View Full Version : AR for use with suppressor
Robinson
10-28-2023, 01:36 PM
Okay so I have pretty much decided to just go with a 16" lightweight carbine and have a suppressor mount installed. I know it will be front-heavy, but it will also suppress nicely.
My question is, how much does the gas system matter for suppressor use? I've read that a mid length gas system will be better all around and especially for use with a suppressor. I'd like to hear opinions on that from members here if you don't mind.
A was looking at a Colt 16" M4 EPR today but the carbine length gas system gave me pause. I think Colt's 6960 uses a mid length gas system?
Since I dropped the idea of a 14.5" barrel I will probably purchase a complete carbine. The Colt Trooper 6960 and the BCM Recce 16 LW are what I am looking at so far. Any opinions on those rifles? A lightweight carbine sounds better for use with a suppressor, but I do wonder if the balance front to back will actually be better with a standard weight carbine.
WobblyPossum
10-28-2023, 02:24 PM
The Colt CR6960 is the CCU Carbine except with an A2 pistol grip and M4 buttstock instead of the Magpul parts the CCU had. It still has the mid-length gas system. It also uses a lighter weight barrel than the typical government profile barrel in a 6920. To answer your primary question, a longer gas system should make shooting suppressed more pleasant because it would decrease the amount of gas you’d be getting in your face compared to a shorter gas system. A carbine gas system already increases wear and tear on the gun compared to a longer one just due to how much more gas is being pushed through the gas tube into the action. Adding a suppressor generally increases that amount of gas into the action. A flow through suppressor would help mitigate that.
I’m a big fan of the BCM lightweight profile barrels and, all things being equal, would take a lightweight barrel over a government or other heavier profile barrel. The AR I put together for my girlfriend uses a BCM ELW-F 14.5” barrel with the original magnesium alloy KMR rail. The only 16” AR I currently have has an ELW 16” BCM barrel and MCMR rail. The balance with a suppressor is something only you can decide for yourself but there are some general principles about leverage that apply. The farther out from your core you hang an extra 8-16 oz you have to hold up, the heavier it will feel. Put the same suppressor on a 16” government profile gun and a 11.5” government profile gun and it’ll feel lighter on the shorter one. If you have a chance to try out someone else’s lightweight, suppressed 16” gun, that would get you better info than anything anyone could tell you about it, especially if you could compare it to a similar gun but with a heavier barrel. There’s also less of a reason to buy a full-size suppressor if it’s going on a 16” gun. Most K cans should be able to drop the decibel level below 140 on a 16” gun. A shorter, lighter suppressor will make a difference in balance and handling. I still wouldn’t shoot a 16” 5.56 rifle without ear pro, but you’d be adding additional weight and length for diminishing returns in sound reduction by buying a larger suppressor.
Wake27
10-28-2023, 02:26 PM
Okay so I have pretty much decided to just go with a 16" lightweight carbine and have a suppressor mount installed. I know it will be front-heavy, but it will also suppress nicely.
My question is, how much does the gas system matter for suppressor use? I've read that a mid length gas system will be better all around and especially for use with a suppressor. I'd like to hear opinions on that from members here if you don't mind.
A was looking at a Colt 16" M4 EPR today but the carbine length gas system gave me pause. I think Colt's 6960 uses a mid length gas system?
Since I dropped the idea of a 14.5" barrel I will probably purchase a complete carbine. The Colt Trooper 6960 and the BCM Recce 16 LW are what I am looking at so far. Any opinions on those rifles? A lightweight carbine sounds better for use with a suppressor, but I do wonder if the balance front to back will actually be better with a standard weight carbine.
I'm a bit confused by what you consider standard weight vs light weight for the rifle. All other factors being equal, midlength will be better suppressed, but it doesn't seem that those other factors will be equal. What suppressor are you going to use? That and the gas port on the barrel itself are probably the two biggest determining factors for gas blow back.
FWIW, you likely couldn't pay me to use a 16" government profile barrel with a suppressor, regardless of carbine vs mid. Where did you work through the thought process of 14.5 vs 16?
JSGlock34
10-28-2023, 02:41 PM
I have run my 10.3" Geissele URG almost entirely suppressed (with an AAC M4-2000) - and it is quite reliable. I think the suppressed shorties are simultaneously on the rougher end of the reliability envelope yet one of the more thoroughly tested and vetted setups over the past 20 years. Still, I suspect that mid-length gas is easier on the gun over the long term. I'd certainly go with mid-length over carbine gas with a 16" gun.
But I think the far more important decision is the can. Were I investing in a suppressor today, I would prioritize one of the flow-through designs. And on a 16" gun I'd look for a 'K' or 'Mini' model.
Robinson
10-28-2023, 04:20 PM
I'm a bit confused by what you consider standard weight vs light weight for the rifle. All other factors being equal, midlength will be better suppressed, but it doesn't seem that those other factors will be equal. What suppressor are you going to use? That and the gas port on the barrel itself are probably the two biggest determining factors for gas blow back.
FWIW, you likely couldn't pay me to use a 16" government profile barrel with a suppressor, regardless of carbine vs mid. Where did you work through the thought process of 14.5 vs 16?
I'm not entirely dead set against 14.5" guns. I would need to buy the complete upper separately and send it away to have my suppressor mount permanently installed. Buying a 16" gun avoids that extra step since a local gunsmith can do a normal install.
The next reason is I already have damaged hearing and a 16" gun will be a little quieter than a 14.5" gun -- I'm not sure how much.
My suppressor is a SilencerCo Omega 300. SilencerCo rates it at 130.1 dB for 5.56, but I don't know what barrel length they used to determine that.
As for weight, I am comparing a BCM Recce 16 LW at 5.8 lbs vs a Colt M4 EPR 16 at 6.5 lbs. If the Colt 6960 Trooper uses a lighter weight barrel (as WobblyPossum posted) then it might be closer to the Recce LW in weight but I don't know.
I'm not entirely dead set against 14.5" guns. I would need to buy the complete upper separately and send it away to have my suppressor mount permanently installed. Buying a 16" gun avoids that extra step since a local gunsmith can do a normal install.
The next reason is I already have damaged hearing and a 16" gun will be a little quieter than a 14.5" gun -- I'm not sure how much.
My suppressor is a SilencerCo Omega 300. SilencerCo rates it at 130.1 dB for 5.56, but I don't know what barrel length they used to determine that.
As for weight, I am comparing a BCM Recce 16 LW at 5.8 lbs vs a Colt M4 EPR 16 at 6.5 lbs. If the Colt 6960 Trooper uses a lighter weight barrel (as WobblyPossum posted) then it might be closer to the Recce LW in weight but I don't know.
As an owner of one of the first Omegas I would urge you to consider a dedicated 5.56 can with lower back pressure.
Cans have come a long way in the 10 years since the Omega came out and most “Do it all cans” are comprises. OK doable for occasionally use but for dedicated to use you want a dedicated can.
Robinson
10-28-2023, 05:02 PM
As an owner of one of the first Omegas I would urge you to consider a dedicated 5.56 can with lower back pressure.
Cans have come a long way in the 10 years since the Omega came out and most “Do it all cans” are comprises. OK doable for occasionally use but for dedicated to use you want a dedicated can.
Thanks for the tip, that is good to know. I was hoping to use the can I already have since they ain't cheap and I'll have to wait on the paperwork to be processed on a new one. Plus I thought the 130.1 dB rating meant it would work well on a 5.56 AR. Sounds like there is more to consider than just the dB rating.
Okay in that case maybe I should be thinking K or Mini like JSGlock34 mentioned if I do go with a 16" gun.
Thanks for the tip, that is good to know. I was hoping to use the can I already have since they ain't cheap and I'll have to wait on the paperwork to be processed on a new one. Plus I thought the 130.1 dB rating meant it would work well on a 5.56 AR. Sounds like there is more to consider than just the dB rating.
Okay in that case maybe I should be thinking K or Mini like JSGlock34 mentioned if I do go with a 16" gun.
Specifically I found the weight and back pressure of the omega negatives on 5.56 guns.
There are newer, dedicated low back pressure cans like the huxworx and new Surefire RC3 and YHM Turbo 3. However, IME others like the SF SOCOM cans and the YHM Turbo k still have less back pressure than the omega.
Personally, I’ve had good luck with the YHM Turbo K, good enough that I bought the second one. The are “HUB”mount capable like the Omega.
Speaking of mounts IME the Sico ASR mount is problematic. I’ve had significant issues with them getting stuck.
Surefire's mounts are decent but they only fit SF and certain B&T cans and they have tight control over their IP. If you want a hub mount that will fix your fire muscle devices, you have to buy a Surefire training can and have D.Wilson cut it up and weld it to a HUB mount. It winds up costing $700 or more.
I’ve had good luck with the Dead Air Key-mo, particularly with the FCD stoner mounts. The Q Plan B is the best suppressor mount IME but the worst without a can.
Do you have a specific suppressor in mind?
Personally, I'd find a 14.5in middy BCM upper you like, preferably with the MK2 receiver, and take the pin & weld option for a Surefire muzzle brake. Then order a Surefire 5.56 suppressor of your choice to match and live happily ever after.
I'd personally go with the RC2 but you might prefer the Mini depending on your OAL preferences and how much you prioritize 'handiness' vs max suppression.
Flow-through cans are great for non-AR rifles that are tricky or impossible to tune to match the suppressor. With an AR I wouldn't bother because we've got BRT EZtune tubes, buffer weights, all kinds of stuff to use to tune it.
BCM off the shelf assembled lower. Maybe go to a VLTOR A5 but otherwise leave it alone. Use different buffer weights to match the ammo you're running and for with/without the suppressor installed.
Then an aimpoint, a decent light, and a sling and you're good to go.
WobblyPossum
10-28-2023, 05:48 PM
I'm not entirely dead set against 14.5" guns. I would need to buy the complete upper separately and send it away to have my suppressor mount permanently installed. Buying a 16" gun avoids that extra step since a local gunsmith can do a normal install.
The next reason is I already have damaged hearing and a 16" gun will be a little quieter than a 14.5" gun -- I'm not sure how much.
My suppressor is a SilencerCo Omega 300. SilencerCo rates it at 130.1 dB for 5.56, but I don't know what barrel length they used to determine that.
As for weight, I am comparing a BCM Recce 16 LW at 5.8 lbs vs a Colt M4 EPR 16 at 6.5 lbs. If the Colt 6960 Trooper uses a lighter weight barrel (as WobblyPossum posted) then it might be closer to the Recce LW in weight but I don't know.
Just an FYI, the Trooper isn’t the same gun as the 6960. There’s a Colt M4 Trooper (formerly called the 6920 Trooper) which is a regular 6920 with a shaved front sight base and the same Centurion MLock rail the 6960 has. It looks a lot like the 6960 on the outside but the Trooper has a government profile barrel with a carbine length gas system. The CR6960 has a lighter weight profile barrel and mid-length gas system.
Robinson
10-28-2023, 05:49 PM
Man this is a lot to take in. But the feedback is invaluable and I have a lot to learn so thanks guys.
So do I need an adjustable gas block for suppressor use?
Having BCM mount the attachment would be really convenient if I want a 14.5" gun, but Surefire cans are pricey.
The YHM Turbo T3 looks real interesting.
Robinson
10-28-2023, 05:52 PM
Just an FYI, the Trooper isn’t the same gun as the 6960. There’s a Colt M4 Trooper (formerly called the 6920 Trooper) which is a regular 6920 with a shaved front sight base and the same Centurion MLock rail the 6960 has. It looks a lot like the 6960 on the outside but the Trooper has a government profile barrel with a carbine length gas system. The CR6960 has a lighter weight profile barrel and mid-length gas system.
Got it, thanks. I saw some listings on the auction sites labeled Trooper CR6960, but it's common to see mistakes like that.
Wake27
10-28-2023, 06:21 PM
Man this is a lot to take in. But the feedback is invaluable and I have a lot to learn so thanks guys.
So do I need an adjustable gas block for suppressor use?
Having BCM mount the attachment would be really convenient if I want a 14.5" gun, but Surefire cans are pricey.
The YHM Turbo T3 looks real interesting.
There are a lot of aspects to a suppressor, you'll need to decide which are important to you. The ones that have the fewest compromises are at the RC2 price point or higher, so if you're looking at something cheaper, you need to figure out where its lacking and if you're ok with that. Even then, SF cans are not usually regarded as quiet.
You don't need an AGB, a gas tube from BRT's is a better option if you're stuck with a very gassy barrel and can.
Man this is a lot to take in. But the feedback is invaluable and I have a lot to learn so thanks guys.
So do I need an adjustable gas block for suppressor use?
Having BCM mount the attachment would be really convenient if I want a 14.5" gun, but Surefire cans are pricey.
The YHM Turbo T3 looks real interesting.
You need barrel with a properly sized gas port.
IME adjustable gas blocks on AR’s are a likely failure point.
To salvage in overgas barrel a better option would be a Gasport insert like the ones available from Black River tactical. The BRT adjustable gas tube would be 2nd option.
But if you’re starting from scratch, just look for something with a gas port properly sized for suppressor use.
The YHM cans are a great value.
WobblyPossum
10-28-2023, 07:23 PM
My only rifle suppressor at this moment is a YHM Turbo K. I’m quite happy with it. It brings a lot to the table at a very competitive price point: light weight and short (especially so with YHM’s new sRx adapter), hub compatible, very little back pressure compared to some other suppressors I’ve had some time on, decent sound reduction, and made by a company that’s been in the suppressor game for decades already so they’re unlikely to just go out of business. If I was buying my first 5.56 suppressor today, I’d just buy the newer Turbo K RB. My only complaint is that the Turbos are still only coming with the Phantom QD muzzle devices and mounts. I don’t like them as much as the sRx because they add a lot more weight and length. The little spring loaded collar on the Phantoms wasn’t a big selling point for me since the primary thing securing the suppressor to the mount was still tapers and threads, which is what the sRx relies on. The only thing I don’t like about the sRx flash hider is that it’s got ports all around the circumference so it can kick up more dust than something like an A2 birdcage. I understand why they designed it like that so it wouldn’t have to be timed with shims or a crush washer. I do like that it’s long enough to bring a 14.5” barrel to over 16” if pinned and welded.
I primarily use it with my 11.5” SBR but I have used it with a 16” mid-length, government profile gun and it was definitely quieter and even less gassy with the longer barrel. The weight at the end, as well as the additional length, were noticeable but not soul crushing. I have an ELW BCM 16” gun but haven’t tried it with the suppressor yet because I’ve been too lazy to swap out the A2 birdcage with the YHM sRx flash hider.
Super77
10-28-2023, 08:38 PM
When you consider the cost of a decent can and stamp, adding a stamp for an SBR and getting a 10.5-12.5” upper with gas tuned to run the suppressor 100% of the time makes a lot of sense. That way you can also have your optic and irons already zeroed on that upper. Quick, clean, and easy.
Robinson
10-28-2023, 10:21 PM
I see that Black River Tactical will install a user-supplied muzzle device on their uppers, including pin & weld on a 14.5" barrel. Does anyone have experience with or know much about BRT's uppers?
I see that Black River Tactical will install a user-supplied muzzle device on their uppers, including pin & weld on a 14.5" barrel. Does anyone have experience with or know much about BRT's uppers?
Haven't ordered an upper from them or used one, but I am very happy with the BRT EZ Tune gas tubes. Great idea and design and they work well.
That said, BRT's 14.5in barrels are ~5oz heavier than the 'enhanced lightweight' BCM options.
Wake27
10-29-2023, 06:30 AM
Haven't ordered an upper from them or used one, but I am very happy with the BRT EZ Tune gas tubes. Great idea and design and they work well.
That said, BRT's 14.5in barrels are ~5oz heavier than the 'enhanced lightweight' BCM options.
Since its a tapered profile, that may not be a bad thing. I've seen several people argue that too light of a barrel with a heavy can attached will suffer from increased barrel whip or other harmonics that may affect accuracy/consistency because of how you're changing the balance. Usually, its argued that the longer the barrel is, the more this may come into play. I'm pretty confident I've never seen any type of test for it, but it seems plausible. That said, I haven't noticed any obvious issues with throwing my full size QDC on the end of my 14.5 ELW barrel so it may be more internet speculation than anything.
FWIW, my primary "long" suppressed guns use a SOCOM barrel and Criterion Core. Have not suppressed either yet though as those cans are still in jail. I wish BCM would keep their EMW-F uppers in stock more, I've always been curious about that one.
Trigger
10-29-2023, 08:45 AM
Another issue implied but not specifically addressed is “gas to face”. Unlike a piston design, the direct impingement gas system leaks gas out the bolt carrier and receiver during firing and cycling. With a can on the barrel, this gas gets in my eyes and be very irritating.
There are various solutions intended to mitigate this problem. Gas busting charging handles, RTV sealant around charging handle, tunable gas keys, carriers with extra holes/ports to vent more gas out the ejection port and less through the back of the receiver. Adjustable gas systems help a little bit, and now reduced back pressure suppressor designs help reduce the back pressure and duration of gas pressure in the receiver area.
I will admit I struggle with gas to face (so to speak), and have not found a great solution. A low back pressure can might be the best solution, but it is also the most expensive, and means having a can in NFA jail for 10-12 months.
If anyone has a great/inexpensive solution, I’m all ears.
matt7184
10-29-2023, 09:21 AM
Another issue implied but not specifically addressed is “gas to face”. Unlike a piston design, the direct impingement gas system leaks gas out the bolt carrier and receiver during firing and cycling. With a can on the barrel, this gas gets in my eyes and be very irritating.
