User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 9:41:04 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The “white page” info sheets HuxWrx has lists the life expectancy of the FLOW at 10,000 rounds but the 556Ti at 20,000. I wonder if the build quality between these 2 is that much different. I was pretty much set on the FLOW as my next can but may go Ti Is it just me or does that seem like a very short life expectancy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 9:58:20 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is it just me or does that seem like a very short life expectancy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 10:29:14 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Its probably a compromise that sacrifices a little life for increased sound and back pressure performance. I'd bet there are some geometries in there that are more erosion prone than traditional baffles. I guess figure out how many years it takes you to shoot 10k, subtract 18 months and set a reminder to buy a new can then. That’s a big guess. We could as easily guess the structure is weaker/thinner than their usual suppressors to reduce cost and maximize profit. IM NOT SAYING THAT IS WHAT THEY DID. I’m just saying, I’m not sure there is value is guessing. It depends on how much you want to spend on suppressors and how much the no gas to your face is worth to you. Some of the RC2s and Sandmans are documented past 50,000 rounds. However, how long have you had a suppressor before you think it is antiquated or shot out anyway? As tech continues to evolve quickly, and if you think your cans are antiquated after four or five years, then this is a non issue (provided you shoot about 2,000 - 2,500 rounds a year, which is a lot). I’m married, two kids and work about 60 hrs a week. I shoot about 500 rounds a year - that’s a plenty long service life for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 10:48:41 AM EDT
[#4]
There are a few market cans that have like .04” thick baffle apertures throughout and stuff like that in centerfire applications. This leans on 17-4 cold strength but doesn’t really account for higher temperature durability when the baffles are closer to white hot.
It makes erosion more likely to occur faster or in one time sprint episodes, and is an obvious way to get better sound performance to happen with less laminar flow inducing surfaces in the bore where nobody wants pencil like laminar flow to occur, leading to higher sound or more difficult R&D workups. Our dual lok cans have .100” thick apertures on blast baffles and .085 on the next pair. .065 thereafter. That makes them more durable for the wear that is most likely to take performance out of the suppressors. The baffles are also located more forward than most, to reduce velocity and focus of particles hitting their surfaces. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 10:54:09 AM EDT
[#5]
Someone (I think Jay in his podcast) was saying that this can will get dirty much faster than traditional rifle cans.
I suspect that if you maintain it and keep it clean, it can last much longer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 12:22:42 PM EDT
[#6]
Seeking donations for a 10,000 round test…
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 12:50:46 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seeking donations for a 10,000 round test |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 1:16:04 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Someone (I think Jay in his podcast) was saying that this can will get dirty much faster than traditional rifle cans. I suspect that if you maintain it and keep it clean, it can last much longer. The way the white paper is phrased almost makes it sound like that service life builds in cleaning (i.e. it’s required to reach that service life). Service Life: 10,000 rounds threshold with objective 20,000 rounds. Detailed cleaning will help ensure product performance and service life are not compromised. I read that as though service life could be cut short if not cleaned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 1:38:41 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The way the white paper is phrased almost makes it sound like that service life builds in cleaning (i.e. it's required to reach that service life). Service Life: 10,000 rounds threshold with objective 20,000 rounds. Detailed cleaning will help ensure product performance and service life are not compromised. I read that as though service life could be cut short if not cleaned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 2:11:26 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Small flow paths that once completely filled with gunk is difficult to remove? Make me wonder now. Is this flow-thru technology going to be too big of a possible negative? It was going to go on a 11.5 SBR upper so flow-thru sounded very appealing BUT if it really doesn't make that big a difference in reality, I'd rather have something much easier to maintain and have it operate at near peak performance through it's entire lifespan. I just don't have any experience behind a suppressed 5.56 SBR to know how much better a flow-thru can is compared to a conventional design. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 4:00:05 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Make me wonder now. Is this flow-thru technology going to be too big of a possible negative? It was going to go on a 11.5 SBR upper so flow-thru sounded very appealing BUT if it really doesn't make that big a difference in reality, I'd rather have something much easier to maintain and have it operate at near peak performance through it's entire lifespan. I just don't have any experience behind a suppressed 5.56 SBR to know how much better a flow-thru can is compared to a conventional design. Flow through means different things to different companies. I think what's important is that the suppressor allows more than traditional amounts of gas to move forward, as that will drop ear signature and toxic gas exposure. From there, it is important that so much gas isn't moving forward unrestricted that the muzzle signature and flash signature explode and begin to effect the ear location, or perhaps bounce off objects in the vicinity of the muzzle rendering the operator side less safe. On our cans it dropped ~142.5 ear to 133-137 territory with low influence to muzzle sound- often improving muzzle sound. So thats a big drop in hearing risk and pressure. I see it as generational change, and the objective for future development being to further mitigate those numbers without increasing the muzzle numbers, while keeping strong awareness of tone and trying to stay on the neutral to positive side of tonal consonance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 7:06:22 PM EDT
[#12]
Finally got to fondle mine at the shop today. It’s fuggin sexy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 7:42:53 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Finally got to fondle mine at the shop today. It’s fuggin sexy. Did you feel how sharp it is inside? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 8:02:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did you feel how sharp it is inside? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 8:08:45 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: On our cans it dropped ~142.5 ear to 133-137 territory with low influence to muzzle sound- often improving muzzle sound. So thats a big drop in hearing risk and pressure. I see it as generational change, and the objective for future development being to further mitigate those numbers without increasing the muzzle numbers, while keeping strong awareness of tone and trying to stay on the neutral to positive side of tonal consonance. Sorry to detract but this would be your M4SD II that performed that well? Thanks |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 8:16:59 PM EDT
[#16]
Here’s the reply I got from Huxwrx when I inquired about the service life:
If it is not cleaned, then by the 10k round mark it will be so full of carbon and lead build up that it will no longer be flow through. If you clean it every 1500 rounds, then It will last 10's of thousands of rounds. We have 2 that have over 50k rounds on them from testing that are still going strong and were cleaned every 1500 rounds. We also have a handful that were never cleaned and are clogged up around the 10k round count. Best, James Boone Customer Service Specialist |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 8:38:27 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Here’s the reply I got from Huxwrx when I inquired about the service life: If it is not cleaned, then by the 10k round mark it will be so full of carbon and lead build up that it will no longer be flow through. If you clean it every 1500 rounds, then It will last 10's of thousands of rounds. We have 2 that have over 50k rounds on them from testing that are still going strong and were cleaned every 1500 rounds. We also have a handful that were never cleaned and are clogged up around the 10k round count. Best, James Boone Customer Service Specialist That’s some great info! Appreciate you sharing it. Does anyone know best cleaning method for these flow thru cans? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 8:42:22 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s some great info! Appreciate you sharing it. Does anyone know best cleaning method for these flow thru cans? Like so: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/08/27/the-unique-method-of-cleaning-oss-helix-qd-suppressors/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 9:49:19 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sorry to detract but this would be your M4SD II that performed that well? Thanks The Recce 5, and the M4SD II perform like that. The HRT and M4SDK are similar. They very similar or identical baffle systems in a shorter length tube chassis. So the only performance change is caused by reduction in length and volume, and is minor compared to the typical scenario on the market where short cans often get less baffles and are made to be cheaper units than full size cans that seriously underperform. That probably is more similar to how the flow 556K was made, because the flow556K numbers are only slightly louder peak than the HXQD full size units according to the pew tests. This is the only logical way to make a can for something like the FBI contract where the end user has been running an RC2, and wants a shorter unit and is ostensibly [or possibly] going to be comparing it to the RC2. There may have been no comparison made, but if you try to imagine worst case scenarios, that is a logical expectation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 11:13:07 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The “white page” info sheets HuxWrx has lists the life expectancy of the FLOW at 10,000 rounds but the 556Ti at 20,000. I wonder if the build quality between these 2 is that much different. I was pretty much set on the FLOW as my next can but may go Ti The Ti is nice; full size at 13 ounces. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 11:39:10 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryHeck yeah!! Looks like a very fun way to clean it |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 9:07:43 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryThat was awesome to watch! Not sure I’d want to use that method though due to concerns about toxicity. That’s gotta be a hell of a brew spewing out of there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 10:01:22 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did you feel how sharp it is inside? No. I have a fleshlight so I don’t need to do stuff like that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 1:05:27 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Here’s the reply I got from Huxwrx when I inquired about the service life: If it is not cleaned, then by the 10k round mark it will be so full of carbon and lead build up that it will no longer be flow through. If you clean it every 1500 rounds, then It will last 10's of thousands of rounds. We have 2 that have over 50k rounds on them from testing that are still going strong and were cleaned every 1500 rounds. We also have a handful that were never cleaned and are clogged up around the 10k round count. Best, James Boone Customer Service Specialist How are they cleaning them won’t an Ultrasonic take the finish off? Edit Never mind I just watched the link, lol that’s crazy I wonder if you can do that with other cans? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 2:42:40 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That was awesome to watch! Not sure I’d want to use that method though due to concerns about toxicity. That’s gotta be a hell of a brew spewing out of there. Yeah, I thought a little bit about that. It wouldn’t stop me, but I’d definitely be cognizant of where I was doing it. I’m sure my usual indoor range wouldn’t be too excited if I tried to have a one-man foam party. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 4:59:21 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, I thought a little bit about that. It wouldn’t stop me, but I’d definitely be cognizant of where I was doing it. I’m sure my usual indoor range wouldn’t be too excited if I tried to have a one-man foam party. I wonder if that was shaving cream? It doesn't seem like oil should instantly foam like that. Maybe shaving cream could clean a suppressor. It works pretty well for removing army camo stick face paint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 5:41:32 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wonder if that was shaving cream? It doesn't seem like oil should instantly foam like that. Maybe shaving cream could clean a suppressor. It works pretty well for removing army camo stick face paint. Would that work on a Recce 7? If I’m not mistaken, the Eco-flow baffles have some smaller peripheral ports, and I’ve wonder about dirty .300 subs clogging them over time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 5:47:12 PM EDT
[#28]
The way they did that in the video should be fine. You could soak the can vertically in oil, pull it out and shoot it. Most of the oil wouldn't be in the suppressor at that point.
We had one unit come back with 50,000 rounds and it was only about one ounce heavier and two DB louder than new. We don't have a coaxial system trapping gas in an outer space or tons of complex geometry for the fouling to pile up on. Coaxial elements can help reduce sound, but they also represent dead weight not reinforcing the outer tube, and insulative space to reduce cooling speed. Not having those is only a design compromise if the product that does have them is better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/3/2022 10:47:46 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wonder if that was shaving cream? It doesn't seem like oil should instantly foam like that. Maybe shaving cream could clean a suppressor. It works pretty well for removing army camo stick face paint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2022 5:35:53 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We had one unit come back with 50,000 rounds and it was only about one ounce heavier and two DB louder than new. We don't have a coaxial system trapping gas in an outer space or tons of complex geometry for the fouling to pile up on. Traditional cans certainly gain weight. My M4SDk II weighs as much as my 30SDk. List weight claims M4SDk is 3.3oz lighter. I don’t remember how much it weighed new. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2022 9:41:35 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Traditional cans certainly gain weight. My M4SDk II weighs as much as my 30SDk. List weight claims M4SDk is 3.3oz lighter. I don’t remember how much it weighed new. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: We had one unit come back with 50,000 rounds and it was only about one ounce heavier and two DB louder than new. We don't have a coaxial system trapping gas in an outer space or tons of complex geometry for the fouling to pile up on. Traditional cans certainly gain weight. My M4SDk II weighs as much as my 30SDk. List weight claims M4SDk is 3.3oz lighter. I don’t remember how much it weighed new. All of my M4SDK's are are 16.9 ounces, without the MD, new. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2022 11:20:15 PM EDT
[#32]
Very interested to see how these cans hold up. We know surefires can effectively go indefinitely while being recored, what would happen with one of these?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/5/2022 12:31:02 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All of my M4SDK's are are 16.9 ounces, without the MD, new. OK, so mine’s only gained an ounce. Cool, thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2022 11:41:35 PM EDT
