Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Page Armory » M-16
Posted: 12/18/2021 9:18:21 PM EDT
Looking for a new hard use suppressor for an M16 and wanted to see what flavor you guys are drinking these days.
Link Posted: 12/18/2021 9:34:37 PM EDT
[#1]
YHM Turbo K
Link Posted: 12/18/2021 9:38:22 PM EDT
[#2]
Sandman S
Link Posted: 12/18/2021 9:40:31 PM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BWood:
YHM Turbo K
View Quote

Yessssss
Link Posted: 12/18/2021 9:45:38 PM EDT
[#4]
M4-2K
Link Posted: 12/18/2021 10:08:52 PM EDT
[#5]
I have burned the paint off and had the following glowing orange and they are still going strong.

AAC m4-2000
Surefire socom and socom 2
AAC 7.62 sdn-6

Soon to have 2 sandman S’s
Link Posted: 12/18/2021 10:17:49 PM EDT
[#6]
Sandman-K is my go to M16 suppressor.

Link Posted: 12/19/2021 12:42:03 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bobweaver:
M4-2K
View Quote


+1
Link Posted: 12/19/2021 1:44:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Manticore_Arms] [#8]
Link Posted: 12/19/2021 6:08:46 AM EDT
[#9]
Between two great suggestions of the AAC and the YHM

If you want the most robust the M4 2000 is a beast and takes a beating without breaking a sweat.

If you want capable while being shorter and lighter the YHM turbo K is your can.

I have both and replaced the brick shithouse that is the M4 2000 with the Turbo K just to save the weight and size. If I was going to do a quick couple mag dumps followed right away by a beta mag I would want the M4 2000 on it. Normal abuse either would work fine.
Link Posted: 12/19/2021 6:55:32 AM EDT
[#10]
I use a Saker
Link Posted: 12/19/2021 7:16:37 AM EDT
[#11]
YHM's are built like tanks.  And if you break one (ask me), they will take care of you.  I got basically a new suppressor when a weld broke from "hard use" (new core, cerakoting, etc).  YHM are good peeps.  My event was with one of their early .30 cal Titaniums that had probably 8K rounds on it when the weld broke.  Their mount system is great also.
Link Posted: 12/20/2021 5:59:11 AM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Steamedliver:
I use a Saker
View Quote


That was my first try at replacing the M4-2000. On my full auto it just had too much backpressure and made my cyclic rate incredibly high. The YHM does better but the M4-2000 was the best for cyclic rate at right around 650-750 RPM.
Link Posted: 12/20/2021 6:02:33 AM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By jd2395:
YHM's are built like tanks.  And if you break one (ask me), they will take care of you.  I got basically a new suppressor when a weld broke from "hard use" (new core, cerakoting, etc).  YHM are good peeps.  My event was with one of their early .30 cal Titaniums that had probably 8K rounds on it when the weld broke.  Their mount system is great also.
View Quote


YHM are built like tanks but it would be like comparing a Sherman to a King Tiger. Both are tanks but one is built stronger. For warranty I would have to go with YHM until the new AAC proves itself.
Link Posted: 12/20/2021 12:12:35 PM EDT
[#14]
I bought a Rugged Micro 30 for FA use back in January. Maybe ill get to use it one day...
Link Posted: 12/20/2021 9:19:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: canon3825] [#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Recoil737:


YHM are built like tanks but it would be like comparing a Sherman to a King Tiger. Both are tanks but one is built stronger. For warranty I would have to go with YHM until the new AAC proves itself.
View Quote


You might want to do a little more research as to the two tanks you listed. "Stronger" is subjective as to what you meant, at least to me. Are you strictly talking about armor protection or how well the tank held up? The drive components in the King Tiger were so over loaded, that lots of the tanks would break down before they ever made it to the front line for combat. Where as the Sherman was known for it's reliability and ease of repair, but limited armor protection. Personally I don't find "stronger" specific enough. If you had specified "armored protection" would have made more sense to me.

I have an AAC M47-2000 can. It is basically a M4-2000 reamed out to 7.62 projectiles. It has held up quite well. 7.62 allows for 300 BLK OUT  7.62X39 subsonic to cycle the action and a little more room for short barrels that don't stabilize bullets as well. I have way more in mounts than what I spent on the can in 2006. I am still happy with the can.

Scott
Link Posted: 12/21/2021 3:18:25 AM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By canon3825:


You might want to do a little more research as to the two tanks you listed. "Stronger" is subjective as to what you meant, at least to me. Are you strictly talking about armor protection or how well the tank held up? The drive components in the King Tiger were so over loaded, that lots of the tanks would break down before they ever made it to the front line for combat. Where as the Sherman was known for it's reliability and ease of repair, but limited armor protection. Personally I don't find "stronger" specific enough. If you had specified "armored protection" would have made more sense to me.

I have an AAC M47-2000 can. It is basically a M4-2000 reamed out to 7.62 projectiles. It has held up quite well. 7.62 allows for 300 BLK OUT  7.62X39 subsonic to cycle the action and a little more room for short barrels that don't stabilize bullets as well. I have way more in mounts than what I spent on the can in 2006. I am still happy with the can.

Scott
View Quote


Since suppressors don't have engines I was talking about how tough they are. A King Tiger can take a lot more punishment than a Sherman making it stronger. Because I don't think many people equate engine capabilities or reliability with strength when talking about a tank.
Link Posted: 12/21/2021 3:36:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: DvlDog] [#17]
Don’t turn this into a tank-wank as you guys banter back and forth over who has the dumbest analogy.