This is a non-issue. Most of the "gas to the face" is due to the suppressor restricting gas down the bore. With adjustable gas blocks (for piston or DI) or playing with weights/cycling in the system (BCG or Buffer or Buffer Spring) you can minimize this. The DI AR system allows you to modify these factors more than most piston systems. FWIW whether it is with my Hux FLOW cans or my traditional baffle cans, my MCXs are more gassy than my ARs with properly sized gas ports (or my uppers with adjustable gas blocks or bolt carriers).
Consider an overbored solution as well (7.62 can for a 5.56 upper). You may sacrifice sound (however most 762 cans tend to have more volume to work with due to larger size), but it also helps decrease the amount of blowback through the barrel.
JSGlock34
10-29-2023, 09:28 AM
I don't care for inhaling the gas either. Sure you can tune the gun to mitigate it, but if buying a new can, why not start with one of the lower back pressure designs? Between the HuxWrX, the KAC PRT (surely unobtanium at the moment), the Surefire RC3, or the new AAC Ranger series - it seems like most manufacturers have moved towards lessening the back pressure. It appears new military requirements for suppressors are specifying this feature - the SIG cans for the new 6.8 cartridge are reduced back pressure designs.
Wake27
10-29-2023, 09:29 AM
Another issue implied but not specifically addressed is “gas to face”. Unlike a piston design, the direct impingement gas system leaks gas out the bolt carrier and receiver during firing and cycling. With a can on the barrel, this gas gets in my eyes and be very irritating.
There are various solutions intended to mitigate this problem. Gas busting charging handles, RTV sealant around charging handle, tunable gas keys, carriers with extra holes/ports to vent more gas out the ejection port and less through the back of the receiver. Adjustable gas systems help a little bit, and now reduced back pressure suppressor designs help reduce the back pressure and duration of gas pressure in the receiver area.
I will admit I struggle with gas to face (so to speak), and have not found a great solution. A low back pressure can might be the best solution, but it is also the most expensive, and means having a can in NFA jail for 10-12 months.
If anyone has a great/inexpensive solution, I’m all ears.
What setup are you using where you struggle? You mention a bunch of possible mitigations, have none of those worked?
HeavyDuty
10-29-2023, 10:03 AM
Personally, I’ve had good luck with the YHM Turbo K, good enough that I bought the second one. The are “HUB”mount capable like the Omega.
I keep seeing recommendations for these. I’d like a dedicated can for SBR ARs, and wonder if this would be the way to go - I think there’s a newer reduced backpressure model.
I keep seeing recommendations for these. I’d like a dedicated can for SBR ARs, and wonder if this would be the way to go - I think there’s a newer reduced backpressure model.
The Turbo 3 as mentioned upthread.
HeavyDuty
10-29-2023, 10:17 AM
The Turbo 3 as mentioned upthread.
Turbo T3, or Turbo K RB? I was thinking the second.
Edit - but looking at specs, I wonder if the Turbo T3 would be a better fit because of my shorter than 14.5” carbines. I don’t want to clutter up this thread, time to research.
Another issue implied but not specifically addressed is “gas to face”. Unlike a piston design, the direct impingement gas system leaks gas out the bolt carrier and receiver during firing and cycling. With a can on the barrel, this gas gets in my eyes and be very irritating.
There are various solutions intended to mitigate this problem. Gas busting charging handles, RTV sealant around charging handle, tunable gas keys, carriers with extra holes/ports to vent more gas out the ejection port and less through the back of the receiver. Adjustable gas systems help a little bit, and now reduced back pressure suppressor designs help reduce the back pressure and duration of gas pressure in the receiver area.
I will admit I struggle with gas to face (so to speak), and have not found a great solution. A low back pressure can might be the best solution, but it is also the most expensive, and means having a can in NFA jail for 10-12 months.
If anyone has a great/inexpensive solution, I’m all ears.
A BRT gas tube is exactly what you need.
BRT's EZ Tune gas tube has a worksheet of sorts before you order, and you put in all the details; barrel length, gas system length, suppressor used, what ammo you'll use, what buffer you'll use, etc. If you're putting down that you run 5.56 all the time and it'll almost always be suppressed, they'll restrict gas flow enough that it'll probably struggle running .223 without a suppressor. But they were really good about answering emails when I ordered mine.
I've got a BRT EZ tune gas tube and a Radian Raptor-SD charging handle on my 11.5in Colt upper SBR, and it's very pleasant to shoot, even for me as a lefty rifle shooter, with a Turbo T2 or Surefire RC2 can and running 5.56.
Robinson
10-29-2023, 11:33 AM
How does one determine whether a given rifle has a gas port properly sized for suppressor use?
How does one determine whether a given rifle has a gas port properly sized for suppressor use?
Almost nothing is made from the factory with a gas system setup specifically to optimize running suppressed unless you're doing a custom build like Sionics offers.
If you have a random AR-15 in your safe and have no idea on the specs it was built with, run some weak ammo through it. If it locks back on empty, it's probably going to be very gassy when suppressed. If it needs quality ammo to run properly unsuppressed, it'll probably suppress well (see Crane spec Mk18s and many 14.5" middy's)
With that said, it's still not going to be optimized for suppression. A gas system which is optimized for suppression will not function reliably when unsuppressed.
Wake27
10-29-2023, 12:04 PM
How does one determine whether a given rifle has a gas port properly sized for suppressor use?
I wouldn't look for suppressor sized port necessarily because as TGS said, it won't function without the can. But you can pretty easily find reviews of several barrel manufacturers that tend to over-gas, general rule of thumb being that all of the cheaper ones will because they know people will run weak ammo through them. This (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tXunBDX5Gaz87BqxwNxDUlWNK9nEv-cZEQoLq2JXXrk/edit#gid=766121382) is a good resource that'll help you understand the trend that known good manufacturers use. BCM and SOLGW are good companies that prioritize solid reliability over pushing the bleeding edge of reduced gas barrels so that's a decent baseline to draw conclusions from.
wolf76
10-29-2023, 12:05 PM
It appears new military requirements for suppressors are specifying this feature - the SIG cans for the new 6.8 cartridge are reduced back pressure designs.
Indeed. NATO has developed scientific test protocols for suppressor evaulation and AEP-4785 specifically deals with measuring blowback and it's my understanding that flowthrough/extremely low backpressure supppressor designs perform better than traditional baffle suppressors in this area: https://standards.globalspec.com/std/14468718/aep-4785-vol-iii.
I live in Canada so I can't own suppressors and don't know enough about the likely different requirements/needs of US civilians vs those of NATO militaries with regards to suppressors. Based solely on considerations for reducing the negative effects associated with a pressurized bore after firing, I would go with a flowthrough/extremely low backpressure suppressor design that's been well vetted by a NATO military.
JSGlock34
10-29-2023, 12:34 PM
Indeed. NATO has developed scientific test protocols for suppressor evaulation and AEP-4785 specifically deals with measuring blowback and it's my understanding that flowthrough/extremely low backpressure supppressor designs perform better than traditional baffle suppressors in this area: https://standards.globalspec.com/std/14468718/aep-4785-vol-iii.
It was certainly a requirement for the recent British solicitation for their Ranger Regiment that resulted in the KAC KS-1 selection.
KS-1: All the gen on the British Army and Royal Marines' new rifle
(https://www.forces.net/technology/weapons-and-kit/ks-1-all-gen-british-army-and-royal-marines-new-rifle)
"With traditional suppressors, these benefits came with added consequences: rifles become fouled faster, cyclic rates increased due to retained bore pressure (causing reliability degradation) and users were exposed to significantly more toxic gasses than when unsuppressed.
Knowing these risks, the UK MOD specifically required the suppressors to perform better in all of those aspects to be considered for use."
It was certainly a requirement for the recent British solicitation for their Ranger Regiment that resulted in the KAC KS-1 selection.
KS-1: All the gen on the British Army and Royal Marines' new rifle
(https://www.forces.net/technology/weapons-and-kit/ks-1-all-gen-british-army-and-royal-marines-new-rifle)
"With traditional suppressors, these benefits came with added consequences: rifles become fouled faster, cyclic rates increased due to retained bore pressure (causing reliability degradation) and users were exposed to significantly more toxic gasses than when unsuppressed.
Knowing these risks, the UK MOD specifically required the suppressors to perform better in all of those aspects to be considered for use."
It almost embarrassing how well spec'd out that rifle is versus what our military issues. They did an awesome job with that.
If I was king for a day and could do a mid-life PIP on our Mk18s, I'd swap the RIS II for the RIS III and pop one of those KAC QDC CQB-PRT suppressors and call it good. Pretty much an ideal short range LE rifle, IMO.
JSGlock34
10-29-2023, 02:36 PM
It almost embarrassing how well spec'd out that rifle is versus what our military issues. They did an awesome job with that.
If I was king for a day and could do a mid-life PIP on our Mk18s, I'd swap the RIS II for the RIS III and pop one of those KAC QDC CQB-PRT suppressors and call it good. Pretty much an ideal short range LE rifle, IMO.
My 10.3" Geissele URG upper isn't far off from your suggestion. My AAC M4-2000 - while certainly combat tested - is yesterday's suppressor technology. Unfortunately it has always been gassy, and while I never had problems with the 51T mount, others have reported issues.
I should be posting about a newer suppressor in the coming weeks though...
110785
My 10.3" Geissele URG upper isn't far off from your suggestion. My AAC M4-2000 - while certainly combat tested - is yesterday's suppressor technology. Unfortunately it has always been gassy, and while I never had problems with the 51T mount, others have reported issues.
I should be posting about a newer suppressor in the coming weeks though..
.110783
We unfortunately issue AAC2000’s - they are decades old tech and notoriously gassy. Worse than the Omega the OP mentioned.
The 51T has been ok. I believe they’re aftermarket options for converting the older AAC cans to accommodate HUB mounts.
JSGlock34
10-29-2023, 02:49 PM
We unfortunately issue AAC2000’s - they are decades old tech and notoriously gassy. Worse than the Omega the OP mentioned.
The 51T has been ok. I believe they’re aftermarket options for converting the older AAC cans to accommodate HUB mounts.
Actually, there are OEM options now to convert the older AAC cans to HUB mounts. I alluded to this in my post - but my M4-2000 is being rebuilt to their new Ranger 5 specs. HUB mount and less back pressure. My cans are at AAC now for the work and should be back soon. Supposedly they've improved the 51T adapter as well if you want to use the legacy muzzle device.
AAC Restoration Program (https://advanced-armament.com/restoration-program/)
LittleLebowski
10-29-2023, 03:00 PM
Okay so I have pretty much decided to just go with a 16" lightweight carbine and have a suppressor mount installed. I know it will be front-heavy, but it will also suppress nicely.
My question is, how much does the gas system matter for suppressor use? I've read that a mid length gas system will be better all around and especially for use with a suppressor. I'd like to hear opinions on that from members here if you don't mind.
A was looking at a Colt 16" M4 EPR today but the carbine length gas system gave me pause. I think Colt's 6960 uses a mid length gas system?
Since I dropped the idea of a 14.5" barrel I will probably purchase a complete carbine. The Colt Trooper 6960 and the BCM Recce 16 LW are what I am looking at so far. Any opinions on those rifles? A lightweight carbine sounds better for use with a suppressor, but I do wonder if the balance front to back will actually be better with a standard weight carbine.
Adjustable gas block is what you seek.
LittleLebowski
10-29-2023, 03:01 PM
My 10.3" Geissele URG upper isn't far off from your suggestion. My AAC M4-2000 - while certainly combat tested - is yesterday's suppressor technology. Unfortunately it has always been gassy, and while I never had problems with the 51T mount, others have reported issues.
I should be posting about a newer suppressor in the coming weeks though...
Have that AAC recored by Ecco. Lose weight, lose back pressure.
Robinson
10-29-2023, 03:12 PM
Almost nothing is made from the factory with a gas system setup specifically to optimize running suppressed unless you're doing a custom build like Sionics offers.
If you have a random AR-15 in your safe and have no idea on the specs it was built with, run some weak ammo through it. If it locks back on empty, it's probably going to be very gassy when suppressed. If it needs quality ammo to run properly unsuppressed, it'll probably suppress well (see Crane spec Mk18s and many 14.5" middy's)
With that said, it's still not going to be optimized for suppression. A gas system which is optimized for suppression will not function reliably when unsuppressed.
Thank you. How crucial is this aspect with a reduced blowback suppressor.
I am tempted to just go with a Colt CR6960 and a YMH Turbo K RB. Set it up and see how it works, adjust from there. Probably around $1600. With sights or an optic still under $2K.
Any thoughts on the Sig Romeo 5? Though I might just use irons to start.
I am tempted to just go with a Colt CR6960 and a YMH Turbo K RB. Set it up and see how it works, adjust from there. Probably around $1600. With sights or an optic still under $2K.
I think that's a fantastic COTS option if you don't want to register an SBR or deal with a pinned and welded 14.5" barrel. I haven't shot a Turbo K-RB so I can't comment on how much of a difference it would make, but it should work nicely regardless. I haven't seen much on the K-RB comparing the blowback, whereas there's videos out already which show a substantial difference in blowback between the Surefire RC2 and RC3. I've been thinking about supplementing my Turbo K with a K-RB, myself...but I'm just sort of waiting it out to see what the market brings since 1) I already have 3 suppressors, and 2) the flow through designs are really just starting to takeover, so who knows what might come out in the short term.
As much as I'd like a KAC or Surefire RC3, I think the YHM cans are the best bang for the buck in the industry and I can't really find a reason to buy anything except the YHM cans until you cross the line of getting into the KAC and Surefire world for organizational duty use.
I adapted my Turbo K to the Griffin Plan-A before they came out with their sRx mount. I'd strongly suggest getting the sRx off the bat, as the taper mount systems save a noticeable amount of length and weight compared to the YHM QD. WobblyPossum
Suppressors are one of those things where it's really easy to want to chase the new hotness since it's a rapidly evolving industry....but it's also painful because by the time your can gets out of jail, something newer and better has already come out. I don't think you ou can go wrong with the 6960 and a Turbo K-RB, though. :cool:
I don't care for inhaling the gas either. Sure you can tune the gun to mitigate it, but if buying a new can, why not start with one of the lower back pressure designs? Between the HuxWrX, the KAC PRT (surely unobtanium at the moment), the Surefire RC3, or the new AAC Ranger series - it seems like most manufacturers have moved towards lessening the back pressure. It appears new military requirements for suppressors are specifying this feature - the SIG cans for the new 6.8 cartridge are reduced back pressure designs.
Because you're always going to sacrifice total suppression and flash suppression with any current-gen flow-through can - though I can't speak for the bleeding-edge new stuff like the Surefire RC3 and YHM HF because I haven't shot one yet. The Huxwrx stuff is cool but they're heavy and expensive and generally less effective than a similar size/weight can that isn't a flow-through design.
Yes, there's a bunch of smarter people than me working on trying to have that proverbial cake and eat it too with new suppressor designs. But as others have mentioned, it's such a rapidly evolving industry that it's hard to pick a time to jump in. Which is why I'd suggest something 100% sorted and proven even if it's a few steps behind the cutting edge.
I haven't seen or shot any flow through cans that really knocked my socks off, especially for the cost, and honestly I see the current crop of available Huxwrx/etc sort of flow through cans as the best choice for un-tuneable hosts where the choice is a less effective suppressor or no suppressor at all.
When it's an AR and I've got tons of options to tune it to suit - Just get a YHM Turbo T2 or T3 and tune accordingly, IMHO.
WobblyPossum
10-29-2023, 05:17 PM
Like I mentioned earlier, I’m a fan of both the Turbo and the sRx mounting system. I think the only YHM suppressor currently coming with the sRx out of the box is the Fat Cat though so you’ll have to buy the adapter and muzzle devices separately. I’ve been trying to find some comparisons between the Fat Cat and Turbo K RB but not much has come up. TFB posted this (https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2023/09/09/yhm-5-56-turbo-vs-fat-cat/) last month but there’s not a ton of information there.
Trigger
10-29-2023, 05:54 PM
What setup are you using where you struggle? You mention a bunch of possible mitigations, have none of those worked?
So I’m fully on board with adjustable gas blocks, and tuning the rifle to use the minimum gas to function. Two settings, one for suppressed, the other unsuppressed. But after the gas has cycled the bolt carrier, unlocked and retracted the bolt, the spent gas has to go somewhere.
I have a JP SCR-11 and it has a closed rear upper receiver combined with a side charging handle. No gas to face, and gas vents out the carrier vent holes before the gas tube unlocks from the gas key, and mostly out the ejection port after the gas key separates from the gas tube.
I’m also on board with mid length and rifle length gas systems to delay unlocking the action until later in the bullet travel down the barrel, to take advantage of a softer part of the peak pressure curve.
But I still think there are ways to vent the spent gas sideways out the carrier vent holes and ejection port, rather than allowing it to escape rearward around the charging handle, or downward into the magazine and dirtying all the rounds in the mag yet to be fired. I think Lantac and LMT are onto something with more gas vent holes on the side of the carrier. I read about the Dutch carrier on their AR-10s which had a longer gas key tube, thereby keeping waste gas out of the action longer in the firing cycle, while pressure drops further, and venting more out the carrier ports and less into the upper receiver.
