Simplistic Shooting Solutions QD Brake Shield

Remington 700 SPS Tactical with QD Brake Shield

The first time I fired my Remington 700 SPS Tactical without hearing protection it felt like someone had taken a sledgehammer to my left ear. The sharp report was courtesy of Advanced Armament Corporations BRAKEOUT 51T muzzle brake. As I watched my intended target, Canis latrans, crest over the horizon unscathed, I remarked to myself that several more shots from a braked rifle would result in some serious hearing loss.

BRAKEOUT and Brake Shield

Advanced Armamanet BRAKEOUT muzzle brake and Simplistic Shooting Solutions QD Brake Shield

Muzzle brakes and compensators are valuable accessories due to the fact that they redirect propellant gas, keeping a shooter on target and mitigating felt recoil. In a CQB/urban environment, assault teams conducting dynamic entry can re-establish their sights faster after breaking a shot when using compensators and muzzle brakes. This also allows them to positively identify a hit or quickly correct for a miss. Precision shooters and snipers take advantage of muzzle brakes for similar benefits: to observe trace, comfortably shoot large, heavy calibers, positively identify hits, and correct for missed shots. Hunters utilize these accessories to tame recoil on hunting rifles. The downside of muzzle brakes and compensators is that the device channels sound waves back towards the shooter, which increases the decibel level at the shooter’s position. Muzzle brakes and compensators, by their design channel propellant gasses sideways…and in some cases rearward from the barrel. This can be extremely distracting for spotters and members of an entry team. Some rifle ranges do not allow muzzle breaks “on the line”. Many precision rifle trainers discourage brakes in their classes. Aside from hot propellant gas being directed away from the muzzle there is also the possibility that pieces of copper, un-burnt powder and flakes of brass will also exit the barrel. One way to mitigate this is to attach a suppressor to the rifle or carbine. This dampens the noise and still acts as a muzzle brake. Some muzzle brakes offered by Advanced Armament Corporation, YHM, and Surefire serve as a muzzle brake and also as a suppressor adaptor. Due to the cost of suppressors and the incredible delay associated with submitting a Form 4 to the ATF this option may not be feasible for many shooters.

Another option is to use Simplistic Shooting Solution’s QD Brake Shield. The Brake Shield screws on to a YHM or an Advanced Armament Corporation M4 2000 suppressor mount, is manufactured from 4140 steel, and is parkerized for corrosion resistance. The Advanced Armament variant includes a set screw that needs to be gently tightened. The Brake Shield works by allowing the chambers on the muzzle brake to divert gas, which slows recoil, but then redirects the propellant gasses in line with the bore, and away from the shooter.

QD Brake Shield

QD Brake Shield


I tested the QD Brake Shield on my Remington 700 SPS Tactical. As previously mentioned the rifle is equipped with Advanced Armament Corporations BRAKEOUT muzzle brake. The BRAKEOUT is unique because it not only acts as a muzzle brake, but is also engineered to mitigate flash. I love the setup. Paired with a Limbsaver recoil pad, felt recoil is almost nonexistent. I use the rifle for varmint hunting and general long range shooting. Though the rifle is a tad heavy to carry around the woods all day it is perfect for varmint hunting, antelope hunting, and for smaller statured shooters, due to the lack of recoil.

The QD Brake Shield is a relatively small lite weight accessory.

The QD Brake Shield is a relatively small lightweight accessory.

