User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/12/2005 1:14:00 AM EDT
[#1]
The bi-lock is just an A2 with wings, built with better precision. I once asked Ron Smith if the tine vibration had anything to do with how the Vortex suppresses flash and this is what he had to say.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2005 1:32:54 AM EDT
[#2]
Your off by one. Here's G4, G5, and G6 G4  G5  G6  And now the latest and current G6A2  And for kicks, the original Vortex that had the expanding tines, not from bad heat treating as urban myth goes but due to the 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2005 5:47:48 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Your off by one. Here's G4, G5, and G6[\quote] Thank you Mike. Can you explain the differences between the G5, G6 and G6A2? And is there a identification stamp (similar to the <YHM> stamp to help identify them an authentic SEI product? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2005 12:26:21 AM EDT
[#4]
I don't recall seeing any markings on any of them, but it's been a while since I really looked. This makes it hard to tell the real ones from the inobvious fakes.
The first model I recall is the G4, I don't know what came before. The G4 has the brush band ring. The G5 dumped the brush band and I think is structurally tougher, possibly more effective in reducing flash as well. The G6 was made to combine the G5 and Surefire suppressor mount thus the ring near the base. The G6A2 underwent some minor modification but I think it was supposed to increase the structural strength by a great degree (40%???). I don't have one and I can't tell the difference from the picture, not to mention that pic was titled with "240" as in the model they make for the M240 so I wonder if the picture is correct in the first place, but that's what they show on the website. As usual my facts are fuzzy and probably misleading so don't take my word for it. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable will chime in.
That's from SE's website so if you have a real early model which probably had straight tines, not to worry, the twist is only to make it self tightening (again, from their website) and can be had in both left and right hand twist. Of course that kind of contradicts the letter I got above.  I think CCF makes a straight tine model for 9mm (MP5?)
That part I believe as I have seen the effect first hand. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/13/2005 7:04:55 AM EDT
[#5]
If you're interested in testing a Phoenix PR4 email me and I'll have one shipped to you.
Michael [email protected] |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2005 8:50:50 PM EDT
[#6]
Not sure if it was mentioned, but I am curious as to the flash suppressing ability of the Levang linear compensator.
While I have read about the purported mechanism by which the typical FH works (mixing with cold surrounding air to cool combustion gases to below ignition temp), as a process engineer I have some questions on this. Furthermore, looking at the Levang, it is the closest in design to what we use in industry as "flame arrestors" to stop flame propagation in piping. Interestingly enough, flame propagation cannot be sustained below a certain pipe diameter even with the most combustible of materials (ethylene oxide for one). This is how flame arrestors work, lots of little tubes in a honeycomb type arrangement, cause the flame to not be able to sustain propagation. The multiple holes of the Levang mimics this. Also, I have wondered about a totally different "flash hider" design, and if I were to prototype it, would Mr. Silver be willing to test it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2005 3:30:56 AM EDT
[#7]
Barnaul 223 is also underloaded. The Russians apparently do not know much about loading to 223 Remington specs let alone 5.56NATO.... and some of their rifles are even chambered to use 5.56x45 and .223, WTF over. So the Phantoms are doing the best jobs at flash hiding and will not get caught in brush or snag on cord/lines? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2005 3:41:46 AM EDT
[#8]
Not the spiral cut but from the poor maching done to create it. the real spiral cut ones were fine, the "slant cut" ones had the undercut tines and were the troublemakers. There is a pic of an undercut one in the Troubleshooting FAQ. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2005 3:54:01 PM EDT
[#9]
Thanks Tweak, I'm always in need of correction...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2005 6:31:56 PM EDT
[#10]
I have the G4 on my 14.5 m-4 barrel and it works great with my night vision on. I'm surprised that the military doesn't have these flashhiders on all there m-4s.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2005 7:00:29 PM EDT
[#11]
When I was talking to Ron Smith, he alluded to military use and basically said they would all be using the Vortex soon.
