User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/21/2020 5:18:34 PM EDT
[#1]
3. The 4 is mostly for clones.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2020 5:30:07 PM EDT
[#2]
3 prong, open tine
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2020 6:42:50 PM EDT
[#3]
The sf3. But on a 10.3 you still get a bunch of flash but that's due to unburned powder in such a short barrel. It'll do fantastic on job on a 14.5. sorry, no pics.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2020 7:35:30 PM EDT
[#4]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2020 8:24:40 PM EDT
[#5]
3P and 4P are the best for hiding flash. i use those for clone builds.
everything else gets the closed tine. i think it's the best all around muzzle device and you do not have the ping. i like normal a2 flash hiders though, my .02. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2020 8:45:08 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 3P and 4P are the best for hiding flash. i use those for clone builds. everything else gets the closed tine. i think it's the best all around muzzle device and you do not have the ping. i like normal a2 flash hiders though, my .02. Same for me, 4 prong on clones, closed tine on the others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2020 8:52:38 PM EDT
[#7]
I dont think you will see much difference between the warcomp and 3p, so here are some good examples. i think the warcomp would have more visible flash with the porting, but you would likely need a lux meter to tell the differences. some videos:
 Warcomp Closetine CTN Part 3 - NIGHT FIRE  Surefire Warcomp vs. Warcomp CTN |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2020 8:35:55 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Same for me, 4 prong on clones, closed tine on the others. Same here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2020 9:52:49 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 3P and 4P are the best for hiding flash. i use those for clone builds. everything else gets the closed tine. i think it's the best all around muzzle device and you do not have the ping. i like normal a2 flash hiders though, my .02. @JLAudio I went back to an A2 flash hider with shims on my 16". Figured I needed as short as possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2020 11:48:56 AM EDT
[#10]
3-prong FHs have been good about mitigating flash, but so has the standard A2 FH. If you are intent on having a SF FH on those barrels, I would say that the 3P is a better option, but my vote would be for a standard A2, especially if you are not having the FH pinned and welded on the 14.5" barrel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2020 6:40:28 PM EDT
[#11]
For those suggesting something other than a Surefire muzzle device, that’s a no go. I need it to run my rc2. Guess I should’ve specified that in the OP
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2020 10:39:16 PM EDT
[#12]
I personally run a warcomp on all 3 of my ARs.
16" 5.56 11.5" 5.56 10.5" .300blk Also waiting for a 7.62RC2 mini to get out of jail haha |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/22/2020 11:06:05 PM EDT
[#13]
Your location says arkansas.
If you spend any time whatsoever in the bush, you will soon learn a lesson that seems to have been forgotten to old man time himself during the great unpleasantness, and that is that open tine flash hiders may be awesome at hiding flash and work great in the open desert of iraq or the wide open high mountain valleys of afghanistan with little veg, but they abso-fucking-lutely suck for anything resembling a real forrest, bush, jungles, etc. Use the sfct and learn from the mistakes of others. There is a reason that phantom and vortex flash hiders fell out of favor and it wasn't because they suck at hiding flash. They were absolutely fantastic at suppressing flash. But they are also "catch-alls" of every last twig, stick, leaf, tall grass and bush you try to move through. And flash suppression of the hider won't matter a whit once the can is attached and doing all of the heavy lifting. Open tines for deserts, clones, and looking cool. Closed tines for everywhere else and doing honest work. And they ain't exactly shabby at suppressing flash either. Especially from yourself, which is what they are actually meant for. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/23/2020 12:02:40 AM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/24/2020 9:41:08 AM EDT
[#15]
I run 3p warcomps and can't recall a single instance of flash including on a 10.3" barrel.
I need to get some CTs next, and they're just as effective from what I've seen. The "bird cage/A2 on steroids" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/24/2020 2:49:36 PM EDT
[#16]
My favorites are the two closed tine models.
