User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/8/2014 12:16:56 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is the top gun in the top pic a socom 556 mini? If so, how do you like it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The repeatable POI is awesome on these cans. I use mine in 3-gun, and the longer shots are no problem even after running around with a hot gun. I beat the crap out of this can and it shows ZERO signs of any performance ore useability loss. Shot side by side with AAC and Silencerco cans, and they all sound the exact same to my ears. There are only slight tone variations. Pic of when the cans were new..... http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/null-63.jpg My 212 office gun. http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/1645C7D9-29EB-48CD-8AC3-F1B7FD172D39.jpg Good eye....It's not as quiet as the RC, and on the 14.5" the length savings isn't worth the slightly higher sound. I would use it as a moderator on a 10.5" SBR though. It might help keep ya from going deef if you need to shoot in a hallway. The Surefire cans are rugged as hell. If my life depended on it, would take the 556RC over any other can on the market. Garin, You're free to use that. 
I have ton of 556 cans. This is the best. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2014 1:22:12 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Right. I guess my post was geared more towards, if you're looking at adding a 2nd -RC, why not go ahead and get a 762Mini. That's what i'd do, anyways. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
... because I know myself, and my habits... I have one SOCOM556-RC... should I grab a second -RC or should I grab a mini? I have 0 plans with going to a different caliber at this time. For essentially the same money (from somewhere like Silencer Shop, anyways) you could get something like a 762Mini SOCOM and then if you did decide to move in the .30 caliber world, you're already setup for it Fair advice, but the 762MiniSocom seems like an alternative to the 556-RC to me, not much of a supplmement as they are identical size and weight. If you know you shoot 556 and will shoot it around people that don't shoot suppressed... The mini can makes a lot of sense imo. Esp when you get into guns with non-adjustable gas systems. Right. I guess my post was geared more towards, if you're looking at adding a 2nd -RC, why not go ahead and get a 762Mini. That's what i'd do, anyways. The 762-mini is going to be a compromise if all you plan to shoot is 5.56. I asked Garin that exact question (I already have a 762-rc in jail and was looking for a can to fit a MK18 build). Garin steered me away from the 762-mini due to the bore size making it a lot louder then the 5 56-rc. To me the 762-mini seems like a "master of none" type of can. It can only be used on 308 (with a 16"+ barrel), loud with 5.56, and if you are doing a 300 blk build I would actually be looking for the lowest db's possible in that scenario. The one scenario I see the mini shining is on a 20"+ bolt gun in an urban/LEO type role where you want a suppressor, but want to keep OAL down. Edit. I really hate Surefire. Their lineup makes me want to buy the 5.56-mini, 5.56-rc, 7.62-rc and 762-mini! If only they sold a SOCOM version in 338 to the public. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2014 2:10:50 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good eye....It's not as quiet as the RC, and on the 14.5" the length savings isn't worth the slightly higher sound. I would use it as a moderator on a 10.5" SBR though. It might help keep ya from going deef if you need to shoot in a hallway. The Surefire cans are rugged as hell. If my life depended on it, would take the 556RC over any other can on the market. Garin, You're free to use that.
I have ton of 556 cans. This is the best. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The repeatable POI is awesome on these cans. I use mine in 3-gun, and the longer shots are no problem even after running around with a hot gun. I beat the crap out of this can and it shows ZERO signs of any performance ore useability loss. Shot side by side with AAC and Silencerco cans, and they all sound the exact same to my ears. There are only slight tone variations. Pic of when the cans were new..... http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/null-63.jpg My 212 office gun. http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/1645C7D9-29EB-48CD-8AC3-F1B7FD172D39.jpg Good eye....It's not as quiet as the RC, and on the 14.5" the length savings isn't worth the slightly higher sound. I would use it as a moderator on a 10.5" SBR though. It might help keep ya from going deef if you need to shoot in a hallway. The Surefire cans are rugged as hell. If my life depended on it, would take the 556RC over any other can on the market. Garin, You're free to use that.
