PDA

View Full Version : Parallax Tactical Paracomp Gen 2 vs Battlecomp 1.0


Prc329
06-07-2012, 12:26 PM
I finally had a chance to shoot the paracomp Gen 2. A buddy and I took our rifles down to American Shooting Center for a little R and R and I decided to try and get an objective opinion from both of us.

First the rifles.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/naytwan/007.jpg

Armalite SPR Mod 1 Midlength upper with Battlecomp 1.0 1/7 twist 16" barrel
Spikes Lower
MOE Grip
MOE Stock with carbine buffer
Eotech 511.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v425/naytwan/Guns/IMG_0431.jpg

Armalite SPR Mod 1 Carbine upper with PXT Paracomp Gen 2 1/7 16" barrel
Centermass Calguns lower
Magpul Maid with Kydex Grip
Pinned CTR Stock
PA Micro reddot

I have shot his rifle before so I was more interested in how the changes from Gen 1 to Gen 2 would changes things. I put my buddy behind the trigger for a quick video to show how the rifles would behave and the difference in flash. Using the same ammo AE223 we put 10 rounds threw each in the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0cW8O7MCSU&feature=plcp

[It was his first time shooting a featurless rifle, took him a sec to figure out the grip]

As you can see in the video the battlecomp is definitely a flash hider. The Paracomp is marketed as a muzzle brake and definitely performs as one. It does not cut down on flash. One thing both shooters commented on was both rifles felt recoil was pretty much identical. Both rifles pushed straight back and had no noticeable muzzle rise that was not induced by the shooter. Especially off hand follow up shots were effortless. Comparing Gen 1 to the Gen 2, the gen 2 is worthy predecessor. The removal of the 2 bottom rows of holes killed any muzzle flip the old comp had. I am not sure if the gas channels in the front changed anything but the do look cool.

All in all the Paracomp at $60 is just as effective at controlling recoil and muzzle flip as the Battlecomp.

HK35
06-07-2012, 12:36 PM
You can see from the vid that the BC equiped rfile had more muzzle movement than the on with the Paracomp.

451040
06-07-2012, 12:49 PM
You can see from the vid that the BC equiped rfile had more muzzle movement than the on with the Paracomp.

That's due to him rocking the rifle on the base of the 10/30 mag and not any difference in effectiveness between the two comps.

ExtremeX
06-07-2012, 12:54 PM
Awesome, thanks for the videos. It seems like a worthy alternate if someone was looking for a cost effective comp and could live without the flash hiding qualities of the BC.

I really need to get my next upper finished so I can compare the Paracomp to the PWS FSC 5.56 which is currently my favorite comp. Id really like to get the Surefire comp in the mix for my own research and comparison.

Prc329, I might have to shoot you a PM when I am ready. We could meet at ASC and have a few more options to compare for another video.

Prc329
06-07-2012, 12:59 PM
ExtremeX

Sure let me know. My buddy is a member so we won't have to wait long for a lane.

m03
06-07-2012, 1:20 PM
As you can see in the video the battlecomp is definitely a flash hider.

Not according to the manufacturer, who has posted on M4C for clarification before. Any flash-hiding is incidental and not by-design.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=55210&page=3


The manufacturer labels/markets/sells it as a compensator. In CA, this is sufficient to avoid triggering the evil feature aspect of state AW laws. I have testified as a court-certified expert in assault weapon/AR-15 pattern rifles in a case involving the legal definition of a muzzle brake vs. a flash hider. The primary design intent of the device is recoil and muzzle rise reduction, not flash suppression. It just happens to do a fairly decent job at that, too.

Yes.

It is a compensator according to the manufacturer and his expert: me.:D

California law is rather unclear on the matter of what is and is not a flash hider. The best way to determine if the item is a FH or not is what the manufacturer calls the item. The name BattleComp was chosen for a number of reasons, one being that it clearly identifies the item as a compensator and not a flash hider, so that folks in states like CA can have cool stuff that works, too.

Prc329
06-07-2012, 1:31 PM
I understand they say it's not a flash hider but yet they advertise the flash hiding capabilities in there promo video. That alone will get people in trouble the way the DOJ says they will confirm what it is. If they were to test it they would consider it a flash hider.

ExtremeX
06-07-2012, 3:08 PM
I understand they say it's not a flash hider but yet they advertise the flash hiding capabilities in there promo video. That alone will get people in trouble the way the DOJ says they will confirm what it is. If they were to test it they would consider it a flash hider.

+1

PWS FSC 556 and the Battle Comp both have flash suppressing capabilities. Its not recommended to use them on featureless builds; you wont see me taking a chance on it.

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=14Sc8MNP9AO6JgHxcnqm5oR45LDLIhpqeBHsCN8-K4XU&pli=1

Prc329
06-07-2012, 3:37 PM
+1

PWS FSC 556 and the Battle Comp both have flash suppressing capabilities. Its not recommended to use them on featureless builds; you wont see me taking a chance on it.

