Armory Sponsor
Posted: 7/20/2026 10:06:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Ronnoc][Edited]
 Did Exigent Defense Call the ATF? Caught this short about someone cutting open other manufacturers cans. Hating on different people, theft of cans by industry people. Not sure what's going on if anyone can spread some light on what thus is or if old news or what. |
Dare to tame me. Nothing can hold back my rage. Dare to tame me. You can't fool the faithless. Dare to tame me. Fear the man who lost it all.
Don't let the join date fool you... here since '97
Joined:
May 2014
Posts:
7332
EE: 100% (24)
VA, USA
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
185
EE: 0% (0)
KY, USA
|
I have nothing against ridgeback. They’re fine. Same for sharkcoast. The only reason them and sharkcost are in the mix is they’re friends with Evan and I guess Evan can’t fight his own battles. Evan is just a shit human in general. Called the ATF on us, lots of lies, etc etc. There’s a long history of beef there. They’ll be okay. Just need to get it out of their system. They’ll release some podcast that 100 people will watch - the same 100 people who always watch, clip some shorts from it, get some clicks, it’ll impact me absolutely 0, I’ll sell more cans than all 3 of them combined in a month, things will go back to normal once they realize I really don’t care that much. Oh well. |
Member
Joined:
Sep 2023
Posts:
4594
EE: 0% (0)
AZ, USA
| @eagerminuteman thanks, saw it on Reddit. Reddit link Was it deleted from IG? Wanted to read the comments, but couldn’t find it. |
 Since the mods dont care about the integrity of the tech forum. Here is Jay from Pew Science being "totally impartial and not aligned with any manufacturers" I work for a test lab, if I made public comments like this, you'd never see me in the office again. I wonder if they are ISO certified |
Member
Joined:
Sep 2023
Posts:
4595
EE: 0% (0)
AZ, USA
|
Originally Posted By CJofFL: @eagerminuteman thanks, saw it on Reddit. Reddit link Was it deleted from IG? Wanted to read the comments, but couldn’t find it. It was an Instagram story, 24 hour timer unless Andrew saved it to his highlights. |
slowly dying of entropy
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: https://i.postimg.cc/2yRvTHs7/Screenshot-20260721-072757-Reddit.jpg Since the mods dont care about the integrity of the tech forum. Here is Jay from Pew Science being "totally impartial and not aligned with any manufacturers" I work for a test lab, if I made public comments like this, you'd never see me in the office again. I wonder if they are ISO certified Pew numbers and rankings probably have some validity, and they definitely have massive marketing value for this teeny industry, but, to your point, if you've ever worked with real engineering labs in a professional capacity, there's not really any question that this ain't that. |
|
Originally Posted By willi3d: Geez, in the pre-3D print days of K or M baffles and monocore designs, how many cans looked about the same when cut apart? Yeah. Definitely some "pot calling the kettle black" nonsense. Delta P was doing outer flow paths from the blast chamber in 2018 with the brevis III. But somehow CAT invented it? Nonsensical drama that the reddit crowd eats up because they discovered suppressors last week. |
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: https://i.postimg.cc/2yRvTHs7/Screenshot-20260721-072757-Reddit.jpg Since the mods dont care about the integrity of the tech forum. Here is Jay from Pew Science being "totally impartial and not aligned with any manufacturers" I work for a test lab, if I made public comments like this, you'd never see me in the office again. I wonder if they are ISO certified |
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer
|
Originally Posted By Gtscotty: Pew numbers and rankings probably have some validity, and they definitely have massive marketing value for this teeny industry, but, to your point, if you've ever worked with real engineering labs in a professional capacity, there's not really any question that this ain't that. Originally Posted By Gtscotty: Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: https://i.postimg.cc/2yRvTHs7/Screenshot-20260721-072757-Reddit.jpg Since the mods dont care about the integrity of the tech forum. Here is Jay from Pew Science being "totally impartial and not aligned with any manufacturers" I work for a test lab, if I made public comments like this, you'd never see me in the office again. I wonder if they are ISO certified Pew numbers and rankings probably have some validity, and they definitely have massive marketing value for this teeny industry, but, to your point, if you've ever worked with real engineering labs in a professional capacity, there's not really any question that this ain't that. This retired engineering professional agrees. Hosts, muzzle devices, and mounts can impact test results and Pew has never publicly published a sensitivity analysis or even a complete series for a particular silencer. He winks that his magic number shouldn’t be the sole criteria but 10 seconds on Reddit will show that too many take that pew number as the one true gospel. Many don’t even understand that it’s a dosing metric. It’s a good start but a one-man monopoly can’t possibly sample the market space enough to provide an accurate contour map that many use it for. It reminds me of the high end hi-fi culture back in the golden era. Total Harmonic Distortion lol. |
