Forward Controls 6315

[UWone77]

Kinda hard to tell Roger, since the shooter on the left has his gun canted upwards a bit.

[Pyzik]

Shot some video footage yesterday, 6315's compensator performance can be seen best in bursts or rapid fire.

That looks like a whole lot more improvement than I thought initially.

[Duffy]

The shooter is new to ARs and firearms in general, and he uses a lot of comps on his ARs. The effect of the muzzle device is more noticeable with a new shooter than someone with more experience, specifically, burst/auto and rapid fire experience.


This footage is of an experienced shooter with the same test setup. The extent of muzzle rise is less pronounced.

[Duffy]

Geared Mind recently did a review of the 6315, and it confirmed what we suspected, that though the compensator improvement is there for every round fired, its effectiveness is more easily perceived and captured in rapid fire.

[Slippers]

The shooter is new to ARs and firearms in general, and he uses a lot of comps on his ARs. The effect of the muzzle device is more noticeable with a new shooter than someone with more experience, specifically, burst/auto and rapid fire experience.


This footage is of an experienced shooter with the same test setup. The extent of muzzle rise is less pronounced.
https://youtu.be/D7VI2JFdbeE

This is a minor observation, but his front hand is different between each clip. Left video has thumb on the side, right video has thumb around the vfg. Something like that can make a big difference in how much the gun rises. As does anticipation, stock placement, cheek weld, etc.

Unless you remove the human element, there are too many variables to make a definitive comparison, especially when the compensation difference isn't that big (based on what you've said in the past about the design).

[Duffy]

If anything, where his thumb is on the side of the receiver should have better control than when it's wrapped around the grip

The compensation improvement is not easy to capture on video, certainly not as visible as a straight comp or brake vs. a straight flash suppressor. I don't think we can remove the human element, that variable will exist along with the shooter's equipment, we can't control either. We've been able to consistently demonstrate the 6315's ability to dampen muzzle rise without causing more flash, noise and concussion, given these variables.

[Slippers]

If anything, where his thumb is on the side of the receiver should have better control than when it's wrapped around the grip

The compensation improvement is not easy to capture on video, certainly not as visible as a straight comp or brake vs. a straight flash suppressor. I don't think we can remove the human element, that variable will exist along with the shooter's equipment, we can't control either. We've been able to consistently demonstrate the 6315's ability to dampen muzzle rise without causing more flash, noise and concussion, given these variables.

Roger, my comments were (and are) 100% meant with constructive intent. I didn't say the 6315 doesn't work or isn't better than an A2.

Do you follow precision rifle blog? Cal is a big data collection guy, and sticks to removing variables so components like muzzle brakes can be easily compared. For instance, this is the test setup for recording recoil force: http://precisionrifleblog.com/2015/0...ipment-rifles/.

I'm not saying you need to go do something that time intensive, that would be insane. A little data wouldn't hurt, though.

[Duffy]

Will, I understand, and didn't take your comments negatively You know me, I welcome all comments and suggestions. Sorry if you thought I was defensive.

What you said about the human element being a variable, it is true. That group of variables are accepted in the tests, so we keep other elements as consistent as possible, including ammo and the test AR. A shooter's level of knowledge and proficiency, stance and the way the test weapon is handled/held, when the last time he shot burst/rapid fire, how well he controls not his own weapon, but the test weapon, etc will vary as 6315 customers/users.

Being 6315 is a comp / flash suppressor, recoil impulse isn't what it aims to mitigate, the same brake tests probably won't work for 6315. Data would be great, a rig could be built to have a camera fixed to a magnified optic to measure how high the reticle jumps. My suspicion is given our experience and difficulty in capturing it with the camera to the side, a scope view video would be similarly difficult to gauge.

So far, given the human element variable, and 6315 being the constant, 6315 has consistently shown the 25% 3 and 9 o'clock ports function as designed, to decrease muzzle rise without the flash, noise, and concussion penalty.