I have ton of 556 cans. This is the best. How loud is the Mini compared to the RC on the 14.5" barrel? TO the shooter, and to the bystander? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2014 3:37:28 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How loud is the Mini compared to the RC on the 14.5" barrel? TO the shooter, and to the bystander? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The repeatable POI is awesome on these cans. I use mine in 3-gun, and the longer shots are no problem even after running around with a hot gun. I beat the crap out of this can and it shows ZERO signs of any performance ore useability loss. Shot side by side with AAC and Silencerco cans, and they all sound the exact same to my ears. There are only slight tone variations. Pic of when the cans were new..... http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/null-63.jpg My 212 office gun. http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/1645C7D9-29EB-48CD-8AC3-F1B7FD172D39.jpg Good eye....It's not as quiet as the RC, and on the 14.5" the length savings isn't worth the slightly higher sound. I would use it as a moderator on a 10.5" SBR though. It might help keep ya from going deef if you need to shoot in a hallway. The Surefire cans are rugged as hell. If my life depended on it, would take the 556RC over any other can on the market. Garin, You're free to use that.
I have ton of 556 cans. This is the best. How loud is the Mini compared to the RC on the 14.5" barrel? TO the shooter, and to the bystander? Its a little louder. You should wear hearing protection even with the can. It stings a bit without ears. I don't use ears when shooting my Saker, 2000, or RC. The MINI is more suited for combat use than casual plinking. The Legacy Micro was suuuuuper loud...... But it wasn't intended for cool-quiet-db-commandos. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/8/2014 6:44:22 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its a little louder. You should wear hearing protection even with the can. It stings a bit without ears. I don't use ears when shooting my Saker, 2000, or RC. The MINI is more suited for combat use than casual plinking. The Legacy Micro was suuuuuper loud...... But it wasn't intended for cool-quiet-db-commandos. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The repeatable POI is awesome on these cans. I use mine in 3-gun, and the longer shots are no problem even after running around with a hot gun. I beat the crap out of this can and it shows ZERO signs of any performance ore useability loss. Shot side by side with AAC and Silencerco cans, and they all sound the exact same to my ears. There are only slight tone variations. Pic of when the cans were new..... http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/null-63.jpg My 212 office gun. http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x115/coctailer/1645C7D9-29EB-48CD-8AC3-F1B7FD172D39.jpg Good eye....It's not as quiet as the RC, and on the 14.5" the length savings isn't worth the slightly higher sound. I would use it as a moderator on a 10.5" SBR though. It might help keep ya from going deef if you need to shoot in a hallway. The Surefire cans are rugged as hell. If my life depended on it, would take the 556RC over any other can on the market. Garin, You're free to use that.
I have ton of 556 cans. This is the best. How loud is the Mini compared to the RC on the 14.5" barrel? TO the shooter, and to the bystander? Its a little louder. You should wear hearing protection even with the can. It stings a bit without ears. I don't use ears when shooting my Saker, 2000, or RC. The MINI is more suited for combat use than casual plinking. The Legacy Micro was suuuuuper loud...... But it wasn't intended for cool-quiet-db-commandos. Good info, thanks! My 556-212 stung the ear a bit on a 14.5" on the first round pop. Sounds like the Mini isn't much worse than that. No suppressor is hearing safe on an M4, so it's a moot point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2014 9:59:08 AM EDT
[#6]
NOT my video. But a moderately good comparison showing Surefire having less blowback (assuming all 3 MK18s are stock).
Hosts: 3 MK18s Left, AAC M4-1000 Middle, Surefire SOCOM556-RC Right, AAC 762SDN They all sounded similar to me (again, impossible to really judge on a video), but the impressive thing is the Surefire had a LOT less gas blowback coming out of the ejection port. The M4-1000 looked horrible, followed by the larger bored 762SDN and then the Surefire looking the most user friendly. [youtube]http://youtu.be/-m71zE4wdRs[/youtube] MK18 Suppressor comparison: Socom556-rc Edit: I can't embed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2014 12:25:00 PM EDT
[#7]
My 2nd one out of hock within the past two weeks! Three more coming within another three weeks (I hope).
