Armory Sponsor
Posted: 12/19/2024 4:46:58 PM EDT
| All of my KAC uppers are nicely gassed, except for one CQB. I have several RC2's I run on them and don't really want to buy a new KAC flow through can right now. Has anyone had any success reducing the amount of gas they are inhaling by installing a new buffer, or an LMT enhanced carrier, bootleg carrier etc? I'd post this on the general sub but I always see those BRT tubes and ADJ gas blocks recommended, which I don't think applies to us, is that correct? The upper runs fine, I'm just tired of breathing in so much crap and would like to mitigate what I can. |
|
You are correct about not being able to run a BRT tube in there. The KAC one's are proprietary. My solution was to install an A5 buffer tube and run an A5-H3 weight buffer, with a KAK down vent carrier and a Huxwrx flow 556k can on it. Super soft recoil and no noticeable gas to the face. I originally had a Socom mini II can on there and it was not a good combo, super gassy. I think even just getting a KAK down vent carrier would help though. |
|
Originally Posted By DetroitSounds: Are you shooting indoors? Ive ran cqb’s with rc2 or kac qdc cqb without excessive gas No, almost exclusively outdoors. It’s just that KAC uppers are all gassed different unfortunately. Most of them are somewhere in the middle. But i’ve had, and seen, multiple examples on both ends of the gas spectrum. This is why sometimes when you see people arguing on the interwebs, it isn’t necessarily because one is an idiot. It’s because they have differently gassed guns and need to run different setups. This is the only really gassy one I have left, but it’s accurate and runs flawless and I like having a beater. Ironically since I care the least about it, I find I grab it the most. I never feel guilty about it being filthy. |
| I was shocked how much a gas buster charging handle redirected gas out of my 10.3 w NT4 vs a standard colt charging handle. Night and day difference. You can get a used one for 50-60 to try. Still get some gas to the face but its not a wash out like it was before. |
|
Originally Posted By OlacAttack: I was shocked how much a gas buster charging handle redirected gas out of my 10.3 w NT4 vs a standard colt charging handle. Night and day difference. You can get a used one for 50-60 to try. Still get some gas to the face but its not a wash out like it was before. That’s good to hear. I’ve been on the fence about these, sounds like it’s worth a try then. |
Joined:
Oct 2024
Posts:
74
EE: 100% (9)
USA
Joined:
Jan 2023
Posts:
227
EE: 100% (2)
TX, USA
|
H3 with super 42 spring. Or a sprinco. Having said that no matter what buffer setup you stick in it there will still be positive pressure within the upper. That pressurized gas is going to take the path of least resistance which in most cases is the gaps above and underneath the charging handle. Take away, or reduce the ability for that gas to get to your face via the charging handle area. Ive always seen better results with gasket maker properly used on the charging handle, even with standard mil spec handles than aftermarket handles alone. Having said that I use Geiselle or PRI gas busters with gasket seal on all my guns and do not have major gas to the face issues at all. |
| I have a blue sprinco in all my lowers (this is the only change I made from the stock KAC congif) with the supplied KAC H2 buffer. I'm gonna try that gasket maker on the stock KAC handles and will go from there. Sounds like it might make more of a difference than I was anticipating. |
|
For my CQB/Surefire Mini 2 setup a radian SD and a PRI gasbuster both seemed to make a significant difference over the stock KAC CH. I've since switched to one of the new KAC PRT cans and I cannot even tell the gun is suppressed anymore in terms of gas to face. |
|
While there are ways to reduce some of the perception of gas to face, when it comes to what you're actually inhaling the problem is that big old ejection port. The only way to reduce your actual exposure is to go to a backpressure reduction suppressor. Traditional suppressors increase user exposure to combustion by about 400%, regardless of charging handle RTV, adjustable gas blocks, or different gas tubes. |
|
Originally Posted By Jack_L: While there are ways to reduce some of the perception of gas to face, when it comes to what you're actually inhaling the problem is that big old ejection port. The only way to reduce your actual exposure is to go to a backpressure reduction suppressor. Traditional suppressors increase user exposure to combustion by about 400%, regardless of charging handle RTV, adjustable gas blocks, or different gas tubes. Yeah, I hear ya. I cure cancer for a living, and know I'm fooling myself with the RTV from a health standpoint. Wish I just started getting into suppressors now, would be a very easy decision. |
