Muzzle flash photos and sound tests. PWS FFC556 compared.

AR/M4 AR Technical Discussion
1

I wanted to test the PWS muzzle brake for flash as muzzle brakes tend to make huge amounts of it. My hypothesis was that the prongs on the front would do nothing to help. That turned out to be incorrect. The design does a great job of not exacerbating flash. My personal opinion is that if you wish you could have a flash hider, but cannot due to state regs, this is the best option I am aware of (for this purpose). I have no comment on recoil reduction as I did not test for that.

This set of images uses Lake City XM193 ammo which seems to have no flash retardant powder. M855 has much less flash. To make the test even more difficult, I used a 10 inch barrel. This is worst-case. Later I will post 14.5 barrel tests, which show a much different picture.

2

I notice that the FSC556 brake tended to direct the blast back some. Was it indeed more effective than than A2 as the photo shows, or is there more of a fireball outside the photo?

3

Since I had setup the camera to only see to the rear of the muzzle device, I did not realize that it would send some flash back. So there is flash which you do not see in the photo. It is all contained in the 14.5" shots though, so wait for those and you will have a better feel for how it compares to an A2.

4

Awesome. I am putting mine on a 20" barrel. I assume the flash will be even less on my setup. Sabre Defence is test-firing my weapon today and so I should have it in a week or so.

PS. Do you mind if I link this thread to any other threads on any other sites where people are wondering about the flash-supression of the FSC556 comp?

5

You can either link or repost my photos as long as they are never altered.

6

Thanks!

7

8

Wow, that performace is closer to the AAC blackout than the A2 hider. I am suprised myself!

9

Ever do the test with one of the Vltor muzzle devices?

10

Well not quite. This was at 400 ISO. My BLACKOUT photos were at 3200ISO. If I did these at 3200 some of the frames would be solid white. Never compare photos without reading the exposure data. 3200 is 8x more sensitive than 400.

11

I missed that, thanks.

12

This is the AAC BLACKOUT taken at the same time, with the same settings, ammo, barrel, etc.

13

Wow.

What ISO is equivalent to what you or I would see at night if we were watching the shot?

14

I would say these look like how I remember it. When I use the camera’s highest settings it is for R&D, not to show people what to expect.

15

WOW! Had to wait to get to work this morning to get on the T4 and check these out! Awesome! Thanks so much for taking the time and expense to do that test. There are those of us still living under the AWB who appreciate the effort…

16

good info - waiting for sound test! thanks for the time and effort.

17

Yes indeed. Thank you for the comparison.

Any comments as to how much louder the FSC556 was compared to the A2 or baseline comps?

18

My unscientific ass would guesstimate that it is less than 400ISO since I have never seen this much blast from an A2.

19

One can use a program to read the actual data from the jpeg photos:

http://www.takenet.or.jp/~ryuuji/minisoft/exifread/english/download.html

You have never seen that much flash, I assume, because you use ammo with flash retardant powder. This is Lake City XM193 NATO ammo.

As for my guess as to how loud this is compared to no muzzle device – I think it was quieter. It is not commonly known but flash makes noise.

20

I’ve never seen that big a flash from my 11.5", A2 FH equiped barrel when firing XM193. I’d guess that my experience was due to it not being pitch black out, and just how fast the flash occurs.