User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:03:11 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Living on the edge...  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Here's a couple pics of the almost finished can. Pick up the spacers tomorrow and then I'm just waiting on the form 1. After that I'll get the end cap drilled and bored. http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3357_zps1c084df5.jpg http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3355_zpsa9b3f4c9.jpg Na. It's still a solvent trap. Won't touch that end cap until the form 1 is approved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:14:13 PM EDT
[#2]
Nah he is just cleaning and capturing in the solvent trap!
pdm can you share the specs on your rifle barrel and rail length? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:15:20 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How did you have him cut it? As in what OD's and for what lengths. I like the look! 1st 3" and last .9" stays at 1.500", then turn the rest to OD of 1.450", leaving a wall thickness of .050" in the turned down portion. I like the look to. Reeminds me of one of those funky Krink cans. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:16:34 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nah he is just cleaning and capturing in the solvent trap! pdm can you share the specs on your rifle barrel and rail length? The bbl and rail are both 7.5" though I may switch out to 8.5" to optimize the 300AAC cartridge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:18:44 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
<snip> Also, what ID and what part number Ti Valve retainers did you end up using??? Great work BTW The ID on the tube is 1.350" from Apogee and the info on the VS retainers is on the bottom of page 10 of this thread. Looks like their server is down right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:20:41 PM EDT
[#6]
This looks like fun. Is there anything special I need to do on eForms?
After entering the "Silencer" info, I was prompted to upload documents. Is anything other than my trust needed? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:22:07 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1st 3" and last .9" stays at 1.500", then turn the rest to OD of 1.450", leaving a wall thickness of .050" in the turned down portion. I like the look to. Reeminds me of one of those funky Krink cans. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How did you have him cut it? As in what OD's and for what lengths. I like the look! 1st 3" and last .9" stays at 1.500", then turn the rest to OD of 1.450", leaving a wall thickness of .050" in the turned down portion. I like the look to. Reeminds me of one of those funky Krink cans. You mean 1.550" or did he cut them to 1.500"? Thanks! I'm looking forward to seeing the exact weight of the turned down tube... running my program tells me that with your specs it would weigh about...11.2oz (I need to check that over and make sure i ran the correct iteration of the program though) edit other version says 11.32oz |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:25:00 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You mean 1.550" or did he cut them to 1.500"? Thanks! I'm looking forward to seeing the exact weight of the turned down tube... running my program tells me that with your specs it would weigh about...11.2oz (I need to check that over and make sure i ran the correct iteration of the program though) edit other version says 11.32oz You're correct. The original OD is 1.550. The turned portion is 1.450". Total weight is 11.475 oz. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:25:36 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This looks like fun. Is there anything special I need to do on eForms? After entering the "Silencer" info, I was prompted to upload documents. Is anything other than my trust needed? Yes. Instructions on top of page 5 of this thread. Trust and schedule of assets. Also in the Manufacture's code enter "FMI" (letter I, not number 1) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:28:47 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're correct. The original OD is 1.550. The turned portion is 1.450". Total weight is 11.475 oz. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You mean 1.550" or did he cut them to 1.500"? Thanks! I'm looking forward to seeing the exact weight of the turned down tube... running my program tells me that with your specs it would weigh about...11.2oz (I need to check that over and make sure i ran the correct iteration of the program though) edit other version says 11.32oz You're correct. The original OD is 1.550. The turned portion is 1.450". Total weight is 11.475 oz. MUAHAHAH. Matlab FTW 
1.4% Error bitches |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:36:25 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes. Instructions on top of page 5 of this thread. Trust and schedule of assets. Also in the Manufacture's code enter "FMI" (letter I, not number 1) Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This looks like fun. Is there anything special I need to do on eForms? After entering the "Silencer" info, I was prompted to upload documents. Is anything other than my trust needed? Yes. Instructions on top of page 5 of this thread. Trust and schedule of assets. Also in the Manufacture's code enter "FMI" (letter I, not number 1) Thanks! I used BigWaylons guide last night, using "FMI". I was more curious about documents. I thought I read somewhere that plans or drawings were needed? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 5:40:49 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The ID on the tube is 1.350" from Apogee and the info on the VS retainers is on the bottom of page 10 of this thread. Looks like their server is down right now. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
