I am trying to get some feedback/info on the OSS HX-QD 762 Suppressor. Does anyone here use one or have any experience with one? From what I have read/watched so far it seems people either love OSS Suppressors or hate them, but a lot of what I read seemed to be based on their older models. I am not really interested in feedback on any of their older models, just the latest generation HX-QD 762 version.

I like the concept of the flow-through design, reduction in blowback, etc. as it would be used solely on my AR-style gas guns, primarily 6.8 SPC and .308.

Is the benefit of the flow-through design that significant, or would it be possible to achieve a similar reduction in blowback with a traditional baffle-style suppressor and an adjustable gas block?

I am moving from Illinois (thankfully) next spring and have learned (also thankfully) that I should be able to start this process now as I already have a residence and everything already set-up in my new state. As far as baffled suppressors go I am leaning toward the Dead Air Sandman-S, but would like to get a better handle on the pros/cons of traditional baffled vs. the latest generation of OSS flow-through suppressors.

Aaron Cowan from Sage Dynamics just put out a video on it. He puts out good info.

The answer is no, this has been covered extensively elsewhere.  The OSS will not offer substantially better suppression at the shooter's ear (or gas in the face) than when using an adjustable gas block like the superlative arms on a properly setup AR15 or AR10.  What's more, on .308 barrels 20in and under the OSS cans are over 146db at the muzzle, which means the shooter will get splashback and the good at the ear numbers are irrelevant.  A traditional can with an AGB doesn't have that problem.  Furthermore, the OSS cans are quite flashy at night: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYVNbUtmiZ8

Then you have the other drawbacks of the OSS like the weight and length, and QD system (at least in comparison to Keymo).  Really the only time OSS cans make sense are on platforms other than the AR15/AR10 that cannot use AGBs, like AKs, Tavors, AUGs, and so on.  For your situation I'd suggest the Dead Air Nomad over the Sandman S, but either way not an OSS can.

lol I was staying out of this one until Potss showed up--he just can't resist the urge to dump on OSS at every opportunity!

To the OP--you'll find very few fans of OSS here, especially among the regulars (most of whom have never touched one, much less shot it).  If you're looking for honest and informed opinions you'll have to go elsewhere.  But if you want some entertaining reading, there are some old threads.  I suspect everybody (including myself as the resident OSS fanboy) are pretty exhausted on the topic at this point.

The weird thing is that whenever you talk to an actual owner, or somebody who has shot one at a demo, they are almost universally positive about it.  Not that it makes any difference to people like Potss...

If you want a real data point, if you follow MAC you'd see that he's a big fan of OSS, puts them on a lot of his guns, and I think he has said in the past that he won't use anything else on an AR-10 (or something like that).  I think that ought to matter a little more than what some anonymous arrogant guy with a keyboard says on the Internet.

The flash thing was obvious in SureFire's video, but I've yet to hear of any owners validating it.  One has to wonder how much they optimized the test in their favor, considering that flash suppression was a stated design goal from the beginning with OSS.  But it's up to them to defend themselves (which for some reason they seem to be REALLY bad at doing online).

Have you used your OSS cans yet?

OSS has been trying to reinvent the wheel for some time now. 5 generations later, they still haven't accepted the fact that computer flow modeling doesn't work for suppressor designs, and that sometimes the road less traveled has light traffic for a good reason.

You'll find a few people who don't use them that like to chat them up because they're awed by the fancy helical machine work, and there are some owners who don't want to admit to themselves or anyone else that they spent a lot of money on an overweight piece of junk.  The rest of us recognize them for what they are.  I'm quick to recognize and compliment companies putting out good products, but I also have no inhibitions about slamming the designs that should have never gone past napkin sketch or maybe prototype.

LOL...it seems OSS cans are to suppressor discussions what "assault rifles" or "climate change" are to political discussions.

I do appreciate the replies.

So who to believe? The yeas or the nays?

I'm still undecided at this point but I will say from everything I have seen thus far it appears the OSS cans (at least the most recent generation) are performing very well. The splitting of the cans, failing tests, etc appear to be the older generation of cans. The fact that they've changed designs so often thus far is certainly an admission that whatever they were doing wasn't working, but the fact that I have not found one negative review from an actual user of the MOST RECENT generation is promising. Considering it is new technology in the suppressor world I would fully expect bugs/hiccups in the earlier generations of the product. I suppose the question is is this generation the one that finally has it right?

