An entirely different result with a (5.56) M-249 running a Silencerco SWR:



Regarding the glowing barrel (whereas if the 240's bbl is yet glowing, you can't see it in this light), that's one of the differences between a 20-lb "light-weight" MG and a 30-lb "general purpose" MG. Even the gas block is glowing on the 249.

I don't know if those guys suspected the can was going to fail on the 249 but you'd think if they'd considered that a possible outcome they'd have worn more protective gear. Because if it hits you, a 1500°F piece of shrapnel is going to leave a mark. Literally.

The clowns who designed the "smuzzle" are crowing that what they've "invented" is the first combination muzzle brake and suppressor but apparently they don't know that ALL suppressors function as something of a muzzle brake. They wouldn't work as a suppressor unless they slowed down the hot propellant gasses to limit (or eliminate) the muzzle blast. What they apparently fail to realize (as do most shooters) is that the propellant gasses are responsible for more of the recoil impulse than the bullet itself.

Sounds counter-intuitive put it is true. Except for low-powered cartridges but especially in centerfire rifle rounds, the jet of hot gas that's released from the barrel once the bullet gets out of its way causes more recoil than the bullet itself does. It's effectively a small scale version of what comes out of the ass-end of a jet engine. Cue the "Jet Principle" visual aids.



I'm sure you've seen a balloon used to demonstrate the "jet principle," but let me put that in another perspective ...



In the real world, the cloud of smoke has more energy than the bullet does. The bullet is just the delivery vehicle that transports all that force in a coherent package to a target beyond the end of the barrel. It isn't even necessary unless the target is further away than the end of the barrel. People have killed themselves for not knowing that a blank gun still can be deadly at very close range.

Based on the "accepted" values for the recoil reduction from a standard suppressor that's known to be pretty good at the reduction, and their claimed recoil reduction for the "smuzzle," I figure it's only at most 20% more effective than a plain old suppressor that's good at it by accident. They could have got the same result by just making an old-fashioned suppressor a bit larger so if you ask me they've done nothing (in that respect) apart wasting taxpayers dollars.

Pretty ironic that the gimmunt hired somebody to make suppressors for the military who knows so little about firearms.