.30 Cal Muzzle Rise Eliminator by Witt Machine

After a soft debut at SHOTShow 2015, Witt Machine has produced the “.30 Cal Muzzle Rise Eliminator” which purports do to exactly what it is called, eliminate muzzle rise from .30 caliber weapons. The brakes feature a nifty profile with  the usual ported chambers and an optimally opened “swiss cheese” top where the ports follow the gas’ path within the chambers.

Our New Muzzle Brake for the AR 10 style rifle has been independently tested to essentially eliminate muzzle rise for follow up shots. This brake WILL keep the barrel down during repeated firing. These are made from 416 stainless bar stock and Cerakote coating is available.

Video of it in action below:


The brake can be purchased directly from Witt Machine for a base price of $89.99. They are custom machined to order. As an added feature, they can be ordered in at least three cerakote colors.

Nathan S

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


  • robert

    I don’t understand the belief that it is necessary for there to be asymmetric ports on an AR muzzle brake. Because the action system is built directly in-line with the stock there should be no upwards torque created, unlike on an AK system that has the action above the stock. The only reason to have asymmetric ports, in my opinion, is to eliminate some dust kick up while in the prone position.

    With good body position, and extra recoil reduction from a proper muzzle brake with ports symmetric at 3 and 9 o’clock, there should be no muzzle rise anyway.

    • Dracon1201

      In theory, yes, you are right, however, most people don’t have the composition and solidity of a brick wall, so a bit of muzzle rise will occur. The ports just help with that.

      • robert

        If you look at the elastic points between the muzzle and the ground, I am looking at:

        1: The muzzle brake bending the barrel down beginning a vibration in the lowest frequency mode

        2: Pushing downwards on your support hand, which when extended does not provide a lot of vertical support, granted in proper standing slung support position you can maximize that support.

        So all I see is the barrel vibrating, and the rifle torquing around the pivot point of your shoulder. You are still being pushed backwards, so your body and rifle are going to try to pivot around your CG. The muzzle brake is going to push straight down, trying to torque the rifle in the opposite direction of your body movement. It just seems like it only serves to break your rifle weld.

        I think it would be far more effective to eek out as much efficiency in the horizontal direction, than it would be to waste potential by putting vertical vents on a brake.

        • garyolson

          In summary, the brake makes simplified assumptions about the forces involved and corrective forces. So, this will result in ineffective firearm discipline.

        • Dracon1201

          And indeed you can do that. There are many horizontal only brakes out there. I’ve found that vertical compensation reduces the amount you have to pull down as you said. It makes it more natural to point when you have to pull down less. Most people still feel muzzle rise, so a compensator just tends to help.

    • GuruOfGuns

      I doubt if there can ever be zero muzzle rise, just reduced to the point it seems manageable. There are theories everywhere and then there are people who actually get out and test these things. In a compensator it’s possible to do two things, the flat wall of the ports will cause the gasses to tend to push the rifle forwards, the ports above the center line will tend to deal with muzzle rise. You only have so much gasses and so much time to use them so designs will lean towards muzzle rise or recoil. In my own experiments as a right handed shooter I find if I orient the top ports towards the right side of the rifle say 15 degrees WAG the comp works better and the rifle is easier to control with the muzzle going pretty much straight up and back down. Go prone and shoot off a bipod and the ports need to be straight up and down or divided from one side to the other equally so the rifle recoils more straight up and back down.

  • dan citizen

    If this is truly zero rise it is easily tested. Lay the rifle on a rest, butt against your shoulder, and without grasping the handgrip, pull the trigger.

    If the muzzle doesn’t rise, it’s good to go.

    It does look to tame muzzle rise pretty well.

  • Panzercat

    And it will grate cheese!

  • Chase Buchanan

    I don’t want it unless and until Andrew Tuohy tests it.

  • William M Durham

    Will it work on my AR10 243 cal rifle?

  • Matt

    You are the one who’s wrong. Caliber does not mean one hundredths of an inch and .30 caliber is not only correct but the most common way you will see this written. Calibers are also written in mm form like 9mm, 10mm or 20mm. Also, the link you provide doesn’t even support your claim. From that link, “The diameter of a bore of a gun USUALLY expressed in hundredths OR THOUSANDTHS of an inch..” (emphasis added)

    • Crumbo

      So, caliber isn’t a unit of measure itself, it’s a concept then. Specifying mm means the units are millimeters and the absence of a specified unit means that inches are the implied units. Does this match your understanding of caliber?

      • Matt

        Yes. Caliber is essentially just the diameter of the bullet or the diameter of the bore.

        • ostiariusalpha

          The issue can be confusing. The word caliber comes from a latin root meaning “measure,” from which we also get the terms caliper & calibrate. The problem is that a caliber is also an imperial unit that is in fact 1/100 of an inch. No one else in the world uses imperial except the US (and colloquially in Britain), so we’re the only ones that run into this problem.

    • Crumbo

      Do you believe one way is more correct? Writing “30 caliber” without a decimal point or “.30 caliber” with a decimal point? I see them both commonly used but I believed the word caliber implied the decimal point, thus it would be doublespeak to use the decimal point.

      • Matt

        I don’t think either way is really incorrect. It may be somewhat unnecessary to add the decimal because it is somewhat implied unless you specify mm, but then again you wouldn’t really say 9 mm caliber. Some people might say a 556 caliber when that is actually 5.56x45mm. Usually if it is in millimeters you just wouldn’t say caliber with it even though it is still the caliber of the weapon or the round. Write it however you prefer I guess.

  • GuruOfGuns

    A .003 or three thousands of an inch bore diameter would be pretty tiny. Before criticizing others work you might want to check yourself.

    • Crumbo

      Yup, three thousandths of an inch is a ridiculous diameter for a bullet, hence my post pointing it out. 30 caliber means 30/100ths of an inch. to