Here is a test that I found that doesn't seem to match up very well with the comments from some of the negative reviewers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFZr6T2NgxE

Additionally, while certainly not out of the question, I do find it hard to believe the US Army would choose this suppressor over the SOCOM for its CSASS and SDMR contracts if it isn't performing as advertised.

I just saw this recently also: http://soldiersystems.net/2019/09/17/oss-begins-shipping-sdmr-suppressors/

IBTL

You linked to two OSS marketing pieces, I'm not sure why you expected them to be anything but that.  The OSS was selected for HK rifles because HK rifles are very over-gassed and don't play nice with regular suppressors.  If you base your decisions on what gear to get off of what bean-counters choose, and what marketing material companies publish, you are going to end up sorely disappointed at the end of the day.

This isn't a "yay or nay" thing.  It is an application thing.  The facts are very clear.  The OSS can is near irreplaceable and extremely good on hosts that are semi-auto and don't have good adjustable gas systems, including but not limited to: AUGs, Tavors, X95, MDR, M14s, SCARs,  AKs, G3s, Some AR15 short stroke piston uppers like the HK or AA, AR15s that cannot use an AGB (like issued stuff) and so on.  If your host is one or more of those rifles, then the OSS is a great option (Nexgen and a few others also have flow-through designs but not much testing on them).

However, if your host is a bolt gun or a semi-auto rifle with a good adjustable gas system like basically all AR15s (that can use the Superlative Arms AGB), K&M M17s, FAL, .300blk X95, or similar then a traditional suppressor will serve you far better than an OSS can will.

It is that simple and really those "debating" on both sides are not reflecting this reality.

Holy shit.

I know it's a tech forum but damn that's funny.

jeff asked the same question I was going to ask.

Wowza

Yes, I understand that the OSS can makes sense on certain rifles, or not so much (or at all) on others. I do have one particular rifle that (by your own admission) make sense for an OSS suppressor, thus my interest in them. The objective in starting this post was to find out from other users (ideally those that actually own or have shot the MOST RECENT generation) of OSS cans what their direct experience/opinion is. I have no idea whether you own/have shot a rifle with a current OSS can. If you have, I would appreciate your actual experience with the can, if you have not (or do not know someone personally who has), I really don't see how your responses are adding to this conversation.

You have answered that you feel a good adj. gas block (with a regular baffle-style suppressor) will mitigate the blowback issues that are present in semi-auto rifles without an AGB. That is exactly the type of info that I am looking for, and I do appreciate your answer. However, you have not yet indicated whether you own/have shot a CURRENT GENERATION OSS can. Or even if you don't own/haven't shot with one, perhaps you know someone else who has direct experience with them, which is fine too.

Frankly, it boils down to this...I'd love to take your advice, but at this point I cannot tell if your feedback is credible or not. It seems with OSS everyone is either a "hater" or a "fanboy", all I'm looking for is some feedback from the following people:

1) You own (and shoot) with the latest generation OSS rifle suppressor(s), preferably the HX-QD 762
2) You do not own (but have shot) with the latest generation OSS rifle suppressor(s), preferably the HX-QD 762
3) You neither own nor have shot an OSS suppressor but you personally know someone from choice 1 and/or 2 that has provided you relevant feedback (positive or negative)

LOL...I guess I was hoping to be the exception to that...no such luck apparently.

The number of people in your categories of 1-3 are likely rather small in the already small world of suppressor enthusiasts.

IIRC there was an SOT/dealer who sold to police/SWAT teams who found favor with OSS (or it might have been the Nexgen) but that may have been an earlier model.  Maybe someone else will recall the thread.

Sig is coming out with some kind of flow-through design apparently, so the idea has merit.

I have gotten to fire there new models about 2 years ago at the IV8888 YT event. (Assuming they have not came out with a new gen) they worked and seemed to be built well. But best I can remember it was heavy and didn’t really stand out as some amazing performer.

Op think you will be better off looking at Dead Air, Rugged, TBAC etc...

Edit: they do have a kinda fun looking cleaning method.

