Is this a muzzle brake?

[cgseanp1]

https://www.primaryarms.com/foxtrot-mike-products-9mm-california-compliant-muzzle-brake

[n8vrmind]

It is marketed as California compliant muzzle brake and no mention of any flash hiding capability. That is how I choose my muzzle device on my featureless ARs.

[tenemae]

The "gills" on top make it look like a brake to me, and not advertised as a hider.

Standard disclaimers: not a lawyer, guy on the internets, do your own homework:

https://gunnersden.com/muzzle-brake-vs-compensator-vs-flash-hider/

[RickD427]

The device certainly looks like a "Muzzle Brake."

But that does not imply that it is legal in California.

Penal Code section 30515 provides that a semi-auto rifle, not having a fixed magazine, and having a "Flash Suppressor" is an "Assault Weapon." Possession of such a weapon is a felony unless registered.

"Muzzle Brakes" and "Flash Suppressors" are not mutually exclusive of each other. A device can be one or the other, or could be both.

11 CCR 5471(r) defines a "Flash Suppressor" as:

If the device is advertised by the manufacture as being a "Flash Hider" or combination of a "Flash Hider" and something else (like a muzzle brake), then the regs make it a "Flash Suppressor" with no more inquiry being needed.

But that's not the case here. In this case, the manufacturer has advertised the device as being only a muzzle break, and also advertises it as being "California Compliant." That may, or may not be true, it's only the manufacture's claim.

The problem here, is that the way the regulation is worded, is that if the device reduces the apparent muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision, then it's a "Flash Suppressor" irrespective of what it was designed as, or advertised by the manufacturer as.

Without functionally testing the device, you can't tell if it's legal or not to have attached to a semi-auto rifle that doesn't have a fixed magazine.

[baih777]

I would not take a chance with that one.
Your the one that pays the attorney.

[Jimi Jah]

The exit hole is not closed like on a brake. Who needs a brake on a 9mm anyway?

[boopiejones]

...but I thought the muzzle brakes had th e smaller opening and the flash hider had the larger opening? Someone please school me. Thanks

[n8vrmind]

When I go to rifle range, almost every single featureless AR rifle has some kind of muzzle brake/comp attached. I just keep PDFs of my muzzle brakes' factory advertisement on my phone in case someone with legal authority inquiries about it. I haven't gotten asked or seen anyone else get asked.

[B.J.F.]

It could be one, but open front generally is a flash hider. This one directs all gas up rather than around. I would be iffy about using it over a real compensator or brake

[theLBC]

so is a fake can considered a flash hider?
i am almost willing to pay for a fake suppressor to protect my ears and fellow shooters from being abused by a muzzle brake.
you might be surprised ho much a good one will keep the barrel down on a .308/7.62, but dang it is loud.

[loademup]

I've got the same Foxtrot Mike 9mm muzzle break that OP is asking about on my AR 9mm. I replaced the factory CMMG AR style bird cage flash hider with it. I don't think I really need a muzzle break on my AR 9 though, just a thread protector on the muzzle end.

Since the slots are aggressively cut on the top side of the muzzle break, the guy at the check-in counter at the range I shoot asked me if I have ever shot the rifle at night. No, but I could see his point....a lot of the flash being directed upward into my line of sight. This, in my non-expert opinion would not visually reduce the flash the shooter sees, but possibly enhance it.

I've never had a problem checking in the rifle at my local range, and they do inspect rifles.. I don't know if this is for legality or safety or both, or they are just curious. They have given a double look at the fake A2 bird cage style muzzle thread protector on my featureless M4 carbine. The slots are not milled through, so it is just a glorified thread protector, but it looks exactly like a real A2 flash hider.

[Jimi Jah]

I've never had my guns checked at any range, only ammo. BLM agents do but I'm happy to show off my stuff and make them drool.

[tenemae]

11 CCR 5471(r) defines a "Flash Suppressor" as:

or functions to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision. A hybrid device that has either advertised flash suppressing properties or functionally has flash suppressing properties would be deemed a flash suppressor. A device labeled or identified by its manufacturer as a flash hider would be deemed a flash suppressor."

"perceptibly" reduce... no guidance of what "perceptible" means. By that (intentionally) vague definition, all brakes/compensators function as flash hiders.

[RickD427]

"perceptibly" reduce... no guidance of what "perceptible" means. By that (intentionally) vague definition, all brakes/compensators function as flash hiders.

I don't share that view. The guidance of the regs is certainly not perfect. Anytime that you try describe something in words, you run the risk of not getting a perfect exchange of thoughts.

But this one is simple enough to functionally test. Get 10 test dummies, line them up behind the test shooter, in darkness, and then fire a number of rounds from a bare barrel, and from a barrel equipped with the device being testing. Then ask the dummies to report which of the weapons produced the greater muzzle flash.

If the dummies report no difference, then the device is not a flash suppressor. If a majority of the dummies report a lesser flash from the test device weapon, then it's a flash suppressor. If a majority of the dummies report a lessor flash from the bare barrel, then the test device is also not a flash suppressor.

The idea here isn't to make the test more complex than it needs to be. It's only to meet the "Preponderance" standard if the issue is in civil court, or the "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" standard in a criminal court.