<snip> Also, what ID and what part number Ti Valve retainers did you end up using??? Great work BTW The ID on the tube is 1.350" from Apogee and the info on the VS retainers is on the bottom of page 10 of this thread. Looks like their server is down right now. The VS look like they have center holes in the .500" area? What did they end up being? I would use FPs over those if that is the case. Also I am having a custom SS and Ti Tube made with 1.375 ID so I have left over .325" and .410" 1.350 vs that more appropriate for 5.56 and 7.62 cans I could part the extra 1.350 retainers I have. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2014 6:37:26 PM EDT
[#13]
I know this is a little off topic on the current discussion but does anyone know where I can get a 6" long aluminum C-cell tube with internal threads on both ends? I thought that used to be an option on SD Tactical, but I didn't see it in the drop down menu. Also what is the ID and OD of the C-cell tubes?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 10:41:35 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The VS look like they have center holes in the .500" area? What did they end up being? I would use FPs over those if that is the case. Also I am having a custom SS and Ti Tube made with 1.375 ID so I have left over .325" and .410" 1.350 vs that more appropriate for 5.56 and 7.62 cans I could part the extra 1.350 retainers I have. The VS guides have an ID of .470", or about .100" over optimal for a .30 cal. I'm most likely going to do a mix of these and some FPs with a .370" bore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 11:22:53 AM EDT
[#15]
Could several freeze plugs be used as spacers if the center was all hogged out, leaving just the ring? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 11:44:06 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Could several freeze plugs be used as spacers if the center was all hogged out, leaving just the ring? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile i suppose you could. IMO sounds like to much for me i would just order the spacer material and cut it length. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 12:52:51 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i suppose you could. IMO sounds like to much for me i would just order the spacer material and cut it length. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Could several freeze plugs be used as spacers if the center was all hogged out, leaving just the ring? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile i suppose you could. IMO sounds like to much for me i would just order the spacer material and cut it length. There is not 1.350 spacer material is the problem with that approach. The steel tubs supplied with this is 1.33 and VERY heavy, I'm going to be experimenting with reducing 1.375, making a slip fitting out of 1.375, or cutting and expanding 1.315. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 4:28:48 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Could several freeze plugs be used as spacers if the center was all hogged out, leaving just the ring? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Uneeded weight |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 5:53:31 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Uneeded weight Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Could several freeze plugs be used as spacers if the center was all hogged out, leaving just the ring? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Uneeded weight It would be lighter than what's sold as spacer material, no? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 6:58:22 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be lighter than what's sold as spacer material, no? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Could several freeze plugs be used as spacers if the center was all hogged out, leaving just the ring? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Uneeded weight It would be lighter than what's sold as spacer material, no? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile It is about the same thickness. There is not great spacer material for the D tubes. The heavy 1.33 Steel tube is certainly really bad, heavy, takes up volume, aluminum is not suitable as a material. I should have 7 flashlight builds to post with the next month, 4 of mine and 3 among two other friends, all different. The biggest hangup has been perfecting the spacers, which I think I have worked out now. Today I played around with Titanium 1" OD .036" Thick that is being used on two of the C builds. In any case based on a couple experiments I think the 1.250 or 1.375 Ti tube could work for the 1.35 spacers. As far as expanding, If you cut a slit in the Ti tube lengthwise it expands 2%. On one that I partially lightened (3 holes that covered about 1/3 of the circumforence) it expanded 7% right after it was cut, so that would cover 1.250 tube if you only lightened it slight more than what I did. As far as closing the OD, I cut out a section of another 1" spacer (which opened it 2% to 1.02) and then I closed the gap with a vise and put on two pipe clams to compress it, 2 hours later I removed the clamps and the pipe expanded to .99" (1% under orginal OD), now though I could compress it with just my fingers to .94" (down 6% from orginal OD), so it appears you can use 1.375 for the 1.350 hole if you use this method. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 8:40:26 PM EDT
[#21]
Picked up the spacers today.
I'm using a 2.250" spacer for the blast chamber which will contain the muzzle brake as well. The rest of the baffles are seperated by .750" SS spacers and then a final shim spacer to tighten everything together. There will be 7 baffles in addtion to the balst chamber/muzzle brake. I also had the SS spacer tube bored to a wall thickness of approx. .045. Total weight for all spacer is 5.43 oz. Ti will be lighter by a couple oz I'd imagine. Total weight right now for the entire can is just at 23oz. This will lighten a bit when I drill and bore the end cap, once the form 1 is approved. 