Ideally I’d like a gas system which uses the gas to cycle the action, and then vents it neatly, rather than spraying it all over the interior on the action and shooter. Oh, and I’d like fries with that, too.
Robinson
10-29-2023, 05:55 PM
I love this place. You all have turned this into an awesome thread.
Actually, there are OEM options now to convert the older AAC cans to HUB mounts. I alluded to this in my post - but my M4-2000 is being rebuilt to their new Ranger 5 specs. HUB mount and less back pressure. My cans are at AAC now for the work and should be back soon. Supposedly they've improved the 51T adapter as well if you want to use the legacy muzzle device.
AAC Restoration Program (https://advanced-armament.com/restoration-program/)
About what's that cost?
I have a buddy at work that wants out of the NFA game. He has an AAC 556. Is there any way it makes sense if I get it cheap off him just to send it off to the AAC resto program?
Evil_Ed
10-29-2023, 06:37 PM
So I’m fully on board with adjustable gas blocks, and tuning the rifle to use the minimum gas to function. Two settings, one for suppressed, the other unsuppressed. But after the gas has cycled the bolt carrier, unlocked and retracted the bolt, the spent gas has to go somewhere.
I have a JP SCR-11 and it has a closed rear upper receiver combined with a side charging handle. No gas to face, and gas vents out the carrier vent holes before the gas tube unlocks from the gas key, and mostly out the ejection port after the gas key separates from the gas tube.
I’m also on board with mid length and rifle length gas systems to delay unlocking the action until later in the bullet travel down the barrel, to take advantage of a softer part of the peak pressure curve.
But I still think there are ways to vent the spent gas sideways out the carrier vent holes and ejection port, rather than allowing it to escape rearward around the charging handle, or downward into the magazine and dirtying all the rounds in the mag yet to be fired. I think Lantac and LMT are onto something with more gas vent holes on the side of the carrier. I read about the Dutch carrier on their AR-10s which had a longer gas key tube, thereby keeping waste gas out of the action longer in the firing cycle, while pressure drops further, and venting more out the carrier ports and less into the upper receiver.
Ideally I’d like a gas system which uses the gas to cycle the action, and then vents it neatly, rather than spraying it all over the interior on the action and shooter. Oh, and I’d like fries with that, too.
There's a company that makes a replacement for the forward assist that's basically a vent / dump tube iirc, found it - https://www.tiogaarms.com/ar-gas-vent/. It doesn't work as a forward assist anymore, and I'm not sure of its efficacy...
helothar
10-29-2023, 06:38 PM
About what's that cost?
I have a buddy at work that wants out of the NFA game. He has an AAC 556. Is there any way it makes sense if I get it cheap off him just to send it off to the AAC resto program?
Ecco machine does it for $195
https://www.eccomachine.net/suppressor-mount-conversions/
Trigger
10-29-2023, 06:41 PM
There's a company that makes a replacement for the forward assist that's basically a vent / dump tube iirc, found it - https://www.tiogaarms.com/ar-gas-vent/. It doesn't work as a forward assist anymore, and I'm not sure of its efficacy...
I’ll look into that. I’ll admit it would be hilarious to put a toot-whistle in that forward assist handle just to piss off my friends at the gun range. . . .
Trigger
10-29-2023, 06:45 PM
Ecco machine does it for $195
https://www.eccomachine.net/suppressor-mount-conversions/
I had Ecco re-machine my two M4-2000s to the HUB standard. Breathed new life into cans I was not using, because the 51t brakes always allowed the cans to work loose. They did great work, and I highly recommend.
LittleLebowski
10-29-2023, 07:02 PM
Love my Turbo K on my AUG.
LittleLebowski
10-29-2023, 07:02 PM
I had Ecco re-machine my two M4-2000s to the HUB standard. Breathed new life into cans I was not using, because the 51t brakes always allowed the cans to work loose. They did great work, and I highly recommend.
Such an easy decision. I’d do this in a second if I had an old AAC can.
JSGlock34
10-29-2023, 07:16 PM
About what's that cost?
I have a buddy at work that wants out of the NFA game. He has an AAC 556. Is there any way it makes sense if I get it cheap off him just to send it off to the AAC resto program?
The cost is quite close to the new cans - and that's the prohibitive aspect of this program. There's very little savings here and I do not think it makes much sense for the situation you propose. If you don't already have an AAC can it makes more sense just to buy one. I even think there's a free tax stamp promotion on the Ranger series right now. Or buy a different brand - the new AAC cans seem to be getting positive reviews but they're hardly the name they once were.
For me - I had a can that I had used for nearly a decade before recently discovering that the baffle and spacer was busted. The original AAC was sold by Kevin Brittingham, purchased by Remington/Freedom Group, went into bankruptcy, and is apparently now back under PSA ownership (to include making the M4-2000 for military customers again). This gets me an essentially new can (the Ranger with HUB mount), with a new warranty, and no new tax stamp or paperwork (which is a bit more onerous after 41F, so that's worth some additional cost to me).
I'm hopeful this will breathe new life into some older cans I had - but I'll hold off on recommending this course until they're back in my hands and I have sent some rounds downrange. I'll certainly post when I get them back (I'll have a Ranger 5 and Ranger 7 Mini).
A friend went with the Ecco option and is pleased, though he's sending a can to AAC as well under this restoration program as well. Note that the cost difference between the AAC restoration program and the Ecco Hub conversion significantly narrows if you also have Ecco recore the suppressor.
Odin Bravo One
10-30-2023, 10:13 AM
Sorry my A-D-D won’t let read every word already posted so if this was already discussed, ignore me.
Is there a reason, other than price, that a piston based gun isn’t on the table?
I ran an 8” LWRC PSD w/AAC M4/2K for nearly 20k rounds and had but a handful of malfunctions, almost all of which can be attributed to shitty mags.
I can’t add much to this but I bought a Huxwrx flow 5.56k for my 11.5” Colt and just because, I bought an additional flash hider for my 16” Sionics pencil barrel gun.
I was worried at first that the free floated pencil barrel might not be as accurate with the can but so far I am pleased with the accuracy. What I also noticed was how the gun balanced very well with the SOPMOD stock on it and how easy the gun is to shoot. The only only time I’ve shot it at dusk, I did not notice any muzzle flash. It was also one of the lighter cans I looked at.
I am very pleased with the setup.
Robinson
10-30-2023, 12:46 PM
Sorry my A-D-D won’t let read every word already posted so if this was already discussed, ignore me.
Is there a reason, other than price, that a piston based gun isn’t on the table?
I ran an 8” LWRC PSD w/AAC M4/2K for nearly 20k rounds and had but a handful of malfunctions, almost all of which can be attributed to shitty mags.
This is the first time a piston gun has been brought up in the thread. To be honest, it hadn't even crossed my mind.
This will be a learning exercise for me as much as anything, so I don't know if I should be considering a piston gun or not. Some things I've read make it sound like they are clearly superior, other things that say they aren't that much better than a DI gun. I don't know enough to answer the question. Does the piston make a big difference when shooting suppressed?
And yeah price enters into the equation for me. I'd like to do this for around $2K all in if I can, even if I have to start with irons and add a red dot sight later.
LittleLebowski
10-30-2023, 01:05 PM
About what's that cost?
I have a buddy at work that wants out of the NFA game. He has an AAC 556. Is there any way it makes sense if I get it cheap off him just to send it off to the AAC resto program?
Send him to Ecco. Seriously.
https://www.eccomachine.net/
Evil_Ed
10-30-2023, 07:08 PM
About what's that cost?
I have a buddy at work that wants out of the NFA game. He has an AAC 556. Is there any way it makes sense if I get it cheap off him just to send it off to the AAC resto program?
It costs $700 - so about the cost of a new can...which is effectively what you're getting, without the long NFA wait, and $200 stamp on top. As far as I know they'll upgrade the 556SD as well. If you go to the contact form on their page, they'll answer your questions; you're not locked into an RMA unless you agree with what you read.
I just sent my M4-2000 mod 8 in to be redone; the time quoted to me was 3-5 weeks. They're essentially cutting off the can above and below the serial number, and rebuilding it with newer tech. The mail I got from the tech service guy at AAC was that the baffles will be machined/welded vs the current stamped/welded, there's much less backpressure with the new baffles and configuration, but the tradeoff is it'll be a dB or two louder at the muzzle. Since that's a discernment most humans can't detect, I'm not worried about it. The tone will also change, but from what I'm hearing, it'll change for the better. I'll find out myself in another month or so.
The two big (other than the backpressure) things that really make the AAC rework attractive is that the baffles are sized for 6mm, so it'll be a lot more tolerant of SBR that may not fully stabilize the round before it exits (this is why the Surefire SOCOM-SB2 exists)...and it'll basically refresh AAC's warranty on the can - it'll now be covered by the new AAC if things go sideways. Plus it opens things up to allowing it to be used on .243, etc. It's still full-auto rated, so on so forth...things probably important to military customers, not so important to little old me.
You CAN do the Ecco thing - they do excellent work and I was considering that before AAC popped back up on the radar - but, you're not getting AAC's warranty with it (presumably Ecco's warrantying it however so that's kind of a wash), and unless you have the can totally redone with new baffles and etc to reduce blowback on it, you're not really "upgrading" the can beyond changing how it can attach. If you're going to send it off to be worked on...may as well go whole hog, you know? But that's just my opinion!
Evil_Ed
10-30-2023, 07:27 PM
This is the first time a piston gun has been brought up in the thread. To be honest, it hadn't even crossed my mind.
This will be a learning exercise for me as much as anything, so I don't know if I should be considering a piston gun or not. Some things I've read make it sound like they are clearly superior, other things that say they aren't that much better than a DI gun. I don't know enough to answer the question. Does the piston make a big difference when shooting suppressed?
And yeah price enters into the equation for me. I'd like to do this for around $2K all in if I can, even if I have to start with irons and add a red dot sight later.
People think piston guns are somehow cleaner than DI guns...not with a can on, they aren't. The only argument you could possibly make would be the piston might keep going in all the fouling for a little bit longer, maybe. The rest of the gun will get sooty as shit, same as an AR. Since I've not yet gone past 300 rounds at the range with a gun that had a can on it, "long term fouling" really hasn't been a concern...of course, I clean things when I get home. It's just as much a pain to clean a piston gun as it is an AR, maybe even worse because there's more parts to lose, and you need to scrub out the piston area and piston as well as everything else - on the AR, the bolt carrier IS the piston, and you're already there as a part of maintenance anyway. This is with an AUG, BRN-180, and FN SCAR in 308. As much as I'd like to try one of the new Sig rifles, they're all pretty expensive and I don't think they'd do anything any better than my AUGs do.
People think piston guns are somehow cleaner than DI guns...not with a can on, they aren't. The only argument you could possibly make would be the piston might keep going in all the fouling for a little bit longer, maybe. The rest of the gun will get sooty as shit, same as an AR. Since I've not yet gone past 300 rounds at the range with a gun that had a can on it, "long term fouling" really hasn't been a concern...of course, I clean things when I get home. It's just as much a pain to clean a piston gun as it is an AR, maybe even worse because there's more parts to lose, and you need to scrub out the piston area and piston as well as everything else - on the AR, the bolt carrier IS the piston, and you're already there as a part of maintenance anyway. This is with an AUG, BRN-180, and FN SCAR in 308. As much as I'd like to try one of the new Sig rifles, they're all pretty expensive and I don't think they'd do anything any better than my AUGs do.
With the new flow through cans I’d imagine both operating methods run cleaner. I know cyclic rate is much closer than it was ETA: without being suppressed.
Wake27
10-31-2023, 03:41 AM
Piston guns tend to be heavier (especially at the front which is the worst place for the weight), less modular, and more expensive. I was talked out of them early on and don’t feel like I’ve missed out at all.
Honestly the worst part about a can to me is rarely discussed - that mf’er gets super hot very fast. That’s the number one reason I don’t use it every time I shoot.
Odin Bravo One
10-31-2023, 07:11 AM
I don’t get paid to market anyone’s products anymore so I’m just tossing it out as an option. If I genuinely wanted to shoot suppressed, and I knew that was a requirement for me without dicking with gas block this, and gas system length that, a piston gun gets around many of the issues facing the end user wanting to run a muffler off their noise maker.
Evil_Ed
10-31-2023, 08:38 AM
Piston guns only partially work around the problem; by default they're almost always overgassed and not a lot of them have suppressor settings. Not until recently, anyway. I had a Colt 6940P that I actually really liked until I put a can on it. It was already overgassed, and putting a can on it (albeit a high backpressure one from like 2015) did it ZERO favors. It just got really dirty, cycled really fast, and became objectively worse. Brass was pooping out straight forward.
Steyr AUGs also didn't work all that well, same reason; it really liked beating the crap out of itself, to the point where parts would bend or break (like the bolt sleeve, or cracking/breaking the plastic supports that the rods that the guide rods on the bolt carriers slide onto, etc). Steyr came out with (or at least, finally started selling in the US) a suppressor-specific gas plug a couple of years ago that "fixed" the issues with it. I can only guess more modern rifles with adjustable gas plugs actually work better. I know the FN SCAR was still overgassed even with the gas plug in "suppressed" setting (which the manual didn't actually remark on...it just said to keep the gas plug in the 12:00 setting - source, the manual that came with my SCAR 17) - I wound up having to re-jet my SCAR to try to prevent it from beating itself up with a can on it. Mine would cycle just fine in the "suppressed" setting until I re-jetted it; now it short strokes in the suppressed setting, and cycles fine in the normal setting.
I'm sure the HuxWrx and other blow through cans work better; I'm still not sold on their efficacy as actual silencers, but I've also never heard/shot one in person. Videos of them make them seem like shrieky deflating balloons so meh?
Anyway - point is, most piston guns don't really "solve" the problem, they just move the problem to a different set of parts, and possibly make it easier to solve if the right parts exist for it.
For me - I had a can that I had used for nearly a decade before recently discovering that the baffle and spacer was busted. The original AAC was sold by Kevin Brittingham, purchased by Remington/Freedom Group, went into bankruptcy, and is apparently now back under PSA ownership (to include making the M4-2000 for military customers again). This gets me an essentially new can (the Ranger with HUB mount), with a new warranty, and no new tax stamp or paperwork (which is a bit more onerous after 41F, so that's worth some additional cost to me).
I'm hopeful this will breathe new life into some older cans I had - but I'll hold off on recommending this course until they're back in my hands and I have sent some rounds downrange. I'll certainly post when I get them back (I'll have a Ranger 5 and Ranger 7 Mini).
Thanks so much for posting this. I have an older M4-2000 that got loose and sustained an end cap strike that is a perfect candidate for this!
I don't think any supprssor is going to be efficient as a silencer on an AR-15. Problem is noise escaping out the chamber with the fired case. That's the benefit of the flow through design.
Just for conversation, my Huxwrx Flow 556K is bearable but not hearing safe on my 11.5" Colt. Even more so on my 16" gun. But we each have our own wants, I didn't want to have to mess with tuning my 16" gun to run suppressed and then change it back to run unsuppressed.
Robinson
10-31-2023, 11:36 AM
Okay so how many people contributing to this thread run a 16" (or 14.5") AR always suppressed? My guess is not that many?
My goal is to protect my hearing as much as possible without going to a ridiculous extreme. Because let's face it, the damn things are loud. My current thinking is a 16" AR with a K or Mini suppressor installed for use all the time. Is that a dumb idea considering the weight, balance, and fouling issues it brings? If it is a dumb idea, I'll need to rethink this whole thing.
Failure2Stop
10-31-2023, 11:50 AM
I highly recommend the use of a low backpressure suppressor for any semi-auto rifle.
The fallacy of pistons being better for suppressed use has be addressed numerous times in recent history.
The first thing you need to do is identify what you want out of a suppressor, and start looking at options that do those things.
If your goal is for a truly hearing safe rifle, you're not going to get there unless you're shooting subsonic ammunition.
Okay so how many people contributing to this thread run a 16" (or 14.5") AR always suppressed? My guess is not that many?
My goal is to protect my hearing as much as possible without going to a ridiculous extreme. Because let's face it, the damn things are loud. My current thinking is a 16" AR with a K or Mini suppressor installed for use all the time. Is that a dumb idea considering the weight, balance, and fouling issues it brings? If it is a dumb idea, I'll need to rethink this whole thing.
Not at all, it's a great idea. But if the gun will only ever be shot with a suppressor then if I were you I'd just go ahead and do a custom build with a gas port sized specifically for running suppressed. Or, at the very least, buy a Black River Tactical ported gas tube (the easy solution, you just put in your rifle, ammo, and suppressor and they pick the size for you).
Robinson
10-31-2023, 11:57 AM
If your goal is for a truly hearing safe rifle, you're not going to get there unless you're shooting subsonic ammunition.
Understood.
My goal is to protect my hearing as much as I can while shooting at the range, since most of it will be indoors. And because I know how obnoxious non-suppressed ARs can be to people in the next lane.
If I ever need to fire my rifle without hearing protection, so be it. But my hope is that suppressed will cause less permanent hearing damage than non-suppressed. My hearing and tinnitus are bad enough as it is.
JSGlock34 @EvilEd LittleLebowski
Any idea if ECCO can turn a Gen 2 YHM Turbo K into a Turbo K-RB? It seems like the only real difference is some extra holes in the baffles that need to be drilled out.
