User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 3:07:19 PM EDT
[#1]
Why?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 3:22:20 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why? I’ve got 3 556 cans and something different is cool |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 6:53:20 PM EDT
[#3]
I think they're a cool concept but the qd version looks ugly
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 6:57:35 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Something different. I’ve got 3 556 cans and something different is cool Now if you know some numbers, I’d like to know. Back pressure, suppression, etc. BTW I have an original oss in 7.62. I’ll tell you my experience if you are interested. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 7:11:26 PM EDT
[#5]
I was interested in this can. But going from charging $1500 down to $400 waves giant red flags. I don’t think they’re making muzzled devices for them anymore.
Just like the MDR there’s very little end user reports. Another red flag. The NG2 Maxflo seems like a better option for this style of suppression. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 7:12:01 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you want something different, that’s a great reason since it’s your reason. I don’t have an opinion on that. Now if you know some numbers, I’d like to know. Back pressure, suppression, etc. BTW I have an original oss in 7.62. I’ll tell you my experience if you are interested. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 10:15:42 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am interested... It’s not as quiet as my Saker 762 but on a full auto 7.62x39 it’s smooth. However I had to get a custom barrel made to accommodate the over barrel nature of the suppressor. I’d get the oss only if you really do mag dumps or full auto or binary trigger. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/22/2018 10:21:41 PM EDT
[#8]
I made a thread on this a while back and got similar responses. A dealer from MN emailed me and said a lot of law enforcement agencies are going with the new OSS cans after demoing them at his store. The new OSS cans are apparently extremely good, and I’m considering one after hearing his endorsement.
The new cans are build off the CSASS contract and shouldn’t change constantly like the previous OSS lineups. The biggest benefit is you don’t need to modify your gun, no adjustable gas, no weird BCGs, no blowback etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2018 11:20:09 AM EDT
[#9]
Feedback on all previous products is interesting, but irrelevant to the new stuff. It's essentially a completely different company--the only thing left over from the old company is the patents. They recently put out a little video explaining:
https://youtu.be/Lm8YXNINXKo Regarding the new (and old) stuff, the backpressure questions should be considered settled at this point, based on all user reports I've ever seen. Anecdotal evidence also indicates that at-the-ear levels are good. The only thing yet unknown is the exact dbs at the muzzle vs the ear. If anybody gets one (or has an old one) and wants to contribute to the community I suggest sending it to Hansohn Brothers so they can put it on the meter. You could even do it while you're waiting for the Form 4. I sent them my Gen 4 to test but there were logistical challenges. I'm hoping to try again soon once they get back from playing in the mountains! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2018 11:10:38 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I made a thread on this a while back and got similar responses. A dealer from MN emailed me and said a lot of law enforcement agencies are going with the new OSS cans after demoing them at his store. The new OSS cans are apparently extremely good, and I’m considering one after hearing his endorsement. The new cans are build off the CSASS contract and shouldn’t change constantly like the previous OSS lineups. The biggest benefit is you don’t need to modify your gun, no adjustable gas, no weird BCGs, no blowback etc. 1. A dealer in MN. Without references why should anyone care about their opinion? 2. A lot of law enforcement agencies? Which ones? What price point are they getting? Did they trial other suppressors? 3. A lot of law enforcement agencies demoed the suppressors at his store. How many agencies went to a local store? Seriously, how many agencies went to a store in MN? Also, adjustable gas is very easy to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2018 11:16:52 AM EDT
[#11]
Instead of editing. I have an adjustable gas block on my rifle with an OSS suppressor. Runs better.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 10:36:31 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All of that is completely irrelevant. 1. A dealer in MN. Without references why should anyone care about their opinion? 2. A lot of law enforcement agencies? Which ones? What price point are they getting? Did they trial other suppressors? 3. A lot of law enforcement agencies demoed the suppressors at his store. How many agencies went to a local store? Seriously, how many agencies went to a store in MN? Also, adjustable gas is very easy to do. https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1885973555015240&ref=content_filter |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 6:41:28 PM EDT
[#13]
I’ve heard the new OSS cans. FWIW they look solid a sound good. And the guys I talked to seemed humbled by past mistakes. Would I buy one? Probably not. Nothing against them.