In testing the QD Brake Shield I found that there was not effect on accuracy. I ran some rounds through the chronograph and didn’t see a substantial increase in velocity. Moving through the bush with the rifle I did not find the device cumbersome and at 5 ounces I hardly noticed the weight.  The big question I had was, since I was redirecting propellant gas forward again, was their going to be an increase in recoil with the brake on? To test this I proned out on some hard sand, maintained a neutral load on my bipod and sent several rounds down range. Granting that this was a nonscientific test, I noticed a very slight increase in recoil, though I was still able to watch my round splash down several hundred yards away. I dug the legs of my bipod into the sand and positioned my body so that I maintained a heavy load on the bipod. Maintaining a heavy load I did not notice the slight increase in recoil and the equipment functioned as intended. One nice side effect of the brake was the lack of dust that was kicked up at my position. Through my hearing protection I noticed that I didn’t hear the massive amounts of noise that accompanies firing a braked rifle. I removed my hearing protection and fired off a shot. I was pleasantly surprised when I realized that the rifle sounded like any other normal unbraked rifle: loud, but not painful. THIS DEVICE IS IN NO WAY A SUPRESSOR! I will say it again…. THIS DEVICE IS IN NO WAY A SUPRESSOR. The device simply channels sound away from the shooter’s ear. It does not in any way slow down gas the way a suppressor does.

Final Thoughts.

Simplistic Shooting Solutions created a product that has been sorely needed. Upon completion of this article I will be purchasing the test sample that was sent to me. I never intend to remove the QD Brake Shield from my Remington 700 unless it is replaced by a suppressor…even then I imagine I would still prefer to use the Brake Shield due to its small and compact size. The Brake Shield is a wonderful accessory for hunters, tactical teams, precision shooters, and snipers. I am building a rifle for an elk hunt this coming October. I will definitely install a muzzle brake from Advanced Armament Corporation on that system, so that I can use my new QD Brake Shield!

Do you have any experience with the Simplistic Solutions QD Brake Shield? Questions, comments, and gripes are welcome in the comment below!

Load that bipod and stay safe!


Rest in peace Amigo. America truly lost a Hero.

  Donate to the Chris Kyle and Chad Littlefield memorial here.



Thomas Gomez

Thomas Gomez currently resides in the mountains of central New Mexico. He has an M.B.A, an Ar-15/M16/M4 armorer certification from Specialized Armament Warehouse as well as a Glock armorer certification. Aside from writing for The Firearm Blog he works as a Clinical Analyst for a large Hospital. He spends his free time farming, ranching, hiking, fly-fishing and hunting in the beautiful forests and prairies of New Mexico. He can be reached at


  • Annika

    When can we see a nighttime flash signature test with this? Very interested to see if it might bring the visible signature of a Brakeout or similar device down significantly.

    • Thomas Gomez

      Annika! My first commenter! First of all I want to thank you for your feedback. I will be doing a follow up article complete with video. If you have anything else you want me to test that pertains to this article please let me know. Hope this finds you well!!

  • Mazryonh

    This reminds me of the Levang Linear Compensators for some rifles, which are supposed to reduce felt recoil while at the same time directing muzzle blast and sound forwards. Does that or this new product do a better job for the money?

    • Thomas Gomez

      Hello Sir. Utility is very subjective. If you have a YHM or AAC muzzle brake that accepts a certain supressor…or you intend to get a YHM or AAC muzzle brake/supressor adapter this product may be something you want to consider. As Noob pointed out..if all my rifles have AAC Brakouts and I intend to hunt with one I will probably attach this product to mitigate noise and keep my hunting partner from getting hosed with hot gas and potentially metal fragments. If you never intend to attach a supressor to your rifle then a linear compensator would probably work for you just fine.

      Thanks for the feedback! Hope this finds you well!!

      • Mazryonh

        Wait, so the Linear Compensators only go on specific barrel configurations?

        I’m still kind of surprised that Linear Compensators aren’t offered in more caliber sizes, and that they haven’t changed the dimensions to be fitted on pistol caliber weapons–imagine if you could fit a miniature Linear Compensator to a Glock 29 with an extended and threaded barrel. Something like that could mitigate felt recoil and muzzle climb, all without losing ballistic performance like a ported barrel would.

        • Thomas Gomez

          Sounds like a you have a good idea. Get some 4140 and a lathe and start fabricating! I would be happy to test for you!

          • Mazryonh

            Sadly I’m not an engineer nor do I have access to a machine shop. I just have a penchant for coming up with ideas for odd things.