I'm still thinking about grabbing my work buddy's AAC 556SD just to send to ECCO or the AAC resto program. My line of thinking is whether or not the Ranger 5 is on the same quality level as the Surefire RC3. One of the reasons I don't invest in the Surefire line is because of the proprietary mounts. But if the AAC 556SD>Ranger 5 gives basically gives me a Surefire RC3 with the advantage of HUB mounting so I can put a YHM sRx on it, then that'd kind of make sense (while being able to help out my buddy). I really like the YHM cans, but it wouldn't hurt to have something that is considered duty quality in terms of durability, IR signature, flash suppression, etc.
I don't think any supprssor is going to be efficient as a silencer on an AR-15. Problem is noise escaping out the chamber with the fired case. That's the benefit of the flow through design.
Just for conversation, my Huxwrx Flow 556K is bearable but not hearing safe on my 11.5" Colt. Even more so on my 16" gun. But we each have our own wants, I didn't want to have to mess with tuning my 16" gun to run suppressed and then change it back to run unsuppressed.
Okay so how many people contributing to this thread run a 16" (or 14.5") AR always suppressed? My guess is not that many?
My goal is to protect my hearing as much as possible without going to a ridiculous extreme. Because let's face it, the damn things are loud. My current thinking is a 16" AR with a K or Mini suppressor installed for use all the time. Is that a dumb idea considering the weight, balance, and fouling issues it brings? If it is a dumb idea, I'll need to rethink this whole thing.
Understood.
My goal is to protect my hearing as much as I can while shooting at the range, since most of it will be indoors. And because I know how obnoxious non-suppressed ARs can be to people in the next lane.
If I ever need to fire my rifle without hearing protection, so be it. But my hope is that suppressed will cause less permanent hearing damage than non-suppressed. My hearing and tinnitus are bad enough as it is.
That’s why I was so shocked at SilencerCo’s claim of 130dB shooting 5.56 out of their can.
It seems almost impossibly quiet for an AR.
When I tested outdoors at the ear I was getting closer to 140-142dB from the M4-2000.
Currently I’m using an 11.5” MCX with an Omega 9k for some sound and blast mitigation knowing that I’ll get some erosion over the lifespan.
Even my 22 can on a 10/22 is loud enough indoors to make you think it ain’t working.
I’d suggest you shoot a few if possible and then decide if you want to invest in any suppressor. Most dealers around here have a few cans they will let you shoot.
LukeNCMX
10-31-2023, 12:21 PM
I have a DD 10.3 MK18 with a Huxworkx Flow 556K. It previously had a SOCOM Mini. I have literally never had an issue with backpressure with either can including full auto. I wear eye pro and I run slip2000 EWG. The rifle has an A5H4 buffer and runs like a dream with and without a can.
I don't think the Flow offers a perceptible performance improvement over the mini. I know the mini is designed for 14.5"+ guns but I never had a chance to try that setup.
Like has been mentioned before, a supersonic bullet cannot be made hearing-safe with any currently made can. If the goal is shooting without ear pro, a suppressor is not the sole solution.
IMO buy a suppressor for the improved recoil pulse, drastically reduced muzzle blast, much more comfortable to shoot around (especially indoors) better for the neighbors or as the centerpiece of a purpose-built subsonic gun (9mm/300 blackout carbine etc.).
Skip a suppressor for high round count training, reduced parts wear, weight etc.
Default.mp3
10-31-2023, 12:45 PM
Okay so how many people contributing to this thread run a 16" (or 14.5") AR always suppressed? My guess is not that many?
My goal is to protect my hearing as much as possible without going to a ridiculous extreme. Because let's face it, the damn things are loud. My current thinking is a 16" AR with a K or Mini suppressor installed for use all the time. Is that a dumb idea considering the weight, balance, and fouling issues it brings? If it is a dumb idea, I'll need to rethink this whole thing.I shoot my 14.5" with a SureFire SOCOM556-RC exclusively, but I don't use it very often these days, I usually stick with my 11.5". I personally only have run suppressed, so I don't really have a good feel for how bad weight and balance is compared to unsuppressed, but it feels okay to me. I have not really have any issues with fouling; I use an AGB on the 14.5" (MicroMOA Govnah) and a gas block insert on the 11.5" (along with LMT eBCGs and A5H2s), but I also don't clean my guns unless I have a reason to, and I've never had to due to fouling, I just throw more lube in if the gun starts feeling sluggish.
Robinson
10-31-2023, 02:05 PM
Okay let me clarify something. It is not my intention (or delusion) to have a rifle I can shoot without hearing protection at the range. I also understand that if I shoot a rifle without hearing protection, it will not be totally hearing safe even with a suppressor.
HOWEVER: shooting a suppressed rifle is much more pleasant than shooting a non-suppressed rifle. It's better for the shooter and the people the next lane over.
If I have to shoot a rifle without earpro it will suck but them's the breaks. It will be less damaging if suppressed.
I already own a suppressor that is installed on a 300 BLK bolt gun. I know what it sounds like at an indoor range and the suppressor is worth it for me. I understand that a bolt gun is quieter than an AR but using a suppressor still seems like a good idea if it is a feasible approach. The intention of this thread is to determine the feasibility of said approach and start putting the pieces of the puzzle together to end up with a combo that meets my perceived needs.
There is a bunch of great feedback in this discussion that I am very appreciative of. But I'm not sure where the idea came from that I am trying to get a "hollywood" quiet rifle that shoots supersonic rounds. That's not what I seek cuz it ain't gonna happen.
WobblyPossum
10-31-2023, 02:17 PM
Okay so how many people contributing to this thread run a 16" (or 14.5") AR always suppressed? My guess is not that many?
My goal is to protect my hearing as much as possible without going to a ridiculous extreme. Because let's face it, the damn things are loud. My current thinking is a 16" AR with a K or Mini suppressor installed for use all the time. Is that a dumb idea considering the weight, balance, and fouling issues it brings? If it is a dumb idea, I'll need to rethink this whole thing.
I think a 14.5”-16” rifle can definitely be run entirely suppressed. If I was going to do something like that, I would probably go with the 14.5” and have muzzle device permanently installed just to do everything I could to shift the balance closer to me and decrease the overall length. Then, based on how the rifle functions and recoils suppressed in its OEM configuration, I might swap out the gas tube for a BRT one of the right size and swap out the receiver extension for an A5. The heavier buffer would also help to shift the balance a tiny bit away from the front. An A5H2 and Sprinco Green spring would be a good place to start and then you could get an A5H3 or 4 if you still need additional weight to counter the increased gas into the action. As TGS said, another option is to build a gun from the ground up to be run entirely suppressed as opposed to taking a gun built to be run unsuppressed and fiddling with it. Depends on your tolerance for fiddling with and tinkering on ARs.
Robinson
10-31-2023, 03:04 PM
I think a 14.5”-16” rifle can definitely be run entirely suppressed. If I was going to do something like that, I would probably go with the 14.5” and have muzzle device permanently installed just to do everything I could to shift the balance closer to me and decrease the overall length. Then, based on how the rifle functions and recoils suppressed in its OEM configuration, I might swap out the gas tube for a BRT one of the right size and swap out the receiver extension for an A5. The heavier buffer would also help to shift the balance a tiny bit away from the front. An A5H2 and Sprinco Green spring would be a good place to start and then you could get an A5H3 or 4 if you still need additional weight to counter the increased gas into the action. As TGS said, another option is to build a gun from the ground up to be run entirely suppressed as opposed to taking a gun built to be run unsuppressed and fiddling with it. Depends on your tolerance for fiddling with and tinkering on ARs.
So if I want to use the A5 I need the buffer, spring, lockplate, nut, and compatible extension tube right?
The goals would be to better balance the rifle and make it more tolerant of shooting with a suppressor?
WobblyPossum
10-31-2023, 03:49 PM
So if I want to use the A5 I need the buffer, spring, lockplate, nut, and compatible extension tube right?
The goals would be to better balance the rifle and make it more tolerant of shooting with a suppressor?
Correct for the most part. The A5 system uses an AR10 length receiver extension, a rifle length spring, and a buffer that’s in between a carbine and rifle buffer in length so it’s not compatible with the receiver extension parts found on most OEM rifles. You’d be able to reuse your old castlenut and possibly your end plate depending on there the stakes were, but several vendors sell the whole setup as a package. SOLGW sells it with the Sprinco Green spring and BCM has their Mk2 Recoil Mitigation System which is an A5 clone (the guy who invented the A5 now works for BCM and probably had to work around his own patent). Honestly, I’d just buy or assemble a lower receiver already using the VLTOR A5 or BCM Mk2 RMS from the get go if the goal is a gun that will only be used suppressed.
Better balancing the weight of the rifle is just a very minor byproduct and won’t be that noticeable. The increased length of travel of the spring and buffer in the A5 system spread the force of the action operating over a longer period of time and distance. This seems to have a positive effect on reliability. It’s been described as an increased reliability envelope. Specifically regarding suppressor use, the heavier buffer and extra power spring would also counteract the increased bolt carrier group speed that results from the increase in gas going back into the system caused by the suppressor. Those same characteristics also lead to more positive chambering when the gun is dirtier and drier just due to the extra mass and force acting on the BCG to close the action. Since suppressors make the gun drier and dirtier due to the increase in gas going into the action, I view that as a positive as well.
Wake27
10-31-2023, 04:27 PM
I think a 14.5”-16” rifle can definitely be run entirely suppressed. If I was going to do something like that, I would probably go with the 14.5” and have muzzle device permanently installed just to do everything I could to shift the balance closer to me and decrease the overall length. Then, based on how the rifle functions and recoils suppressed in its OEM configuration, I might swap out the gas tube for a BRT one of the right size and swap out the receiver extension for an A5. The heavier buffer would also help to shift the balance a tiny bit away from the front. An A5H2 and Sprinco Green spring would be a good place to start and then you could get an A5H3 or 4 if you still need additional weight to counter the increased gas into the action. As TGS said, another option is to build a gun from the ground up to be run entirely suppressed as opposed to taking a gun built to be run unsuppressed and fiddling with it. Depends on your tolerance for fiddling with and tinkering on ARs.
Correct for the most part. The A5 system uses an AR10 length receiver extension, a rifle length spring, and a buffer that’s in between a carbine and rifle buffer in length so it’s not compatible with the receiver extension parts found on most OEM rifles. You’d be able to reuse your old castlenut and possibly your end plate depending on there the stakes were, but several vendors sell the whole setup as a package. SOLGW sells it with the Sprinco Green spring and BCM has their Mk2 Recoil Mitigation System which is an A5 clone (the guy who invented the A5 now works for BCM and probably had to work around his own patent). Honestly, I’d just buy or assemble a lower receiver already using the VLTOR A5 or BCM Mk2 RMS from the get go if the goal is a gun that will only be used suppressed.
Better balancing the weight of the rifle is just a very minor byproduct and won’t be that noticeable. The increased length of travel of the spring and buffer in the A5 system spread the force of the action operating over a longer period of time and distance. This seems to have a positive effect on reliability. It’s been described as an increased reliability envelope. Specifically regarding suppressor use, the heavier buffer and extra power spring would also counteract the increased bolt carrier group speed that results from the increase in gas going back into the system caused by the suppressor. Those same characteristics also lead to more positive chambering when the gun is dirtier and drier just due to the extra mass and force acting on the BCG to close the action. Since suppressors make the gun drier and dirtier due to the increase in gas going into the action, I view that as a positive as well.
All of this. My SF Mini just got approved so I should have it in a few weeks. I'm more likely to run that on one of my 14.5s than my fullsize KAC QDC can, but I don't want to give the impression that I wouldn't run a full can on a full barrel.
As for flow through, I'm intrigued by the RC3 and KAC PRT cans but not in a huge rush to buy them. My BCM 14.5 with A5H2, stock spring, and standard BCG rarely feels gassy with my KAC QDC. I expect the SF cans to be more gassy, but I'll tune bolt carriers, springs, buffers, and gas tubes (probably in that order) before I jump to one of those cans most likely. At the end of the day, there are lots of things you can do but if you have a decent barrel and can, I don't know how much you really need to do. We'll see if that opinion changes when I get the SF cans in.
JSGlock34
10-31-2023, 04:35 PM
I don't think any supprssor is going to be efficient as a silencer on an AR-15. Problem is noise escaping out the chamber with the fired case. That's the benefit of the flow through design.
The other benefit we're not discussing is lessening the amount of not-so-awesome gases you're inhaling at the range. Personally, I'll give up a few dbs to inhale less carbon monoxide, ammonia, and hydrogen cyanide...
JSGlock34 @EvilEd LittleLebowski
Any idea if ECCO can turn a Gen 2 YHM Turbo K into a Turbo K-RB? It seems like the only real difference is some extra holes in the baffles that need to be drilled out.
I'm still thinking about grabbing my work buddy's AAC 556SD just to send to ECCO or the AAC resto program. My line of thinking is whether or not the Ranger 5 is on the same quality level as the Surefire RC3. One of the reasons I don't invest in the Surefire line is because of the proprietary mounts. But if the AAC 556SD>Ranger 5 gives basically gives me a Surefire RC3 with the advantage of HUB mounting so I can put a YHM sRx on it, then that'd kind of make sense (while being able to help out my buddy). I really like the YHM cans, but it wouldn't hurt to have something that is considered duty quality in terms of durability, IR signature, flash suppression, etc.
TGS - So, I don't know if there's enough data on either the Ranger 5 or the RC3 to make a comparison yet. I'm not sure such a comparison is fair to the Ranger 5; the RC3 is twice as expensive. I imagine anything with a HUB mount is going to suffer a weight and length penalty compared with competitors who use a dedicated mount, but such is the tradeoff for versatility. I do think the Ranger 5 looks promising though - mine just shipped so I'm hopeful...
If your buddy really wants out of his suppressor, the AAC restoration is a viable option that would essentially give you a new Ranger 5 or Ranger 5 Mini, but as I noted earlier I just can't see how it would be cost effective vs. buying a new can. I can't speak to Ecco Machine or YHM as I don't have any experience with either.
Okay let me clarify something. It is not my intention (or delusion) to have a rifle I can shoot without hearing protection at the range. I also understand that if I shoot a rifle without hearing protection, it will not be totally hearing safe even with a suppressor.
HOWEVER: shooting a suppressed rifle is much more pleasant than shooting a non-suppressed rifle. It's better for the shooter and the people the next lane over.
If I have to shoot a rifle without earpro it will suck but them's the breaks. It will be less damaging if suppressed.
I already own a suppressor that is installed on a 300 BLK bolt gun. I know what it sounds like at an indoor range and the suppressor is worth it for me. I understand that a bolt gun is quieter than an AR but using a suppressor still seems like a good idea if it is a feasible approach. The intention of this thread is to determine the feasibility of said approach and start putting the pieces of the puzzle together to end up with a combo that meets my perceived needs.
There is a bunch of great feedback in this discussion that I am very appreciative of. But I'm not sure where the idea came from that I am trying to get a "hollywood" quiet rifle that shoots supersonic rounds. That's not what I seek cuz it ain't gonna happen.
It was probably me that drifted it this direction. My apologies. Someone used the term silencer and I was more addressing that. As for shooting indoors, yes the suppressor will help but the noise will escape out of the action and sound pretty loud. The lack of concussion though will be worth it.
Evil_Ed
10-31-2023, 06:51 PM
If your buddy really wants out of his suppressor, the AAC restoration is a viable option that would essentially give you a new Ranger 5 or Ranger 5 Mini, but as I noted earlier I just can't see how it would be cost effective vs. buying a new can. I can't speak to Ecco Machine or YHM as I don't have any experience with either.
Oh it's very much as effective as buying a new can in a couple ways, if not more -
1) No new tax stamp, so $200 and long approval process saved right there
2) Brand new can warranty - just like a brand new can. Which it effectively is; the only re-used part is the metal ring that has the serial number and maker information on it.
3) Removing muzzle device dependency from the list of problems
The only time invested is the repair time, and at the end of it you're getting a brand new can to replace a can you're probably not using because it's so gassy, not to mention it's tied to outdated and wobbly muzzle devices.
The main reasons I'm getting my M42k done is because I want to use the thing again which is kind of annoying in it's current format, I don't want to have to keep swapping muzzle devices away from all the Keymo stuff I already have...and I don't want to deal with another form 4, fingerprints, photos, $200 I may as well have used to light cigars with, and an 8-11 month wait just for a rubber stamp and "ok, you can use this harmless metal tube now". The AAC upgrade program abrogates all of that at the cost of $700 and 3-5 weeks (other quotes on time may differ, that's just what they quoted me. For all I know they'll have it done in a week, who knows)
Also, TGS - no idea on if ECCO can upgrade or otherwise do work like that? As far as I know, they can recore and convert to HUB, but maybe they can do more...you'd need to ask them. You could contact YHM and ask, too? Maybe they can do the work in-house? Also, I'm not sure I'd directly compare the new RC3 to the AAC Ranger series; the Ranger series has at this point been around a little longer, and the RC3 was developed with some very specific customers in mind...it's more a "whole signature reduction" kind of product; IR, heat, sound, and gas mitigation...they also probably got Uncle Sugar to defray some if not most of the R&D costs, as they'll probably be the primary customer. I don't think AAC can really compete with that juggernaut :) If the R5 comes even close to the RC3 I'd consider that a "win" - for me, I'm just trying to make an otherwise unused can become useful again, without buying a whole new product and tax stamp for it. To me, it sounds like the perfect program for the old 556-AC, if AAC can even upgrade it...you should probably ask them first.