Mike, weren’t you the guy that bought a couple of the OSS cans as your first suppressors? Would you do it again? You sure love that company. Lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
The point is not to reference him as an authority you should respect, it's just that he's the only guy I know of who has used the new models so far, so his feedback is interesting. He doesn't have a store, he's a dealer who sets up extensive demos for agencies that includes industry leaders. Scan his feed for more details: https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1885973555015240&ref=content_filter |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 7:26:54 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've heard the new OSS cans. FWIW they look solid a sound good. And the guys I talked to seemed humbled by past mistakes. Would I buy one? Probably not. Nothing against them. Mike, weren't you the guy that bought a couple of the OSS cans as your first suppressors? Would you do it again? You sure love that company. Lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 7:53:21 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hehe I bought 4 closeouts because I couldn't resist the deal. Haven't shot any yet--there's no space in my life for that right now, and I live in a bad place if you want to shoot a rifle outdoors. I'm the kind of gun owner who just buys stuff for the future, I have owned rifles for years without shooting them once. But I did send them to Hansohn to test. Unfortunately they had logistics challenges and it didn't work out but I hope to try again soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 9:24:26 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Have you ever shot an OSS suppressor? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 9:41:30 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No... Why? Four OSS cans. I hope it was a screaming deal. For four rifle cans to just sit unused. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 10:12:27 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Feedback on all previous products is interesting, but irrelevant to the new stuff. It's essentially a completely different company--the only thing left over from the old company is the patents. They recently put out a little video explaining: https://youtu.be/Lm8YXNINXKo Regarding the new (and old) stuff, the backpressure questions should be considered settled at this point, based on all user reports I've ever seen. Anecdotal evidence also indicates that at-the-ear levels are good. The only thing yet unknown is the exact dbs at the muzzle vs the ear. If anybody gets one (or has an old one) and wants to contribute to the community I suggest sending it to Hansohn Brothers so they can put it on the meter. You could even do it while you're waiting for the Form 4. I sent them my Gen 4 to test but there were logistical challenges. I'm hoping to try again soon once they get back from playing in the mountains! https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Ever_want_to_compare_a_Specwar__Omega__Sandman__Surge__YHM__OSS_all_at_once_/20-460124/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 10:13:17 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No... Why? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 10:23:51 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
here is the comparison I did with @hansohnbrothers 2 years ago. https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Ever_want_to_compare_a_Specwar__Omega__Sandman__Surge__YHM__OSS_all_at_once_/20-460124/ Quote HistoryQuoted:
here is the comparison I did with @hansohnbrothers 2 years ago. https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Ever_want_to_compare_a_Specwar__Omega__Sandman__Surge__YHM__OSS_all_at_once_/20-460124/ Quoted:Bax, Josh and Ray; thank you for the kind words. Yes, I own a Larson/Davis LTX1-QPR. I have seen the conflicting information regarding this meter, ASE/UTRA's Tuuka writing on the subject (among others) and read Ray and Frank's article (Integrally Suppressed RPR, starting at post 21). I've known Ray for several years and he's not one to bullshit you. I don't know Frank personally, maybe traded a few emails, but doesn't strike me as a shit-bird either. With them saying it was bad, maybe this is something worth investigating? So, I decided to borrow a BK 2209 and see for myself. I calibrated both meters and set them up just like the RPR test and was instantly greeted with conflicting data between the 2209 and the QPR. So I moved the QPR to the same location of the 2209, more bad data. Ok, is it consistent, hoping I could just add 2 or 3 db and be good? Nope, not even close. I was seeing non-linear differences of 2~9 db. That's significant. I wished I had recorded the results but I was so frustrated and disgusted over the time and money wasted. I swear I could hear Pat Rogers' voice saying "Just as good usually isn't..." So, I spent most of last night researching the topic. Ray sent me a link to an outstanding article: Principles of Full Matrix Capture (page 32 if you want to skip ahead). Now, the QPR is a fine meter, it just not designed to measure gun shots, regardless what the Larson/Davis rep tells you.