The most significant reason I see against the Vortex is that it can kick up dust when prone as opposed to a closed bottom flash suppressor like the A2 or Phantom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2005 7:43:06 PM EDT
[#12]
tagged
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2005 12:41:23 AM EDT
[#13]
That's what I'm here for, my job is done 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2005 12:46:54 AM EDT
[#14]
Any particular reason you are shortening it? Also, any test results? I have Vortexes (Vortices?) on my M4 uppers to bring the Colt barrels to legal length (silver-brazed to meet with ATFs approval). |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2005 4:07:26 AM EDT
[#15]
He would have to get the price lower than Phantoms (under $15-$20 in quantity) before the military would likely consider them. At least that is what would make sense.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2005 11:39:02 PM EDT
[#16]
will a BFA work with the current model Vortex?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2005 8:15:05 AM EDT
[#17]
Taggity, Tag, Tag. I wonder if Muzzle BRAKE photos will show any relative increase in flash? I'm ordering a slew of Phantoms right now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2005 8:20:14 AM EDT
[#18]
Also this may have been debunked at ARFCOM, but the tines can get caught on stuff like webbing, para cord, and brush. Unless there's a legit reason this is not a concern, I SERIOUSLY doubt the military will be using the Vortex in a widespread manner. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2005 10:48:40 PM EDT
[#19]
.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2005 12:31:24 PM EDT
[#20]
Has anyone tried the same supressor on light and heavy barrels of the same length? Say a Bushmaster Superlight Carbine and a Bushmaster Heavy Barrel Carbine or 16" M4. If barrel harmonics really plays a role in flash suppression, I'd expect a given flash suppressor to work better on the lighter barrel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2005 1:49:44 PM EDT
[#21]
You can't assume that it would be better or worse, only that it had more of an effect. The weight of the muzzle device may take you closer or farther away from the point in the wave curve that will produce the best accuracy.
In anycase, a muzzle device like the Vortex can significantly increase your accuracy (I've noticed as have others to an even more significant degree) as it reduces the gas turbulance behind the exiting bullet, increasing stabilization and the time it takes to get there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2005 2:06:34 PM EDT
[#22]
I started a thread on this and the conclusion was that while it doesn't reduce the accuracy, it also doesn't significantly increase accuracy. Are there any threads/tests done to determine if the Vortex does increase accuracy? Supposedly Chuck Taylor gave his seal of approval on the Vortex. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2005 3:16:27 PM EDT
[#23]
I also noticed something on rsilver's photos. While the Vortex reduces overall flash, it concentrates the flash towards the center and forward of the muzzle, potentially giving away the position of the shooter.
The Phantom dissipates that and spreads it into thin whicks of flash around the muzzle (sort of what the .gov wanted with the USGI A2/A1 flash hiders) so as to not concentrate the flash. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2005 11:33:35 PM EDT
[#24]
So, what you're saying is that from the front, the flash reduction might be more important from the rear. I suggest somebody do a series of pictures with the camera mounted in front of the muzzle to measure flash from there. No, silly, not DIRECTLY in front of the muzzle or you're likely not to get a single picture out of it. Just below the line of sight like where you'd put a chronograph. As I don't have that many flash suppressors, I can't do the test. Any volunteers?
Me, I don't think it would be significantly different. From the rear, the fireball looks HUGE with an A2 Suppressor whereas with a short vortex (HK G36C) it was barely a flicker. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/23/2005 1:39:49 AM EDT
[#25]
The weight alone affecting the barrel harmonics may increase or reduce accuracy. I myself have noted improvement in group accuracy when using the Vortex, up to .25 MOA. However another member (it may have been Green0) noted an increase of up to or over .5-1MOA. Perhaps it was due to the combination of the gas turbulence reduction added with a favorable change in barrel harmonics. I cannot definitively tell how much the increase in accuracy is due to the reduction in gas turbulence vs a change in barrel harmonics. I have not seen published testing of the increase in accuracy due to using the Vortex, but I have had several acquaintances note an increase when using it. The phenomena of gas turbulence reduction is a known effect and I have from time to time read print to that fact. Of important note one article the effect was talked about and a recommendation to only hand tighten (8-10ft/lbs) the muzzle device otherwise torque on the barrel may become significant and have an impact on accuracy.