Aka the Taco Bell method.

Haha the Taco Bell method. Aka ass spray! Thought that was funny

What a joke, stating facts back up by hard data from some of the most reputable sources industry isn't good enough for you OP.  Everyone must have first hand XP to generate some kind of subjective opinion and that is the only valid bit of data to you? Sounds like you are seeking only confirmation of your own opinion.

I've given you the facts, from start to finish.  If you want to ignore them that is on you.  If you have a host that falls into the category that fits OSS use, get an OSS.  If you don't, dont.  Simple as that.

What others companies are offering flow through style designs NOW and in the near future?

I'm sorry but you have put forth what you claim to be facts. I am not saying what you claim is either accurate or inaccurate, but you have not included any corroboration/hard data to substantiate those claims other than the video of the OSS can. That particular piece of data must be taken with a grain of salt due to the source (Surefire). Just as the OSS video I linked to must also be taken with a grain of salt. There are several video reviews out there done by non-OSS sources, and (while they may too have an incentive to positively review the product) they have all been extremely positive toward the most recent generation of the OSS cans.

There is objective (data/facts/etc) and there is subjective (opinion/thoughts/etc). What you are offering clearly seems to be of the subjective variety (poorly masked under the barest of objective-sounding words).

Ideally, I am looking for objective hard data (preferably from actual users), which clearly isn't easy to get. In the absence of hard data I am left with using subjective opinion, which if that is all I can get then so be it. BUT...if I am going to make a decision using largely subjective data points, I think I would be much better served using subjective opinions from people who actually have real-world experience with the product.

I am not seeking confirmation, I am seeking INFORMATION.

Perhaps, but others have given facts (claims, actually) too (not only here but in other posts/videos/conversations/etc), from start to finish, that do not match up with and/or contradict some of your facts/claims. I am not saying yours are wrong, but you have offered little in actual evidence that yours are right either.

What I can tell so far is this (regarding OSS cans):

1. Do not buy/use for a bolt gun - not my intention
2. Slightly louder at the muzzle than traditional baffle suppressors - fine with me
3. Slightly quieter at the ear than traditional baffle suppressors - ideal for me
4. 1.9oz heavier and 0.4 inches longer than the other can I have been considering (Sandman-S) - not a problem
5. Well suited to certain semi-auto guns, especially those that have non-adj gas systems - I intend to use it primarily on two (both semi-auto) rifles, one adjusts, the other does not (but I can change that)
6. Flow through design minimizes blowback - big plus - but if an AGB can minimize a baffle-style blowback than not so much of a big plus
7. They have changed designs very frequently which means that earlier versions were problematic - concerning
8. The Army has seen fit to purchase thousands of OSS cans for their SDMR/CSASS rifles (HK G28), but apparently ONLY for that particular rifle - slight plus

I guess my decision largely revolves around number 7...have they finally gotten rid of whatever problems have caused them to continually change/upgrade their products?

Like those of you who do not have confidence in OSS cans I too have some skepticism and a big part of me is leaning away from getting an OSS can.

Ideally I was hoping to get some direct first-hand feedback from someone who runs the same (or similar) set-up with regard to their satisfaction/dis-satisfaction with the latest OSS cans. It appears that is not likely to happen...which is fine...I was just reaching out.

Unfortunately OP most of these OSS threads go south rather quickly.  I feel there is some merit to what they are trying to do but in the end I believe most people will stick to the more traditional baffle stack arrangement and will suggest the same.

If you buy an OSS can great.  If you don't that is ok too.  All I can tell you is this with my sample size of 2 Dead Air cans. I love them.  The Sandman S is a great can, backed by a great group of individuals and your going to be hard pressed to find alot of folks going meh on that one.  Todd Magee is their main engineer and he is very meticulous.  He's stated with some of the designs they've tried 20-30 different baffle configurations  to find the optimum tone, back pressure, accuracy etc....  They really pay attention to the end user experience and have tried to find a nice balance to give that user a good experience across all of their product line.