I would use the SFCT for a suppressed weapon and the CT-warcomp for a non-suppressed. I say this because the warcomp style muzzle devices weld the can to the device faster than the models without ports. Unlike the SF brake the warcomp ports are located right on the locking ring of the suppressor. The non-comped version is also slightly shorter in the neck - so it gives you less rail->suppressor gap. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2020 11:28:18 PM EDT
[#17]
All good choices. Just don’t get the warcomp on a short barrel. Too much bang. I like the FA 215, which is the first generation 4-prong.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 3:05:36 AM EDT
[#18]
Do the closed tine models actually help with baffle erosion? I know that brakes help with that, but I don't exactly understand how a closed tine wouldn't just direct the blast right into the baffle just like a 3/4 prong but in a different pattern. Has anyone confirmed this?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 1:25:56 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do the closed tine models actually help with baffle erosion? I know that brakes help with that, but I don't exactly understand how a closed tine wouldn't just direct the blast right into the baffle just like a 3/4 prong but in a different pattern. Has anyone confirmed this? I posted pics of my baffles at 1000rounds using only closed tine sure fire devices and the guys in the suppressor forum were impressed with how little erosion there was. Realistically it dont matter because these surefire cans can last forever. Garand Thumb has one that has 80,000+ rounds... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 1:28:35 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All good choices. Just don’t get the warcomp on a short barrel. Too much bang. I like the FA 215, which is the first generation 4-prong. I actually think the warcomp versions only really work well on a short barrel. Closed tine warcomp on my 16" did absolutely nothing...but on my 11.5" it is super noticeable. Actually drives the gun straight down - which takes some getting used to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 2:52:01 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I posted pics of my baffles at 1000rounds using only closed tine sure fire devices and the guys in the suppressor forum were impressed with how little erosion there was. Realistically it dont matter because these surefire cans can last forever. Garand Thumb has one that has 80,000+ rounds... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Do the closed tine models actually help with baffle erosion? I know that brakes help with that, but I don't exactly understand how a closed tine wouldn't just direct the blast right into the baffle just like a 3/4 prong but in a different pattern. Has anyone confirmed this? I posted pics of my baffles at 1000rounds using only closed tine sure fire devices and the guys in the suppressor forum were impressed with how little erosion there was. Realistically it dont matter because these surefire cans can last forever. Garand Thumb has one that has 80,000+ rounds... Haha... no. An SF can is a tough bastard, but it isn't going to last 80k and have any real utility left as a suppressor. Maybe he has 80k after a re-core or two, that's certainly possible. But if he's claiming he has 80k+ on the original baffle stack and that it still does its job... I can virtually guarantee that's nonsense. Even if you managed to somehow keep the stack more or less intact by using a brake (which if memory serves, he uses mostly pronged SF devices), eventually melted copper and lead are going to kill the internal volume. And that assumes you're diligent about cleaning; without cleaning, carbon will kill it long before the baffles erode. Personally, I have 13k+ on my RC and I doubt I'll go much past 30k before it's ready for a rebuild. That's not to say it couldn't go beyond that, but how much performance loss are you willing to accept? Eventually, you're carrying around a useless weight for no reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 3:44:42 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do the closed tine models actually help with baffle erosion? I know that brakes help with that, but I don't exactly understand how a closed tine wouldn't just direct the blast right into the baffle just like a 3/4 prong but in a different pattern. Has anyone confirmed this? It's physics, yo. Spread the expanding hi-temp gasses over a wider area, the less erosion all the way around. Most likely the same amount of erosion, it's just spread over more surface area. Focus the expanding hi-temp gasses to 3 or 4 concentrated locations and get a good visual instruction as to how gas cutting works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 6:39:16 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I posted pics of my baffles at 1000rounds using only closed tine sure fire devices and the guys in the suppressor forum were impressed with how little erosion there was. Realistically it dont matter because these surefire cans can last forever. Garand Thumb has one that has 80,000+ rounds... Thank you. I'm going standard closed tine. Is that what you had or was it the Warcomp closed tine? Also, I tend to agree with the poster below regarding Garand Thumb's numbers. I'd be shocked if he didn't rebaffle at least a couple times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 6:47:59 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's physics, yo. Spread the expanding hi-temp gasses over a wider area, the less erosion all the way around. Most likely the same amount of erosion, it's just spread over more surface area. Focus the expanding hi-temp gasses to 3 or 4 concentrated locations and get a good visual instruction as to how gas cutting works. What exactly is happening? Unburnt powder and gas being blasted along the prongs and essentially sand blasting the baffle? It's just strange, because there are enormous gaps between each prong on the pronged flash hiders, but there's only tiny gaps with a standard bird cage. You would expect the gases to be more concentrated at the baffles with the birdcage: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 8:20:23 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What exactly is happening? Unburnt powder and gas being blasted along the prongs and essentially sand blasting the baffle? It's just strange, because there are enormous gaps between each prong on the pronged flash hiders, but there's only tiny gaps with a standard bird cage. You would expect the gases to be more concentrated at the baffles with the birdcage: https://oregonrifleworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_6197.