            Speaking hypothetically, just how tight a fit is necessary for Linear Compensators? Suppressors are more efficient (obeying pressure limitations, of course) the less free space there is between a fired round and the suppressor bore size, but since Linear Compensators are essentially one-chambered suppressors with a lot more holes or near the end, would the need for a tight fit be obsolete? If that were true, one could make a short but fat Linear Compensator with a bore size of .50 caliber or larger and then only change that design to fit the compensator onto barrels of different sizes.

  • brokenforks

    Shooting your rifle without ear protection? I think I’ve found your problem!

    • Thomas Gomez

      Hello Sir. Thanks for the feedback. I always carry electronic hearing protection or at least ear plugs but I don’t always have the time to put them in. When I come across a coyote harassing or mauling a calf on the ranch its game time. In hunting scenarios I usually don’t hunt with braked rifles except when I am calling coyotes. (I will ALWAYS have ear pro while calling coyotes) There are a lot of hunters that don’t use ear pro. The Brake Shield offers me the capability to sneak through the woods and use a braked rifle. If I don’t have time to get my hearing protection on…its not a big deal, as the article stated firing the rifle without ear pro isn’t any louder that any other braked rifle. It’s loud but not uncomfortable. Hope this finds you well!

      • brokenforks

        I can appreciate the fact that some things necessitate the firing of a rifle without ear protection. But at the same time when I see an opportunity to give a good ribbing, I have to take it 😀

        • Thomas Gomez

          Roger that brokenforks! I figured someone was going to get me on that one!

  • DashVT

    What’s the advantage of this over a linear compensator like the Levang, KIES, or Hera Arms?

    • noob

      afaik only the KIES offers a .308 version of their linear compensator, and it has no qd facility.

      The Levang and the Hera are both exclusively 5.56mm devices. the center bore is machined into the above linear comps rather than a separate piece from the brake shield. This means that the SSS brake shield can be bought once and swapped between your rifles fitted with a AAC M4-2000 suppressor mount.

      The SSS Brake Shield gives you options – Brake only, suppressor or Brake with shield – in two calibers.

      With a linear comp, I don’t know of any suppressor compatible with the Levang, Kies or Hera.

      • Thomas Gomez

        Thank you Sir for your feedback! Are you running an SSS Brake Shield? Hope this finds you well!

        • noob

          Afraid not, I don’t have a M4-2000 suppressor mount 🙂

      • Scott

        Black River Tactical offers a Linear Comp in .30.

    • Thomas Gomez

      I have heard nothing but good things about those brakes. The QD Brake Shield is simply another tool in the tool box for Shooters that use certain YHM or AAC muzzle brakes.

      Thank you for reading my article. I hope this finds you well!

  • J in Ga

    Ear plugs are a lot cheaper

  • Icchan

    It may be quieter at the shooter’s end, but I imagine the report’s a lot louder forward of the muzzle. Be interesting to see how much this gizmo changes the sound.

    • Thomas Gomez

      I would have to agree with you sir. I will definitely be doing a more scientific follow up. Please let me know if you have testing ideas. Thanks for the feedback…hope this finds you well!

  • noob

    hmm. can you shoot past a db meter with and without the brake shield?

    I heard that the linear comps focus the blast forwards and sound like .50 BMG if the echo reflects off a hard quarry wall and comes back at you.

    • Thomas Gomez

      I will be doing a follow up article. I need to test decibel levels at the shooters position as well as the QD Brake Shield effects on the AAC Brakeouts ability to mitigate flash. Let me know if you have anything else you want me to test. Thanks for the feedback!

      • SafeArmsReview

        I really don’t like it when people do tests and try to show the differences between the front and back of the gun. Why? Because hearing loss occurs regardless with sound spikes of 130 dB or more. That damage is permanent and occurs instantly.

        For some reason a lot of people think since a gunshot sound is of such a short duration it does not inflict that much damage but its the intensity that does it. Now if you coupled the 130 dB with a long duration the damage is even worse.

        So don’t fall into a false sense of security when doing your tests.

  • Eh…..why not just take the compensator off? You’re neutering its ability to compensate by adding the shield so you may as well go without and save your money.