Will go shoot'n this weekend and see how it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2014 1:14:49 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
NOT my video. But a moderately good comparison showing Surefire having less blowback (assuming all 3 MK18s are stock). Hosts: 3 MK18s Left, AAC M4-1000 Middle, Surefire SOCOM556-RC Right, AAC 762SDN They all sounded similar to me (again, impossible to really judge on a video), but the impressive thing is the Surefire had a LOT less gas blowback coming out of the ejection port. The M4-1000 looked horrible, followed by the larger bored 762SDN and then the Surefire looking the most user friendly.  http://youtu.be/-m71zE4wdRs
MK18 Suppressor comparison: Socom556-rc Edit: I can't embed. Not all Mk18s are created equal... Not even inside of DD, they had a mil version with a normal gas port and a civ with a WAY TOO LARGE gas port.... But.... It's interesting the 556-RC has obviously less blowback than the 30cal SDN6. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2014 8:11:48 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
GreenO has always been trolling other manufactures. Maybe someday they will invest in 50K worth of sound equipment and have the staff to conduct non stop testing and they can answer their own questions instead of relying on others to provide them "data" that they in turn actually trust. Surefire 556 RC tested You were right in that it was easier to test the product than to wait for someone else to test it. I didn't want to answer my own questions as much as I wanted to help people have a better understanding of the RC suppressor performance which was widely speculated in this thread. I don't have a 762 RC to test, but was able to test the 556 RC. I tested two of our suppressors, the M4SD II, (and the M4SD which is new for this year) for the sake of comparison. The surefire did very well at the ear (in our non mil-std right ear test). What you can't see in this test is that most of the name branded market competitors are grouped in the 143-147DB range at the ear (when tested in this way). What I personally found interesting was comparing the data of the Socom RC to the NT4 it replaced: The Surefire SOCOM RC outperforms the NT4 it replaces by ~2DB (based on our past testing) on the 10.3" MK18 platform. It provides a 2.6 ounce reduction in system weight, a higher performing flash suppressor mount, and ~ 2 tenths of an inch reduction in [mounted system length]. The NT4 bore clearance was ~.304, and the surefire bore is .022" tighter. That reflects a loss of just over 25% of total bullet to bore clearance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2014 8:49:41 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Surefire 556 RC tested You were right in that it was easier to test the product than to wait for someone else to test it. I didn't want to answer my own questions as much as I wanted to help people have a better understanding of the RC suppressor performance which was widely speculated in this thread. I don't have a 762 RC to test, but was able to test the 556 RC. I tested two of our suppressors, the M4SD II, (and the M4SD which is new for this year) for the sake of comparison. The surefire did very well at the ear (in our non mil-std right ear test). What you can't see in this test is that most of the name branded market competitors are grouped in the 143-147DB range at the ear (when tested in this way). What I personally found interesting was comparing the data of the Socom RC to the NT4 it replaced: The Surefire SOCOM RC outperforms the NT4 it replaces by ~2DB (based on our past testing) on the 10.3" MK18 platform. It provides a 2.6 ounce reduction in system weight, a higher performing flash suppressor mount, and ~ 2 tenths of an inch reduction in [mounted system length]. The NT4 bore clearance was ~.304, and the surefire bore is .022" tighter. That reflects a loss of just over 25% of total bullet to bore clearance. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
GreenO has always been trolling other manufactures. Maybe someday they will invest in 50K worth of sound equipment and have the staff to conduct non stop testing and they can answer their own questions instead of relying on others to provide them "data" that they in turn actually trust. Surefire 556 RC tested You were right in that it was easier to test the product than to wait for someone else to test it. I didn't want to answer my own questions as much as I wanted to help people have a better understanding of the RC suppressor performance which was widely speculated in this thread. I don't have a 762 RC to test, but was able to test the 556 RC. I tested two of our suppressors, the M4SD II, (and the M4SD which is new for this year) for the sake of comparison. The surefire did very well at the ear (in our non mil-std right ear test). What you can't see in this test is that most of the name branded market competitors are grouped in the 143-147DB range at the ear (when tested in this way). What I personally found interesting was comparing the data of the Socom RC to the NT4 it replaced: The Surefire SOCOM RC outperforms the NT4 it replaces by ~2DB (based on our past testing) on the 10.3" MK18 platform. It provides a 2.6 ounce reduction in system weight, a higher performing flash suppressor mount, and ~ 2 tenths of an inch reduction in [mounted system length]. The NT4 bore clearance was ~.304, and the surefire bore is .022" tighter. That reflects a loss of just over 25% of total bullet to bore clearance. Not bad actually GreenO. The SF is quieter at the ear than your two cans, and from the video seems to have less blowback, which the two should correlate nicely I would think (blowback and noise at ear). Too bad you didn't test cyclic rate (5 rounds full auto, audio analysis), as I'd bet the SF has the lowest cyclic rate as well. Interesting for the can with the tightest end cap. So, despite you only calling out the SF for being .8db over "the limit" and didn't mention your specific cans being higher in the Recap or text section being higher there... You're making the SF seem like a really nice can as where it counts, it's the quietest at the ear, less blowback and lower cyclic rate. I'd love to see night time flash testing as well. Oh, and I sure do like the little video covering your face at the beginning that makes it look like the SF is just so hard to remove :D Good times! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2014 3:14:37 PM EDT