|
Apparently if you tune the gun via spring/buffer to work with the lmt enhaced carrier you can solve this issue since the carrier delays the bolt unlock time and therefore keeps the chamber closed longer allowing that extra back pressure/gas to escape out of the muzzle and vent of the carrier. I have an e-carrier laying around I'll be testing with an a5 buffer/spring with both a traditional can and a flow-through to see how well it works. I'm hoping the combo of an A5+lmt e-carrier+flow through can makes it shoot soft with no gas to the face |
|
Originally Posted By ribeyemediumrare: Apparently if you tune the gun via spring/buffer to work with the lmt enhaced carrier you can solve this issue since the carrier delays the bolt unlock time and therefore keeps the chamber closed longer allowing that extra back pressure/gas to escape out of the muzzle and vent of the carrier. I have an e-carrier laying around I'll be testing with an a5 buffer/spring with both a traditional can and a flow-through to see how well it works. I'm hoping the combo of an A5+lmt e-carrier+flow through can makes it shoot soft with no gas to the face Originally Posted By ribeyemediumrare: Apparently if you tune the gun via spring/buffer to work with the lmt enhaced carrier you can solve this issue since the carrier delays the bolt unlock time and therefore keeps the chamber closed longer allowing that extra back pressure/gas to escape out of the muzzle and vent of the carrier. I have an e-carrier laying around I'll be testing with an a5 buffer/spring with both a traditional can and a flow-through to see how well it works. I'm hoping the combo of an A5+lmt e-carrier+flow through can makes it shoot soft with no gas to the face If you can report back please do. Debating the bootleg vs LMT route. Originally Posted By Jack_L: While there are ways to reduce some of the perception of gas to face, when it comes to what you're actually inhaling the problem is that big old ejection port. The only way to reduce your actual exposure is to go to a backpressure reduction suppressor. Traditional suppressors increase user exposure to combustion by about 400%, regardless of charging handle RTV, adjustable gas blocks, or different gas tubes. Jack, I read this as traditional suppressors increase exposure by about 400% compared to no can. Do you have any data for the difference in exposure between something like an RC2 and the new full size 5.56 KAC cans? Has anyone else out there directly compared an RC2 vs the new full size KAC cans in regards to gas blowback? Now that the KAC cans are more reasonably priced, and it sounds like they have an option coming out that shaves a few oz, I’m much more interested in taking the plunge. |
|
Originally Posted By AndysAR15name: If you can report back please do. Debating the bootleg vs LMT route. Jack, I read this as traditional suppressors increase exposure by about 400% compared to no can. Do you have any data for the difference in exposure between something like an RC2 and the new full size 5.56 KAC cans? Has anyone else out there directly compared an RC2 vs the new full size KAC cans in regards to gas blowback? Now that the KAC cans are more reasonably priced, and it sounds like they have an option coming out that shaves a few oz, I’m much more interested in taking the plunge. I have tried all of the gas-mitigating charging handles that I am aware of and the Griffin SNACH G2 is the best of them all. It, along with the PRI Gasbuster, are the only two charging handles that I have found to have any appreciable affect on gas and the SNACH bests the PRI. |
Montani Semper Liberi
NRA Life Member - GOA - WVCDL
NRA Life Member - GOA - WVCDL
|
Originally Posted By AndysAR15name: All of my KAC uppers are nicely gassed, except for one CQB. I have several RC2's I run on them and don't really want to buy a new KAC flow through can right now. Has anyone had any success reducing the amount of gas they are inhaling by installing a new buffer, or an LMT enhanced carrier, bootleg carrier etc? I'd post this on the general sub but I always see those BRT tubes and ADJ gas blocks recommended, which I don't think applies to us, is that correct? The upper runs fine, I'm just tired of breathing in so much crap and would like to mitigate what I can. The answer is a HUXWRX Flow 556k or 556 Ti suppressor. I went through the same grief with a Mod 2 16” upper and KAC QDC 556 suppressor. Gas to the face nightmare. I tried everything with that combo and nothing worked short of using a 762 Surefire can (and my DD4V7 upper still ran better). |