Here's the schematic from page 13. The spacers are evenly spaced on this one which may not be optimal. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 9:02:13 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Picked up the spacers today. I'm using a 2.250" spacer for the blast chamber which will contain the muzzle brake as well. The rest of the baffles are seperated by .750" SS spacers and then a final shim spacer to tighten everything together. There will be 7 baffles in addtion to the balst chamber/muzzle brake. I also had the SS spacer tube bored to a wall thickness of approx. .045. Total weight for all spacer is 5.43 oz. Ti will be lighter by a couple oz I'd imagine. Total weight right now for the entire can is just at 23oz. This will lighten a bit when I drill and bore the end cap, once the form 1 is approved. <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/spacers_zpsd1a4ce56.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/spacers_zpsd1a4ce56.jpg</a> Here's the schematic from page 13. The spacers are evenly spaced on this one which may not be optimal. <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/Slide1_zpscbe99978.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/Slide1_zpscbe99978.jpg</a> Please describe (or post photos!) how the baffles and spacers fit together. I'm not able to visualize it, and that's driving me bats! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 9:19:56 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
<snip> Please describe (or post photos!) how the baffles and spacers fit together. I'm not able to visualize it, and that's driving me bats! Hope this helps. The spacers and baffles slide into the outer tube and are arranged as in the schematic. Base cap and muzzle brake w/spacer 
Blast chamber spacer placed over muzzle brake 
A few spacers and baffles stacked up 
Few more 
Entire stack of blast chamber, six spacers and 7 baffles. Outer tube next to the stack. Of course all of the baffles are arranged as illustrated within the outer tube. The two end caps are tightened down and the baffle stack is held rigidly in the the tube. The OD of the baffles are within a few .001s" of the ID of the outer tube so bore alignment is near perfect. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 10:10:04 PM EDT
[#24]
I am curious as to why you didn't go with more baffles and less spacers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2014 10:18:31 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am curious as to why you didn't go with more baffles and less spacers. To be candid I haven't decided yet if I'll go with the stack in the photos or perhaps try using a mix of freeze plugs. I figure it'll be about 3 more weeks until the F1 is approved and in the interim I'm going to play around with forming the Freeze plugs and look at other baffle configs. esstac- has posted a great thread with pics of the FP baffles after firing. Based on that I'm most likely going to replace 3 of the Ti baffles with 6 of the FP baffles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 7:40:07 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hope this helps. The spacers and baffles slide into the outer tube and are arranged as in the schematic. Base cap and muzzle brake w/spacer <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3363_zpsca71f93e.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3363_zpsca71f93e.jpg</a> Blast chamber spacer placed over muzzle brake <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3365_zps8b90c0c1.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3365_zps8b90c0c1.jpg</a> A few spacers and baffles stacked up <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3367_zps3c990830.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3367_zps3c990830.jpg</a> Few more <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3368_zps3106fbfb.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3368_zps3106fbfb.jpg</a> Entire stack of blast chamber, six spacers and 7 baffles. Outer tube next to the stack. Of course all of the baffles are arranged as illustrated within the outer tube. The two end caps are tightened down and the baffle stack is held rigidly in the the tube. The OD of the baffles are within a few .001s" of the ID of the outer tube so bore alignment is near perfect. <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3369_zpsfdec7afc.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3369_zpsfdec7afc.jpg</a> Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
<snip> Please describe (or post photos!) how the baffles and spacers fit together. I'm not able to visualize it, and that's driving me bats! Hope this helps. The spacers and baffles slide into the outer tube and are arranged as in the schematic. Base cap and muzzle brake w/spacer <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3363_zpsca71f93e.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3363_zpsca71f93e.jpg</a> Blast chamber spacer placed over muzzle brake <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3365_zps8b90c0c1.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3365_zps8b90c0c1.jpg</a> A few spacers and baffles stacked up <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3367_zps3c990830.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3367_zps3c990830.jpg</a> Few more <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3368_zps3106fbfb.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3368_zps3106fbfb.jpg</a> Entire stack of blast chamber, six spacers and 7 baffles. Outer tube next to the stack. Of course all of the baffles are arranged as illustrated within the outer tube. The two end caps are tightened down and the baffle stack is held rigidly in the the tube. The OD of the baffles are within a few .001s" of the ID of the outer tube so bore alignment is near perfect. <a href="http://s157.photobucket.com/user/pdmundt/media/IMG_3369_zpsfdec7afc.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t53/pdmundt/IMG_3369_zpsfdec7afc.jpg</a> Perfect! That helps immensely. Your baffles are aligned by the spacers and I can see how it works now. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 9:32:11 PM EDT
[#27]
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:00:20 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. This is getting interesting, and my pending form 1 build keeps getting more expensive. Wonder what the weight savings is over the stainless on these tubes |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:01:47 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. Several other lengths of tubes as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:05:01 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. They now have various stainless lengths too. But the new stainless tubes and the titanium are 1.60" OD with the same 1.350" inner. Not sure why they are getting thicker. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:11:50 PM EDT
[#31]
Wish that titanium was 6" instead of 8+...