The Sandman series is a good buy no matter which flavor you wind up with. I bought a K fully knowing it was the loudest option but my goal was good enough for .300blk on a bolt gun and be able to knock down some of the noise on the AR platform.  It does that effortlessly. They are a low back pressure design compared to alot of the other cans out there and you can now add the E brake option which even reduces the back pressure a bit more at the expense of some slightly higher numbers at the muzzle.  That translates to a smoother shooting gun over all and a touch less port pop which at the shooters ear you will appreciate. The Silencero Co Omega also offers an add on brake option and it does the same thing.  It's another proven all around performer that you may want take a look at as well.

I haven't heard an OSS can before so I can't comment directly on them.  What I will say is the idea is interesting.  I kinda put them in the same category as Kel Tec.  It's wonderful to see a company think out of the box and try something different to the norm.  But the execution, availability, etc..... if it's flawed and as the paying consumer you wind up realizing your the companies guinea pig to find the flaws and your purchase winds up back in customer service's hands a few times kinda leaves a bad taste in the mouth doesn't it?  It would have been nice to see OSS release their latest revision as thier first after doing extensive testing on the previous ones going nope, back to the drawing board intstead of lets just sell this flavor anyway.

YMMV.

OP did you not see my post? Is that not enough hands on experience?

I think the best way to view the OSS cans as not a suppressors but as a highly effective blast diverters. With the exclusion of there rimfire can.

All suppressors are...

And....   Tell it to the ATF.

Yeah I guess they are but you know what I mean like a flash KAK can.

Yes, I saw your post. I appreciate the reply, thank you. Your comments were kind of middle ground though..."worked, seemed well built, but heavy and didn't stand out as an amazing performer", plus you added the caveat of not being sure if it was the newest generation or not. All things considered, you didn't really give me a whole lot to go on. But again, I do appreciate your reply.

I also appreciate the suggestion of steering toward the conventional suppressors, which is actually what I am largely leaning toward, more specifically the Sandman-S, based on a combination of factors, mostly performance (from reviews I have read/seen), length/girth, weight, mounting options, etc.

I am of course considering a few others as well...even the DA Nomad that Potss as suggested. Seems like a great choice but a little bulkier that I would like and once I add the Key-Mo it appears it will be a bit longer/heavier than the Sandman-S. I am also considering a SilencerCo Omega, but if so I will use the Dead Air Key-Mo mounting system. At this point (assuming I don't go with the OSS can) my top two contenders are Sandman-S and the Omega (with DA Key-Mo).

It’s only a grand. if you’re so intrigued, be the test mule nobody else wants to be

Nothing you linked contradicts anything I've said.  Nothing anyone has posted did either.  Again, your post seems more like fishing for confirmation rather than actually asking for the reality of the situation.

It sounds to me like both of your hosts are AR15s.  If that is the case then Superlative Arms AGBs+a good traditional can (like a DA Nomad, Omega 300, YHM Fantom, Surefire, KAC, etc.) will net a better system than the OSS.  Look at Suppressed Nation vids.  Look at Surefire vids.  Look at the posts here by Todd of Dead Air.  All confirm this.

If that isn't the case, just get the OSS, or if you really want to go down the rabbit hole try to find a comparison between OSS and the most recent Nexgen flow-through cans.

lol I thought you'd like that--I was thinking of you and jefflebowski as I typed it.  

For the OP's benefit--I own 4 of the Gen 4 designs but have not gotten around to mounting them on a rifle and shooting them yet.  I bought them because they were great close-out deals, but I haven't even fired a single round from a rifle since I got them suppressed or not.  It's just not part of my life right now.  Evidently some here think that disqualifies me from saying anything in these conversations.  Seems to me it's just too difficult for them to separate statements based on personal experience (which I have never made) from statements based on something else (like simple logic, in some examples).

Anyway, for the OP--if you missed the story, basically the separation between old OSS and new OSS is that new management and ownership took over a few years ago.  They continued to sell the existing products while they did their R&D on the new line, which is the current products you're focused on.  So for all practical purposes, although the general approach carried over, just consider them as two separate companies and anything anybody has to say about the old products (the ones with the octagonal exterior) has limited relevance to what you are considering buying.

That was this guy:

https://www.sentinelmn.com/

https://www.facebook.com/SentinelMN/

I think he had the new (current) products before they were officially announced.  If you look back through his FB posts (and what he has posted here if you can find it) you'll see that he says that almost every time he has done a demo event with LE agencies they ended up choosing OSS.  Obviously they have limitations on their equipment that the rest of us don't have, but it's an interesting data point.