|
For these people to argue about who stole the design from who is ridiculous and, honestly, a joke. All these designs have been brainstormed and even tested on silencer forums for years. Form 1 makers have spent the time to develop these designs and...well, we'll leave it at that. Also, have none of these guys seen the myriad of silencer x-ray pics? |
|
Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: I'm a silencer noob and maybe retarded but I can still spot quite a few differences between those two suppressors. Well, now that we're veering towards actual TECH vs. Industry Gossip, my understanding of things is that the two cutaways in the photo are the Ridgeback and the Exigent, but they are not being called copies of EACH OTHER, they are being accused of copying CAT's tech. Which is odd: Seems if someone's gonna claim something copied CAT, then posting a pic of a *CAT* cutaway next to the alleged copy would allow apples-to-apples. Those two cutaways don't look like Josh's patented CAT baffles with that "erosion wall". And having an exterior vent area going longitudnally, or twisty spiral vents around an interior M/cone-ish reduced diameter core had been done a bunch of times prior (OSS/HUX, DeltaP, GSL, B&T, etc.) So not sure what part is claimed to be a "copy".     - And, as I posted in the Reddit thread, an nod to that 30-year old drama Hanson Bros. alluded to: "Where was my man Andrew back in 1995?"   -- Editorial: We all stand on the shoulders of giants, it's hard not to reinvent the wheel these days, etc. Also, if something's not patented, then it's fair game to take, either as a building block for evolution or a dead-nuts copy, whether we like that reality or not. In the old days, there were only so many ways to make a can and not too many people in this small-business game - no strangers, not a lot of money. Now, everyone's in a big business, patenting everything that might make them big bucks. Some of the new players don't know each other and aren't going to chummily let patent violations slide. (Or be as easily pushed around.) Places like PTR, Smith Wesson, etc., have lawyers on call to protect IP because now this little suppressor game is worth actual money. Back when we were getting ripped off, it was annoying but often small money that wasn't worth pursuing a patent on, much less racking up $$$ expenses in court. |
|
As a buyer I welcome the competition driving the innovation, performance increases, and lower costs that come with the proliferation of these newer designs. It’s awesome to be able to get a 5.56 can that suppresses well enough on a short barrel to not ring my ears for less than mortgage payment. I suspect at the end of the day there is only so much you can do to slow down expanding hot gasses while letting a projectile pass through unobstructed. I regret not trying out the form 1 stuff from way back before the aft jacked it all up. The different baffles with spiral cuts and vents looked cool as hell. |
|
Originally Posted By KalmanPhilter: This retired engineering professional agrees. Hosts, muzzle devices, and mounts can impact test results and Pew has never publicly published a sensitivity analysis or even a complete series for a particular silencer. He winks that his magic number shouldn’t be the sole criteria but 10 seconds on Reddit will show that too many take that pew number as the one true gospel. Many don’t even understand that it’s a dosing metric. It’s a good start but a one-man monopoly can’t possibly sample the market space enough to provide an accurate contour map that many use it for. It reminds me of the high end hi-fi culture back in the golden era. Total Harmonic Distortion lol. He has done a duel muzzle device test on 2 hosts on 2 KAC Silencers. The big issue is no one really seems to give a fuck about a doing a full test of a silencer other than its manufacturer (sometimes), and manufacturer data is dealership level slob. And one man really can't do it but the other option seems to be youtubers and manufacturers posting ads |
|