TL/DR: The Larson is not a valid meter for measuring gun shots and here's why: It simply cannot capture the peak of the gunshot. Also, the sampling rate is too low. Take either of those shortcomings and what you get is bad data. There is nothing that can be done to overcome that. Any data that I posted prior to yesterday should be considered invalid. Now if y'all excuse me, I need to find a good recipe for crow..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2018 10:29:09 PM EDT
[#21]
I have 2 OSS cans that came as a package with HKs. Haven’t shot them a lot but they are the 2 smoothest shooting that I own. The 7.62 is very smooth.
While I was waiting for them to get out of jail I shot both guns with AAC supressors that I have and the sound to my ears were the same but the recoil impulse is different. I am assuming the oss has less back pressure. Would I buy them again, yes for those 2 guns, but they are big and heavy cans. I wouldn’t want them on all my guns but for 1 or 2 they are ok |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 1:21:09 AM EDT
[#22]
I ran into a couple of guys from OSS at the range where they were testing a batch (30 or so?) of cans a few weeks ago. On this particular day they were shooting the 556K on a Tikka T3 .223. The muzzle device reminds me of Q's cherry bomb, a compensator that attaches to the can with threads and a generously sized taper. The can did have a very pleasing tone to it though I have no other experience with bolt guns w/ a .223 can, I can only compare it to my ARs with a specwar 556k and FN SPR with an Omega. It was noticeably quieter than my specwar K (on an AR) but that is to be expected with a bolt gun vs a semi. They let me shoot one on their setup - the Tikka T3, HX-QD 556K and FGMM 223 and the combo managed a .4" (3 shot) group at 100yds so the suppressor/mount obviously didn't affect the accuracy negatively.
OSS was not on my radar beforehand but now I am certainly more interested. Just one anecdotal experience. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 10:55:55 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You are an enigma wrapped in a riddle, Mike Smith. You buy four old OSS cans, have never shot them, but still are interested in the promotion of the revamped OSS. Four OSS cans. I hope it was a screaming deal. For four rifle cans to just sit unused. Regarding purchases, I'm just more of a stockpiler more than a shooter right now. That will change at some point, but I'm not bothered that new and better models came out since then--I'll buy and stockpile those too! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 11:04:08 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I ran into a couple of guys from OSS at the range where they were testing a batch (30 or so?) of cans a few weeks ago. On this particular day they were shooting the 556K on a Tikka T3 .223. The muzzle device reminds me of Q's cherry bomb, a compensator that attaches to the can with threads and a generously sized taper. The can did have a very pleasing tone to it though I have no other experience with bolt guns w/ a .223 can, I can only compare it to my ARs with a specwar 556k and FN SPR with an Omega. It was noticeably quieter than my specwar K (on an AR) but that is to be expected with a bolt gun vs a semi. They let me shoot one on their setup - the Tikka T3, HX-QD 556K and FGMM 223 and the combo managed a .4" (3 shot) group at 100yds so the suppressor/mount obviously didn't affect the accuracy negatively. OSS was not on my radar beforehand but now I am certainly more interested. Just one anecdotal experience. https://youtu.be/C4DgnsV-Eqs If you ever run into them again, ask them if they will ever send a test sample to somebody with a proper meter. That's the best thing they could do to improve public perception of their brand! At one point I saw indication that they were going to work with MAC on that, but it wasn't going to happen soon due to his backlog. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 1:11:55 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If anybody is interested, they just released a video about the muzzle device: https://youtu.be/C4DgnsV-Eqs If you ever run into them again, ask them if they will ever send a test sample to somebody with a proper meter. That's the best thing they could do to improve public perception of their brand! At one point I saw indication that they were going to work with MAC on that, but it wasn't going to happen soon due to his backlog. The oss cans are good and I don’t have one of the new ones but they are headed in the right direction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 1:35:00 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I made a thread on this a while back and got similar responses. A dealer from MN emailed me and said a lot of law enforcement agencies are going with the new OSS cans after demoing them at his store. The new OSS cans are apparently extremely good, and I’m considering one after hearing his endorsement. The new cans are build off the CSASS contract and shouldn’t change constantly like the previous OSS lineups. The biggest benefit is you don’t need to modify your gun, no adjustable gas, no weird BCGs, no blowback etc. 1. A dealer in MN. Without references why should anyone care about their opinion? 2. A lot of law enforcement agencies? Which ones? What price point are they getting? Did they trial other suppressors? 3. A lot of law enforcement agencies demoed the suppressors at his store. How many agencies went to a local store? Seriously, how many agencies went to a store in MN? Also, adjustable gas is very easy to do. The demo guns with the OSS cans did not have any adjustable gas blocks or selectable BCGs. They did not seem over gassed at all. I don't own any OSS cans, but after that demo I wouldn't be against getting one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 4:53:03 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have a gen 5 oss and think besides weight and price at the time it's just as good as most anything else out there. The reference to having them tested by a proper meter is ridiculous, these so called proper meters can be weighted to show low numbers and I have asked a few times to get together with people and test my Larson Davis side by side with what everyone thinks is the holly grail bk 2209 but no takers yet. Dr. Dater has said based on his years of experience that the Larson Davis is +- 1 db from the LD 800 which has better stats than the bk2209. The oss cans are good and I don't have one of the new ones but they are headed in the right direction. I just think it's good to avoid some questions if possible, but worst case scenario at least include measurements from a known industry leader in the same test so that even if people question the absoluteness of the numbers there is some relative data that might be useful.
I have heard that multiple reviewers are working on evaluating the new models so hopefully we will start seeing some of that soon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 6:46:31 PM EDT
[#28]
I actually dont have a store (online or physical) The concept is pretty simple: I ONLY sell to LE, Ive got a fair amount invested in gear from various manufacturers, and we allow the departments to evaluate it head to head with their own ammo. To me, thats the best way to actually see what will work for a team, and what might not. This is a critical advantage because the LE departments are spending someone else's money (or at least someone else controls the budget). This makes it really important to get the decision correct the first time when purchasing gear.
I will say that this year we've been pretty busy and have at least 1 eval every week for some agency. this Friday we have another one for a department SWAT team (first ring suburb 80,000 people) looking for 10-20 rifles and suppressors. They will evaluate Silencerco, Surefire, Gemtech, Dead Air, OSS, and the new LMT suppressors. For rifles, these suppressors are mounted on LMTs, DD, BCM, FN, Larue, and Colts. We have optics from Steiner, Eotech, Leupold, Aimpoint, Trijicon, and several others. Specifically to the OPs question: the 556k is short (pretty close to the sandmanK). it does as well as any other K can we've shot in terms of suppression (meaning that it sucks on SBRs along with the other Ks), but it takes the edge off, theres no/minimal blowback, brass ejects where it normally does, and it has an easy mounting system. It actually sounds really good on any 14.5" or 16" rifle. We have several agencies moving to this selection for their patrol rifles to keep length as short as possible, but so far the entry guys have purchased the most to keep length to a minimum. IF youre willing to add another 1" to the K, then the HX-QD 556 is a much quieter option - even on a 10.5. a bit longer, but its still shorter than the 762QD multi cal and shorter than the Sandman S. PM or email me if you'd like more information and good luck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 7:38:08 PM EDT
[#29]
Thanks for popping in, Sentinel--you're the only person I've seen so far who has their hands on the new models so I'm sure your thoughts are of interest to some here.