Also...if you're form 4-ing the can away from your friend in the first place, it might honestly not be worth it in that case - unless he sends it off to be upgraded while the form 4 is processing. Even then, that's iffy. Having to do a form 4 anyway kind of defeats the purpose of a lot of this for most people. If you're doing that, you may as well just buy a whole new can for your trouble, IMO. The AAC upgrade is more geared towards those of us who already have the can, want to make it more useful, and don't want to go through the tax stamp BS again when we don't strictly need to.
Evil_Ed
10-31-2023, 07:00 PM
Also, before anyone gets too deep into this...remember, the military has been running 10.3, 11.5 and 14.5 unmolested USGI carbines with cans on them (AAC M42000s, KAC M4QDs, Surefires, Ops Inc 5th models, Dead Air Sandman-Ss, probably tons more I don't know about) for decades at this point. Other than fucking around with gas ports, they haven't really done too much past that as far as I know. You don't need to go super high speed A5 buffer tube with special buffers made out of the finest spices mined from Turkish mountains, with gas tubes made out of pure diamond silica and twisted into pretzels to delay bolt unlocking, with bolt carriers crafted by gnomes in Germany with adjustable gas keys and extra-long cam pin paths in them. I won't even get into the cold hammer forged barrels with polygonal rifling and gas ports drilled in steps by hand by retired dentists, putting their decades of dental training to good use.
You can buy an off-the-shelf Colt 6920, replace the muzzle device, throw just about any can on it, and with %99 certainty it'll run just fine with nothing but lube, ammo and love for thousands of rounds.
You don't need to go nuts if you really don't want to.
Doesn't mean you shouldn't go nuts - just saying, you don't need to :)
Wake27
10-31-2023, 07:37 PM
Also, before anyone gets too deep into this...remember, the military has been running 10.3, 11.5 and 14.5 unmolested USGI carbines with cans on them (AAC M42000s, KAC M4QDs, Surefires, Ops Inc 5th models, Dead Air Sandman-Ss, probably tons more I don't know about) for decades at this point. Other than fucking around with gas ports, they haven't really done too much past that as far as I know. You don't need to go super high speed A5 buffer tube with special buffers made out of the finest spices mined from Turkish mountains, with gas tubes made out of pure diamond silica and twisted into pretzels to delay bolt unlocking, with bolt carriers crafted by gnomes in Germany with adjustable gas keys and extra-long cam pin paths in them. I won't even get into the cold hammer forged barrels with polygonal rifling and gas ports drilled in steps by hand by retired dentists, putting their decades of dental training to good use.
You can buy an off-the-shelf Colt 6920, replace the muzzle device, throw just about any can on it, and with %99 certainty it'll run just fine with nothing but lube, ammo and love for thousands of rounds.
You don't need to go nuts if you really don't want to.
Doesn't mean you shouldn't go nuts - just saying, you don't need to :)
Be a lot cooler if you did though... except for the Turkish part. They kind of suck and I prefer my spices from the islands.
JSGlock34
10-31-2023, 08:18 PM
The cost is quite close to the new cans - and that's the prohibitive aspect of this program. There's very little savings here and I do not think it makes much sense for the situation you propose. If you don't already have an AAC can it makes more sense just to buy one. I even think there's a free tax stamp promotion on the Ranger series right now.
If your buddy really wants out of his suppressor, the AAC restoration is a viable option that would essentially give you a new Ranger 5 or Ranger 5 Mini, but as I noted earlier I just can't see how it would be cost effective vs. buying a new can.
Oh it's very much as effective as buying a new can in a couple ways, if not more -
Also...if you're form 4-ing the can away from your friend in the first place, it might honestly not be worth it in that case - unless he sends it off to be upgraded while the form 4 is processing. Even then, that's iffy. Having to do a form 4 anyway kind of defeats the purpose of a lot of this for most people. If you're doing that, you may as well just buy a whole new can for your trouble, IMO. The AAC upgrade is more geared towards those of us who already have the can, want to make it more useful, and don't want to go through the tax stamp BS again when we don't strictly need to.
So, um, we're saying the exact same thing, right?
Just to reiterate, as the guy who brought up the AAC restoration option in this thread, I've got a Ranger 5 and Ranger 7 Mini on their way back to me right now.
Robinson
10-31-2023, 08:52 PM
You don't need to go nuts if you really don't want to.
Well shit, just when this thread was going so well.
:)
Robinson
10-31-2023, 09:15 PM
So is anyone running a suppressor on an AR using direct thread mount? I see YHM has direct thread mounts with wrench flats. Does that imply they can be tightened with a wrench as opposed to merely hand tightened?
Going direct thread if it's feasible might get me into a Turbo T3 instead of a Turbo K-RB.
HeavyDuty
10-31-2023, 09:20 PM
So is anyone running a suppressor on an AR using direct thread mount? I see YHM has direct thread mounts with wrench flats. Does that imply they can be tightened with a wrench as opposed to merely hand tightened?
Going direct thread if it's feasible might get me into a Turbo T3 instead of a Turbo K-RB.
What would direct thread be gaining you that would cause the change?
WobblyPossum
10-31-2023, 09:43 PM
By going direct thread you might gain a small advantage in overall length on a 16” gun but you’d be missing out on the benefits of a muzzle device. For example, a muzzle brake has been shown to act almost like a sacrificial baffle, extending the life of your suppressor by taking some of the muzzle blast. Also if you ever decide to shoot the rifle unsuppressed, you’d have no recoil or flash mitigation without a muzzle device.
Robinson
10-31-2023, 10:20 PM
What would direct thread be gaining you that would cause the change?
I just figured it would give the shortest, lightest method of attachment is all. I think WobblyPossum corrected my thinking on that.
Robinson
10-31-2023, 10:22 PM
By going direct thread you might gain a small advantage in overall length on a 16” gun but you’d be missing out on the benefits of a muzzle device. For example, a muzzle brake has been shown to act almost like a sacrificial baffle, extending the life of your suppressor by taking some of the muzzle blast. Also if you ever decide to shoot the rifle unsuppressed, you’d have no recoil or flash mitigation without a muzzle device.
Okay, gotcha.
Is a flash hider as good as a muzzle brake in that regard? With a suppressor mounted, that is.
Evil_Ed
11-01-2023, 07:06 AM
So, um, we're saying the exact same thing, right?
Just to reiterate, as the guy who brought up the AAC restoration option in this thread, I've got a Ranger 5 and Ranger 7 Mini on their way back to me right now.
I guess? My assumption was that he already owned/possessed the can to be upgraded. If there's no form 4 involved, then the upgrade is for sure worth it.
If he's got to buy the can to do the upgrade, and do a form 4 transfer, then no...not so much worth it.
Evil_Ed
11-01-2023, 07:31 AM
So is anyone running a suppressor on an AR using direct thread mount? I see YHM has direct thread mounts with wrench flats. Does that imply they can be tightened with a wrench as opposed to merely hand tightened?
Going direct thread if it's feasible might get me into a Turbo T3 instead of a Turbo K-RB.
A lot of people do; some pin/weld a can to an 11.5 or 12.5" barrel to bring a rifle to 16" so the can is permanently attached; others do it even if they don't have to because the can is dedicated to the rifle and there's zero need to quickly detach the can from the barrel, so why bother. It's got it's downsides though, including cleaning if you're never going to take the can off (if you lose a patch in the baffles, good luck). The main downside with a direct thread is every time you take it off and put it on, you may stretch the threads a bit especially if you over-torque it, and if you cross-thread it you now need to send your barrel off to be repaired, or if it can't be repaired, cut and re-threaded. That becomes a problem if it's a 16" barrel and you can't cut more without putting it in NFA territory...then you'll be forced to pin-weld a muzzle device anyway, or buy a new barrel. It would also suck if the threads aren't concentric with the bore, but that's a risk either way.
Of course, if you never take it off ever and just clean through it (Which is fine, plenty of people do), the can will probably be carbon-locked to the barrel after a thousand or two rounds anyway...may as well be welded :D
I just figured it would give the shortest, lightest method of attachment is all. I think WobblyPossum corrected my thinking on that.
It would be, for sure, both the shortest and lightest, if you direct thread a can on. The direct thread adapters are lighter than the muzzle device + adapter to connect to the muzzle device...even if it's only a few ounces, it'll still be lighter.
Okay, gotcha.
Is a flash hider as good as a muzzle brake in that regard? With a suppressor mounted, that is.
With the can attached, the only difference between them would be that a muzzle brake can act as a sacrificial blast baffle and eat some of the wear that would normally go to the blast baffle in the can. Having said that, sometimes it can have detrimental effects on sound...see Pew Science's tests of Socom RC2s, both with the 3 prong flash hider, and the Warcomp brakes - with a Warcomp installed, the can was much louder to the ear; noticeably louder. On shorter barrels, shorter than 12", a brake is probably not a bad idea to eat some of the baffle wear - just be aware of the tradeoffs. Longer than that, a flash hider is fine IMO. Otherwise - they really have no difference when a can is mounted as far as whether it'll act as a muzzle brake or not...the can isolates everything.
The Rat
11-01-2023, 07:50 AM
With the can attached, the only difference between them would be that a muzzle brake can act as a sacrificial blast baffle and eat some of the wear that would normally go to the blast baffle in the can. Having said that, sometimes it can have detrimental effects on sound...see Pew Science's tests of Socom RC2s, both with the 3 prong flash hider, and the Warcomp brakes - with a Warcomp installed, the can was much louder to the ear; noticeably louder. On shorter barrels, shorter than 12", a brake is probably not a bad idea to eat some of the baffle wear - just be aware of the tradeoffs. Longer than that, a flash hider is fine IMO. Otherwise - they really have no difference when a can is mounted as far as whether it'll act as a muzzle brake or not...the can isolates everything.
The issue with the Warcomp is the lack of labyrinth seals more than anything else. The Surefire closed tine flash hiders also lack those and have the same issue.
On shorter barrels, shorter than 12", a brake is probably not a bad idea to eat some of the baffle wear - just be aware of the tradeoffs. Longer than that, a flash hider is fine IMO.
Do you have data to support this?
Evil_Ed
11-01-2023, 08:16 AM
Do you have data to support this?
How do you mean? The shorter the barrel, the faster the blast baffle erodes from all the crap and blast that hit it; there's a ton of threads on arfcom including a long running thread photoing blast baffles at round counts on long and short barrels. Cans that mounted to brakes fared far better than cans that didn't (SOCOM RC2s in particular with the 4 tine flash hider show some hideous erosion issues at higher counts). Every manufacturer that's participated in threads like that there has said that brakes work great as sacrificial first baffles...they're also a lot cheaper and easier to swap out when they get worn.
As far as barrel length goes, that's just a SWAG on my part. I wouldn't get concerned about baffle erosion on 16" barrels, but I'd start to get worried on 11.5", and definitely worried at 10.3 if I were going to shoot it a bunch, no matter how stout the can is claimed to be.
LittleLebowski
11-01-2023, 08:51 AM
Do you have data to support this?
Sure. Chris Hansohn knows a thing or two about cans and has mentioned this to me. He's actually not a ran of brakes, but explained how they can be useful in situations like this.
LittleLebowski
11-01-2023, 08:54 AM
JSGlock34 @EvilEd LittleLebowski
Any idea if ECCO can turn a Gen 2 YHM Turbo K into a Turbo K-RB? It seems like the only real difference is some extra holes in the baffles that need to be drilled out.
I'm still thinking about grabbing my work buddy's AAC 556SD just to send to ECCO or the AAC resto program. My line of thinking is whether or not the Ranger 5 is on the same quality level as the Surefire RC3. One of the reasons I don't invest in the Surefire line is because of the proprietary mounts. But if the AAC 556SD>Ranger 5 gives basically gives me a Surefire RC3 with the advantage of HUB mounting so I can put a YHM sRx on it, then that'd kind of make sense (while being able to help out my buddy). I really like the YHM cans, but it wouldn't hurt to have something that is considered duty quality in terms of durability, IR signature, flash suppression, etc.
I have no clue, but that's some pretty cool thinking out of the box.
As far as barrel length goes, that's just a SWAG on my part. I wouldn't get concerned about baffle erosion on 16" barrels, but I'd start to get worried on 11.5", and definitely worried at 10.3 if I were going to shoot it a bunch, no matter how stout the can is claimed to be.
That's the part I'm asking if you have data on....because YHM's take is 10" is fine. They do not recommend you only use a flash hider for barrel's above >insert personal preference here<.
Evil_Ed
11-01-2023, 09:23 AM
That's the part I'm asking if you have data on....because YHM's take is 10" is fine. They do not recommend you only use a flash hider for barrel's above >insert personal preference here<.
Well, define "fine"?
"Fine" as in "if/when you wear it out we'll replace it", or fine as in "it'll never erode, we're using diamond baffles and it's impervious to high pressure particulate matter"...I can virtually guarantee you it's the former and not the latter. Tons of cans still have barrel length restrictions, for this reason.
Just because they say it's "fine" doesn't mean it won't erode the baffle; it just means the manufacturer prepared to deal with it. If you're prepared to monitor the blast baffle and send it in when it's blatantly blown out, go for it, nothing's stopping you. I'd rather look at my muzzle device and when it's flame cut, blown out, or otherwise worn to the point where I think it's not doing it's job anymore, I'll just spend the $75-$100 on a new muzzle device and keep on trucking of a good cleaning can't restore it.
Ask them about 7" barrels, see if their tune changes...nothing escapes one of those without scars. I'd also bet that the 10" barrel being "fine" is contingent on it not being on a full-auto host...then again if you're buying for a gov't entity then it doesn't really matter; you can just get a new one when you blow out the old one.
Well, define "fine"?
"Fine" as in "if/when you wear it out we'll replace it", or fine as in "it'll never erode, we're using diamond baffles and it's impervious to high pressure particulate matter"...I can virtually guarantee you it's the former and not the latter. Tons of cans still have barrel length restrictions, for this reason.
Just because they say it's "fine" doesn't mean it won't erode the baffle; it just means the manufacturer prepared to deal with it. If you're prepared to monitor the blast baffle and send it in when it's blatantly blown out, go for it, nothing's stopping you. I'd rather look at my muzzle device and when it's flame cut, blown out, or otherwise worn to the point where I think it's not doing it's job anymore, I'll just spend the $75-$100 on a new muzzle device and keep on trucking of a good cleaning can't restore it.
Ask them about 7" barrels, see if their tune changes...nothing escapes one of those without scars. I'd also bet that the 10" barrel being "fine" is contingent on it not being on a full-auto host...then again if you're buying for a gov't entity then it doesn't really matter; you can just get a new one when you blow out the old one.
I'm not sure why there's so much talking past people in this thread. Robinson asks about cans and people starting talking to him like he's an idiot that thinks he can shoot without earpro when that's never what he said he wanted to do.
Similarly, I'm asking for data about your assertion on using flash hiders below a certain barrel length. I understand that brakes can act as a sacrificial blast baffle. I also understand the sky is blue. I'm not asking about either of those, however. I asked for data about your assertion that flash hiders shouldn't be used below a certain barrel length.
If you don't have the data to back up that assertion, then you don't have the data. That's it. That's fine. That's all.
HeavyDuty
11-01-2023, 12:20 PM
I just figured it would give the shortest, lightest method of attachment is all. I think WobblyPossum corrected my thinking on that.
Makes sense. I jumped on a Turbo T3 myself, and have decided their new sRx mount system is the one for me partially due to how compact it is.
Evil_Ed
11-01-2023, 12:28 PM
I'm not sure why there's so much talking past people in this thread. Robinson asks about cans and people starting talking to him like he's an idiot that thinks he can shoot without earpro when that's never what he said he wanted to do.
Similarly, I'm asking for data about your assertion on using flash hiders below a certain barrel length. I understand that brakes can act as a sacrificial blast baffle. I also understand the sky is blue. I'm not asking about either of those, however. I asked for data about your assertion that flash hiders shouldn't be used below a certain barrel length.
If you don't have the data to back up that assertion, then you don't have the data. That's it. That's fine. That's all.
I don't have data because I didn't say that?
I said probably not a bad idea to use a brake - I didn't say "if you run a barrel shorter than X, you need to run a brake" anywhere, I don't think. It's your barrel, your can; do what you want. I know what I would do, and actually do, on my barrels and with my cans. Common sense says the shorter the barrel, the more violent the erosion effects on unprotected surfaces. There's billions of points of empirical data (sorry - this is slight hyperbole that you might decide to take literally - settle on "thousands of points") on this on every silencer forum, NFA-specific forum, reddit, facebook, arfcom, whatever. It doesn't take a PHD to realize that putting a brake on a shorter barrel will better protect your lifetime "investment" of a can, or at least string out times between maintenance and parts replacement in the can longer.
Do what you want, whatever, I'm not invested in what you decide you want to do.
I don't have data
Simple, thanks.
I run a direct thread T2 and TK on two 11.5 hosts and a third TK on a 14.5”. All work very well for me and I’m under no illusion they’re hearing safe. For the money they’re extremely appealing cans. They do make a huge difference compared to shooting unsuppressed. The TK has less back pressure due to one less baffle at the expense of being louder, not by much but it’s noticeable if not wearing ear pro. I do run all three with YHM direct thread adapter for weight savings and the shortest length possible. Bang for the buck is strong with the YHM cans in my opinion and if I encounter a problem I have faith YHM will take care of me.