Elite Soviet Democrat
|
Originally Posted By AndysAR15name: If you can report back please do. Debating the bootleg vs LMT route. Jack, I read this as traditional suppressors increase exposure by about 400% compared to no can. Do you have any data for the difference in exposure between something like an RC2 and the new full size 5.56 KAC cans? Has anyone else out there directly compared an RC2 vs the new full size KAC cans in regards to gas blowback? Now that the KAC cans are more reasonably priced, and it sounds like they have an option coming out that shaves a few oz, I’m much more interested in taking the plunge. Finally tested the lmt carrier side by side with a regular carrier on a cqb mod 2.1 with an a5h3 buffer using a flow through Cat WB can. I could definitely tell the lmt carrier was a little bit softer shooting and a little bit less gas although the difference was minor since the setup is already not very gassy due to the can design. So the LMT e carrier definitely reduces some gas, but I think I'm going to stick with the geissele rebcg carrier in this upper with the e3.2 bolt since it was already not that gassy and the geissele carrier rides smoothly in the upper and the lmt carrier seems to have some hot spots where it kind of rubs/scrapes insides the upper compared to a normal carrier. Also the kac cans are definitely way less gassy than an rc2, you can't even compare them. One is flow through, one is gassy cone baffle design. |
|
Originally Posted By themao: The answer is a HUXWRX Flow 556k or 556 Ti suppressor. I went through the same grief with a Mod 2 16” upper and KAC QDC 556 suppressor. Gas to the face nightmare. I tried everything with that combo and nothing worked short of using a 762 Surefire can (and my DD4V7 upper still ran better). I have not tried the 556 Ti but I bought two 556Ks based on the hype and regret it immensely. My primary need in a suppressor is sound suppression and the 556K is just way too darn loud for my liking. My secondary need is flash suppression and both of my 556Ks spark like crazy, especially under NODs. |
Montani Semper Liberi
NRA Life Member - GOA - WVCDL
NRA Life Member - GOA - WVCDL
|
Originally Posted By ribeyemediumrare: Finally tested the lmt carrier side by side with a regular carrier on a cqb mod 2.1 with an a5h3 buffer using a flow through Cat WB can. I could definitely tell the lmt carrier was a little bit softer shooting and a little bit less gas although the difference was minor since the setup is already not very gassy due to the can design. So the LMT e carrier definitely reduces some gas, but I think I'm going to stick with the geissele rebcg carrier in this upper with the e3.2 bolt since it was already not that gassy and the geissele carrier rides smoothly in the upper and the lmt carrier seems to have some hot spots where it kind of rubs/scrapes insides the upper compared to a normal carrier. Also the kac cans are definitely way less gassy than an rc2, you can't even compare them. One is flow through, one is gassy cone baffle design. Since new lighter KAC cans are coming out i’m just gonna pick one up if they are truly going to be around 1k dollars. My other uppers are fine with the RC2s. Makes more sense to just get the flow through KAC on this gassy upper instead of messing around with a bunch of crap. |
|
Originally Posted By WVUSIG: I have not tried the 556 Ti but I bought two 556Ks based on the hype and regret it immensely. My primary need in a suppressor is sound suppression and the 556K is just way too darn loud for my liking. My secondary need is flash suppression and both of my 556Ks spark like crazy, especially under NODs. Appreciate the feedback. Reports like this are the reason I’m not going to go that route. They are extremely polarizing |
| I ended up going with B&T SRBS in inconel for my first flowthrough cans. The mounting system offers flexibility with HUB while still offering the reliability and performance consistent with a military contractor. Flash testing has shown them to be excellent too in comparison to Huxwrx. |
|
Originally Posted By themao: The answer is a HUXWRX Flow 556k or 556 Ti suppressor. I went through the same grief with a Mod 2 16” upper and KAC QDC 556 suppressor. Gas to the face nightmare. I tried everything with that combo and nothing worked short of using a 762 Surefire can (and my DD4V7 upper still ran better). Are you talking Legacy QDC or the newer PRT? |
Joined:
Jan 2023
Posts:
239
EE: 100% (2)
TX, USA
Armory Sponsor