The Smuzzle sound suppressing muzzle brake.The US Army’s Latest “Invention “


The Big Brains at one of the Army’s many tax dollar wasting centers has cooked up another great idea for the future replacement of the M4 ( snicker).

Engineers at the U.S. Army’s CCDC Armaments Center have designed a firearm sound suppressor that incorporates the features of a high-performance muzzle brake.

Known as the smuzzle, this hybrid device limits the muzzle climb of automatic and semi-automatic weapons while simultaneously providing significant sound suppression.

The Smuzzle’s flow-through design features asymmetric venting through tiny holes which researchers claim results in a 50% drop in volume at the shooter and a 25% reduction in the flash signature downrange with a minimal weight increase. They also incorporated a feature they refer to as a “bottom blocker” which reduces how much dust is kicked up.

The initial design work comes from a muzzle device for a 155mm Howitzer, but they say it is scalable you any caliber. The team has manufactured multiple devices based on this technology; they’ve made short and light cans (.8 pounds) with the design, and longer three-pound versions.

In these two photos, you can see the Smuzzle mounted to a 6.8mm Next-Gen Squad Weapon Technology Demonstrator. The Smuzzle is 3D printed Titanium and incorporates a bore evacuator.

This weapon was used by Army researchers to establish a baseline during the early stages of the NGSW program. It’s important to note that this demonstrator was manufactured by Textron and based on years of development under the Lightweight Small Arms Technology project of the Joint Service Small Arms Program. It fires Case Telescope ammunition.

Its refinement has included the use of sophisticated engineering techniques including computational fluid dynamics modeling and the center’s state-of-the-art testing equipment.

The size, weight, and durability of the device are tailorable, ie., its manufacture is adaptable.

Prototypes for the NATO 7.62mm and 6.8mm cartridges have been constructed using titanium and/or Inconel 718 steel. 3D printing techniques have also been successfully used.

Based on this research, they have two patents:
U.S. Patent 10,598,458 (33)
U.S. Patent 9,347,727


  1. ‘50% reduction….’

    Um, they know how the log scale works, right? Pretty sure that translates into only a 3 dBA reduction in noise for the shooter.

  2. New? WTF? Anyone looked at the muzzle brake on the original AR-10, lately?

    I swear to God, all these people need to be fired and replaced with people that actually read history books and know what’s gone on before.

    This whole NGSW program is just a re-hash of the BS that got us the exquisitely appropriate 7.62 NATO and the equally useful M14. And, I predict it will end in similar terms–Much money spent, the taxpayer raped anally, and not a single effective “improved” weapon in the hands of the troops.

    What they need to do is get that Knight’s MG going in something just a little bit bigger than the 7.62 NATO (but not that gawdawful .338 BS that nobody is gonna be able to hump on foot…), and a truly PIP M4 in something a bit more “oomphy” than the 5.56 “Oops, we set a new NATO standard by accident”.

    The NGSW stuff is based on a false premise of “Overmatch”, which isn’t even well-defined as a term. It makes about as much sense as the “Battle Rifle” bullshit the gun rags created out of whole cloth back in the 1980s, and which I now see infesting everything in the official sources.

    I still want to see a defined term for “Overmatch”, and what they think is gonna happen with it all. Do they foresee a ratcheting escalation of small arms ammo, between us and the equally ill-defined “threat”? Will we match them, when they inevitably try to “Overmatch” us, like some turn-of-the-century battle between naval procurement agencies? Where does that fucking stupidity end? When we’re saddling the troops with single-shot 20mm rifles that can penetrate Level 8 plates?

    This whole thing lacks even a rudimentary theoretical basis, so far as I can see. Milley basically just said “Me wan more bigguh gun. Mo dakka is betta fo wah. No idea how will use… Mo dakka…”.

    Frankly, the dudes intellectual achievements make me think he’d fit in just fine with the Orks…

    • Now, now Kirk.
      Be realistic, think of the promotions,the second careers with industry, the chance to make points with your peers in ambition and ignorance.
      It’s a win/win for the people that matter!

  3. “use of sophisticated engineering techniques including computational fluid dynamics modeling”

    All comments on the validity of the rest of the project aside this is exactly what we need in the silencer and muzzle break world. Less Bubbas tinkering around in their basement charging you hundreds of dollars for what’s basically a machinist’s fantasy and more actual hydrodynamics behind the designs. Send the project off to a couple universities and see what they come up with.

    • I’ve been reading the occasional paper on the use of CFD in silencer design since, oh, the mid-90’s.

      It isn’t as easy as some would think – ie, ‘if we only used CFD and modern computer modeling, we could invent a really quiet suppressor.” Hmmm, not as quickly or compactly as people might hope. It’s one of those things that reminds me of “if Colt would only use CNC, they could make a Python for $800…”

      Part of the problem in suppressor design is instrumenting a suppressor to find out what in the heck is actually going on in there. The second part of the problem is that volume is one of the variables that matters most, and volume is what suppressor buyers don’t want to use – mostly because they either don’t want a 18″ long tube hanging off the end of their rifle, or they don’t want to try to sight around a can the diameter of an oil filter.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here