Originally Posted By kel: Well, now that we're veering towards actual TECH vs. Industry Gossip, my understanding of things is that the two cutaways in the photo are the Ridgeback and the Exigent, but they are not being called copies of EACH OTHER, they are being accused of copying CAT's tech. Which is odd: Seems if someone's gonna claim something copied CAT, then posting a pic of a *CAT* cutaway next to the alleged copy would allow apples-to-apples. Those two cutaways don't look like Josh's patented CAT baffles with that "erosion wall". And having an exterior vent area going longitudnally, or twisty spiral vents around an interior M/cone-ish reduced diameter core had been done a bunch of times prior (OSS/HUX, DeltaP, GSL, B&T, etc.) So not sure what part is claimed to be a "copy". https://i.postimg.cc/NjLzy5f1/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-53-13-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/TYvdJvWC/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-52-43-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/P5LSX9SX/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-3-54-42-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/L6VpkYSY/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-51-11-PM.png Originally Posted By kel: Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: I'm a silencer noob and maybe retarded but I can still spot quite a few differences between those two suppressors. Well, now that we're veering towards actual TECH vs. Industry Gossip, my understanding of things is that the two cutaways in the photo are the Ridgeback and the Exigent, but they are not being called copies of EACH OTHER, they are being accused of copying CAT's tech. Which is odd: Seems if someone's gonna claim something copied CAT, then posting a pic of a *CAT* cutaway next to the alleged copy would allow apples-to-apples. Those two cutaways don't look like Josh's patented CAT baffles with that "erosion wall". And having an exterior vent area going longitudnally, or twisty spiral vents around an interior M/cone-ish reduced diameter core had been done a bunch of times prior (OSS/HUX, DeltaP, GSL, B&T, etc.) So not sure what part is claimed to be a "copy". https://i.postimg.cc/NjLzy5f1/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-53-13-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/TYvdJvWC/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-52-43-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/P5LSX9SX/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-3-54-42-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/L6VpkYSY/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-51-11-PM.png What are these four suppressors in these figures? |
Dare to tame me. Nothing can hold back my rage. Dare to tame me. You can't fool the faithless. Dare to tame me. Fear the man who lost it all.
|
Originally Posted By kel: In the old days, there were only so many ways to make a can Originally Posted By kel: In the old days, there were only so many ways to make a can If you have time, get ahold of Neal Parker's books or do some patent searching. There's a vast treasure trove of silencer designs, over the last 100yrs. Wild ideas, most would never have thought of, let alone file a patent for. Originally Posted By hodgescl:I regret not trying out the form 1 stuff from way back before the aft jacked it all up. In all honesty, it's far easier and cheaper to do home R&D on silencers today than it ever has been. |
|
Originally Posted By The_Sugar_Weasel: He has done a duel muzzle device test on 2 hosts on 2 KAC Silencers. The big issue is no one really seems to give a fuck about a doing a full test of a silencer other than its manufacturer (sometimes), and manufacturer data is dealership level slob. And one man really can't do it but the other option seems to be youtubers and manufacturers posting ads Originally Posted By The_Sugar_Weasel: Originally Posted By KalmanPhilter: This retired engineering professional agrees. Hosts, muzzle devices, and mounts can impact test results and Pew has never publicly published a sensitivity analysis or even a complete series for a particular silencer. He winks that his magic number shouldn’t be the sole criteria but 10 seconds on Reddit will show that too many take that pew number as the one true gospel. Many don’t even understand that it’s a dosing metric. It’s a good start but a one-man monopoly can’t possibly sample the market space enough to provide an accurate contour map that many use it for. It reminds me of the high end hi-fi culture back in the golden era. Total Harmonic Distortion lol. He has done a duel muzzle device test on 2 hosts on 2 KAC Silencers. The big issue is no one really seems to give a fuck about a doing a full test of a silencer other than its manufacturer (sometimes), and manufacturer data is dealership level slob. And one man really can't do it but the other option seems to be youtubers and manufacturers posting ads Silencer Summit seems to do a good job at testing and getting the info out. |
Not everyone gets to be an astronaut, the world needs pole dancers too. ~Observer
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: https://i.postimg.cc/2yRvTHs7/Screenshot-20260721-072757-Reddit.jpg Since the mods dont care about the integrity of the tech forum. Here is Jay from Pew Science being "totally impartial and not aligned with any manufacturers" I work for a test lab, if I made public comments like this, you'd never see me in the office again. I wonder if they are ISO certified It's funny how he is claiming they are all CAT, when the SilencerCo Velos design predates them all. 