I'll cross-post what I wrote on another thread, as it's relevant here as well. From: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/Which-mini-silencer-for-a-5-56-Looking-at-Mini-4-M4SDK-Saker-556k-Sandman-K-others-/20-490421/ It's probably not in the budget for the OP, but the new OSS HX-QD 556K is 5.7" (so adds probably just over 5" past the muzzle), and their web site says at the ear it measures: " 136-140 dB on 20" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 138-142 dB on 16" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 142-146 dB on 10.5" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo " Numbers from Silencer Shop on a 16" gun at the ear: -- mini-4 143 DB -- M4-SDK 141.9 DB -- regular Saker (not K) 143.7 DB -- SOCOM 556RC2 143.8 DB (Source: https://modernrifleman.net/suppressors/ ) If the numbers from OSS are accurate it's very possible that on an SBR the HX-QD 556K would be the most quiet at the ear if you care about that (and heat up about half as much, as a bonus). It's about 15 oz so you may pay a little weight penalty but it's a lot better than it used to be. ------------ ETA: for those of you interested, I asked OSS what meter they used and it was the B&K Pulse system. -------- ETA: they've also posted numbers for the other models--I'll copy them here so you don't have to look them up. Everything is at the ear. HX-QD 556: 130 - 134 dB on 20" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 133 - 137 dB on 16" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 138 - 142 dB on 10.5" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo HX-QD 762: 134 -138 dB on 20" Remington 700 Rifle using commercial grade 150 gr ammo 133 - 137 dB on 16" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 138 - 140 dB on 16" 7.62 AR15 DI using commercial grade 150 gr ammo |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2018 9:57:51 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
... ETA: for those of you interested, I asked OSS what meter they used and this was the response I got: Model: 378A12. (2) Left & Right Ear 1/4-inch pressure prepolarized 377A12 microphone, with 1/4-inch preamplifier 426B03 and TEDS v0.9 Model: 113B27 (1) Muzzle High frequency ICP pressure sensor, 100 psi, 50 mV/psi, 0.218" dia. diaphragm, accel. comp. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2018 1:50:41 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks for popping in, Sentinel--you're the only person I've seen so far who has their hands on the new models so I'm sure your thoughts are of interest to some here. I'll cross-post what I wrote on another thread, as it's relevant here as well. From: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/Which-mini-silencer-for-a-5-56-Looking-at-Mini-4-M4SDK-Saker-556k-Sandman-K-others-/20-490421/ It's probably not in the budget for the OP, but the new OSS HX-QD 556K is 5.7" (so adds probably just over 5" past the muzzle), and their web site says at the ear it measures: " 136-140 dB on 20" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 138-142 dB on 16" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 142-146 dB on 10.5" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo " Numbers from Silencer Shop on a 16" gun at the ear: -- mini-4 143 DB -- M4-SDK 141.9 DB -- regular Saker (not K) 143.7 DB -- SOCOM 556RC2 143.8 DB (Source: https://modernrifleman.net/suppressors/ ) If the numbers from OSS are accurate it's very possible that on an SBR the HX-QD 556K would be the most quiet at the ear if you care about that (and heat up about half as much, as a bonus). It's about 15 oz so you may pay a little weight penalty but it's a lot better than it used to be. ------------ ETA: for those of you interested, I asked OSS what meter they used and this was the response I got: Model: 378A12. (2) Left & Right Ear 1/4-inch pressure prepolarized 377A12 microphone, with 1/4-inch preamplifier 426B03 and TEDS v0.9 Model: 113B27 (1) Muzzle High frequency ICP pressure sensor, 100 psi, 50 mV/psi, 0.218" dia. diaphragm, accel. comp. -------- ETA: they've also posted numbers for the other models--I'll copy them here so you don't