From what I have seen, NG2 MaxFlo is the most direct competitor.  I saw the OSS guy say in an interview that they have had to send out some cease and desist letters, so anybody trying to copy their philosophy has to be careful to avoid patent infringement.  The more common approach seems to be the hybrid concept (as seen in the OSS .22 product).  If you're talking about companies that combine baffles with "flow through" channels, I know that at least LaRue, Delta P, and Thermal Defense are doing that right now.  Sig is talking about it.  paco_ramirez probably knows of others, he has shown us patent drawings going back a long time following the concept.

lol has anybody ever metered a blast diverter at the ear?  If you're telling me that they lower the sound at the shooter's ear better than almost all the baffle competition then they ought to be on every rifle at this point!

Also, I find your comment about weight rather amusing.  This board is full of recommendations for the Sandman-S which weighs 17.7 oz, but the OSS HX-QD 762 at 19.3 oz is too heavy?  And that's just the regular version, I'm not even comparing it to the TI which cuts it down to 14.5 oz.

What's a grand, OSS?  Right now SS has the 5.56 for $869 and the 7.62 for $899.  Botach has them for the same price but includes the muzzle device (SS does not).  And I'm pretty sure if you contacted the SentinelMN guy he'd give you a much better price.

Anyway, OP you'd better be careful or these guys are going to start accusing you of being me under another account!  Don't bother trying to get more from Potss, I already tried many times and he never goes beyond "I know everything, I don't need to prove anything I say is right."

That being said, I'm pretty sure the Suppressed Nation guys are eventually going to collect some data that's going to settle some of these questions that have been lingering for a long time.  Maybe some day we'll finally get that test with OSS head to head with some competitors on the same stock rifle without an adjustable gas block.

Maybe I’ve had too much vodka but I don’t comprehend.
OP should spend a grand more or less and buy one and test it. I’ll chip into the gofundme for ammo for the comparison

Glad I amuse you.

OP I didn’t have a scale with me on the firing line that day all I can go off of was me picking it up. For-all I know it was a demo can full of crud and that’s why it was heavy.

I will say the 2 guys from OSS was super talkative and likeable. Far more than others in attendance. The redhead guy in the video I posted was one of the 2 I spoke with. I was interested in their can for use on a MG. And think it would work fine for that but still with so many manufacturers producing cans now at blow out prices think you will be doing yourself an injustice if you don’t look at other cans.

Whatever happened to the guy that started OSS and left after some issues.  He said something about a no compete clause for a year but he would be back in the game.

Based on the results from goloud's test, the OSS seemed rather 'meh' to me.

At-ear dB readings were very comparable to the Surefire SOCOM 5.56 RC2 he tested alongside the OSS.

My experience is that the OSS suppressors do a great job reducing sound, flash, and back pressure.  On the SCAR the added back pressure from the OSS cans is so minimal that if I set the gas valve to the suppressed setting the rifle does not cycle...but it cycles 100% in the regular setting with or without an OSS suppressor.  This gives me some reassurance that I have little risk of damaging the SCAR 17s when running suppressed, something that has been reported to occur on high round counts with higher back pressure cans.  

I've attached pics of two 17s's, one with the older style hex-sided can and the other with the newer HX-QD 7.62  I don't recall the generation of the older OSS can but compared to many other 7.62 cans it is long (almost nine inches), wide, and heavy (>25 oz).  That being said, it works great so long as you accept its beefy proportions and the reality that while it's possible to dismount using the supplied tool, the can is really a permanent installation because it has so many parts involved in disassembly from the barrel. 

The new OSS quick detach cans seem to do everything the old designs did but in a much more compact size and are easily removable. 

If you were including the tax stamp in the price then I apologize--I thought you were using the MSRP when you referenced the price, so I thought I'd correct it for the record so nobody is confused.
If there is a GoFundMe, it ought to be set up by Hansohn Bros so when the comparisons happen a meter is involved.  