    • Thomas Gomez

      The Brake Shield allows the best of both worlds. Mitigated recoil without loud noise, dust and distraction to shooters around me. In testing I found there was a slight increase in recoil. With a heavy bipod load I noticed absolutely no increase in recoil. Thanks for reading the article!! Hope this finds you well!!

  • bbmg

    Interesting but it seems to be too much of a compromise. I personally would put the money this device and the brake would cost into paying the $200 fee for a suppressor.

    A more scientific measurement of the difference in recoil would have been worth setting up, it would not need to be sophisticated – for example clamping the rifle to a small trolley, and seeing how much it rolls back on a uniform surface, allowing the three configurations to be compared (no brake, brake only, brake and shield) in a non-subjective manner.

    • Thomas Gomez

      Currently working on a sled type system for the follow up article. If you were to buy a supressor what brand would you go with? How would you attach it?

      • bbmg

        Good to hear 🙂 for science!

        Personally if I had to make a suppressor, I would probably roll my own – with a decent lathe and mill and a bit of patience, making a good suppressor is not exactly brain surgery. This Kiwi illustrates the point very well:

  • Uncle Charlie

    Hello, you already have ear damage. It will only get worse if you continue to shoot anything but a cap gun without ear protection. Duh!

    • Thomas Gomez

      I think all Shooters at least suffer a small degree of hearing loss. Some people that shoot the really big caliber will recommend both ear plugs and ear muffs. Craig Boddington…well known “old guard” gun writer has written several pieces about hearing loss. That generation in many ways refuses to hunt with hearing protection….granted those guys wrote a lot of articles that pertain to hunting dangerous game. Such hunting requires all of the senses. Hearing loss was just part of the deal. I remember Boddington writing about suffering permanent hearing damage when a hunting companion fired a braked big bore rifle inches away from his ear….talk about pain. You don’t wear ear pro with your cap gun?!

      • Mazryonh

        Yes, hearing loss is a real issue that is ignored because even with hearing protection, shooting unsuppressed weapons is likely to damage your hearing piecemeal. Some suppressed weapons (such as very short-barrelled rifles) will STILL damage your hearing without hearing even with suppressors labelled “hearing safe.”

        It’s hard to hear soft-stepping game in the woods or armed opponents trying to keep quiet if you have a constant ringing in your ears from too much hearing damage, or even something as mundane as listening to the radio.

  • SafeArmsReview

    Good article except when the author said this…

    “I removed my hearing protection and fired off a shot. I was pleasantly surprised when I realized that the rifle sounded like any other normal unbraked rifle: loud, but not painful.”

    Usually hearing loss starts at around 85dBA and gets worse as the decibels increase. For example when listening to a music player with stock earphones at a maximum volume, the levels can reach 110+ dBA, loud enough to cause permanent hearing loss/damage after just 15 minutes of listening. However as the decibels increase so does the amount of damage/hearing loss. So when the author made his statement it already showed he has had damage to his hearing and does not understand what he is doing. No offense but I was just like him till I got educated.

    So what decibels do various calibers produce in regards to decibels and what levels?

    .32 ACP = 153.5 dB
    .380 = 157.7 dB
    .38 Spl = 156.3 dB
    .357 Mag = 164.3 dB
    .45 ACP = 157.0 dB
    .223, 55GR. Commercial load 18″ barrel = 155.5dB
    .30-30 in 20″ barrel = 156.0dB
    7mm Magnum in 20″ barrel = 157.5dB
    .308 in 24″ barrel = 156.2dB

    One thing to note is that pain is not felt until about 120-125 dBa depending on what reports you read. Now what most people do not understand is how the dB levels work.

    When decibels increase the intensity is expressed in a logarithmic scale. Example: near total silence is represented as 0 dB. A sound 10 times more powerful is 10 dB. A sound 100 TIMES more powerful than is 20 dB. A sound 1,000 TIMES more powerful than near total silence is 30 dB. Most people look at the noise levels and think a 10 dB increase is not dangerous but it is and the levels rise exponentially.