|
|
Originally Posted By KalmanPhilter: This retired engineering professional agrees. Hosts, muzzle devices, and mounts can impact test results and Pew has never publicly published a sensitivity analysis or even a complete series for a particular silencer. He winks that his magic number shouldn’t be the sole criteria but 10 seconds on Reddit will show that too many take that pew number as the one true gospel. Many don’t even understand that it’s a dosing metric. It’s a good start but a one-man monopoly can’t possibly sample the market space enough to provide an accurate contour map that many use it for. It reminds me of the high end hi-fi culture back in the golden era. Total Harmonic Distortion lol. From what I've been able to learn of them, Pew testing protocols are inconsistent (ie. hosts, mounts, etc), but he won't reveal them, which is telling in itself. As such, I consider Pew "science" to be a dubious source, at best, vis a vis how Griffin/GreenO conducts (& shows) his comparison tests. Night vs day difference. |
|
@kel had an excellent point. Vaguely familiar with Greg Latka being one of the first guys to have helical bypass baffles. They do have relationships to Werbells spiral diffusers which are a baffle vis a vis the tube with holes in the center being “the baffles”. So Werbell was likely first- which is like being the person who invented but didn’t perfect the light bulb for service life optimization and economical scaled manufacturing and feasible sale. Werbells design was inspired by his first hand experience with the DeLisle .45 bolt action carbine system in WWII. That system differed in that the baffles were the spiral helix, rather than the helix wrapped around the baffle like Werbell's SIONICS stuff and Greg Latka's 1990 patent. The gap Between Latka and Cat is bridged by OSS (maybe ptr I don’t have the exact dates) and KAC and Silencer co in that order, which all had helical flow paths outside baffles after Latka and before CAT. Oss claimed not to have baffles but it was a ludicrous claim with .265 bores in baffling geometries in 5.56 cans. So as usual the helical paths technology which is all fair game, and all different in ways, is getting blamed for being the same as something else. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By kel: Well, now that we're veering towards actual TECH vs. Industry Gossip, my understanding of things is that the two cutaways in the photo are the Ridgeback and the Exigent, but they are not being called copies of EACH OTHER, they are being accused of copying CAT's tech. Which is odd: Seems if someone's gonna claim something copied CAT, then posting a pic of a *CAT* cutaway next to the alleged copy would allow apples-to-apples. Those two cutaways don't look like Josh's patented CAT baffles with that "erosion wall". And having an exterior vent area going longitudnally, or twisty spiral vents around an interior M/cone-ish reduced diameter core had been done a bunch of times prior (OSS/HUX, DeltaP, GSL, B&T, etc.) So not sure what part is claimed to be a "copy". https://i.postimg.cc/NjLzy5f1/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-53-13-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/TYvdJvWC/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-52-43-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/P5LSX9SX/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-3-54-42-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/L6VpkYSY/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-51-11-PM.png - And, as I posted in the Reddit thread, an nod to that 30-year old drama Hanson Bros. alluded to: "Where was my man Andrew back in 1995?" https://i.postimg.cc/J4HP5bm3/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-43-55-PM.png -- Editorial: We all stand on the shoulders of giants, it's hard not to reinvent the wheel these days, etc. Also, if something's not patented, then it's fair game to take, either as a building block for evolution or a dead-nuts copy, whether we like that reality or not. In the old days, there were only so many ways to make a can and not too many people in this small-business game - no strangers, not a lot of money. Now, everyone's in a big business, patenting everything that might make them big bucks. Some of the new players don't know each other and aren't going to chummily let patent violations slide. (Or be as easily