The Velos 556 vs Flow 762 Ti isn't a valid comparison.   For 5.56, the Velos blows the Flow 762 Ti out of the water... but you're stacking the deck.  

The Flow series is best for supersonic projectiles, ideally on gas guns, of the appropriate caliber.  So for a Flow 762 Ti, a SCAR 17 will full power loads will be a good match.  300 Blackout subs, or 5.56 will not.  

The Velos is a 5.56 can with other-the-top durability that still sounds good at the ear.  It's a well-balanced (in terms of dB reduction) can with exceptionally low backpressure.  

The Flow cans are lighter, less modular, and focus on zero blowback.  (That can also be at the cost of raw dB reduction.)

Think about a traditional can as being a Glock 17.   Think about the Flow cans as a 26.  The Velos would be a 19.  It's a balance between both aspects.

That's interesting with 8 baffles in the can, it would seem like they should be sounding better than a Flow 556K. That hoplon baffle can really hurt a design though and the Sakers with hoplons kind of showed people that.  I was really surprised how thin all the material in the Velos is for a can marketed to be super durable.  It seemed like the marketing videos were implying that the can will glow red in ~60 rounds of auto fire. I just got a Flow 556K in for a week, and we designed the Recce 5K that is in production, and we exceeded performance of the Flow 556K by 5DB muzzle, ~2.5DB ear A weighted, in a package .200" longer mounted system length, .100" smaller diameter, and one ounce heavier, but supported with mounts 1.4 ounces lighter before getting to titanium mounts, making these cans pretty comparable in everything but cost where our can will be approximately half the cost.  Those two cans sound different- the Flow 556K sounding markedly more harsh, but not as bad as the larger 556 Helix HXQD in my opinion, so I feel like they improved on the Helix HX QD.  

The Flow 556K peak metered ~143DBA and muzzle was 145DBA, and I didn't shoot it without ear protection, because it didn't sound ear safe, and the meter said it wasn't ear safe.  We were also running the Recce 5K on the 2.25" stealth flash suppressor (to compare what the two companies call flash suppressors), and the flow 556K flash suppressor has a baffle like a brake which should help the suppressor perform for flash and sound.

The flow performed better than I expected in muzzle flash, and that was where we had more trouble in development.  We eventually developed a totally kick ass flash suppressor system that has no flash after the first round, whereas the flow has very low flash after the first round.  

Using thin material will allow the heat to establish a high gradient rapidly, which will support rapid cooling because there is very little mass to volume relationship.  This is an excellent strategy for very practical cans that are not too heavy.  That is basically what we did with the Explorr and the Dual lok 5, albeit SICO used inconel 625 with the Velos.  I have the opposite issue right now with a nato partner trying to drop 180 rounds on an 11.5" in 40 seconds, cool and cycle that more than 10 times.  For that scenario, thin material will be over 2000F and damage will occur.  But that test is not very practical.  

Our excersize was can we beat the Flow 556K in a week.  I think we did a good job.  They had 1.5 years to develop it.  





Yeah the Recce 5K is a new can, designed to give people something that actually performs as well as the hype around the Flow 556K, for half the price.  It's probably not going to be marketed by influencers though, because we don't know that many of those.  We would like to know some more, because customers would be well served to have better performing cans for something like half the price.  

If you know any influencers who can send their terms, we will consider any media influencers.

Yes its in production now.

[Deleted]

Thanks.  It is a solid, proven mounting system, and an economical suppressor model that hopefully can be economically reachable to people.

We have no intention of new mounting systems at this point, but there is a place for the systems we currently offer.

The titanium barstock in that size is not a stocked item, so that's the only reason this can't easily happen.  Titanium has slight limitations as it pertains to heat, but nothing terrifically bad.  The wear of titanium for a rear mount would not be ideal, because it is softer. We have an ~1.85 ounce mount in the plan A L, but obviously titanium would reduce that to 1.11 ounces so that's lighter than that.  



This is a good point.  We did the testing of the Recce 5K on the 11.5" gun, on a 2.25 flash suppressor, and we used the tactical compensator for the 14.5" barrel because that was already on that upper, but brakes will perform better for sound.  Every muzzle device will perform slightly differently, and that is an impossible amount of data to create if the manufacturer has numerous muzzle device options.

The AHAAH has limitations.  AHAAH puts less difference between a can and another if it is louder over 140DB than if it is louder  below 140DB.  This appears to be a bias favoring the safety of numbers over 140- AKA if the Army has an unsuppressed M16-A2, AHAAH will say it can be safely fired 1.7 rounds a week warned, which is probably inaccurate.  Ear dosing suggested on the 11.5" platform, our left ear was 4 rounds more safe than the Flow, and on the right ear we were 2 rounds less safe.  The muzzle we were up 5 rounds in safety.    

On A weighted energy (an older metric also supported by AHAAH) we are up in safe dosing 76 rounds a week muzzle (more than double), 7 rounds Left ear(6.5%), 32 rounds right ear (about 50%).    

The cans are more comparable using AHAAH than with A weighted energy, and more comparable using A weighted energy than using A weighted peak numbers.  To observers listening to both, the comparison is more like the A peak numbers suggest it should be- stark contrast in tone and perceived loudness, supporting the fact that people hear in the A scale.

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

This thread is going places where it shouldn't be going.  Locked pending further review.

Unlocked.  The purse-swinging posts have all been removed.  I tried to keep anything relating solely to suppressors.

The suppressor community (speaking generally, I am not referencing or condemning the Arfcom community) is easily the most childish part of the NFA world.  Someone makes a product and has it tested.  "Was it tested by x?  Oh, they suck because some guy said so."  "They strapped the gun to the top of a really tall picnic table, so it was shot at a different altitude than prone and the atmosphere is different up there....."

Look, I get that the NFA makes it expensive, a long wait, there’s no resale, and nobody wants to be stuck with garbage.  But don't get wrapped into those stupid games.  If you can, go and hear the cans shot somewhere.  I've offered people, including those with cans still awaiting transfer, $20-50 to shoot their can at the store or at a range.  Even $50 a tiny investment to determine if a can meets your needs, and $20 is NOTHING to avoid a dud.  

Also, a few db louder might be made up by a lower tone, better construction, less weight, different metals, less backpressure, different dimensions which work better for your sights, better mounting system, more easily rebuilt, a manufacturer with an excellent reputation who you know will be around versus a startup which may orphan your can, POI shift...  

Your results may also vary dramatically from oFfIcIaL results because you handload, only use a special load, are buying a can intended for one caliber to be used with another caliber, and/or are using a different barrel length than standard.  And yes, all of those tolerances stack.  Imagine the difference in 5.56 suppressor results from a 14.5" AR15 if you're buying it for a bolt action 24" .22-250 with special handloads.  Or for a 7.5” AR pistol which shoots .22 Hornet or something wacky but only using whatever factory ammo is on sale that day.  Think your results will be different than those oh-so-important oFfIcIaL results?

Finally, when comparing two different cans' noise levels, sometimes you may not even be able to tell the difference between them.  It's not like most of us don't have hearing loss from shooting in general.  Base YOUR purchase on YOUR needs and wants!  Stop getting caught up in the drama and marketing hype of results.  Do your own research, and do it in the way you intend to use your can.

/end rant

Please do not make me re-lock this thread.  Consider this a generalized warning that I have a LOW tolerance for purse swinging and drama.

@1168RGR

Unlocked now; feel free to post the additional information you wanted to post.