[#11]
We didnt missrepresent anything at all. The cans are within about .5db at the ear which is pretty much imperceptible compared to other market offerings that would have broadened it to a more noteworthy 2-6db. The not Osha safe at the ear comment wasn't a dig but just a reality. The surefire rc was the second best 556 can I ever metered at the ear but it still confirmed what I said previously (556 cans are louder at the right ear on di ars).. Those mounting clips if camera audio hadn't glitched out would have been seperate and included a description of what was happening. That slowed it down slightly as the surefire can you open a ring, seat the suppressor, rotate into the rotational stop, seat fully, then tighten the lock ring. Our can you open a gate drop the can on and close the gate so that is easier to describe. The surefire was new so the labyrinth seals were very tight making it difficult to seat and remove.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2014 5:27:22 AM EDT
[#12]
Green0, thanks for the test. Really appreciate the data.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2014 3:08:36 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Surefire 556 RC tested You were right in that it was easier to test the product than to wait for someone else to test it. I didn't want to answer my own questions as much as I wanted to help people have a better understanding of the RC suppressor performance which was widely speculated in this thread. I don't have a 762 RC to test, but was able to test the 556 RC. I tested two of our suppressors, the M4SD II, (and the M4SD which is new for this year) for the sake of comparison. The surefire did very well at the ear (in our non mil-std right ear test). What you can't see in this test is that most of the name branded market competitors are grouped in the 143-147DB range at the ear (when tested in this way). What I personally found interesting was comparing the data of the Socom RC to the NT4 it replaced: The Surefire SOCOM RC outperforms the NT4 it replaces by ~2DB (based on our past testing) on the 10.3" MK18 platform. It provides a 2.6 ounce reduction in system weight, a higher performing flash suppressor mount, and ~ 2 tenths of an inch reduction in [mounted system length]. The NT4 bore clearance was ~.304, and the surefire bore is .022" tighter. That reflects a loss of just over 25% of total bullet to bore clearance. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
GreenO has always been trolling other manufactures. Maybe someday they will invest in 50K worth of sound equipment and have the staff to conduct non stop testing and they can answer their own questions instead of relying on others to provide them "data" that they in turn actually trust. Surefire 556 RC tested You were right in that it was easier to test the product than to wait for someone else to test it. I didn't want to answer my own questions as much as I wanted to help people have a better understanding of the RC suppressor performance which was widely speculated in this thread. I don't have a 762 RC to test, but was able to test the 556 RC. I tested two of our suppressors, the M4SD II, (and the M4SD which is new for this year) for the sake of comparison. The surefire did very well at the ear (in our non mil-std right ear test). What you can't see in this test is that most of the name branded market competitors are grouped in the 143-147DB range at the ear (when tested in this way). What I personally found interesting was comparing the data of the Socom RC to the NT4 it replaced: The Surefire SOCOM RC outperforms the NT4 it replaces by ~2DB (based on our past testing) on the 10.3" MK18 platform. It provides a 2.6 ounce reduction in system weight, a higher performing flash suppressor mount, and ~ 2 tenths of an inch reduction in [mounted system length]. The NT4 bore clearance was ~.304, and the surefire bore is .022" tighter. That reflects a loss of just over 25% of total bullet to bore clearance. To me, it looks like the SOCOM did exactly what Garin Lee said it would do, and what everyone else in this thread claimed it would do. 137.5dB from a 14.5" gun is within 2.5dB of what Surefire claimed for the Legacy can on a 14.5" gun (SF has maintained that the Legacy and SOCOM suppressors are nearly identical in dB reduction). This is accountable in difference in atmospheric conditions, ammunition variance (They used M855 vs. M193). The real kicker, though, is what it sounds like to the shooter, because mid 130dB is way quieter than bullet flight. SF excels in that area, as you have shown. I honestly feel that a Surefire SOCOM MINI would be the best suppressor you test, with regard to the ear position you have chosen. What amazes me, is that the full-size SF suppressor had less than a 3dB increase at the ear vs. the muzzle, and this measured on the port side! This is deep into the territory of most "mini" cans, and is a result of the SF's very low back-pressure, comparative to other designs. Also evidenced by ejection pattern and fouling seen exiting the chamber. Also as you noted, not a product of a massive bore, either. It's no secret that I love my Surefire products, and am a huge fan, but this video quantifies the "why" of that, and coming from someone who obviously has had some competitive feelings toward Garin Lee/Surefire, it means a lot. No "padded reviews" from you on their products! That being said, I appreciated the review, and while I am far from a sound-meter technician, it looked non-biased to me. Thanks for the testing! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2014 5:48:36 PM EDT
[#14]
Green0, nice test.