I’ve reached out to ECCO and he wasn’t optimistic about upgrading the T2/TK to the T3/TK RB. I reached out to YHM and Kevin responded stating there is no option to upgrade the T2/TK to the T3/TK RB at this time. As was already mentioned, it’s easy to get caught up in the latest and greatest but in the end I think you’ll be extremely happy with a 16” or 14.5” barrel and a short K can. You may find you actually prefer it and no longer care to shoot any of your ar15 platforms without a suppressor.
I’ve reached out to ECCO and he wasn’t optimistic about upgrading the T2/TK to the T3/TK RB. I reached out to YHM and Kevin responded stating there is no option to upgrade the T2/TK to the T3/TK RB at this time. As was already mentioned, it’s easy to get caught up in the latest and greatest but in the end I think you’ll be extremely happy with a 16” or 14.5” barrel and a short K can. You may find you actually prefer it and no longer care to shoot any of your ar15 platforms without a suppressor.
By chance I happened to get a response today from YHM saying the same thing about T2/TK>T3/RB.
Unfortunate, but hopefully if they get enough inquiries they'll be able to work something out.
crosseyedshooter
11-01-2023, 03:04 PM
This thread is all over the place, but I’ll chime in and say that I’m a lefty who shoots an 11.5” and 14.5” suppressed all the time. Mine happen to be PWS piston guns and the cans are Dead Air Sandman S and K.
I’m particularly sensitive to gas blowback and chose overbored .30 cal cans for my .223 application. Some observations that may be relevant:
The S can at 17 ounces makes the 14.5” too unwieldy for me. At that point, I’d prefer to use it as a bench rifle.
The K can on an 11.5” sounds like almost no can at all. Concussion is reduced, so it’s more pleasant to shoot, but perceived sound reduction is quite minimal.
If it’s any indication of back pressure, I run the S can with gas block setting 3 (smallest port) while the K can runs on setting 2 (same setting as unsuppressed brass-cased ammo).
Even with the piston rifles, I still notice some gas coming out the ejection port, especially with the S can.
For an all-around rifle, I’d go with a mid-length 14.5” and K can. Get the proper gas port and use a heavier H3 buffer to delay the bolt opening and push more gas down the barrel. With all that said, the industry is moving towards low backpressure designs and I’m waiting on feds’ blessing for a Huxwrx Flow 556k.
By chance I happened to get a response today from YHM saying the same thing about T2/TK>T3/RB.
Unfortunate, but hopefully if they get enough inquiries they'll be able to work something out.
I wonder if they’re just too busy or if they just have zero interest? Kevin also stated “ The bore of the new Turbo T3 is the same as previous models. We achieved the reduced back pressure by making some changes to the internal baffle geometry and integrating porting to provide venting within the suppressor itself. This is not designed to be a flow-through suppressor like some others on the market but is a significant improvement over the previous generation of the Turbo T2”.
They are inexpensive enough I think I’ll just purchase a T3. Plus I could compare it to my T2
WobblyPossum
11-01-2023, 04:43 PM
I’ve thought about buying a Turbo T3 and dedicating it to my 11.5” and dedicating the Turbo K currently on the 11.5” to the 16.” I’m waiting to see if YHM decides to sell a SKU that comes with the sRx adapter so I don’t end up with a second set of Phantom muzzle devices and adapters I don’t have a use for.
By chance I happened to get a response today from YHM saying the same thing about T2/TK>T3/RB.
Unfortunate, but hopefully if they get enough inquiries they'll be able to work something out.
I’ve thought about buying a Turbo T3 and dedicating it to my 11.5” and dedicating the Turbo K currently on the 11.5” to the 16.” I’m waiting to see if YHM decides to sell a SKU that comes with the sRx adapter so I don’t end up with a second set of Phantom muzzle devices and adapters I don’t have a use for.
WobblyPossum
I wouldn’t hold my breath. Kevin also shared the following when I asked.
During our development of the Turbo line we found that using the full size Phantom adapter that ships with the Turbo provided roughly 3-4 dB's of reduction over the Kurz adapter when compared side to side due to the increase in blast chamber volume. This is the reason we chose to ship all of our Q.D. suppressors with the full size Phantom adapter and allow the consumer to decide if they'd rather have the length/weight savings the Kurz adapter provides. The same applies with our SRX system.
I wonder if they’re just too busy or if they just have zero interest? Kevin also stated “ The bore of the new Turbo T3 is the same as previous models. We achieved the reduced back pressure by making some changes to the internal baffle geometry and integrating porting to provide venting within the suppressor itself. This is not designed to be a flow-through suppressor like some others on the market but is a significant improvement over the previous generation of the Turbo T2”.
They are inexpensive enough I think I’ll just purchase a T3. Plus I could compare it to my T2
Great stuff, thanks for sharing all this.
That's interesting on the T3/RB not being a true flow through design, and one of the reasons I'd really like to see a comparison video (or metrics of some type) on the back-pressure and gas to face to the T2. For instance, with the video that TFBTV did comparing the Surefire RC2 and RC3 back to back, there's no doubt it's a significant difference....it's very dramatic. If I'm going to spend the money on another suppressor, I might as well go for an actual flow through instead of an incremental improvement.
I’ve thought about buying a Turbo T3 and dedicating it to my 11.5” and dedicating the Turbo K currently on the 11.5” to the 16.” I’m waiting to see if YHM decides to sell a SKU that comes with the sRx adapter so I don’t end up with a second set of Phantom muzzle devices and adapters I don’t have a use for.
Similarly, I've wanted a 12.5" or 13.7" gun with a lightweight barrel and DD RIS III. If the Turbo K can't be upgraded to a RB, I might do something along the lines of an extreme reduced gas port from Sionics and dedicate my current Turbo K to direct thread on the gun, and then get flow throughs for my other 3 Mk18s and Filippino MSSR.
WobblyPossum
11-01-2023, 06:00 PM
WobblyPossum
I wouldn’t hold my breath. Kevin also shared the following when I asked.
During our development of the Turbo line we found that using the full size Phantom adapter that ships with the Turbo provided roughly 3-4 dB's of reduction over the Kurz adapter when compared side to side due to the increase in blast chamber volume. This is the reason we chose to ship all of our Q.D. suppressors with the full size Phantom adapter and allow the consumer to decide if they'd rather have the length/weight savings the Kurz adapter provides. The same applies with our SRX system.
Interesting. I might reach out for some clarification. Does this mean the sRx gets you 3-4 fewer dBs of reduction than the Phantom or does this mean the short sRx muzzle device gets you 3-4 fewer dBs of reduction than the full size sRx?
Interesting. I might reach out for some clarification. Does this mean the sRx gets you 3-4 fewer dBs of reduction than the Phantom or does this mean the short sRx muzzle device gets you 3-4 fewer dBs of reduction than the full size sRx?
I took it to mean 3-4 fewer dBs when using anything other than the Phantom. I was told to expect 3-4 fewer dBs when using the YHM direct thread mount as well, which I’m fine with the trade off.
I think the Phantom is increasing the volume of the suppressor and giving better numbers due to the larger volume. Purely a guess on my part though.
Wake27
11-01-2023, 07:06 PM
Great stuff, thanks for sharing all this.
That's interesting on the T3/RB not being a true flow through design, and one of the reasons I'd really like to see a comparison video (or metrics of some type) on the back-pressure and gas to face to the T2. For instance, with the video that TFBTV did comparing the Surefire RC2 and RC3 back to back, there's no doubt it's a significant difference....it's very dramatic. If I'm going to spend the money on another suppressor, I might as well go for an actual flow through instead of an incremental improvement.
Similarly, I've wanted a 12.5" or 13.7" gun with a lightweight barrel and DD RIS III. If the Turbo K can't be upgraded to a RB, I might do something along the lines of an extreme reduced gas port from Sionics and dedicate my current Turbo K to direct thread on the gun, and then get flow throughs for my other 3 Mk18s and Filippino MSSR.
Do you have experience with/knowledge of the RIS III? The 203 hangars really pissed me off. There's a thread on ARFCOM about it but basically they block a number of forward MLOK slots. I thought about pairing mine with a 13.9 barrel but couldn't find all of the specs I wanted so mine is on a DD SOCOM 14.5 with FSB.
Do you have experience with/knowledge of the RIS III? The 203 hangars really pissed me off. There's a thread on ARFCOM about it but basically they block a number of forward MLOK slots. I thought about pairing mine with a 13.9 barrel but couldn't find all of the specs I wanted so mine is on a DD SOCOM 14.5 with FSB.
Nope, I'll have to look into that. Thanks for mentioning. Just seems like a natural progression since I already have a few RIS IIs. Come to think of it, I still have a 9" DDM4 rail lying around, too....seems like a perfect excuse to build a gun on it :)
TBH, Sionics already has a turn-key solution for what I want, and I'll probably just do that and sRx all the things instead of direct threading it just for the sake of compatibility and swapping suppressors if one platform goes down, etc.
Wake27
11-01-2023, 08:22 PM
Nope, I'll have to look into that. Thanks for mentioning. Just seems like a natural progression since I already have a few RIS IIs. Come to think of it, I still have a 9" DDM4 rail lying around, too....seems like a perfect excuse to build a gun on it :)
TBH, Sionics already has a turn-key solution for what I want, and I'll probably just do that and sRx all the things instead of direct threading it just for the sake of compatibility and swapping suppressors if one platform goes down, etc.
RIS III (https://www.ar15.com/forums/industry/New-RIII/382-300958/&page=5). The swinging arms for the 203 can be removed by a screw IIRC, but the shroud that holds the arms is riveted in so if it blocks an MLOK slot you want to use (it blocked a few for me), your only option is to drill them out. Not impossible but pretty frustrating for a rail that costs so much and has to have a tiny percent of the population with that requirement. You could also file down the MLOK screws but that seemed more tedious to me.
WobblyPossum
11-01-2023, 08:38 PM
RIS III (https://www.ar15.com/forums/industry/New-RIII/382-300958/&page=5). The swinging arms for the 203 can be removed by a screw IIRC, but the shroud that holds the arms is riveted in so if it blocks an MLOK slot you want to use (it blocked a few for me), your only option is to drill them out. Not impossible but pretty frustrating for a rail that costs so much and has to have a tiny percent of the population with that requirement. You could also file down the MLOK screws but that seemed more tedious to me.
I’ve cut down a couple screws that are too long recently. I used a dremel cutting wheel and it only took a minute. Mark where you want to cut with a sharpie and thread the screw into the nut. Use a set of pliers to hold the nut, and thus the screw, in place while you cut. If I make modifications to things, I try to modify the cheapest part I can. With the cost of the RISIII rail, I’d rather cut the screws down.
I’ve cut down a couple screws that are too long recently. I used a dremel cutting wheel and it only took a minute. Mark where you want to cut with a sharpie and thread the screw into the nut. Use a set of pliers to hold the nut, and thus the screw, in place while you cut. If I make modifications to things, I try to modify the cheapest part I can. With the cost of the RISIII rail, I’d rather cut the screws down.
You had me at Dremel…
MistWolf
11-01-2023, 11:30 PM
Let's make your life simple-
-The easiest way to tune an AR to shoot reliably suppressed and unsuppressed is don't bother. The compromises are not worth it. When shooting suppressed, recoil will be sharper than normal and the pain accumulates as you shoot. Shooting unsuppressed, the AR will extract and eject, but not lock back on an empty mag. If it locks back, it's not tuned to shoot suppressed. If you need to be able to shoot suppressed and unsuppressed, get two ARs. Set one up to shoot with a suppressor and the other without.
-Instead of suppressing a 14.5 with a pinned adaptor, go direct thread on a 16. Adaptors add cost and weight and carbon will lock them up. Just screw the suppressor directly to the muzzle and leave it there until it has to be removed for maintenance. You won't be removing the suppressor at the range because the suppressor will be too hot.
-An 11.5 inch AR handles better than a 14.5 inch. The double stamp is worth every penny.
-Adjustable gas blocks are fine for experimenting but not so good for long term reliability.
-The difference between the carbine gas system and the middy doesn't matter. Gas port diameter does. Gas port diameter is critical.
NOTE: DO NOT buy into the idea the bullet is further down the barrel before the gas pressure opens the action with a middy gas system. That's pure bullshit. The action does not start opening until after the bullet has exited the muzzle.
-The best option for shooting suppressed is a barrel ported for a suppressor. Black River Tactical is very knowledgeable about porting barrels for shooting suppressed.
-The second best option is a BRT gas tube.
-Use no buffer lighter than an H2 and none heavier than a rifle buffer. No tungsten powder. Do not use cheap action springs. Do not use an extractor spring not made by Colt or Sprinco.
-If you get a stovepipe or a spent case and a live round stuck in the action, replace the extractor spring with a spring made by Colt or Sprinco before doing anything else.
-Suppressors are not hearing safe. However, shooting suppressed does less damage to your hearing than shooting unsuppressed.
-Don't try to tune any AR to shoot all types of 5.56/223 ammo. Therein lays madness. Pick a power level and stick to it.
Robinson
11-02-2023, 08:15 AM
Let's make your life simple-
Yeah. This thread has been a blessing because of so many contributions from people that know way more than I do about the subject. On the other hand, I do see different approaches being discussed and there isn't really a consensus on what to focus on. What that tells me is that everything is a compromise of some kind, and it's up to me to come up with something I can live with.
Direct attach or flash hider? Or maybe a brake is better. But it depends on barrel length.
Adjustable gas block? Some say yes others say no.
Should probably go with a K or Mini can. But the YHM Turbo T3 isn't that much longer and heavier than the K-RB. Crap.
Putting any suppressor on a 14.5" or 16" gun will suck. Or maybe it won't.
Going with a BRT gas tube means I should probably decide on a bullet weight ahead of time and stick with it. Not sure what I should do there, could go 55gr could go 70+ grain, could go in the middle.
Literal analysis paralysis is setting in. I have a feeling I just need to start somewhere. That's why I was thinking the CR6960 with a YHM suppressor would be a reasonable starting point. I can always make some adjustments.
But I am intrigued by the BRT gas tube option. Just need to think about what ammo I am most likely to stick with, right? How hard are the things to install?
And the H2 buffer seems like a good idea that will be pretty easy to implement.
WobblyPossum
11-02-2023, 08:29 AM
I contacted YHM last night to ask if there were plans to sell the Turbo and Turbo K with sRx mounts and muzzle devices.
Here’s what I got back this morning:
Thank you for your email.
The SRX System can be added to your TK but not the Gen 1 Turbo, unfortunately.
This would require the purchase of the muzzle device and the adaptor.
At this time only the Fat Cat comes with the SRX system with the suppressor.
However, we will review your suggestion.
ETA: Robinson the CR6960 with YHM suppressor would be a fine starting point. According to that spreadsheet of gas port sizes floating around online, the CR6960 also has a gas port smaller than average for a 16” mid-length, 0.071” compared to 0.076” IIRC. That should also help mitigate the additional gas going into the action with the suppressor. Give it a try in its OEM configuration and compare how the gun runs with and without the suppressor. If you decide you’d still like to slow things down a little more, buy an H2 buffer and Sprinco Blue spring. Then you can mix and match the buffers and springs to see which combination gets the gun running how you want it to feel. The Turbo and Turbo K are fairly close in size but I’d go with the K if I knew it was going to permanently reside on a 16” rifle.
ETA2: I think the YHM site might have the wrong weights for the Turbo K RB. Check the original Turbo K and you’ll see the weight is several ounces off what is listed for the K RB. If the only difference between the previous generation and this generation of Turbos is the drilling of a few additional holes in the baffles, that shouldn’t result in an increase in weight. Might be worth contacting YHM for clarification.
HeavyDuty
11-02-2023, 08:59 AM
Yeah. This thread has been a blessing because of so many contributions from people that know way more than I do about the subject. On the other hand, I do see different approaches being discussed and there isn't really a consensus on what to focus on. What that tells me is that everything is a compromise of some kind, and it's up to me to come up with something I can live with.
Direct attach or flash hider? Or maybe a brake is better. But it depends on barrel length.
Adjustable gas block? Some say yes others say no.
Should probably go with a K or Mini can. But the YHM Turbo T3 isn't that much longer and heavier than the K-RB. Crap.
Putting any suppressor on a 14.5" or 16" gun will suck. Or maybe it won't.
Going with a BRT gas tube means I should probably decide on a bullet weight ahead of time and stick with it. Not sure what I should do there, could go 55gr could go 70+ grain, could go in the middle.
Literal analysis paralysis is setting in. I have a feeling I just need to start somewhere. That's why I was thinking the CR6960 with a YHM suppressor would be a reasonable starting point. I can always make some adjustments.
But I am intrigued by the BRT gas tube option. Just need to think about what ammo I am most likely to stick with, right? How hard are the things to install?
And the H2 buffer seems like a good idea that will be pretty easy to implement.
As an analyst, I get this. At some point you just have to step off the cliff and see if you go splat.
I would personally make very basic initial choices and tweak as needed. A CR6960 as is, YHM T3 and sRx mounting system should get you on the scoreboard - you seem to have arrived at the same place. A BRT gas tube is an easy swap if you find it’s needed.
Default.mp3
11-02-2023, 09:08 AM
Yeah. This thread has been a blessing because of so many contributions from people that know way more than I do about the subject. On the other hand, I do see different approaches being discussed and there isn't really a consensus on what to focus on. What that tells me is that everything is a compromise of some kind, and it's up to me to come up with something I can live with.