Still the weight savings of ti vs ss is a good thing. I will gladly pay more for a lighter tube. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 10:46:07 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They now have various stainless lengths too. But the new stainless tubes and the titanium are 1.60" OD with the same 1.350" inner. Not sure why they are getting thicker. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. They now have various stainless lengths too. But the new stainless tubes and the titanium are 1.60" OD with the same 1.350" inner. Not sure why they are getting thicker. They're probably focused on the 1.350" ID and that's what was available. Still, 1/8" wall thickness is pretty thick... Just found these. Revolving center and this Going to start forming FP baffles once these arrive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 11:17:21 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They're probably focused on the 1.350" ID and that's what was available. Still, 1/8" wall thickness is pretty thick... Just found these. Revolving center and this Going to start forming FP baffles once these arrive. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. They now have various stainless lengths too. But the new stainless tubes and the titanium are 1.60" OD with the same 1.350" inner. Not sure why they are getting thicker. They're probably focused on the 1.350" ID and that's what was available. Still, 1/8" wall thickness is pretty thick... Just found these. Revolving center and this Going to start forming FP baffles once these arrive. I'm complaining about the tubes getting thicker walls. More material & weight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 11:24:02 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm complaining about the tubes getting thicker walls. More material & weight. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. They now have various stainless lengths too. But the new stainless tubes and the titanium are 1.60" OD with the same 1.350" inner. Not sure why they are getting thicker. They're probably focused on the 1.350" ID and that's what was available. Still, 1/8" wall thickness is pretty thick... Just found these. Revolving center and this Going to start forming FP baffles once these arrive. I'm complaining about the tubes getting thicker walls. More material & weight. My calculations put the titanium tube around 13oz. That's too beefy for me and, by the time you paid to have it turned down, makes it too rich for my blood for a form 1 build. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2014 11:29:29 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm complaining about the tubes getting thicker walls. More material & weight. I understand. My point was that Apogee is focused on the 1.350 ID because of all the parts that have already been made. I'm thinking that the supplier that they buy from only had thick wall Ti tubing with the 1.350 ID. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:16:50 AM EDT
[#36]
I commissioned a SS tube at more ideal spec that should come in around 10.2oz that is finished but not in my hands yet, and a Ti one that I have ordered the parts for that should come in around 5.7oz, both for 8" and adapters and end caps that are both cut pockets (even the adapters) with a different thread pitch and more length to accommodate the changes without steps in profile. The ID is 1.375, there are still freeze plugs this size, unlike 1.350 you also have Ti tubing for spacers in this size, SS freeze plugs off the shelf, Valve Retainers off the shelf in Steel and Ti.
Speaking to a machinist that may be willing to cut the SD and Apogee tubes, looks like it will be $15 mail order, I am arranging getting a tube for them to cut now as a test run. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 1:04:33 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My calculations put the titanium tube around 13oz. That's too beefy for me and, by the time you paid to have it turned down, makes it too rich for my blood for a form 1 build. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. They now have various stainless lengths too. But the new stainless tubes and the titanium are 1.60" OD with the same 1.350" inner. Not sure why they are getting thicker. They're probably focused on the 1.350" ID and that's what was available. Still, 1/8" wall thickness is pretty thick... Just found these. Revolving center and this Going to start forming FP baffles once these arrive. I'm complaining about the tubes getting thicker walls. More material & weight. My calculations put the titanium tube around 13oz. That's too beefy for me and, by the time you paid to have it turned down, makes it too rich for my blood for a form 1 build. I think for an extra margin of safety for use on weapons such as a SBR 308 the extra thickness would be nice. If you are doing a 300 BLK can I could see the problem, but why not just use a 7075-T6 for that application and call it good. This had the potential to be used on full power magnum rifles with proper Ti end-caps. 13 oz is a good weight compared to weight the s/s one was. If it was just under 100$ I would jump in it. You cant find a Ti rifle can for under 500$ that will do full power load from anything above a 308. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 8:18:38 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I commissioned a SS tube at more ideal spec that should come in around 10.2oz that is finished but not in my hands yet, and a Ti one that I have ordered the parts for that should come in around 5.7oz, both for 8" and adapters and end caps that are both cut pockets (even the adapters) with a different thread pitch and more length to accommodate the changes without steps in profile. The ID is 1.375, there are still freeze plugs this size, unlike 1.350 you also have Ti tubing for spacers in this size, SS freeze plugs off the shelf, Valve Retainers off the shelf in Steel and Ti. Speaking to a machinist that may be willing to cut the SD and Apogee tubes, looks like it will be $15 mail order, I am arranging getting a tube for them to cut now as a test run. I'm interested in this for my next build. I just got raped by the machinist that turned the OD on my SS tube. Looking for alternatives for the next build. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:10:22 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryMy calculations put the titanium tube around 13oz. That's too beefy for me and, by the time you paid to have it turned down, makes it too rich for my blood for a form 1 build. I would contact them to see if the 1.6" OD 1.350" ID is correct. None of the US Titanium sources even produce a standard tube product that would make machining a tube to those dimensions possible, so I am skeptical. They would of had to do a 150ft+ order to get a custom tube produced, or happened across a odd size surplus custom pipe deal. No commercial 1.625 Ti tube has a ID that small, the only commercial product that does and is 1.5" or over is 1.5" .087 1.326. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:24:45 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They're probably focused on the 1.350" ID and that's what was available. Still, 1/8" wall thickness is pretty thick... Just found these. Revolving center and this Going to start forming FP baffles once these arrive. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Apogee now has a Ti tube listed on their site. They now have various stainless lengths too. But the new stainless tubes and the titanium are 1.60" OD with the same 1.350" inner. Not sure why they are getting thicker. They're probably focused on the 1.350" ID and that's what was available. Still, 1/8" wall thickness is pretty thick... Just found these. Revolving center and this Going to start forming FP baffles once these arrive. Thanks been looking for a way to form my freeze plugs and that 60 degree looked perfect so I FO'd |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:30:05 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks been looking for a way to form my freeze plugs and that 60 degree looked perfect so I FO'd Check out the other thread as well, the $100 suppressor thread. He uses a nice technique of a 45 degree cone and then a 60. I'm going to try a 3/4" bearing to start to form a cone and then switch to the 60 degree cone to finish. Or at least I'm going to experiment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 12:48:39 PM EDT
[#42]
On silencertalk, one of the guys there used Torx bits to form his cones. This turned out really well!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 1:00:54 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On silencertalk, one of the guys there used Torx bits to form his cones. This turned out really well! A very good expanation of that technique is in this thread as well. Page 5 or 6, IIRC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 1:11:04 PM EDT
[#44]
Any benefits to trying the FP method backwards, IE, forming a cone shaped as opposed to the 'm' shape?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 1:55:57 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any benefits to trying the FP method backwards, IE, forming a cone shaped as opposed to the 'm' shape? It would only waste $.69 to try. Go for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 2:20:55 PM EDT
[#46]
it's been almost a month since I ordered my preppers discount stuff, still haven't gotten it. just an FYI for anyone thinking of going through them. planning on emailing if I don't have it by the end of the week.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 4:09:12 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any benefits to trying the FP method backwards, IE, forming a cone shaped as opposed to the 'm' shape? The cone portion looked longer in the one that was shown formed that way. It also looked more like the M42k baffles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 5:00:27 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any benefits to trying the FP method backwards, IE, forming a cone shaped as opposed to the 'm' shape? One of the issues that I would foresee is the use of a jig to form the cone. For the "M" baffles a socket is used to support the lateral inner edge of the FP as pressure is applied to the center. This allows the cone to form and rolls the lateral edge over. I'm not sure that reversing this process; e.g. forming a cone baffle vice a "M" baffle, would have the same effect. Worth a try though! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 7:40:17 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
it's been almost a month since I ordered my preppers discount stuff, still haven't gotten it. just an FYI for anyone thinking of going through them. planning on emailing if I don't have it by the end of the week. I just got my 6" C cell tube and end caps today, it's been alittle over two weeks, but they did call me and let me know the 6" C tube was back ordered, so no complaints. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2014 9:10:30 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I just got my 6" C cell tube and end caps today, it's been alittle over two weeks, but they did call me and let me know the 6" C tube was back ordered, so no complaints. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
it's been almost a month since I ordered my preppers discount stuff, still haven't gotten it. just an FYI for anyone thinking of going through them. planning on emailing if I don't have it by the end of the week. I just got my 6" C cell tube and end caps today, it's been alittle over two weeks, but they did call me and let me know the 6" C tube was back ordered, so no complaints. Where did the 6" C tube come from? Is it internally threaded on both ends? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
