Some of you may find this interesting.  It's amazing how hot the 5.56 ones get compared to the pistol cans:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh0qnfI0870

I did not think the Ti can was suppose to handle a straight mag dump.
The SS can I've used seems to handle about 120-160 rounds dumping before its over 900.

That sounds pretty accurate.  I was shooting my reloads in this video and it took 60 rounds of fire at that rate to reach those temps.  XM193 will heat it to those temperatures in about 30-40 rounds at that shooting pace.

That's pretty rapid heating for the titanium suppressor.  It probably is best to keep titanium below 900F.

The stainless cans hit about 900F in 3 30 round magazines.   16" 308 hits 900F in 60-80 rounds.   I think it's smart to keep stainless cans below 1000 or 1100.  We've had them up to 1800 in failure testing but that's really abusive.  The hotter materials get, the more harmful oxygen will be to them.  At 1800F, it's like welding without shielding gas.

Cool info.  Thanks for sharing.

Are these SOCOM tables the testing standard at which the GMT-556LE/QM are advertised as meeting? Were there other test the SOCOM standard testing on the new Extreme Duty 556 cans were based on? Last with those 240 rnd test were there cooling stages and if not did you all experience baffle or end cap strikes given the high temps and 556 bullet instabilities from the copper jacket / small amount of lead makeup you have discussed before?
*info

Cool video but get rid of the music next time.

Can you share how many mags you get through them before tube failure when running FA, back-to-back? Just curious. Also, BMW M5 V10 exhaust, on an engine dyno, for your viewing pleasure.

We didn't hit failure and discontinued the test out of a desire for some safety.  The finish baked off, the cans turn gold, blue, purple, and then scale black (visible flake carbon rising to the surface) so the metal was changing it's properties.  When you're done there is surface corrosion on the baffles, and accelerated wear has occurred (modest peening of baffle apertures that exceeds normal use wear consistent with well over 5000 rounds with our product, dimensionally leaving room to probably have similar wear 5 times before seriously harming product performance).  I wouldn't want to run a can I owned like that.  It doesn't seem intelligent at all.  Even high temperature alloys don't want to be at that temperature in oxygen.  I consider anything under 1000F to be normal use conditions. Running cans like that is no different than buying a brand new set of tires and proceeding to do a couple burn outs and locking up the brakes a couple times from 60 MPH.






As for 1300F after 240 rounds, I would like to know what the testing protocols were.   That sounds really light on temperature, when cans are hitting 900F at 90 rounds, and lighter titanium cans nearly hitting that at 60 as this video shows.  The older Gemtech cans at ~20 ounces didn't survive the only 240 round Socom test that I ever saw on video.  I think surviving that test without failure, damage, or performance loss of the suppressor would be highly impressive.  If you guys have a video of that, you should post it.  It would be good for sales.

AAC for example used to have a gorilla marketing machine prior to the Remington acquisition.  AAC people would claim they ran multiple M4-2000's through that [240 round 10.5" 416] test back to back 4+ times at the ten minute interval with no adverse effects, but they never showed anyone proof they had.  You yourself at that time would argue stable bullet flight required for negotiating the test in 5.56mm 10.5" barrels wasn't possible to that round count.  You would argue that after 120 rounds, bullet stability would be gone in a 10.5" barrel and baffle strikes would occur- meaning any suppressor tested would fail.  I didn't have any reason to believe their M4-2000 could do that [what they demonstrated would destroy a G5] several times back to back with limited time for cooling without damage or failure. They never showed a video of an M4-2000 passing even one 240 round segment of the test and I personally thought what they didn't show the customers spoke louder than the test of your product that they did show.

It's interesting you mention the UK as a customer in the post.  You previously talked about UK customers of yours requiring 3/8" bores on 5.56mm cans for baffle strike mitigation or liability reduction. If you can pass a 240 round test with a 3/8 bored 5.56mm can, that would be less impressive than doing it in the consumer market configuration.  We haven't ever attempted that test here as we don't have an HK416 in our collection.  The most abusive formal testing  procedure from outside of our company that we have participated in was  6.8 UICW testing that LWRC had a foreign market requirement for. The UICW is hard on cans.  According to an LWRC employee, our suppressor exceeded the durability of AAC and Surefire suppressors tested and was the only suppressor to successfully complete their test without performance degredation.

THIS!  At some point in internet forum history, somebody said not to get titanium hot.  Apparently, they don't practice engineering enough.

Internet myth. Titanium cans can handle just as much heat as a SS suppressor. Im not sure how or why the myth of titanium suppressors being inferior got started. Maybe a bad manufacturer produced some titanium cans that failed years ago and the reputation stuck or maybe people who cant afford a $1,000 price tag justified buying the heavier SS can because they felt it was more durably for whatever imaginary reason.

At the end of the day Titanium suppressors are just as durable at a fraction of the weight. The only negative is the price, if you can afford one def go titanium.

I think if you were to stop right here you'd be mostly right.

With the use of 17-4 as a tube material now, the edge would have to be pulled away from Gr9 in what it used to have over SS tubing back when everyone used 304 or 316.



I would image it would be based on Titanium's (6al-4v) own data sheet via Timet:

Titanium has excellent resistance to gaseous oxygen and air at temperatures up to about 700°F (371°C). At 700°F it acquires a light straw color. Further heating to 800°F (426°C) in air may result in a heavy oxide layer because of increased diffusion of oxygen through the titanium lattice. Above 1200°F (649°C), titanium lacks oxidation resistance and will become brittle. Scale forms rapidly at 1700°F (927°C).