With hard use as the operative parameter over value I would recommend anything with a stellite blast baffle. Saker, Chimera, Sandman.
Link Posted: 12/21/2021 6:07:54 AM EDT
[#18]
Rugged Surge.
Link Posted: 12/22/2021 1:07:30 PM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By canon3825:

I have an AAC M47-2000 can. It is basically a M4-2000 reamed out to 7.62 projectiles. It has held up quite well. 7.62 allows for 300 BLK OUT  7.62X39 subsonic to cycle the action and a little more room for short barrels that don't stabilize bullets as well. I have way more in mounts than what I spent on the can in 2006. I am still happy with the can.

Scott
View Quote


Why ream out a M4-2k can? I'd just get a can that was designed for 7.62.

My paint on my M4-2k is burnt as well which is too bad since it was the old style before they went the cheap finish.
I'm curious what the "new" AAC quality will be like.
Link Posted: 12/22/2021 3:29:53 PM EDT
[#20]
Another legacy vote for the M4-2000.  I have two of them and they have held up extremely well (minus the finish), one of which is pushing 14 years old at this point as it was made in 2008.

The most flat out durable 5.56 suppressor I probably own is a American Manufacturing XXX Warrior, but the reality is it weighs as much as a boat anchor and is bored out to 30cal and then some.

Unfortunately neither of these two brick shithouse cans are still in production to the best of my knowledge. (although AAC may come back to life in the near future)

If I were to buy another heavy duty full auto M16 suppressor today that is still manufactured and supported, it would be a Silencerco Chimera 300.

I have a Chimera 300 that I use full auto on my short barreled 7.62x39 uppers as well as my my short barrel Colt LE901 in 308 and have been happy with it.

The Chimera 300 can also be run on a standard 5.56 M16 upper as well so it would give you some flexibility on caliber as well.
Link Posted: 12/22/2021 3:32:17 PM EDT
[#21]
SOCOM RC2 seems like a logical choice.
Link Posted: 12/22/2021 5:30:53 PM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bobweaver:
M4-2K
View Quote


Not a good current option, given lack of support. The M4-2k was awesome in the early to mid 2000s. It’s gassy AF. I don’t like mine now that I have other less gassy options.

The DeadAir Sandman K is my current favorite.
Link Posted: 12/22/2021 5:58:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Smurgeon] [#23]
Gemtech Halo if you can find one
Link Posted: 1/16/2022 12:27:13 AM EDT
[#24]
I get to brag on my Tac-16 Suppressor
I just don't know if they make them any longer.  Probably not
Its Range Report

So I have a Dragoon in NFA jail right now
Day 264 as I type this.
Link Posted: 1/24/2022 12:15:25 PM EDT
[#25]
Rugged M16?

Surefire RC2

KAC CQB

KAC NT4
Link Posted: 1/24/2022 12:28:12 PM EDT
[#26]
I went with a Turbo K. I'm too poor for a M16
Link Posted: 1/24/2022 1:07:21 PM EDT
[#27]
Sandman S
Link Posted: 1/24/2022 2:18:59 PM EDT
[#28]
AAC Mini4 and 762-SD for me.
Link Posted: 1/24/2022 7:32:21 PM EDT
[#29]
Well, the Gold Standard is the NT4
Link Posted: 1/24/2022 10:17:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Heineken] [#30]
oss helix 556 qd

The lack of added back pressure is much appropriated as is the fact there is nothing to come loose. And it self tightens as you shoot it.

Was worried it would be loud, but to my ears it's negligable as 5.56 isn't really ever "quiet" anyway. and well worth the trade off for the benefits.  I have done 60 round Magpul mag dumps and ran it way harder overall then my omega 300.
Link Posted: 1/26/2022 9:05:28 AM EDT
[#31]
This.  

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Heineken:
oss helix 556 qd

The lack of added back pressure is much appropriated as is the fact there is nothing to come loose. And it self tightens as you shoot it.

Was worried it would be loud, but to my ears it's negligable as 5.56 isn't really ever "quiet" anyway. and well worth the trade off for the benefits.  I have done 60 round Magpul mag dumps and ran it way harder overall then my omega 300.
View Quote

Link Posted: 1/26/2022 9:10:07 AM EDT
[#32]
Sandman S and Turbo K would be my choices.  I have the Sandman S and have handled and shot the Turbo K.
Link Posted: 1/26/2022 9:49:06 AM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By An1913t:
This.  


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By An1913t:
This.  

Originally Posted By Heineken:
oss helix 556 qd

The lack of added back pressure is much appropriated as is the fact there is nothing to come loose. And it self tightens as you shoot it.

Was worried it would be loud, but to my ears it's negligable as 5.56 isn't really ever "quiet" anyway. and well worth the trade off for the benefits.  I have done 60 round Magpul mag dumps and ran it way harder overall then my omega 300.


A friend has an older model and I've only shot a single mag through it the lack of gas to the face and unaffected cyclic rate was magical compared to my M4-2000.
Link Posted: 1/28/2022 11:58:37 AM EDT
[#34]
I use a Surefire SOCOM 300SPS
Link Posted: 1/28/2022 12:06:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: akethan] [#35]
Page Armory » M-16
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! 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.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top