pushed around.) Places like PTR, Smith Wesson, etc., have lawyers on call to protect IP because now this little suppressor game is worth actual money. Back when we were getting ripped off, it was annoying but often small money that wasn't worth pursuing a patent on, much less racking up $$$ expenses in court. Originally Posted By kel: Originally Posted By RolandofGilead: I'm a silencer noob and maybe retarded but I can still spot quite a few differences between those two suppressors. Well, now that we're veering towards actual TECH vs. Industry Gossip, my understanding of things is that the two cutaways in the photo are the Ridgeback and the Exigent, but they are not being called copies of EACH OTHER, they are being accused of copying CAT's tech. Which is odd: Seems if someone's gonna claim something copied CAT, then posting a pic of a *CAT* cutaway next to the alleged copy would allow apples-to-apples. Those two cutaways don't look like Josh's patented CAT baffles with that "erosion wall". And having an exterior vent area going longitudnally, or twisty spiral vents around an interior M/cone-ish reduced diameter core had been done a bunch of times prior (OSS/HUX, DeltaP, GSL, B&T, etc.) So not sure what part is claimed to be a "copy". https://i.postimg.cc/NjLzy5f1/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-53-13-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/TYvdJvWC/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-52-43-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/P5LSX9SX/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-3-54-42-PM.png https://i.postimg.cc/L6VpkYSY/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-51-11-PM.png - And, as I posted in the Reddit thread, an nod to that 30-year old drama Hanson Bros. alluded to: "Where was my man Andrew back in 1995?" https://i.postimg.cc/J4HP5bm3/Screen-Shot-2026-07-21-at-12-43-55-PM.png -- Editorial: We all stand on the shoulders of giants, it's hard not to reinvent the wheel these days, etc. Also, if something's not patented, then it's fair game to take, either as a building block for evolution or a dead-nuts copy, whether we like that reality or not. In the old days, there were only so many ways to make a can and not too many people in this small-business game - no strangers, not a lot of money. Now, everyone's in a big business, patenting everything that might make them big bucks. Some of the new players don't know each other and aren't going to chummily let patent violations slide. (Or be as easily pushed around.) Places like PTR, Smith Wesson, etc., have lawyers on call to protect IP because now this little suppressor game is worth actual money. Back when we were getting ripped off, it was annoying but often small money that wasn't worth pursuing a patent on, much less racking up $$$ expenses in court. This is a refreshingly professional and measured post, almost like a foreign language in the age of Reddit. I will say I just got my Ridgeback Rhodie 6 TI and put the first 100 rounds or so of 5.56 and 6mm ARC through it and am very happy with the performance. It does get hot faster than any other can I have, including a handful of other TI cans, I guess that's the annular channels just under the exterior doing their work. |
|
Originally Posted By Gtscotty: This is a refreshingly professional and measured post, almost like a foreign language in the age of Reddit. I will say I just got my Ridgeback Rhodie 6 TI and put the first 100 rounds or so of 5.56 and 6mm ARC through it and am very happy with the performance. It does get hot faster than any other can I have, including a handful of other TI cans, I guess that's the annular channels just under the exterior doing their work. More flow = thinner interior walls = more heat transfer, as a very gross generalization |
|
Originally Posted By HansohnBrothers: The usual silencer industry drama that's been going on for 30+ years; just new names and brands. This. And I honestly couldn't care less. I bought a FT556, I'm gonna get a rhodie 6, and damn sure will have an OCM6 for my NSW 6 arc. Reminds me of the griffin vs KAC days. |
|