    Now here is the kicker…

    When you experience a gun shot without hearing protection you experience immediate hearing loss – the pain is also very different from any other physical pain we normally experience. One reason people experience hearing loss is that they think hearing loss is minimized because a gunshot and the duration of the sound is so short – nothing could be further from the truth. Another reason is that many don’t think they have ‘lost their hearing’ because the pain is different from other pain they experience. They think hearing loss means everything you hear is turned down or muffled and that is not the case. So they continue to do stupid things; like fire their guns without hearing protection. Even is you fire a .380 thats 153.5 dBA and once you damage your hearing in that frequency range/spot and you never get it back. Most experts agree you would have to be exposed to eight continuous hours of noise at 85 dB to cause permanent hearing loss, but sound spikes of 130 dB or more can cause permanent damage instantly. You can still hear most of the other sound frequencies but damage has been done non the less. This again causes people to ignore safety precautions and continue to do stupid. If they continue to do stupid, firing more guns without protection, the more hearing loss they experience. Another thing people tend to think is that hearing is ‘on’ or ‘off’ but the truth is hearing loss is a gradual process that 99.9% of people cannot gauge the subtle losses until it get really bad and its too late. Its bad enough your hearing gets worse just from getting old but to willfully fire guns without protection it is stupid. If only I was not so stupid when I was younger… sigh…

    In my military experience we had sergeants that would have us shoot our practice string/s, zero, etc before qualification so we would get used to what it would be like in war. Unfortunately for me and so many others, we experienced hearing loss at an early age and it could have been avoided. Yes there are times when you will not have time to put on protection (self defense, LEO, military, etc) but NEVER EVER willfully choose to NOT put on hearing protection if you can. Why? Because its just stupid!

    Most people don’t know that ear plugs do not provide enough protection when firing guns. Ear muffs cover the whole ear and the area behind the ear which provides even more protection. IOW if you just use ear plugs you can still experience hearing loss because the area behind the ear is not protected. So there are clearly some pros and cons of earplugs versus ear muffs.

    Ear plugs can be reusable and small in size. They are simple to use, less expensive than muffs, and more comfortable in hot or damp work areas. On the negative side, they provide less protection than a good set of ear muffs, and should not be used in areas having noise levels over 105 dBA (did you get that?). They must be properly inserted to provide adequate protection. Fact remains when shooting firearms ear plugs are not suited for that activity.

    Now ear muffs can be made with heavier materials and different sizes. The deeper and heavier the dome, the greater the low-frequency attenuation provided. Ear muffs usually provide greater protection than plugs, although this is not always true if they are not used correctly. They are easier to fit, generally more durable than plugs, and they have replaceable parts. On the negative side, they are more expensive, and often less comfortable than plugs. So for new shooters I always recommend ear muffs and if shooting high caliber rifles, I recommend both plugs and muffs.

    Now while I shoot my pistols with triple flange plugs I have started to use muffs more and more. The thing is I have already experienced so much hearing loss, have tinnitus and other problems its way too late for me but not for others (FLEE YOU FOOLS! SAVE YOURSELVES!!!). With that said, I hope others take the time to read and study about hearing loss and take the appropriate measures. At least make an informed decision.

    So when the author states… “If I don’t have time to get my hearing protection on…its not a big deal…” and “firing the rifle without ear pro isn’t any louder that any other braked rifle” I find this lacking and/or ignorant (ignorant as not knowing about something, not as an insult). Fact is the frequency that he lost is gone so there is nothing really to compare it to. So I advise even in a stalking/hunting situation you use quality electronic ear muffs with noise cancellation features. You can turn up the volume of the ambient noise levels and hear more so its easier to track game quietly. Then when you have to fire it cancels/cuts off the high level of decibels that cause hearing loss. Yea they are sometimes uncomfortable and might not look tacticool but you need to make an informed decision. Take precautions now and save your hearing… or not.

    Anyway thats my 2 cents, in the end each of us will do what we want and reap the consequences.


  • bryan

    Where does the set screw touch the AAC FH/brake? It loops like the threads and that would worry me.