Good question, I've been wondering that myself for a while--he had a countdown clock on his new web site at some point but everything has been silent ever since.  No updates on LinkedIn, no new posts on the FB page, etc.  But personally I was never too excited about his approach because he seemed to favor extreme durability even if you paid a heavy price with the weight.  That may be great for a special ops military guy like him but the general market just isn't going to accept that trade-off.

Are you baiting me into reminding you that the Surefire measurements were taken at the ear with an adjustable gas block, which was adjusted for the OSS because it didn't function with the gas so low (validating the superior back pressure claims, by the way, since there are still some who don't seem to accept them), so it wasn't an apples to apples comparison?

That looks like a flush-mount Gen 5 if it's all one piece.  At that length, any chance that's the .338 model?  I don't think the 7.62 was that long, but the HX Magnum is listed at 8.37" and 25 oz.  If so, that probably is contributing to what you're noticing about the weight as well. (ETA I found an old listing for the HX-762 that says 8" and 22.8 oz so maybe there isn't that much difference regardless)
FWIW, EuroOptic is still showing some Gen 5 closeouts available on their web site, but the price is not very exciting ($699).  But they have expressed a willingness to negotiate in the past if anybody is interested.

Here we go again! Apparently 1/4 turn on an adjustable gas block is enough to disregard any data you don't agree with...



https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/-ARCHIVED-THREAD-OSS-HELIX-QD-Suppressors-Anyone-have-one-/20-490380/?page=4#i5016385

As linked above, that doesn't negate the fact that the at-ear results were so close. Additionally, if the rifle only needed 1/4 turn of adjustment to lock back properly, that means the backpressure was rather similar on both the OSS and Surefire cans, essentially negating another one of their claims to fame.

1/4 turn...

Just to add fuel to this dumpster fire, let's all take a look at this thread where mikesmith13807 does a 180 degree turn on the use of adjustable gas blocks, while trying to simultaneously defend his complete disregard for them previously...

https://www.ar15.com/forums/armory/Silencer-Shop-Nomad-metering-video/20-499681/&page=4#i5125641



Now that's comedy, folks!

Come on, man--I'm trying to be nice here and not get snarky but you're just failing at basic logic and reading comprehension.  Let me make it clear for you.  Remember, the fundamental question that's being discussed is whether OSS would do significantly better at the ear on the typical AR-15 than almost all of the competition.

1. I am not saying, and have never said, that adjusting the gas doesn't help with ear levels.  I have always believed and said the opposite, because it's obvious.  OSS is the one who put out a video trying to demonstrate that you still get blow back (extra gas coming out of the barrel) even if you adjust the gas block for back pressure. I have no way to evaluate the truth of that one way or another, but I think it's an interesting topic for conversation and something that's worth exploring further but that all the haters/skeptics want to completely ignore.

2. I am not saying, and never have said, that there is no value in using an adjustable gas block, because there obviously is.  The only point I have tried to make is that many people either will not or do not want to use them/swap them on their rifles, so there is value in discussing what is best in that situation instead of simply assuming that anybody with a suppressor is going to or should just switch to an adjustable gas block.

3. I never said that 1/4 turn on the gas adjustment was significant, yet you and others ARE saying that it is insignificant.  WHAT I SAID IS THAT WE DO NOT KNOW IF IT IS SIGNIFICANT OR NOT BECAUSE WE HAVE NO WAY TO QUANTIFY IT IN TERMS OF EFFECT ON THE GAS ALLOWED THROUGH!  That being said, the fact that the Surefire functioned without it and the OSS didn't is certainly an indication that it could be significant, but we just don't know because it was not quantified (and would be difficult to quantify in any way that would allow us to know how much the meter numbers should be adjusted to compensate).  To be clear--"1/4 turn" may technically be a description of the adjustment that was made, but there is no scientific measurement of flow of gas that uses measurement units of "turns" and as far as I know nobody has even attempted to figure out the effect that 1/4 turn would have even in terms of percentage.  And even if they could, or even if they could convert "1/4 turn" into an actual quantity of gas or gas flow, there is still no way to calculate the effect on sound levels being measured at the ear that would result in a reliable conclusion about the question of how to compare the two samples being measured!