It probably depends much on the flash suppressor design as to how much effect it has on accuracy apart from the weight changing barrel harmonics. It may be significant to zero help. I think in the end, the flash suppressors effect on accuracy through gas manipulation is almost insignificant when compared to the effect on barrel harmonics so I think your original premise is probably correct. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2005 12:54:10 PM EDT
[#26]
Great info. I bought the Phantom 5C2 from Brownells because of this info. Thanks to all who contributed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2005 12:58:22 PM EDT
[#27]
I'd like to see how this flash suppressor (the Noveske krink fs) compares to the vortex and other F/S.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2005 8:25:34 AM EDT
[#28]
Any thoughts on trying the KAC flash suppressor? Just curious. Bigfeet |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2005 8:03:13 AM EDT
[#29]
Great thread. Mods - maybe this should be a sticky (if it isn't already).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2005 8:32:31 AM EDT
[#30]
rsilvers,
To validate the photos, shoot at least 4 shots using the same FS. That would validate whether there is any shot-to-shot variation in the photo's timing or the ammunition's flash. If there is any difference using the same FS and ammo, then the difference noted between FS becomes less important and camera photo-timing and ammunition variables become moreso. C97 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/7/2005 9:27:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Tag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2005 10:07:10 PM EDT
[#32]
tag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2005 5:22:36 AM EDT
[#33]
This one should be tacked
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2005 12:44:04 PM EDT
[#34]
Didn't he say much earlier that he didn't have time so he stopped doing tests and pics?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/20/2005 11:56:47 AM EDT
[#35]
Most definately! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2005 6:51:40 PM EDT
[#36]
Or repeatedly bumped.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/2/2005 7:01:05 PM EDT
[#37]
Great testing guys! Thanks
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/3/2005 8:37:54 PM EDT
[#38]
Even though this topic is flash supressors, I'd like to see the same tests done with the more common muzzle brakes...
Love my Phantom 29! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/4/2005 3:00:16 AM EDT
[#39]
VERY COOL< THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION, VERY COOL INDEED
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/4/2005 5:05:21 AM EDT
[#40]
+1 for a muzzle brake test!! I am in the process of putting a Miculek brake on mine and I want to see how much money I wasted.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2005 4:08:04 PM EDT
[#41]
I'd also like to see the Krinkov Flash Hider on a AR. Anyone got any pic of this?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2005 12:06:58 PM EDT
[#42]
is this getting tacked?
I see from Smith's site that they sell a BFA that fits the current model, glad they finally took my advice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2005 2:45:43 PM EDT
[#43]
Thats some Wild Stuff, Thanks for the information
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2005 2:38:00 PM EDT
[#44]
tag
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2005 2:13:04 PM EDT
[#45]
It looks like the next battery of tests needs to include the Phoenix and the krink definitely. These are the other two designs out there that have a healthy following and we need to see if they are warranted. Good thread,
MOD's TACK THIS THREAD!!!!!! (please) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2005 2:18:22 PM EDT
[#46]
Also, can anyone get a video camera and do some comparative testing between the phantom and vortex with regards to how much dust is kicked up while prone. I have a feeling that unless you're REALLY low, you won't notice much difference. Also, can anyone come up with some credible examples of someone "snagging" their vortex. That's something that I've heard so many times over the years, but I've yet to encounter one person who says "yeah, it happened to me".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2005 2:24:57 PM EDT
[#47]
LOL I just made a post about that before reading this... Also the Vortex with the vents at 45 degree off angles have an almost identical vector of gasses as a Phantom with closed bottom. The reduced prone signature idea is really silly IMO. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2005 2:26:08 PM EDT
[#48]
It is simply an A2 flash suppressor so look at those tests. Same for the Gemtech Bilock and Surefire flash hiders. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2005 2:22:21 AM EDT
[#49]
did that, the majority of the dust kicked up is IN FRONT of the muzzle device |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/4/2006 4:08:12 PM EDT
[#50]
wild I was also getting those little tracer lines off the 5C1, had to go back and watch the video recently |
|
|
|
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.