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=14Sc8MNP9AO6JgHxcnqm5oR45LDLIhpqeBHsCN8-K4XU&pli=1

8. The first step is determination of whether the device in question is designed or intended to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision. The assigned Firearms Division personnel examine the device and review material produced by the manufacturer of the device to see what the manufacturer has said publicly about its designed or intended uses for the device. Manufacturer materials reviewed can include brochures and packaging provided with the device, advertising materials, websites, and point-of-sale or other marketing materials. If it is determined that the device in question was designed or intended to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision, then the device is determined to be a flash suppressor, and the inquiry is at an end.

So if the DOJ was to try and figure out if the Battlecomp was a flash hider it would take them all of 2 minutes to search Google and watch the Battlecomp promo video to see its being advertised as having flash reducing capabilities. Then if they for some reason still are not sure they will test the device. That will definitely show it does reduce flash.

Now back to the topic at hand. We need to get a group of guys with as many different muzzle brakes and flash hiders and do a serious comparison. Maybe go to South Bay Rod and Gun Club.

loosewreck
06-07-2012, 3:58 PM
Thanks! That was a great "to the point" video. Shooting them indoor really helps show the difference in flash.

Now back to the topic at hand. We need to get a group of guys with as many different muzzle brakes and flash hiders and do a serious comparison. Maybe go to South Bay Rod and Gun Club.

Exactly, now what about the Spikes Dynacomp, KAC Tripple Tap, and there's another one, I just can't remember what it was called :banghead:

ac427cpe
06-07-2012, 4:02 PM
Awesome, thanks for the videos. It seems like a worthy alternate if someone was looking for a cost effective comp and could live without the flash hiding qualities of the BC.

I really need to get my next upper finished so I can compare the Paracomp to the PWS FSC 5.56 which is currently my favorite comp. Id really like to get the Surefire comp in the mix for my own research and comparison.

Prc329, I might have to shoot you a PM when I am ready. We could meet at ASC and have a few more options to compare for another video.

I have a Surefire MB556AR on one of my AR's, I'm always willing to meet up and shoot with other Calgunners (and usually shoot at ASC).

ExtremeX
06-07-2012, 6:16 PM
Prc329, I am also a member at ASC. If you guys want to get this done, ill setup a date via PM.

My 2nd upper wont be done in time but its was going to have a Paracomp which you already have.

That makes:
Prc329 - Battlecomp
Prc329 - Paracomp
ac427cpe - Surefire MB556
ExtremeX - PWS FSC 556

I will send a PM shortly.

Prc329
06-07-2012, 6:23 PM
That works, we will work out the details in PM and email.

SD619
06-07-2012, 6:33 PM
I was shooting directly next to you guys today...and I can confirm the flash from the Paracomp was pretty big. I could see it from the bottom and front of the lane dividers while shooting from my lane.

Prc329
06-07-2012, 6:41 PM
I was shooting directly next to you guys today...and I can confirm the flash from the Paracomp was pretty big. I could see it from the bottom and front of the lane dividers while shooting from my lane.

Was that you with the AK Pistol? That thing was crazy. I like.

SD619
06-07-2012, 7:00 PM
Ya, that was me..the mini Draco is definitely a blast to shoot. If I see you at the range again you are welcome to give it a go.

I liked the Paracomp ...I wish it was in stock during my previous build. I ended up with a spike's Dynacomp and my current build is a 13.7 with a kx3. I will for sure go with the Paracomp on my next build though.

wsmc27
06-07-2012, 9:56 PM
Prc329, thanks very much for the report.

Think I am headin' for Parallax tomorrow, the new PSA middy wants that Gen2.

:)

TheHammerOfTruth
06-07-2012, 10:19 PM
If you want serious recoil reduction you gotta try the GoGun Supercomp. I personally feel its the best on the market these days. I have shot many, many comp/brakes and this one takes the cake.

k1dude
06-08-2012, 12:06 AM
What about noise? The BC has the reputation of being one of the quietest muzzle brakes out there. Was the noise and concussion any worse with the Paracomp?

ExtremeX
06-08-2012, 12:35 AM
What about noise? The BC has the reputation of being one of the quietest muzzle brakes out there. Was the noise and concussion any worse with the Paracomp?

Quiet and muzzle brake don't belong in the same sentence. Like I said above, if you can shoot any of them w/o hearing protection you have already done def. Its loud to the point they hurt without protection, I personally think its a non issue and not worth comparing. BUT... if I can get my hands on a dB meter before the test, I will bring it and report results but don't expect a noticeable difference in actual dBs.

In regards to concussion, from the shooters position I have not seen much difference across all the comps I've used. Which includes the PWS, Surefire, and BC.

The differences are when you are not in the shooter position and standing the the sides. Side firing brakes cause more discomfort to thought around you than a battle comp, but I really have not testing them side by side yet, and all my observations about this are really just from shooting rifles which my friends have.

The general pro/con for side blasting comps vs things like Battle Comp and Paracomp is they direct blast upwards. There is more noticeable flash in your optics, if you shoot at night, you would still benefit from comps that still blast out the sides. Even if there is flash, its not really picked up in the optics. This is something I have experienced in my night shoots in the desert when using BC vs PWS.