OSS probably has the can that will run cleaner on the gun.  

Of course a flash suppressor on an Ar also runs cleaner than a sound suppressor.  

Someone just commented from a position of having fired both the DL5 and the Flow556K and he said they both performed well for backpressure but the flow 556K had slightly less backpressure, which is to be expected.  That's what OSS is historically best at.  

I like cans to perform well all around.  I don't personally see the benefit of sacrificing muzzle sound for a little less backpressure.   Everyone's taste is different and there are definitely people who are OK with sacrificing muzzle sound for backpressure reduction.

I was just working a can design last week and I got to a point where backpressure faded to nothing, and the AHAAH dosing dropped off 50%. AKA it was half as safe as the revision before it which had really low backpressure.  I shot them outside and the one the AHAAH said was worse was louder to observers.   The interesting thing for that testing was that the A DB peak had dropped off only 1DB in two locations, but AHAAH was saying we lost 50% of our dosing volume on that particular prototype.

I think Mike Pannone is a proponent of 15% heavier action springs.  What those can accomplish is increased force to strip the first rounds off magazines, and also increased force to close a system when the system is dirty. The spring weight increase is also like static mass increase for the system. 15% is not bad as far as extra force to charge and operate with. This is generally compatible with std gas.

I once saw a gun designed for less than 4 malfunctions in 20,000 rds and it had maybe a plus 45% (or higher) spring and adverse gas.  That involved lubrication only every 2000 rds. It was shit as a suppressor host due to the adverse gas being so loud, but it showed a firearms manufacturer had to significantly increase operating power to get the reliability significantly up from standard to meet the extreme reliability requirement.

+15% is as high as I would go in changing a spring in an ar. It seems to be a happy place where the charging force isn’t excessive to a point of being bothersome. It can also be a sort of gap fix for commercial spec guns running Nato ammo more optimally.

I had the Tubb spring at a point for an AR10.  It is a little strange.  Complicates disassembly a little as the flat wire is more difficult to get past the buffer spring retainer. My rifle for that was an overgassed early 16" carbine style gas LMT MWS and it would be hard to tell a difference between one spring and another with a rifle gassed that excessively.  

With the +15% std in Ar15's and our current cans I felt ejection patterns moved rearward about 1 clock face hour.

The MWS wasn't 100% reliable with cans until we swapped in a KAK dual ejector bolt.  At that point it runs 100%.

For semi-autos, it's either quiet at the ear or quiet at the muzzle, generally not both.  My recommendation is to get the Hux or a Surefire SOCOM if you don't want an adjustable gas block.

Our work for the last 7 years has been toward getting both locations to have reduced sound among other things.

We have metered many of our cans below 140db at the position of right handed firers ears on the lmt 16” mws.  Lmt’s own suppressor, developed by Doug Olson with approximately 55 or more years of suppressor experience, is a unit that is advertised to be ~sub 139.9 db shooters ear.

This may not meet a definition of quiet, but I believe ~135 is about as low as something like a 16” mws will be able to get, without something like an adjustable gas system.

We are producing currently PSR7’s that are identical to the tested unit in this video, and they are the most quiet suppressor we have made at the shooters ear on the lmt mws platform.  Im sure adjustable gas would improve the performance but we have not used adjustable gas. This gun is running a sprinco red .308 car spring, and an h5 buffer, and it is a circa 2009, early overgassed mws.



I believe it would be fair to say KAC is a low or no compromise company, although all system engineering involves some compromises.  KAC has the clients willing to pay double or more than market price and they were able to control the parameters of the entire KAC built, M110 weapon system, a longer 20” barrel 308 gas gun.  Their 14” long 32 ounce suppressor for it, metered 138db muzzle and 142db at the shooters right ear (not 10cm right of it) when I tested it with John Titsworth at Silencer Research in Arkansas on their m110 system.  Obviously KAC has also developed new suppressors since, so they may have something better now that I have no knowledge of.

Still, for us to outperform with half the weight, 5 inches shorter, at less than half the street price, with the same m118lr ammo, on a less ideal, shorter 16” barrel, MWS is a pretty substantial achievement.