Direct attach or flash hider? Or maybe a brake is better. But it depends on barrel length.
Adjustable gas block? Some say yes others say no.
Should probably go with a K or Mini can. But the YHM Turbo T3 isn't that much longer and heavier than the K-RB. Crap.
Putting any suppressor on a 14.5" or 16" gun will suck. Or maybe it won't.
Going with a BRT gas tube means I should probably decide on a bullet weight ahead of time and stick with it. Not sure what I should do there, could go 55gr could go 70+ grain, could go in the middle.
Literal analysis paralysis is setting in. I have a feeling I just need to start somewhere. That's why I was thinking the CR6960 with a YHM suppressor would be a reasonable starting point. I can always make some adjustments.
But I am intrigued by the BRT gas tube option. Just need to think about what ammo I am most likely to stick with, right? How hard are the things to install?
And the H2 buffer seems like a good idea that will be pretty easy to implement.I haven't noticed if you've said if you plan on having the can on the gun full time as a dedicated suppressed gun, or if you plan to have it see mixed use.
I would advise getting an A5 RE if possible; outside of some extra cost and the tiny bit of extra length, there is no downside to it at all, unlike, say, an AGB or a tuned gas port.
As for carbine versus middy:
Add a suppressor into the mix and the difference becomes much more significant between the two. A carbine gas 16" barrel has more dwell than it needs as is... add a can on there and bolt speed gets to be problematic for some guns. Middy plus a can still stay very reliable, and doesn't have the extreme bolt speed issues the carbine gassed version has.
I think you're greatly underestimating the operational envelop of the BRT gas tube; you can certainly fine tune the gun to shoot only one load extremely smoothly and consistently, but it'll take much more than just tuning the gas system to get that level of granularity, and into the realm of ultralight BCGs, buffers with nothing but Delrin in them, etc. Yeah, a BRT tube that's selected to work with steel case bunny farts with your suppressor on will exhibit some mild overgassing if you start putting XM193 through it, but it will still be much better than not using the tube at all. Or maybe to get the gun to lock back on empty when using a BRT gas tube that's specced for 5.56 only with a can when shooting PMC Bronze, you'll have to go from an H3 to and H2 or H1, but that's a pretty easy ask.
Going with a BRT gas tube means I should probably decide on a bullet weight ahead of time and stick with it. Not sure what I should do there, could go 55gr could go 70+ grain, could go in the middle.
But I am intrigued by the BRT gas tube option. Just need to think about what ammo I am most likely to stick with, right?
It's not that specific for the BRT gas tube. See here for if you buy the midlength: https://blackrivertactical.com/WP/BRT-EZTUNE-Gas-Tube-Configurable-Midlength-p103167236
Ammo for the sake of "tuning" with a BRT gas tube is limited to general categories such as caliber (5.56 vs 223) and quality (such as brass case vs steel case, as steel case ammo is commonly loaded with weak garbage powder). It's not as specific as selecting a given brand of ammunition and projectile weight.
However, if what WobblyPossum shared about the reported gas port specs on the Colt 6960 is true, you should probably just shoot the rifle as-is to start out before buying the BRT gas tube. While it's 2023 and we have better mousetraps than 2003 to make shooting suppressed more enjoyable and technically efficient, there's a chance you might not even feel the need to use a ported gas tube or AGR if the gun is gassed that softly and you use a flow-through suppressor.
I would definitely agree with what's been said about muskets and suppressors vs SBRs, though. If you're at all willing to ever SBR an AR15, doing it for a suppressor host is definitely the time to do it just for the balance factor alone.
Robinson
11-02-2023, 09:30 AM
A CR6960 as is, YHM T3 and sRx mounting system should get you on the scoreboard - you seem to have arrived at the same place.
I've seen lots of conjecture on the web that the sRx system will be less effective at sound suppression than the Phantom QD system, so that is something I'm still milling around.
And I still haven't totally ruled out direct thread attachment, as it might actually make sense with a 16" barrel that will always have a suppressor mounted. But in the end a QD mount will probably win out.
Robinson
11-02-2023, 09:35 AM
I haven't noticed if you've said if you plan on having the can on the gun full time as a dedicated suppressed gun, or if you plan to have it see mixed use.
It is my intention to always shoot suppressed.
And thanks for your post.
I've seen lots of conjecture on the web that the sRx system will be less effective at sound suppression than the Phantom QD system, so that is something I'm still milling around.
Disclosure that I haven't actually converted to the sRx yet, I'm still using the Griffin Plan-A. It's very similar, just another taper mount.
I haven't been able to detect a difference under my hearing protection from shooting the can with the Phantom FH QD that I was using. I don't believe that's something WobblyPossum has observed either, at least he hasn't mentioned it. I understood the difference was between using the full-size vs mini muzzle devices due to a change in internal volume, not necessarily the sRx vs Phantom in particular.
The difference is probably academic and only measurable on equipment.
Default.mp3
11-02-2023, 09:46 AM
It is my intention to always shoot suppressed.For a dedicated suppressed gun, there is no need for an AGB, with the existence of the BRT gas tubes; the AGB is useful to change between shooting suppressed and unsuppressed, but for a dedicated gun, they are more expensive, and another possible point of failure.
A BRT gas tube should really be all you need to get good performance. An A5 would open up the operational envelop a bit, but is more of a nice to have, albeit one with only advantages and no downsides. You can also get into specific charging handles, LMT e-carriers, etc., but those start become diminishing returns if you've already dialed in your gassing.
The fallacy of pistons being better for suppressed use has be addressed numerous times in recent history.
Don't know why it took me so long to find this video as a reference for both this statement and some others regarding suppressed pistons, but I finally found it. For everyone watching, there's only 1 or 2 suppressed M4 carbines in this...the rest are M27s (16" HK416s) with KAC QDSS NT4 cans. It's noticeable on the semi-auto strings, but especially when they get to the full auto strings at the end the significant amount of gas coming out the ejection port makes it look like a 18th/19th century heavy infantry firing line with blackpowders:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n--Z1zetoks
HeavyDuty
11-02-2023, 10:18 AM
I've seen lots of conjecture on the web that the sRx system will be less effective at sound suppression than the Phantom QD system, so that is something I'm still milling around.
And I still haven't totally ruled out direct thread attachment, as it might actually make sense with a 16" barrel that will always have a suppressor mounted. But in the end a QD mount will probably win out.
I would think direct thread would be slightly less effective than sRx since it’s shorter. I would doubt it is significant.
crosseyedshooter
11-02-2023, 10:19 AM
Don't know why it took me so long to find this video as a reference for both this statement and some others regarding suppressed pistons, but I finally found it. For everyone watching, there's only 1 or 2 suppressed M4 carbines in this...the rest are M27s (16" HK416s) with KAC QDSS NT4 cans. It's noticeable on the semi-auto strings, but especially when they get to the full auto strings at the end the significant amount of gas coming out the ejection port makes it look like a 18th/19th century heavy infantry firing line with blackpowders:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n--Z1zetoks
As a lefty, just watching that video made my eyes water.
Robinson
11-02-2023, 10:37 AM
Well, here we go. I just placed an order for a Colt CR6960 mid-length carbine.
Next I will get some sights and maybe a RDS ordered.
Time to dig out my trust and see about having another can added to it. It will probably be a Turbo K-RB or a Turbo T3 with sRx mounting system. If I go K-RB I might stick with the Phantom QD system.
Might as well get an order going for the H2 buffer, spring, etc... while I'm at it.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread so far -- I appreciate all the help.
HeavyDuty
11-02-2023, 10:40 AM
Well, here we go. I just placed an order for a Colt CR6960 mid-length carbine.
Next I will get some sights and maybe a RDS ordered.
Time to dig out my trust and see about having another can added to it. It will probably be a Turbo K-RB or a Turbo T3 with sRx mounting system. If I go K-RB I might stick with the Phantom QD system.
Might as well get an order going for the H2 buffer, spring, etc... while I'm at it.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread so far -- I appreciate all the help.
Woot!
MistWolf
11-02-2023, 01:04 PM
Well, here we go. I just placed an order for a Colt CR6960 mid-length carbine.
Next I will get some sights and maybe a RDS ordered.
Time to dig out my trust and see about having another can added to it. It will probably be a Turbo K-RB or a Turbo T3 with sRx mounting system. If I go K-RB I might stick with the Phantom QD system.
Might as well get an order going for the H2 buffer, spring, etc... while I'm at it.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread so far -- I appreciate all the help.
I would also order a BRT gas tube. If the 6960 has a slightly smaller gas port than other makers, it means the larger gas ports are too big. Colt knows what it's doing.
Congrats! You've taken the first step towards new learning.
Robinson
11-02-2023, 02:08 PM
I would also order a BRT gas tube. If the 6960 has a slightly smaller gas port than other makers, it means the larger gas ports are too big. Colt knows what it's doing.
I will definitely start looking at that option seriously. I've got some time before I'll need it.
Well, here we go. I just placed an order for a Colt CR6960 mid-length carbine.
Next I will get some sights and maybe a RDS ordered.
Time to dig out my trust and see about having another can added to it. It will probably be a Turbo K-RB or a Turbo T3 with sRx mounting system. If I go K-RB I might stick with the Phantom QD system.
Might as well get an order going for the H2 buffer, spring, etc... while I'm at it.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread so far -- I appreciate all the help.
If I only had one lower, I’d seriously consider just buying a dedicated upper for unsuppressed.
I would rather just tune the whole upper and swap en bloc.
Robinson
11-02-2023, 02:50 PM
If I only had one lower, I’d seriously consider just buying a dedicated upper for unsuppressed.
I would rather just tune the whole upper and swap en bloc.
I'm going to set this gun up as a dedicated suppressor host. If I ever decide I want to shoot unsuppressed I will seriously consider just getting a second upper. On the other hand, lowers aren't really the expensive piece so I would guess some people just build two complete rifles.
I'm going to set this gun up as a dedicated suppressor host. If I ever decide I want to shoot unsuppressed I will seriously consider just getting a second upper. On the other hand, lowers aren't really the expensive piece so I would guess some people just build two complete rifles.
Depends… can get fancy with stocks and triggers, etc. It all depends on your use patterns.
My 11.5” suppressed is my favorite… so it lives on an SBR lower.
So swapping uppers on a dedicated SBR lower with the stock and trigger and tax stamp…
jeep45238
11-02-2023, 03:45 PM
Interestingly enough, this popped up on the feed today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2pipOADKFo
Eric_L
11-02-2023, 04:23 PM
MistWolf what do you think of the Sionics uppers which are build specifically for supressors? Good to go?
HeavyDuty
11-02-2023, 05:07 PM
If I only had one lower, I’d seriously consider just buying a dedicated upper for unsuppressed.
I would rather just tune the whole upper and swap en bloc.
I’m seriously thinking about trying this. I have an unfired PSA 10.5” I picked up from another member, I can tweak it to run always suppressed. But I would like to see if my other shorties can be made to run both ways.
I’m seriously thinking about trying this. I have an unfired PSA 10.5” I picked up from another member, I can tweak it to run always suppressed. But I would like to see if my other shorties can be made to run both ways.
If you have a 10" barrel with a Crane spec .070" gas port (i.e. "mil-spec" Mk18), it'll suppress well and still shoot reliably with quality 223 and 5.56 ammo when unsuppressed. The PSA has a blow-hole sized gas port to cater to the typical Poverty State Armory customer (I have one as well) and you should definitely go for a BRT gas tube if suppressing.
Wake27
11-02-2023, 06:07 PM
Depends… can get fancy with stocks and triggers, etc. It all depends on your use patterns.
Yeah my lowers end up having around $750 poured into them... and that's not counting a tax stamp or engraving.
Wake27
11-02-2023, 06:15 PM
If you have a 10" barrel with a Crane spec .070" gas port (i.e. "mil-spec" Mk18), it'll suppress well and still shoot reliably with quality 223 and 5.56 ammo when unsuppressed. The PSA has a blow-hole sized gas port to cater to the typical Poverty State Armory customer (I have one as well) and you should definitely go for a BRT gas tube if suppressing.
I need to shoot my MK18 back to back with my Super Duty 11.5. Its been a while but I remember the MK18 with E-BCG being super smooth.
HeavyDuty
11-02-2023, 07:18 PM
If you have a 10" barrel with a Crane spec .070" gas port (i.e. "mil-spec" Mk18), it'll suppress well and still shoot reliably with quality 223 and 5.56 ammo when unsuppressed. The PSA has a blow-hole sized gas port to cater to the typical Poverty State Armory customer (I have one as well) and you should definitely go for a BRT gas tube if suppressing.
That’s probably the only practical way. A hell of a lot easier than changing out the gas block.
What was that company that made the pigtail gas tubes back in the 80s or 90s? French name?
Default.mp3
11-02-2023, 11:18 PM
That’s probably the only practical way. A hell of a lot easier than changing out the gas block.
What was that company that made the pigtail gas tubes back in the 80s or 90s? French name?Tim La France did have a twin gas tube system for ultra short ARs. Concept was somewhat similar to the pigtail gas tubes, might be you're conflating the two? PRI also made "fat boy" gas tubes that was grounded behind the same theories.
HeavyDuty
11-03-2023, 09:28 AM
La Grance, that’s it. I remember that it was touted as a way of making SBRs run but didn’t recall the details.
MistWolf
11-03-2023, 09:57 AM
MistWolf what do you think of the Sionics uppers which are build specifically for supressors? Good to go?
I have no first hand experience with any Sionics AR. However, they have a reputation for good quality, getting the details right and delivering the highest customer service. They worked closely with Will Larson (RIP) who was a well trained, very experienced armorer of the AR family of weapons (and others including AK, Glock and M60) to make sure they got all the details right. Will gave Sionics his highest recommendation. Based on that, I'd be surprised if the Sionics was not good to go.
I would also order a BRT gas tube. If the 6960 has a slightly smaller gas port than other makers, it means the larger gas ports are too big. Colt knows what it's doing.
Congrats! You've taken the first step towards new learning.
I will definitely start looking at that option seriously. I've got some time before I'll need it.
Why ?
The BRT tube is great for fixing guns which have issues. You don't even have the gun yet.
Shoot the gun, then shoot it with your chosen suppressor. If it is over gassed - a BRT gas tube is a valid solution. If not, why fix something which isn't broken ?
MistWolf
11-03-2023, 10:09 AM
Why ?
The BRT tube is great for fixing guns which have issues. You don't even have the gun yet.
Shoot the gun, then shoot it with your chosen suppressor. If it is over gassed - a BRT gas tube is a valid solution. If not, why fix something which isn't broken ?
After spending time and money experimenting, my conclusion is if an AR extracts, ejects and locks back on the last round unsuppressed, it is over gassed for suppressor use. Recoil will be unnecessarily sharp and become painful after more than a few shots. Sharp recoil batters the AR unnecessarily. There's no need to put up with either situation when the solution is easy and inexpensive. Normally, I tell people shoot before modifying, ammo before accessories, but in this case I make the exception. Does that mean I think a BRT gas tube has to be installed before shooting a factory Colt AR with a suppressor? No. Shooting suppressed before installing the BRT will show what a difference proper gas flow makes.
The BRT gas tube addresses one issue- An over sized gas port. The BRT gas tube is a simple, economical and acceptable alternative to replacing an over gassed barrel.
Robinson
11-03-2023, 10:27 AM
Why ?
The BRT tube is great for fixing guns which have issues. You don't even have the gun yet.
Shoot the gun, then shoot it with your chosen suppressor. If it is over gassed - a BRT gas tube is a valid solution. If not, why fix something which isn't broken ?
To be honest, when I say I will starting looking at the option what I mean is that I will educate myself on it so that I can make a good decision when the time comes.
After spending time and money experimenting, my conclusion is if an AR extracts, ejects and locks back on the last round unsuppressed, it is over gassed for suppressor use. Recoil will be unnecessarily sharp and become painful after more than a few shots. Sharp recoil batters the AR unnecessarily. There's no need to put up with either situation when the solution is easy and inexpensive. Normally, I tell people shoot before modifying, ammo before accessories, but in this case I make the exception. Does that mean I think a BRT gas tube has to be installed before shooting a factory Colt AR with a suppressor? No. Shooting suppressed before installing the BRT will show what a difference proper gas flow makes.
The BRT gas tube addresses one issue- An over sized gas port. The BRT gas tube is a simple, economical and acceptable alternative to replacing an over gassed barrel.
I appreciate a well gassed AR, and it might even make a minor difference in split times but even the most over gassed AR in 5.56 is not “painful.”
https://youtu.be/Ah7ePVlLvLE?si=2qi_QgvzOj_eMzRr
MistWolf
11-03-2023, 04:41 PM
I appreciate a well gassed AR, and it might even make a minor difference in split times but even the most over gassed AR in 5.56 is not “painful.”
I'm not worried about split times. However, sharp recoil causes a little bit of pain with each shot and it accumulates. My first shorty AR was a 10.5 inch pistol with a huge gas port. It was so overgassed, it slapped my shoulder and stung my trigger finger. Being stubborn as a mule, I tried to power my way through it. The pain only got worse with each shot and I ended up with broken capillaries from the butt-pad. No, I'm not a tough guy and I usually only wear a tee shirt when shooting and I did go through a couple of hundred rounds each session. But it hurt even through my heavy jacket. To hell with that noise! Shooting is supposed to be fun. That started me down the road of experimenting with different gas flow (adjustable gas block), action springs, buffers, ammo and extractor springs.
