PDA

View Full Version : Slant muzzlebreak considered a flash hiding device?


Charliegone
02-23-2006, 10:49 PM
I don't think it is. Its design just seems to direct gas up rather than hiding flash. What do you think? I don't want to build up my ewbanks and than get busted for an illegal aw (i'm going the no evil features way). In California, it seems, the definition is different than that of federal law.

TKo_Productions
02-23-2006, 11:02 PM
No. It's exactly that: a muzzle break.

socalguns
02-23-2006, 11:23 PM
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/regs/fsor.htm explains what is a "Flash Suppressor"
978.20 (b) Flash Suppressor

This term was originally defined as "any device that reduces or conceals the visible light or flash created when a firearm is fired. This definition includes flash hiders, but does not include compensators and muzzle brakes (devices attached to or integral with the muzzle barrel to utilize propelling gasses for counter-recoil)." There were two primary problems with the definition when it was originally noticed to the public (December 31, 1999 through February 28, 2000). The most significant problem with the original definition was that it included and/or excluded particular devices by name (flash hider, muzzle brake, compensator) without consideration of whether the devices actually suppress flash. After further consideration prompted by public comments, the Department concluded that the absence of statutorily defined specific measurement standards or a statutory requirement to establish those standards demonstrates a legislative intent to identify any device that reduces or redirects flash from the shooter's field of vision as a flash suppressor regardless of its name and intended/additional purpose. Thus, "flash hiders" are flash suppressors only if they reduce or redirect flash from the shooter's field of vision. Conversely, "compensators" and "muzzle brakes" are not flash suppressors only if they do not reduce or redirect flash from the shooter's field of vision. The revised definition is clearly consistent with the legislative intent of the statute as it neither includes nor excludes any particular device on the basis of its name only. Additionally, "conceals" in the original definition presented the possibility of an overly broad interpretation which could have included any device positioned between the shooter's eye and the muzzle flash, such as the sights on a gun. To avoid such unintended interpretation, the word "conceals" was replaced with "redirects." Accordingly, the original definition was changed to: "flash suppressor means any device that reduces or redirects muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision." This revised definition was noticed to the public during the first 15-day comment period (May 10 through May 30, 2000). Comments addressing this version of the definition prompted further reconsideration and revision. As such, the definition was revised a second time by replacing " . . . that reduces or redirects muzzle flash . . . " with " . . . designed, intended, or that functions to reduce or redirect muzzle flash . . . " This change was necessary because it became clear that flash suppressors are typically attached by twisting or screwing the device onto the threaded barrel of a firearm. Therefore, by simply making a half turn (180 degrees), an otherwise fully operational flash suppressor would not function as prescribed in the prior definition. The revised definition eliminates this potential loophole. Accordingly, this final revision "flash suppressor means any device designed, intended, or that functions to reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision," was noticed during the second 15-day comment period (July 12 through July 31, 2000). Although additional comments were received, no comments were received during the second 15-day comment period that resulted in substantial revision to the definition. However, the Department made a non-substantial revision by adding "perceptibly" to the phrase "reduce or redirect" to confirm that if a reduction or redirection of flash is so minuscule that it is imperceptible to the human eye, it could not reasonably be considered a reduction.

Charliegone
02-24-2006, 4:06 PM
Cool. Thanks I couldn't find that part.:D

dwtt
03-02-2006, 4:55 PM
I've got a question about this. My romanian kit had a slash cut muzzle brake, but it's not exactly pointing up, but to the right at a 45-degree angle. The index cut on the circumference of the muzzle brake that indexes into the pin on the front of the front sight assembly was machined off a bit. Would this make the brake a flash suppressor since it now redirects a bit of the flash off to the side a bit?

ohsmily
03-02-2006, 5:23 PM
Whether something is a brake or a flash suppressor has nothing to do with slots or holes or otherwise...

you will see that a muzzle brake doesn't have an area for the gases to expand toward the end of the barrel (basically, muzzle brakes maintain more or less the same bore diameter all the way to their exit point whereas flash hiders open up and have a much bigger area for the gas to expand in and allow the unburnt powder to combust quickly right at the exit rather than spitting out in front of the barrel...

it has nothing to do with slots or holes or anything else. Some flash hiders don't have any holes or slots, like the original one for the M1 Carbine (the opening cone). However, most all muzzle brakes (unless for weight) have holes or porting in them. But again, muzzle brakes have more or less the same exit bore diameter as the bore of the barrel (only slightly bigger so the bullet can pass freely whereas flash hiders open up to a large diameter.

ohsmily
03-02-2006, 5:24 PM
it is a "brake" guys, not a break

ady
03-02-2006, 7:21 PM
I've got a question about this. My romanian kit had a slash cut muzzle brake, but it's not exactly pointing up, but to the right at a 45-degree angle. The index cut on the circumference of the muzzle brake that indexes into the pin on the front of the front sight assembly was machined off a bit. Would this make the brake a flash suppressor since it now redirects a bit of the flash off to the side a bit?

The angle is cut to counter the torque created by the bolt and bullet under F/A firing.