[#34]
Having read the FBI solicitation for this suppressor, it would be really interesting to see who else submitted. Gut feeling would be that all the major players threw something up there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2022 1:15:30 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Having read the FBI solicitation for this suppressor, it would be really interesting to see who else submitted. Gut feeling would be that all the major players threw something up there. You are correct from what I’ve heard. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2022 9:05:20 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You are correct from what I’ve heard. Wish we could know the scores of each suppressor. All cans were scored against flash reduction compared to an rc2 and awarded points for being better, no points for being equal, and deducted points for being worse. Theoretically, the flow556k could have been worse and still had the best points total, but I doubt it would’ve won had the flash been worse. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2022 5:21:55 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wish we could know the scores of each suppressor. All cans were scored against flash reduction compared to an rc2 and awarded points for being better, no points for being equal, and deducted points for being worse. Theoretically, the flow556k could have been worse and still had the best points total, but I doubt it would’ve won had the flash been worse. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You are correct from what I’ve heard. Wish we could know the scores of each suppressor. All cans were scored against flash reduction compared to an rc2 and awarded points for being better, no points for being equal, and deducted points for being worse. Theoretically, the flow556k could have been worse and still had the best points total, but I doubt it would’ve won had the flash been worse. Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar to beat. The RC2 doesn’t sound good, isn’t super durable and is crazy heavy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2022 5:29:34 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar to beat. The RC2 doesn’t sound good, isn’t super durable and is crazy heavy. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: You are correct from what I’ve heard. Wish we could know the scores of each suppressor. All cans were scored against flash reduction compared to an rc2 and awarded points for being better, no points for being equal, and deducted points for being worse. Theoretically, the flow556k could have been worse and still had the best points total, but I doubt it would’ve won had the flash been worse. Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar to beat. The RC2 doesn’t sound good, isn’t super durable and is crazy heavy. While it’s been around the block, the rc2 is the gold standard for flash reduction. It still is the can to beat in that regard. If you read pew science, the rc2 isn’t shabby at all at the muzzle or the ear considering it’s competition and it’s age. It’s also pretty durable, unless your definition of minimum durable is a Helios qd. I don’t think it’s off base for the baseline flash metric to be a rc2 with flash suppressed duty ammunition…. I challenge you to find a combo that has beaten that on short guns. It killed all comers in otter creeks night vision videos, it’s beaten old gen OSS cans easily, PRT cans on video have had more flash, etc etc. For flash reduction, the rc2 is literally the can to beat. If the flow 556k beat that on a short gun, then that is very impressive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2022 6:22:54 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar to beat. The RC2 doesn’t sound good, isn’t super durable and is crazy heavy. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: You are correct from what I’ve heard. Wish we could know the scores of each suppressor. All cans were scored against flash reduction compared to an rc2 and awarded points for being better, no points for being equal, and deducted points for being worse. Theoretically, the flow556k could have been worse and still had the best points total, but I doubt it would’ve won had the flash been worse. Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar to beat. The RC2 doesn’t sound good, isn’t super durable and is crazy heavy. That's quite the hot take. So not a SF fanboy. Who do you fanboy for? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2022 6:11:34 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's quite the hot take. So not a SF fanboy. Who do you fanboy for? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You are correct from what I’ve heard. Wish we could know the scores of each suppressor. All cans were scored against flash reduction compared to an rc2 and awarded points for being better, no points for being equal, and deducted points for being worse. Theoretically, the flow556k could have been worse and still had the best points total, but I doubt it would’ve won had the flash been worse. Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar to beat. The RC2 doesn’t sound good, isn’t super durable and is crazy heavy. That's quite the hot take. So not a SF fanboy. Who do you fanboy for? It’s a bad take |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2022 11:19:45 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's quite the hot take. So not a SF fanboy. Who do you fanboy for? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You are correct from what I’ve heard. Wish we could know the scores of each suppressor. All cans were scored against flash reduction compared to an rc2 and awarded points for being better, no points for being equal, and deducted points for being worse. Theoretically, the flow556k could have been worse and still had the best points total, but I doubt it would’ve won had the flash been worse. Doesn’t sound like a terribly high bar to beat. The RC2 doesn’t sound good, isn’t super durable and is crazy heavy. That's quite the hot take. So not a SF fanboy. Who do you fanboy for? I own several brand, sico, dead air, oss, gemtech, OCL and a bunch of form1s. When I first got into looking for suppressors all I wanted was surefire. With a little research I found all the other brands and went that route instead. I also do tons of sound testing now with 4 BK2209s. The RC2 is middle of the road can. The only thing it does well is flash reduction. I was very underwhelmed when I shot one and metered it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2022 11:32:47 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I own several brand, sico, dead air, oss, gemtech, OCL and a bunch of form1s. When I first got into looking for suppressors all I wanted was surefire. With a little research I found all the other brands and went that route instead. I also do tons of sound testing now with 4 BK2209s. The RC2 is middle of the road can. The only thing it does well is flash reduction. I was very underwhelmed when I shot one and metered it. In comparison to the others, why do you consider the RC2 crazy heavy? What durability issues have you had with it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2022 2:46:36 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In comparison to the others, why do you consider the RC2 crazy heavy? What durability issues have you had with it? When Surefire brought out the FA556-212, they were talking in marketing videos like they reduced substantial weight vs the KAC NT4 (which essentially defines "Crazy Heavy" in the carbine can market). They didn't mention the NT4, but they were talking about SOCOM and SOCOM was running the NT4. The NT4 weighs 21.5 ounces and its mount brings the system weight to 23.5. The RC2 which is the more modern flagship is 17 ounces, and the mount brings the can to 21.7 ounces, which is only 1.8 ounces down vs the NT4. There is of course more depth to that, in that the A2 is not a competitive flash suppressor and the 3P is, but still, weight wasn't dramatically reduced. The RC2 isn't light. It looks light when you look at specs without considering system weight, which is what the majority of people are going to do. It also doesn't sound tonally as good as it meters IMO, which is fairly competitive from an Ear/Muzzle perspective. That would be my only way of quantifying what the StrikeEagle member is saying, as my RC2 puts down pretty competitive comprehensive numbers compared to most suppressors on the market that are in that military competitive space, and that's also comprehensive in that the performance is pretty balanced and competitive across MK18/HK416/M4A1/ and other DI platforms. AKA it's not just doing really well on one barrel length like the M4-2000 on the 16" mid length gas. As a product development person, I would want comprehensive performance across multiple platforms as objectively better than lop-sided performance in one direction. The only possible variable, would be my RC2 has like 50 rounds on it, and maybe the design loses some performance with fouling earlier than most. If we're to assume Strike Eagle is looking at different numbers than I am. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2022 8:46:10 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: When Surefire brought out the FA556-212, they were talking in marketing videos like they reduced substantial weight vs the KAC NT4 (which essentially defines "Crazy Heavy" in the carbine can market). They didn't mention the NT4, but they were talking about SOCOM and SOCOM was running the NT4. The NT4 weighs 21.5 ounces and its mount brings the system weight to 23.5. The RC2 which is the more modern flagship is 17 ounces, and the mount brings the can to 21.7 ounces, which is only 1.8 ounces down vs the NT4. There is of course more depth to that, in that the A2 is not a competitive flash suppressor and the 3P is, but still, weight wasn't dramatically reduced. The RC2 isn't light. It looks light when you look at specs without considering system weight, which is what the majority of people are going to do. It also doesn't sound tonally as good as it meters IMO, which is fairly competitive from an Ear/Muzzle perspective. That would be my only way of quantifying what the StrikeEagle member is saying, as my RC2 puts down pretty competitive comprehensive numbers compared to most suppressors on the market that are in that military competitive space, and that's also comprehensive in that the performance is pretty balanced and competitive across MK18/HK416/M4A1/ and other DI platforms. AKA it's not just doing really well on one barrel length like the M4-2000 on the 16" mid length gas. As a product development person, I would want comprehensive performance across multiple platforms as objectively better than lop-sided performance in one direction. The only possible variable, would be my RC2 has like 50 rounds on it, and maybe the design loses some performance with fouling earlier than most. If we're to assume Strike Eagle is looking at different numbers than I am. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: In comparison to the others, why do you consider the RC2 crazy heavy? What durability issues have you had with it? When Surefire brought out the FA556-212, they were talking in marketing videos like they reduced substantial weight vs the KAC NT4 (which essentially defines "Crazy Heavy" in the carbine can market). They didn't mention the NT4, but they were talking about SOCOM and SOCOM was running the NT4. The NT4 weighs 21.5 ounces and its mount brings the system weight to 23.5. The RC2 which is the more modern flagship is 17 ounces, and the mount brings the can to 21.7 ounces, which is only 1.8 ounces down vs the NT4. There is of course more depth to that, in that the A2 is not a competitive flash suppressor and the 3P is, but still, weight wasn't dramatically reduced. The RC2 isn't light. It looks light when you look at specs without considering system weight, which is what the majority of people are going to do. It also doesn't sound tonally as good as it meters IMO, which is fairly competitive from an Ear/Muzzle perspective. That would be my only way of quantifying what the StrikeEagle member is saying, as my RC2 puts down pretty competitive comprehensive numbers compared to most suppressors on the market that are in that military competitive space, and that's also comprehensive in that the performance is pretty balanced and competitive across MK18/HK416/M4A1/ and other DI platforms. AKA it's not just doing really well on one barrel length like the M4-2000 on the 16" mid length gas. As a product development person, I would want comprehensive performance across multiple platforms as objectively better than lop-sided performance in one direction. The only possible variable, would be my RC2 has like 50 rounds on it, and maybe the design loses some performance with fouling earlier than most. If we're to assume Strike Eagle is looking at different numbers than I am. FWIW I just weighted an M4SDK Mod 4 and the Hammer Comp which totaled 18.8 ounces (2.4 HC, 16.4 M4SDK). Website states the can is 14.5 ounces...I've never found that result weighing one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2022 4:58:44 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FWIW I just weighted an M4SDK Mod 4 and the Hammer Comp which totaled 18.8 ounces (2.4 HC, 16.4 M4SDK). Website states the can is 14.5 ounces...I've never found that result weighing one. The spec probably didn't get updated when the tube became fluted. I've mentioned it to the media department. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2022 11:38:38 PM EDT
[#46]
The CGS HELIOS QD Ti seems to also be a flow through with the proper front cap and it’s 4 ounces lighter with the direct thread insert. It’s an inch longer but the diameter is proper. Seems like a no brainer going with the CGS HELIOS QD Ti if minimizing blowback is a priority. I believe it may reduce flash better and both should be similarly quieter at the ear than non flow through suppressors.
maybe ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/20/2022 7:26:14 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The CGS HELIOS QD Ti seems to also be a flow through with the proper front cap and it’s 4 ounces lighter with the direct thread insert. It’s an inch longer but the diameter is proper. Seems like a no brainer going with the CGS HELIOS QD Ti if minimizing blowback is a priority. I believe it may reduce flash better and both should be similarly quieter at the ear than non flow through suppressors. maybe ? According to pew science, one is clearly better on a mk18. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/20/2022 9:34:06 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: According to pew science, one is clearly better on a mk18. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The CGS HELIOS QD Ti seems to also be a flow through with the proper front cap and it’s 4 ounces lighter with the direct thread insert. It’s an inch longer but the diameter is proper. Seems like a no brainer going with the CGS HELIOS QD Ti if minimizing blowback is a priority. I believe it may reduce flash better and both should be similarly quieter at the ear than non flow through suppressors. maybe ? According to pew science, one is clearly better on a mk18. Better at minimizing gas to the face or db @ the ear ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/20/2022 10:18:50 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Better at minimizing gas to the face or db @ the ear ? The FLOW 556k is better at both metrics. Substantially. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/20/2022 10:52:17 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryThe CGS HELIOS QD Ti seems to also be a flow through with the proper front cap and it’s 4 ounces lighter with the direct thread insert. It’s an inch longer but the diameter is proper. Seems like a no brainer going with the CGS HELIOS QD Ti if minimizing blowback is a priority. I believe it may reduce flash better and both should be similarly quieter at the ear than non flow through suppressors. maybe ? Assuming you mean the vented cap for flow-through functionality, it is definitely not similarly quiet compared to non-flow through suppressors. On a short barreled 5.56, it's sort of average with the standard cap, but it is noticeably louder with the vented one. The inconel model might be great at flash suppression, but my own Helios QD Ti, with a few hundred rounds through it so far, sparks like an actual sparkler and is literally the brightest can in that dark that I own. |
|
|
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.