It would be interesting to see how full-auto effects these cans. Deciding on the RC had a lot to do with mounting to my MG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2014 4:47:45 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Green0, nice test. It would be interesting to see how full-auto effects these cans. Deciding on the RC had a lot to do with mounting to my MG. The ejection patterns with the 212 were about as pretty as could ever be expected. I would expect the surefire to be very reliable and to minimally effect weapon operation on full auto. It appears that surefire placed a design emphasis on that. Our suppressors also looked pretty similar in that regard and their ear data coincides with that. Obviously some of the suppressor products on the market would have made forward ejection occur- a sign of excessive bolt speed. Those cans pretty much exhibited 3 o'clock ejection on the mk18 even which is really impressive to me as the mk18s typically eject there without the cans. Our mk18 has had at least 6, 120 round suppressed full auto cycles so if its gas port is pristine ild be surprised. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2014 4:52:23 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The ejection patterns with the 212 were about as pretty as could ever be expected. I would expect the surefire to be very reliable and to minimally effect weapon operation on full auto. It appears that surefire placed a design emphasis on that. Our suppressors also looked pretty similar in that regard and their ear data coincides with that. Obviously some of the suppressor products on the market would have made forward ejection occur- a sign of excessive bolt speed. Those cans pretty much exhibited 3 o'clock ejection on the mk18 even which is really impressive to me as the mk18s typically eject there without the cans. Our mk18 has had at least 6, 120 round suppressed full auto cycles so if its gas port is pristine ild be surprised. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Green0, nice test. It would be interesting to see how full-auto effects these cans. Deciding on the RC had a lot to do with mounting to my MG. The ejection patterns with the 212 were about as pretty as could ever be expected. I would expect the surefire to be very reliable and to minimally effect weapon operation on full auto. It appears that surefire placed a design emphasis on that. Our suppressors also looked pretty similar in that regard and their ear data coincides with that. Obviously some of the suppressor products on the market would have made forward ejection occur- a sign of excessive bolt speed. Those cans pretty much exhibited 3 o'clock ejection on the mk18 even which is really impressive to me as the mk18s typically eject there without the cans. Our mk18 has had at least 6, 120 round suppressed full auto cycles so if its gas port is pristine ild be surprised. Curious for 3rd party data on a socom mini if you can snag one for a day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2014 11:42:11 AM EDT
[#17]
Someone got that vid in first.
Scooped again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2014 9:12:20 PM EDT
[#18]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2014 11:52:38 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Love my SOCOMs: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7409/14177189293_a291144933_b.jpgBecause 'Merica by TacCoyote, on Flickr I still have several months to go on my 7.62&7.62 mini. And a really long time before I see my 5.56  Trying to stay strong and not order the 5.56 mini |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2014 11:08:36 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Winning! I still have several months to go on my 7.62&7.62 mini. And a really long time before I see my 5.56
Trying to stay strong and not order the 5.56 mini
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Love my SOCOMs: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7409/14177189293_a291144933_b.jpgBecause 'Merica by TacCoyote, on Flickr I still have several months to go on my 7.62&7.62 mini. And a really long time before I see my 5.56
Trying to stay strong and not order the 5.56 mini
So...do it now and wait 10mo or do it later and wait longer. It's going to happen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 8:35:18 AM EDT
[#21]
Just got my SOCOM556-RC a couple weeks ago! I love it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 12:32:47 PM EDT
[#22]
762RC and 556RC:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 1:46:29 PM EDT
[#23]
Just ran a carbine / precision / low light class with the 556-RC on a 12.5".....