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It's physics, yo. Spread the expanding hi-temp gasses over a wider area, the less erosion all the way around. Most likely the same amount of erosion, it's just spread over more surface area. Focus the expanding hi-temp gasses to 3 or 4 concentrated locations and get a good visual instruction as to how gas cutting works. What exactly is happening? Unburnt powder and gas being blasted along the prongs and essentially sand blasting the baffle? It's just strange, because there are enormous gaps between each prong on the pronged flash hiders, but there's only tiny gaps with a standard bird cage. You would expect the gases to be more concentrated at the baffles with the birdcage: https://oregonrifleworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_6197.jpg The primary route for erosion is gas/flame cutting; and the hotter you get the baffle, the more susceptible it is. Spread the blast over a larger area, and you slow the process; think of a shotgun with a full choke versus an open cylinder. This should pretty clearly illustrate how the two designs erode: RC and 4P:  NT4 and M4QD:  You can see how the CT spreads the erosion over the entire baffle whereas the pronged device forces the blast into concentrated channels. Keep in mind the NT4 has a significantly thinner blast baffle than the RC, which is the main cause of the ragged bore and not necessarily the type of device. In fact, if I were using a 4P-style device on the NT4, it likely would've already cut through the first baffle by this point. Contrarily, you might argue that although a CT will erode slower, once you do eventually penetrate the baffle, the effect on performance would be worse (i.e. more of the baffle would be removed). However, it's going to take a lot longer to get to that point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2020 9:56:40 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The primary route for erosion is gas/flame cutting; and the hotter you get the baffle, the more susceptible it is. Spread the blast over a larger area, and you slow the process; think of a shotgun with a full choke versus an open cylinder. This should pretty clearly illustrate how the two designs erode: RC and 4P: http://wkd.site.nfoservers.com/CQBR/CQBR.091520.RC.Baffle.13300-RSC-01.jpg NT4 and M4QD: http://wkd.site.nfoservers.com/CQBR/CQBR.080520.NT4.Baffle.2464-RS-01.jpg You can see how the CT spreads the erosion over the entire baffle whereas the pronged device forces the blast into concentrated channels. Keep in mind the NT4 has a significantly thinner blast baffle than the RC, which is the main cause of the ragged bore and not necessarily the type of device. In fact, if I were using a 4P-style device on the NT4, it likely would've already cut through the first baffle by this point. Contrarily, you might argue that although a CT will erode slower, once you do eventually penetrate the baffle, the effect on performance would be worse (i.e. more of the baffle would be removed). However, it's going to take a lot longer to get to that point. Thanks for the info. Have we ever gotten to the bottom of why SOCOM ever went with a pronged flash hider? Was it primarily due to the fact that the flash suppression is superior to the birdcage? Seems like they modified a part that didn't need modifying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2020 12:22:06 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What exactly is happening? Unburnt powder and gas being blasted along the prongs and essentially sand blasting the baffle? It's just strange, because there are enormous gaps between each prong on the pronged flash hiders, but there's only tiny gaps with a standard bird cage. You would expect the gases to be more concentrated at the baffles with the birdcage: https://oregonrifleworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/IMG_6197.jpg In a manner of speaking, yes. As to open prong vs. closed tine openings, remember that the expanding gasses have a primary direction of flow. Once they deviate from the primary direction of flow, they slow significantly. This is actually one of the primary design functions if a suppressor. Slow the speed of expanding and burning gasses to subsonic, thereby reducing or eliminating the sound associated with breaking the sound barrier. This means that the baffle is subject to more heat and pressure the closer it is to the primary direction if flow, and less the further away. This is why the edges of the blast baffle aperature always looks so ragged as in krdt's nt4 pic above. My legacy M4-96D did the same. The side slots of a flash hider present very little pressure and heat by comparison, as they are 90 degrees off axis from the primary direction of flow exiting the bore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2020 12:28:40 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks for the info. Have we ever gotten to the bottom of why SOCOM ever went with a pronged flash hider? Was it primarily due to the fact that the flash suppression is superior to the birdcage? Seems like they modified a part that didn't need modifying. Because BE Meyers had a great product that influenced flash suppression tech in socom to the point that people forgot the reason why pronged hiders went out of vogue in the 90's to begin with. Pronged are great for the deserts, but are shit for anywhere else that has any kind of veg. Given that a great amount of current small arms accessory development is based in the gwot, which has primarily been in desert environs, it's no surprise that the pronged designs have returned to the forefront. Wait until we're back in europe or full time jungle fighting. The prongs will dissapear faster than a box of doughnuts in a DoD breakroom. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2020 8:30:10 PM EDT
[#29]
The 3 or the open Warcomp.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2020 8:33:57 PM EDT
[#30]
3P Warcomp.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2020 9:38:33 AM EDT
[#31]
Just reposting what he literally said in one of his recent videos (I think its the one where he is reviewing the Honey Badger or maybe the new Razor?). I also thought the number was very high but he is never intentionally deceptive.
|
|
|
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.
Attached File
Attached File