manufacture by the order. With castings you would like to have some kind of batches.

As welder I'm sorry I have to go a little bit more into inconel inconel is the cream of the crop some of the best steel you can find on this planet, specifically it's a variant of stainless steel but it has a lower chromium content so it's magnetic, and last time I worked with it, it was over $100 per pound

7:07 I'm genuinely confused. I'm looking up .223 Remington and 9mm Parabellum on Wikipedia, and they are listed as roughly 60gr @ 960m/s = ~1800J, and 124gr @ 410m/s = 675J (granted for very different barrel lengths). Based on these neither the momentum, nor the mass, nor the speed are similar. What am I missing? Does barrel length used in these numbers account for them ending up the same? (my experience with firearms is very limited)

You know, there are better ways to keep your fingers warm than holding the barrel! Hahahahahahaha

Great to see new tech I wonder what shape would work on my .740cal matchlock musket ( getting the black stuff off it will be a chore) 👍

How is the visible flash on the .223?

So if you have a shorter barrel, does that mean more gas to work with?

I would be very interested in those other videos mentioned. I hope they do get made.

Damn it Bloke, you keep showcasing things that put the future of my wallet in danger.

(and getting to comment now is why I follow on FB)
an interesting thing that's related to the discussion:

I find it amusing how Barrett went from using a simple arrowhead muzzle brake on the early models (M82) to more of a compensator cylinder design on later iterations (M107) in order to allow suppressor use.

the idea that popped into my head as a result of this video and thinking about it:

one of the things I have noticed in the world of automotive performance (as an enthusiast), is "Scavenging", where each successive exhaust charge running down the pipes create vacuum to then pull the next exhaust charge out of the engine, increasing efficiency.

now, imagine this: a QD mount that functions like a muzzle brake when nothing is mounted, but when you do add a suppressor, rather than trying to control gas going forward, it directs most of it into baffles BEHIND the QD mount (overlapping the barrel), with the movement of that gas pulling the remaining amount trying to come out the front, away from it.

otherwise works like a normal suppressor, but the party trick is to use a similar Scavenging effect to reduce gas trying to get out the bullet hole at the end. why? to allow effective suppression while trying to reduce the OAL added by installing the suppressor, while still having a more effective can than the many "K" stubby suppressors that function more or less as an advanced flash hider but with less effective suppression capability than a more sound-reducing but larger model.

if done right, I think you could get away with pretty decent suppressor performance, but only 2-5in of length added to the gun because you are physically trying to overpower what little gas would be trying to escape, by creating a stronger vacuum than the gas following the bullet's own velocity.

the benefits would also include having less weight past the muzzle of the gun, improving weight balance over a comparable traditional "non-vac" can.
unfortunately though, it would require a minimum length of barrel be left with enough space for the can to overlap, or else it wouldn't fit.

the idea being that if we're talking 5.56, you could fit it easily onto a 14.5in AR15 carbine gassed barrel, without requiring the additional porting and loss in velocity that said ported barrel causes.
it won't be as quiet as a proper integral suppressor, but the concept isn't to replace integrals; it's to make a sound-suppressing can that can potentially add less OAL than some mini or "K" cans,

while also allowing longer barrels for the same OAL than would be an option when using a traditional "Non-Vac" can. for the same length, my can concept would allow a suppressor mounted 14.5in barrel, in the same length as a traditional can on a 11.5-10in. barrel AR, and the same ratio for longer barrels.

you can probably see why that might be good for overall rifle performance beyond 100yd ranges, in addition to avoiding an excessively long setup to have a 18-20in rifle suppressed compared to unsurpassed with an A2 flash hider.

at the same time though, it would also mean that you can't go shorter than a certain length without it simply not being able to reach the threads or thread on securely, due to hitting the gas block.

anyway, it's 105AM here so I'mma sleep now and dream about MP5SD's and aerodynamics in relation to small arms gas control.

I'd be quite interested to see how well this brake would perform on a pistol. Sadly my pistol doesn't have a threaded barrel and I'm not willing to dump a large handful of money into it to find out.