FUCKING AWESOME. I had zero issues with POI shift at range (0-700y) can on or off. Slight issue with the can getting stuck on for about 10 minutes (recommend a couple drops of fireclean on the SF mount, zero issues after that) but it was raining and the mount and can were alternative hot and then wet/cold all morning. And with the MicroMOA running where it should, I had probably the smoothest shooting / lowest recoil of any gun in that class, or maybe it just seemed smoother than the 16" guns with comps because the blast was a lot less. So very pleased with the 556-RC. Under a tin roof it's infinitely easier to shoot precision and hear hits, the guys with brakes/comps alone were flinching from the blast. I've got a ton of experience with cans in general, but I just forgot the SF was there nearly the entire class, it's just part of the gun now.... That said, there is a training requirement to adjustable blocks that you have to know your setting all the time. (Check your gear!) Fwiw, I still kinda want the mini, but really hauling it around for 12hr a day, I can't say I once noticed the 1" or couple ounces.... But I still kinda want the mini :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 3:05:27 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just ran a carbine / precision / low light class with the 556-RC on a 12.5"..... FUCKING AWESOME. I had zero issues with POI shift at range (0-700y) can on or off. Slight issue with the can getting stuck on for about 10 minutes (recommend a couple drops of fireclean on the SF mount, zero issues after that) but it was raining and the mount and can were alternative hot and then wet/cold all morning. And with the MicroMOA running where it should, I had probably the smoothest shooting / lowest recoil of any gun in that class, or maybe it just seemed smoother than the 16" guns with comps because the blast was a lot less. So very pleased with the 556-RC. Under a tin roof it's infinitely easier to shoot precision and hear hits, the guys with brakes/comps alone were flinching from the blast. I've got a ton of experience with cans in general, but I just forgot the SF was there nearly the entire class, it's just part of the gun now.... That said, there is a training requirement to adjustable blocks that you have to know your setting all the time. (Check your gear!) Fwiw, I still kinda want the mini, but really hauling it around for 12hr a day, I can't say I once noticed the 1" or couple ounces.... But I still kinda want the mini :) Thanks for the report. My 556RC is still in jail... I will be running it on a 11.5" BCM KMR upper. Did you use the factory GOVNAH settings or did you go custom? What weight buffer? Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 3:36:25 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks for the report. My 556RC is still in jail... I will be running it on a 11.5" BCM KMR upper. Did you use the factory GOVNAH settings or did you go custom? What weight buffer? Thanks again. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just ran a carbine / precision / low light class with the 556-RC on a 12.5"..... FUCKING AWESOME. I had zero issues with POI shift at range (0-700y) can on or off. Slight issue with the can getting stuck on for about 10 minutes (recommend a couple drops of fireclean on the SF mount, zero issues after that) but it was raining and the mount and can were alternative hot and then wet/cold all morning. And with the MicroMOA running where it should, I had probably the smoothest shooting / lowest recoil of any gun in that class, or maybe it just seemed smoother than the 16" guns with comps because the blast was a lot less. So very pleased with the 556-RC. Under a tin roof it's infinitely easier to shoot precision and hear hits, the guys with brakes/comps alone were flinching from the blast. I've got a ton of experience with cans in general, but I just forgot the SF was there nearly the entire class, it's just part of the gun now.... That said, there is a training requirement to adjustable blocks that you have to know your setting all the time. (Check your gear!) Fwiw, I still kinda want the mini, but really hauling it around for 12hr a day, I can't say I once noticed the 1" or couple ounces.... But I still kinda want the mini :) Thanks for the report. My 556RC is still in jail... I will be running it on a 11.5" BCM KMR upper. Did you use the factory GOVNAH settings or did you go custom? What weight buffer? Thanks again. A5H2 buffer, standard rifle spring, 12.5" barrel, and iirc, the plate is .70-something and .50-something. I tried .46 plates for suppressed but the gun didn't cycle, the SF 556-RC doesn't make enough back pressure for that. BUT, the gun will run unsuppressed at .65 or so. I'm left with maybe making a custom plate. But I'm still kicking around other options. That other option for this gun, is probably dialing down the port to .65-equiv with an adjustable and just having a little more gas suppressed. The issue with this is I'm loosing some of the smoother cleaner running, but I kinda don't want to ever have this particular gun on the suppressed setting with no can and have it be down. Happened once during class, not cool, on the other hand, my fault for not checking gear. May set up a dedicated suppressed gun with a cheaper thread on can. Not sure yet. Really picked up the 556-RC for my SPR, but it was so damn pleasant on my carbine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 3:38:56 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryIs that an endcap strike on the 762? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 5:20:44 PM EDT