have to look them up. Everything is at the ear. HX-QD 556: 130 - 134 dB on 20" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 133 - 137 dB on 16" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 138 - 142 dB on 10.5" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo HX-QD 762: 134 -138 dB on 20" Remington 700 Rifle using commercial grade 150 gr ammo 133 - 137 dB on 16" AR15 DI using commercial grade 55 gr ammo 138 - 140 dB on 16" 7.62 AR15 DI using commercial grade 150 gr ammo |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2018 9:29:54 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All of that is completely irrelevant. 2. A lot of law enforcement agencies? Which ones? What price point are they getting? Did they trial other suppressors? 1. I dont carry the water for any manufacturer, and will bid and sell any quality product to the LE department. Im not trying to convince anyone...buy what you want and enjoy it. We've been shooting the new OSS stuff since last Fall, and probably have minimum 8,000-10,000 rounds through them just ourselves. Every LE eval we conduct in addition usually runs between 1000 and 6000 rounds of 556, 100-200 rounds of 762, and varying amounts of 9mm, 45, 300blk, and even 22LR. This is a side gig for us, so scheduling the evals sometimes gets delayed. 2. In the past 6 months: Minneapolis SWAT OSS 556k and OSS 762 QD. Eden Praire SWAT OSS 556k. Woodbury MN PD OSS 762 QD Lacrosse County SD OSS 762 QD Waukesha WI OSS 762 QD Rochester MN PD SWAT OSS 762 and OSS 556 Olmsted County SD OSS 762 Annandale PD OSS 556 Kern County CA SD SWAT OSS 762 QD PENDING SALES (mostly waiting for budget process, but selection has been made after evals) Inver Grove Heights PD OSS 556k and OSS 762 Ti Cottage Grove PD. OSS 556k Woodbury PD Patrol Rifles OSS 556k Rochester PD Patrol Rifles. OSS 556k There are a lot of other agencies in the pipeline with Evals scheduled or initially conducted. The deals above are mostly suppressors, but some included rifles and optics - the numbers of suppressors sold vary from 4-70. 3. No store. I bring the equipment to the department's range - sometimes we tag onto their scheduled training day, or more often they set up a separate day to include armorers, VIPS (Budget folks), brass, skeptics, etc. The biggest point we stress to departments is to have a realistic view of suppressors and what they bring to the table. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2018 11:55:38 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's great, but what did they use to capture the signal from the microphone? Hopefully something that samples at least 192khz at 16-bit resolution or better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2018 10:00:01 AM EDT
[#34]
Thanks for all the responses so far. Nice to see their new stuff is getting out there and being used.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2018 3:38:48 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good catch, I didn't realize that was just the details for the microphones used. I followed up and confirmed that they are using the B&K Pulse system. I will update my original post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2018 11:51:40 PM EDT
[#36]
Looks like I will have one on the way for metering.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2018 2:48:39 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Looks like I will have one on the way for metering. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2018 8:17:45 PM EDT
[#38]
I have a helix 7.62 coming, probably get it released in December. Completely comfortable with it based on everything I read and learned about oss. Personally, I think most silencers are way over priced for what they are but at $399, i couldn’t pass it up. It came with a muzzle adaptor, compensator for the 30 cal and for $60, I bought another to go on my 223.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2018 9:45:13 PM EDT
[#39]
In my testing, the new HX-QD556k hovers around 150db at muzzle and at ear. But there definitely no blowback. Tested at 1.6m height, 1m left of muzzle and 6" from right ear.