4. Therefore, if we have unknown variables that cannot be quantified and multiple variables being changed simultaneously (gas setting and the suppressor being tested) WE CANNOT DRAW FIRM CONCLUSIONS FROM THE OUTCOME ONE WAY OR THE OTHER!  If you don't get it, let me spell it out for you--that is not the same thing as saying OSS is better than Surefire, that is not the same thing as saying Surefire is better, that is not the same thing as saying they are close enough that it doesn't matter, that is not a criticism of Pete or questioning his morals/character, that is not saying that the test was useless, and that is not the same thing as saying a lot of things that some of you have said after that test was done.  IT'S SIMPLY THE ABSENCE OF A CONCLUSION BASED ON SIMPLE LOGICAL SCIENCE 101!!!!!!!!

5. All I ever wanted, and continue to want, is for one of these guys with a sound meter to take a simple stock AR-15, take measurements with whatever competitor they want to use, take it off, put on the OSS product, and take more measurements without changing anything else.  For some reason, that seems to be something nobody has done yet as far as I know except for OSS which nobody is going to take at face value.  I assume it's partly because few people have access to all the necessary components of the test, but it irritates me as a matter of principle that so many people are happy to not only draw conclusions for themselves but also repeat them to others who are looking for guidance and information without any acknowledgement that there really isn't a solid basis for their conclusions.

I think the whole Internet needs a lesson about confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.  Throw Dunning Kruger in there while you're at it...

/rant off

If you had bothered reading the thread I linked, which you participated in, you would see that paco_ramirez did in fact provide the calculations for 1/4 turn based on thread pitch, and I provided a different method of estimating the percentage based on the number of turns from full open to full close.

And now we have all of this ranting from you simply because I had the audacity to say that in my opinion the OSS performance was rather 'meh'...

It's like my opinion somehow gored your sacred ox.

I have over a dozen suppressors and my two oss suppressors are by far my favorite on my AR platforms just became my favorite suppressor on my two aks.
Being a lefty sucks and oss fixed on of my biggest issues.

mikesmith, once again totally discrediting himself and proving he doesn't belong on the tech forum.

I'll add that the SCAR17 is a perfect example of a good OSS (or similar ultra-low back pressure design can) host, especially given FN's crappy stance on their warranty with suppressors.  Use case dictates applicability, and the AR15 simply has better options, while things like the SCAR do not.

Sorry, I must have missed where you or anybody else explained how the db numbers should have been adjusted to compensate for the change in the gas setting.

I'll be waiting, can't wait to see the technical documentation on that!

Mike, you're the one claiming 1/4 turn made such a significant difference that you can disregard the data entirely. Why don't you tell us how much that 1/4 turn affected the results?

Another tech thread derailed by the usual suspect.

Sorry...

I'll be taking my suppressors to the range this afternoon, and will be choking on gas as penance.

Derailed!?  Any thread with OSS mentioned is immediately derailed by the lovers and haters.  They never have been anything close to technical.  You've got Mike Smith who is an avid fanboy on a mission, and then you've got yourself, and about a half dozen other arfcom commandos hellbent on trashing and bashing OSS almost immediately.

The culture here is anything but productive.  The arguments are terrible and the fallacies are rampant.

There are plenty of people that love OSS.  There are also plenty of people that hate them, but most of the time these folks are more ignorant.

Suppressor guys are so cult-like in their buying considerations and purchasing decisions.  It's what happens when you do months of research, and then spend the big bucks on a product you have to wait a year to obtain.  Nobody likes feeling like they perhaps made a bad or unwise decision with it comes to buying cans.  As a result you get crazy die hard fanboys and haters when it comes to certain brands, and changing minds is very difficult.

If the OP really wants good information about OSS products perhaps go elsewhere.  Watch about a dozen reviews on Youtube.  Talk to folks who have experience with OSS and other cans, and then make your decision.

Dude... did you even read what I wrote?  I specifically said the test was not useless, but we can't draw firm conclusions from it.  How does that become "disregard the data entirely"?

I'm so sorry, please forgive me for derailing a technical thread by trying to separate fact and hard science from assumptions and premature conclusions that don't have a solid basis in the TECHNICAL DATA.

I'll make a deal with you--you guys stop corrupting technical threads with advice and subjective opinions presented as fact without support in the data and I'll stop pushing back against it.  How does that sound?