[#27]
556RC
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 5:59:45 PM EDT
[#28]
Double tap.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2014 6:01:34 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is that an endcap strike on the 762? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is that an endcap strike on the 762? No, it's not. The copper color is evenly distributed around the bore of the end cap. I believe that it's just vaporized jacket material. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/7/2014 12:51:25 PM EDT
[#30]
hopefully my 7.62 stamp comes around august
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2014 12:51:39 AM EDT
[#31]
socom 762 mini and a socom monster hopefully a range report soon |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2014 2:16:32 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://rs1260.pbsrc.com/albums/ii563/BADW85/IMG_20140418_053133_887.jpg~320x480 socom 762 mini and a socom monster hopefully a range report soon Please shoot the 762 MINI with 5.56. I would love to get a user comparison. I ended up adding a 556-rc to my 762-rc because I was told the 762 MINI would be pretty loud when running 5.56. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2014 9:46:56 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please shoot the 762 MINI with 5.56. I would love to get a user comparison. I ended up adding a 556-rc to my 762-rc because I was told the 762 MINI would be pretty loud when running 5.56. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
http://rs1260.pbsrc.com/albums/ii563/BADW85/IMG_20140418_053133_887.jpg~320x480 socom 762 mini and a socom monster hopefully a range report soon Please shoot the 762 MINI with 5.56. I would love to get a user comparison. I ended up adding a 556-rc to my 762-rc because I was told the 762 MINI would be pretty loud when running 5.56. Not true at all. I have a 7.62 Mini and a 5.56 RC and I cannot tell the difference between the two on my 16" 5.56. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/9/2014 9:57:36 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not true at all. I have a 7.62 Mini and a 5.56 RC and I cannot tell the difference between the two on my 16" 5.56. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://rs1260.pbsrc.com/albums/ii563/BADW85/IMG_20140418_053133_887.jpg~320x480 socom 762 mini and a socom monster hopefully a range report soon Please shoot the 762 MINI with 5.56. I would love to get a user comparison. I ended up adding a 556-rc to my 762-rc because I was told the 762 MINI would be pretty loud when running 5.56. Not true at all. I have a 7.62 Mini and a 5.56 RC and I cannot tell the difference between the two on my 16" 5.56. Interesting. Just repeating what I heard from a well known surefire rep. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 12:48:39 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting. Just repeating what I heard from a well known surefire rep. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://rs1260.pbsrc.com/albums/ii563/BADW85/IMG_20140418_053133_887.jpg~320x480 socom 762 mini and a socom monster hopefully a range report soon Please shoot the 762 MINI with 5.56. I would love to get a user comparison. I ended up adding a 556-rc to my 762-rc because I was told the 762 MINI would be pretty loud when running 5.56. Not true at all. I have a 7.62 Mini and a 5.56 RC and I cannot tell the difference between the two on my 16" 5.56. Interesting. Just repeating what I heard from a well known surefire rep. there was a test not to long ago that showed the rc cans quieter at the shooters ear if I remember right. so you may tell the difference if your standing back. I will be shooting them on a 10.5 lmt mrp and the mini on a lmt mws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 1:53:46 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Please shoot the 762 MINI with 5.56. I would love to get a user comparison. I ended up adding a 556-rc to my 762-rc because I was told the 762 MINI would be pretty loud when running 5.56. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