OSS test procedures differ however. "height of 5' 3" (1.6 meters): Right handed shooter's left ear position 5 meters in front of the muzzle, slightly left of the line-of-fire 5 meters to the right front of the weapon, at 45 5 meters to the right and parallel to the weapon muzzle, at 90 5 meters to the right rear of the weapon, at 135 5 meters directly to the rear of the weapon, at 180 5 meters to the left rear of the weapon muzzle, at 225 5 meters to the left and parallel to the weapon muzzle, at 270 5 meters to the left front of the weapon, at 315 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2018 1:40:04 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In my testing, the new HX-QD556k hovers around 150db at muzzle and at ear. But there definitely no blowback. Tested at 1.6m height, 1m left of muzzle and 6" from right ear. OSS test procedures differ however. "height of 5' 3" (1.6 meters): Right handed shooter's left ear position 5 meters in front of the muzzle, slightly left of the line-of-fire 5 meters to the right front of the weapon, at 45 5 meters to the right and parallel to the weapon muzzle, at 90 5 meters to the right rear of the weapon, at 135 5 meters directly to the rear of the weapon, at 180 5 meters to the left rear of the weapon muzzle, at 225 5 meters to the left and parallel to the weapon muzzle, at 270 5 meters to the left front of the weapon, at 315 I don't know where that other protocol comes from... If you have a dealer relationship established, maybe you could ask them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2018 5:54:37 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have you measured on a regular 16" AR yet? In all the marketing I've seen they've said it's supposed to stay below 140 at the ear on a normal setup. The press release says "delivers hearing safe mid 130s dB performance", and they use a Pulse system so it's not a question of meter accuracy on their part... I don't know where that other protocol comes from... If you have a dealer relationship established, maybe you could ask them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/30/2018 1:15:01 PM EDT
[#42]
Here are readings from 2 days of metering on Hansohn's 2209 from two back to back weekends. There was a tempature difference and humidity difference on each day. No doubt the Helix is the loudest 556 I've heard metered. But no blow back and very controllable.
Helix 556 on 10.5 with an adjustable gb Muzzle 147.3 148.5 148.8 147.3 147.1 Ear 140+ pegged the 130scale thought it'd be quieter 145.5 144.6 145.5 145.5 Helix 556 on a standard 16" ar15 Muzzle 152 147.5 148.9 148.9 149 Ear 150.8 150.2 150.2 150 149.9 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 2:50:55 AM EDT
[#43]
10-15 dB drop? Jeez, thought it was better than that.
MAC had the older models doing sub 140 muzzle and ear on an X95 of all things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 5:20:54 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Awesome. Which model? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Looks like I will have one on the way for metering. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 6:56:11 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
10-15 dB drop? Jeez, thought it was better than that. MAC had the older models doing sub 140 muzzle and ear on an X95 of all things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 8:35:35 AM EDT
[#46]
Keep in mind we measured the 556K model. Full size silencers hovered around 140db.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 9:30:53 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
10-15 dB drop? Jeez, thought it was better than that. MAC had the older models doing sub 140 muzzle and ear on an X95 of all things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 10:03:13 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here are readings from 2 days of metering on Hansohn's 2209 from two back to back weekends. There was a tempature difference and humidity difference on each day. No doubt the Helix is the loudest 556 I've heard metered. But no blow back and very controllable. Helix 556 on 10.5 with an adjustable gb Muzzle 147.3 148.5 148.8 147.3 147.1 Ear 140+ pegged the 130scale thought it'd be quieter 145.5 144.6 145.5 145.5 Helix 556 on a standard 16" ar15 Muzzle 152 147.5 148.9 148.9 149 Ear 150.8 150.2 150.2 150 149.9 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 10:07:47 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those are certainly surprising numbers, but it's a sample size of one so it's hard to know what conclusions to draw. The 556k is going to be the loudest because they were probably trying to keep it as short as possible, but I don't think it's supposed to be that loud at the ear. I'm hoping GoLoud is able to publish the numbers from his testing soon so we have something to compare to. The more we test with ARs, muzzle and at ear, I must recommend always wear hearing protection. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/31/2018 10:07:55 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those are certainly surprising numbers, but it's a sample size of one so it's hard to know what conclusions to draw. The 556k is going to be the loudest because they were probably trying to keep it as short as possible, but I don't think it's supposed to be that loud at the ear. I'm hoping GoLoud is able to publish the numbers from his testing soon so we have something to compare to.  Attached File |
|
|
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.
.jpg)