You know what a factory 6920 lacks? That sharp recoil. A Colt civilian M4A1 is even softer. My factory SBR 11.5 inch Colt with an Omega suppressor is a soft shooter. To get there, I used a BRT gas port reducer in the FSB sized for shooting 100%. With a bit more tuning, I settled on a Sprinco rifle length action spring and an A5H2 (whichever one is about rifle buffer weight). The result is a soft shooting suppressed SBR.
Bottom line- Life is too short and I'm too old to shoot a sharp recoiling AR, suppressed or not.
Note that I use the terms "sharp" and "soft" recoil, not "increased" or "decreased" recoil in this discussion.
I'm not worried about split times. However, sharp recoil causes a little bit of pain with each shot and it accumulates. My first shorty AR was a 10.5 inch pistol with a huge gas port. It was so overgassed, it slapped my shoulder and stung my trigger finger. Being stubborn as a mule, I tried to power my way through it. The pain only got worse with each shot and I ended up with broken capillaries from the butt-pad. No, I'm not a tough guy and I usually only wear a tee shirt when shooting and I did go through a couple of hundred rounds each session. But it hurt even through my heavy jacket. To hell with that noise! Shooting is supposed to be fun. That started me down the road of experimenting with different gas flow (adjustable gas block), action springs, buffers, ammo and extractor springs.
You know what a factory 6920 lacks? That sharp recoil. A Colt civilian M4A1 is even softer. My factory SBR 11.5 inch Colt with an Omega suppressor is a soft shooter. To get there, I used a BRT gas port reducer in the FSB sized for shooting 100%. With a bit more tuning, I settled on a Sprinco rifle length action spring and an A5H2 (whichever one is about rifle buffer weight). The result is a soft shooting suppressed SBR.
Bottom line- Life is too short and I'm too old to shoot a sharp recoiling AR, suppressed or not.
Note that I use the terms "sharp" and "soft" recoil, not "increased" or "decreased" recoil in this discussion.
The OP is buying a factory Colt 6960. It’s a factory midlength.
Not a defective with a gas port like a porn star’s orifices.
Shoot the gun. Fix if needed. If not, needed don’t mess with it.
The idea that any gun that is functional un-suppressed must be modified sight unseen because it is presumed to be overgassed when suppressed is not a valid assumption.
The gun, ammo and suppressor are a system so all are factors. Change a factor you change the equation.
With proper choices it is possible to get a gun that is properly gassed both suppressed and unsuppressed.
Hodge is the prime example but I’ve been able to get similar results from Primary Arms house brand (Expo) barrels which are 1/4 the cost.
PSA was mentioned up thread but there are “premium” guns like Noveske which are severely over-gassed.
Going back to cans:
As stated up thread I have an Omega, I was an early adopter. TLDR that can, like the AAC M-4 2000 has significant back pressure. I’ve seen it cause malfunctions in multiple guns that ran fine with SF, YHM, and Dead Air cans.
I’d rather relegate it to bolt gun use than re-engineer my guns around a poorly designed can. Particularly when a YHM can at half the price doesn’t require the Rube-Goldberg effort.
Robinson
11-03-2023, 10:33 PM
As stated up thread I have an Omega, I was an early adopter. TLDR that can, like the AAC M-4 2000 has significant back pressure. I’ve seen it cause malfunctions in multiple guns that ran fine with SF, YHM, and Dead Air cans.
I’d rather relegate it to bolt gun use than re-engineer my guns around a poorly designed can. Particularly when a YHM can at half the price doesn’t require the Rube-Goldberg effort.
Yeah I've decided my Omega will stay on my 300 BLK bolt gun and am pretty much committed to a dedicated 5.56 suppressor -- very likely a YHM reduced blowback model.
Amazon dropped off a set of Daniel Defense fixed BUIS and a QD MLOK sling attachment today. The Colt will be in my FFL dealer's hands by Monday.
Nephrology
11-05-2023, 06:08 PM
in my experience every solution to running an AR suppressed has limits. I agree with HCM you should just shoot what you got and adjust as needed. The BRT gas tube is a great way to adjust pressure but I have also been satisfied with adjustable gas blocks and carriers. The carrier is an easy drop in solution -0 my two bootlegs work just fine.
edit: The YHM Turbo K is a great value 5.56 suppressor. I have two and will probably buy another at some point down the line.
Odin Bravo One
11-11-2023, 03:27 AM
Piston guns only partially work around the problem; by default they're almost always overgassed and not a lot of them have suppressor settings. Not until recently, anyway. I had a Colt 6940P that I actually really liked until I put a can on it. It was already overgassed, and putting a can on it (albeit a high backpressure one from like 2015) did it ZERO favors. It just got really dirty, cycled really fast, and became objectively worse. Brass was pooping out straight forward.
Steyr AUGs also didn't work all that well, same reason; it really liked beating the crap out of itself, to the point where parts would bend or break (like the bolt sleeve, or cracking/breaking the plastic supports that the rods that the guide rods on the bolt carriers slide onto, etc). Steyr came out with (or at least, finally started selling in the US) a suppressor-specific gas plug a couple of years ago that "fixed" the issues with it. I can only guess more modern rifles with adjustable gas plugs actually work better. I know the FN SCAR was still overgassed even with the gas plug in "suppressed" setting (which the manual didn't actually remark on...it just said to keep the gas plug in the 12:00 setting - source, the manual that came with my SCAR 17) - I wound up having to re-jet my SCAR to try to prevent it from beating itself up with a can on it. Mine would cycle just fine in the "suppressed" setting until I re-jetted it; now it short strokes in the suppressed setting, and cycles fine in the normal setting.
I'm sure the HuxWrx and other blow through cans work better; I'm still not sold on their efficacy as actual silencers, but I've also never heard/shot one in person. Videos of them make them seem like shrieky deflating balloons so meh?
Anyway - point is, most piston guns don't really "solve" the problem, they just move the problem to a different set of parts, and possibly make it easier to solve if the right parts exist for it.
Ok…….
I’m not here to convince anyone. If you feel that strongly about something without ever having used one, then any words of mine are not going to make anyone want to. Maybe I’d I got kick backs but alas, my opinion is only my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it.
Evil_Ed
11-11-2023, 08:24 AM
Ok…….
I’m not here to convince anyone. If you feel that strongly about something without ever having used one, then any words of mine are not going to make anyone want to. Maybe I’d I got kick backs but alas, my opinion is only my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it.
? I literally said I used piston guns repeatedly in my post and all they do is move the problem from one set of parts to another, in my experience, and gave 3 examples. Two of which are guns you can actually still buy new..and one might come back into play if Colt sacks up for it. And if they give it an adjustable gas piston...I might even be willing to give it a shot again.
Robinson
11-11-2023, 07:37 PM
Ok…….
I’m not here to convince anyone. If you feel that strongly about something without ever having used one, then any words of mine are not going to make anyone want to. Maybe I’d I got kick backs but alas, my opinion is only my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it.
Thanks for your comments on here -- a piston gun wasn't really on my radar. I'm new to the AR and I'm starting out with a DI gun but who knows where it could lead.
Odin Bravo One
11-11-2023, 09:35 PM
? I literally said I used piston guns repeatedly in my post and all they do is move the problem from one set of parts to another, in my experience, and gave 3 examples. Two of which are guns you can actually still buy new..and one might come back into play if Colt sacks up for it. And if they give it an adjustable gas piston...I might even be willing to give it a shot again.
Sorry, I meant something with actual proven field use like a 416……..
Sero Sed Serio
11-11-2023, 11:20 PM
MistWolf what do you think of the Sionics uppers which are build specifically for supressors? Good to go?
Sionics is a company run by people with a P-F-level of knowledge about the AR system that offer Model T level options, but do it right. They are my go-to recommendation for an AR done right.
Sorry, I meant something with actual proven field use like a 416……..
That video I posted shows 16" HK416s exhibiting a pretty substantial amount of backpressure/gas out the ejection port...so much so that I didn't even think it was possible for a piston gun to do that.
Was your experience entirely with the 10" models, or did you see a big difference in suppression performance between the 10" and 16" models? Also, which suppressor did you guys run, the M42000, Surefire, NT4? Something else entirely?
As another point, PFPA is attempting to get HUXWRX Flow 556Ks for their 10" LWRC M6 piston guns, specifically because of the blowback with their current Surefires. I don't have any of the experience on piston guns you do, and whether the LWRC option counts as a "proven" host on the same level as the 416...but, just figured I'd mention it.
Thanks for any insight on the above questions.
Cool Breeze
11-13-2023, 03:04 PM
That video I posted shows 16" HK416s exhibiting a pretty substantial amount of backpressure/gas out the ejection port...so much so that I didn't even think it was possible for a piston gun to do that.
Was your experience entirely with the 10" models, or did you see a big difference in suppression performance between the 10" and 16" models? Also, which suppressor did you guys run, the M42000, Surefire, NT4? Something else entirely?
As another point, PFPA is attempting to get HUXWRX Flow 556Ks for their 10" LWRC M6 piston guns, specifically because of the blowback with their current Surefires. I don't have any of the experience on piston guns you do, and whether the LWRC option counts as a "proven" host on the same level as the 416...but, just figured I'd mention it.
Thanks for any insight on the above questions.
That was painful to watch. So much gas.
Odin Bravo One
11-13-2023, 08:36 PM
My experience was limited to the 10.5”, 14.5”, 20” 416 variants, 8” & 14.5” LWRC variants w/M4-2K 51T ratchet attach, Sure-Fire QD Variants, KAC, and the SCAR variants and prescribed Sure-Fire supppressors.
I am not sure what the question is beyond that…….. is blowback a thing? Sure. I suppose. I don’t recall ever being concerned about it. I just don’t think I grasp the question……
Evil_Ed
11-17-2023, 09:28 PM
Sorry, I meant something with actual proven field use like a 416……..
You mean...like the SCAR?
And the AUG, which has been in continuous military service since 1977?
But, sure...keep on keeping on
Sig_Fiend
11-18-2023, 08:22 AM
If you have a 10" barrel with a Crane spec .070" gas port (i.e. "mil-spec" Mk18), it'll suppress well and still shoot reliably with quality 223 and 5.56 ammo when unsuppressed. The PSA has a blow-hole sized gas port to cater to the typical Poverty State Armory customer (I have one as well) and you should definitely go for a BRT gas tube if suppressing.
Speaking of poverty builds! ;) Figured I'd mention Expo Arms' 10.3 and 11.5 inch barrels (https://www.primaryarms.com/ar-15/barrels/barrel-length/10-3-in,11-5-in/brand/expo-arms) (Rosco made). They're heavy profile like the Colt "HRT" barrels. I now have 3 (2x 10.3 and 1 11.5), and each gaged at precisely .070" ports. At ~$130, they're a bargain. With Black Friday almost here, they usually drop another $20-30. I haven't run cans on them yet but, the port size has been as advertised with my sample of 3, so they should be good.
Odin Bravo One
11-18-2023, 10:51 AM
You mean...like the SCAR?
And the AUG, which has been in continuous military service since 1977?
But, sure...keep on keeping on
You betcha….
But maybe we stick to the ones no re-jetted by the end user, and nonfunctional now.
Odin Bravo One
11-18-2023, 10:54 AM
When did this place open up to the douche patrol?
When anyone on this board gets anywhere near a fraction of the the round count of experience with these systems as I managed to rack up in my 30 years of LE and SOF experience, to include the entire testing protocols for 2 of the 3 systems mentioned, wants to add value to the discussion I’m game.
Until then; I’ll leave the speculative thinking and downright dumb assery to ya’all.
It was fun while it lasted. Hopefully TLG isn’t rolling his eyes too much for how this place has turned out.
Evil_Ed
11-18-2023, 01:54 PM
When did this place open up to the douche patrol?
When anyone on this board gets anywhere near a fraction of the the round count of experience with these systems as I managed to rack up in my 30 years of LE and SOF experience, to include the entire testing protocols for 2 of the 3 systems mentioned, wants to add value to the discussion I’m game.
Until then; I’ll leave the speculative thinking and downright dumb assery to ya’all.
It was fun while it lasted. Hopefully TLG isn’t rolling his eyes too much for how this place has turned out.
Dude, I dunno what your problem is, honestly. I don't know if we're just talking past each other, or if one of us simply isn't reading the posts. Maybe it's me.
My point was - piston guns are nice but they do not solve the issue of overgassing when a can is put on the gun, not %100. Not a conventional can, anyway. The problems with it moved from one set of components to another set, but just because it's now piston driven vs what everyone likes to call DI (even if it technically isn't), doesn't mean the problems of overgassing, bolt thrust, and dirt/crud is now ameliorated.
Honestly, I don't understand what your issue is? Seriously, what's the beef?
Clusterfrack
11-18-2023, 03:47 PM
When did this place open up to the douche patrol?
You never know when someone will have the urgent need for a douche. We like to be prepared, so that's the mission of the douche patrol.
When anyone on this board gets anywhere near a fraction of the the round count of experience with these systems as I managed to rack up in my 30 years of LE and SOF experience, to include the entire testing protocols for 2 of the 3 systems mentioned, wants to add value to the discussion I’m game.
But seriously, we're glad you're here. We all appreciate your experience, and I hope you'll keep adding value.
Until then; I’ll leave the speculative thinking and downright dumb assery to ya’all.
It was fun while it lasted. Hopefully TLG isn’t rolling his eyes too much for how this place has turned out.
Yeah, it's not the same Pistol-Forum, but it's the Pistol-Forum we have. Personally, I like it being a little more open. But that does mean SMEs are going to have to repeat themselves a bit, and put up with regular folks having their say as well.
Forums are a dying breed. I'm glad PF's still alive.
You never know when someone will have the urgent need for a douche. We like to be prepared, so that's the mission of the douche patrol.
But seriously, we're glad you're here. We all appreciate your experience, and I hope you'll keep adding value.
Yeah, it's not the same Pistol-Forum, but it's the Pistol-Forum we have. Personally, I like it being a little more open. But that does mean SMEs are going to have to repeat themselves a bit, and put up with regular folks having their say as well.
Forums are a dying breed. I'm glad PF's still alive.
Hell yeah; still more helpful than anywhere else on the internet. Aside from gun stuff, I get informative discussion on everything from truck tires to fixing refrigerators to humor here. It’s my one stop shop. I absolutely appreciate the cadre here.
Lex Luthier
11-19-2023, 08:16 PM
Dude, I dunno what your problem is, honestly. I don't know if we're just talking past each other, or if one of us simply isn't reading the posts. Maybe it's me.
My point was - piston guns are nice but they do not solve the issue of overgassing when a can is put on the gun, not %100. Not a conventional can, anyway. The problems with it moved from one set of components to another set, but just because it's now piston driven vs what everyone likes to call DI (even if it technically isn't), doesn't mean the problems of overgassing, bolt thrust, and dirt/crud is now ameliorated.
Honestly, I don't understand what your issue is? Seriously, what's the beef?
The fella in question is one of our remaining SMEs. He’s a wealth of practical knowledge on this very subject. In fact, he is responsible for some of the recent positive developments in rifle suppressor tech owing to his operational experience.
I’m nobody important but I pull up a chair when he shows up so I might learn something I might have to pay to gain otherwise.
Wake27
11-19-2023, 08:27 PM
When did this place open up to the douche patrol?
When anyone on this board gets anywhere near a fraction of the the round count of experience with these systems as I managed to rack up in my 30 years of LE and SOF experience, to include the entire testing protocols for 2 of the 3 systems mentioned, wants to add value to the discussion I’m game.
Until then; I’ll leave the speculative thinking and downright dumb assery to ya’all.
It was fun while it lasted. Hopefully TLG isn’t rolling his eyes too much for how this place has turned out.
What was your experience with them in SOF? Everything I'm aware of was pretty meh and the only ones that adopted the 416 was a SMU and they didn't stick with them for long IIRC. USASOC didn't seem to be impressed enough to buy them.
What was your experience with them in SOF?
In particular, compared to the traditional DI systems.
This is us asking you to share the specifics of your knowledge, Sean. It's not us questioning the legitimacy of your Budweiser, whether you've BTDT, or whatever.
What was your experience with them in SOF? Everything I'm aware of was pretty meh and the only ones that adopted the 416 was a SMU and they didn't stick with them for long IIRC. USASOC didn't seem to be impressed enough to buy them.
The USMC was apparently impressed enough to conduct a massive "rope a dope" (m27 IAR program) to backdoor their way into 416s for all combat units....
Wake27
11-20-2023, 06:02 PM
The USMC was apparently impressed enough to conduct a massive "rope a dope" (m27 IAR program) to backdoor their way into 416s for all combat units....
I'm aware, they obviously found something they liked but SOF procurement tends to be a little more fluid and the ones that picked up any form of piston 5.56 moved on in relative short order it seems. I know of at least one CIF team that tested them back in the day that didn't think the trade offs were worth shelving their M4s. I don't pay attention to any of the other branches or subsequent cloning scene so I'm not sure if they're still in use with NSW or anyone else.
The USMC was apparently impressed enough to conduct a massive "rope a dope" (m27 IAR program) to backdoor their way into 416s for all combat units....
I don't believe suppression performance was a factor in the M27 program. The only USMC units running suppressors up until the last few years when they went to all victor units (which were mainly MARSOC and RTTs) weren't even using HK416s for said suppressor use.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.