http://rs1260.pbsrc.com/albums/ii563/BADW85/IMG_20140418_053133_887.jpg~320x480 socom 762 mini and a socom monster hopefully a range report soon Please shoot the 762 MINI with 5.56. I would love to get a user comparison. I ended up adding a 556-rc to my 762-rc because I was told the 762 MINI would be pretty loud when running 5.56. My 30 Mini (Not a SOCOM) is MUCH louder on my 10.5" 5.56 than either a 556 mini SOCOM or 556-sb SOCOM fwiw. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 4:35:06 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My 30 Mini (Not a SOCOM) is MUCH louder on my 10.5" 5.56 than either a 556 mini SOCOM or 556-sb SOCOM fwiw. What's the difference like between the mini and the sb? ETA: here's my SB... http://www.hkbeltfed.com/mrsup.m4v http://www.hkbeltfed.com/aug2.m4v |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/10/2014 6:57:32 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What's the difference like between the mini and the sb? ETA: here's my SB... http://www.hkbeltfed.com/mrsup.m4v http://www.hkbeltfed.com/aug2.m4v The 30 mini and the 556sb are the same physical size. The 556 mini is obviously a lot smaller. The 30 mini has a considerably larger exit aperture than the 556sb. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My 30 Mini (Not a SOCOM) is MUCH louder on my 10.5" 5.56 than either a 556 mini SOCOM or 556-sb SOCOM fwiw. What's the difference like between the mini and the sb? ETA: here's my SB... http://www.hkbeltfed.com/mrsup.m4v http://www.hkbeltfed.com/aug2.m4v The 30 mini and the 556sb are the same physical size. The 556 mini is obviously a lot smaller. The 30 mini has a considerably larger exit aperture than the 556sb. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2014 3:36:34 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The 30 mini and the 556sb are the same physical size. The 556 mini is obviously a lot smaller. The 30 mini has a considerably larger exit aperture than the 556sb. I meant the difference in your perception of sound as the shooter between the mini and the SB. Any input? Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2014 3:07:59 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I meant the difference in your perception of sound as the shooter between the mini and the SB. Any input? Thanks again. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The 30 mini and the 556sb are the same physical size. The 556 mini is obviously a lot smaller. The 30 mini has a considerably larger exit aperture than the 556sb. I meant the difference in your perception of sound as the shooter between the mini and the SB. Any input? Thanks again. I don't have a lot of time with either can, and virtually none shooting them back to back. However, they subjectively seem pretty similar. I got the mini first, and took a two day class with it and I thought it worked very well. It's obviously not the quietest can, but I was surprised by its effectiveness. The SB is virtually new. I shot a match with it last weekend and was likewise pleased. I hope to be able to compare them back to back pretty soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2014 3:32:26 PM EDT
[#41]
Thanks! Looking forward to your thoughts once you get them side by side!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/17/2014 6:22:53 PM EDT
[#42]
I currently have three 7.62 cans and now I'm looking for a smaller, lighter suppressor. The limitation is that I'm left handed and this can will be on a rifle with an FSB (so no adjustable gas block). However, I am willing to sacrifice sound reduction for blowback reduction.
I've done a lot of research and narrowed it down to either a 5.56 RC, 5.56 SB or 7.62 Mini. Since they are all the same size and weight I think the SB will be the best balance of sound reduction and blowback mitigation (its bore size is in between the two other options). Does that sound right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2014 2:02:48 AM EDT
[#43]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2014 10:29:44 AM EDT
[#44]
I can't get the embed to work.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2014 11:30:43 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryGood info. Was that a 16" barrel? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2014 11:37:53 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good info. Was that a 16" barrel? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good info. Was that a 16" barrel? 12.5". Makes it a bit harder to make an apples to apples comparison with some of the other SS 5.56 tests. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/18/2014 11:50:17 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
12.5". Makes it a bit harder to make an apples to apples comparison with some of the other SS 5.56 tests. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Good info. Was that a 16" barrel? 12.5". Makes it a bit harder to make an apples to apples comparison with some of the other SS 5.56 tests. Check out the Saker video, same 12.5" bbl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOzi60nGN0s |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2014 4:33:12 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So...do it now and wait 10mo or do it later and wait longer. It's going to happen. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Love my SOCOMs: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7409/14177189293_a291144933_b.jpgBecause 'Merica by TacCoyote, on Flickr I still have several months to go on my 7.62&7.62 mini. And a really long time before I see my 5.56 Trying to stay strong and not order the 5.56 mini So...do it now and wait 10mo or do it later and wait longer. It's going to happen. 5.56 mini ordered.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2014 1:23:56 PM EDT
[#49]
Sigh...my socom can Is still forward deployed to Nfa jail.
|
|
|
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.