Originally Posted By Master_Blaster: From what I've been able to learn of them, Pew testing protocols are inconsistent (ie. hosts, mounts, etc), but he won't reveal them, which is telling in itself. As such, I consider Pew "science" to be a dubious source, at best, vis a vis how Griffin/GreenO conducts (& shows) his comparison tests. Night vs day difference. Wild He has the mk18 and m4 for 556. Theyre the same host every time. He uses the same ammo from the same lot. And typically uses the mount that ships with the silencer. What's the etc? Like do you not understand that his mk18 tests aren't meant to be directly compared to the m4 tests? |
|
Originally Posted By The_Sugar_Weasel: Wild He has the mk18 and m4 for 556. Theyre the same host every time. He uses the same ammo from the same lot. And typically uses the mount that ships with the silencer. What's the etc? Like do you not understand that his mk18 tests aren't meant to be directly compared to the m4 tests? People in this thread are talking about a laboratory, with multiple employee engineers, they are conjecturing about how the score is directly related to dosing. Is there any direct evidence supporting these things? Like a picture of the lab, or the published method of obtaining the score? Video of employees at work in the lab? Maybe I missed something and like you wear a white coat and wherever you go becomes a lab? |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Green0: People in this thread are talking about a laboratory, with multiple employee engineers, they are conjecturing about how the score is directly related to dosing. Is there any direct evidence supporting these things? Like a picture of the lab, or the published method of obtaining the score? Video of employees at work in the lab? Lol no. His cage code shows his lab is his house. He claims "Our staff is formally educated, credentialed, and subject to continuous technical and ethics audits by Professional Engineering boards" but never mentions any specific boards or accreditation. And if he had them, he would list them. Labs love bragging about every certification and accreditation they ever get. |
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish:He claims "Our staff is formally educated, credentialed, and subject to continuous technical and ethics audits by Professional Engineering boards" That's all true, because he is the staff, and is a licensed civil PE. Is that relevant to acoustics? Eh, not really. |
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: Honestly, this is the tech forum. So this should be moved to the GD. There has been some accusations for a while now. A lot of BS. Even some lawsuits involving other companies and them. But this isnt the place for it 
|
|
Originally Posted By The_Sugar_Weasel: He has the mk18 and m4 for 556. Theyre the same host every time. He uses the same ammo from the same lot. And typically uses the mount that ships with the silencer. What's the etc? Like do you not understand that his mk18 tests aren't meant to be directly compared to the m4 tests? Wild. He avoided answering my questions about PS test protocols when questioned a few years back. As in, he wouldn't divulge even basic, non-proprietary information. Don’t know why he was evasive. Made no sense, & it didn't give me a sense of confidence in PS as an operation. |
|
Originally Posted By Master_Blaster: Wild. He avoided answering my questions about PS test protocols when questioned a few years back. As in, he wouldn't divulge even basic, non-proprietary information. Don’t know why he was evasive. Made no sense, & it didn't give me a sense of confidence in PS as an operation. So your issue went from the host,mounts, and ammo to now something else that you won't even say? |
|
Originally Posted By Green0: People in this thread are talking about a laboratory, with multiple employee engineers, they are conjecturing about how the score is directly related to dosing. Is there any direct evidence supporting these things? Like a picture of the lab, or the published method of obtaining the score? Video of employees at work in the lab? Maybe I missed something and like you wear a white coat and wherever you go becomes a lab? I was not responding to a comment about his laboratory. |
|
Originally Posted By kel: It’s always fair to question hyperbole, but NEVER disparage white lab coats. It’s the universal seal of approval for everything from diet drugs to Shamwows. https://i.postimg.cc/rs1JVWSs/IMG-0877.jpg Haha yes. The photo/video guys wanted to get them for our new “How loud is it” infotainment series of testing of random cans. They just kind of didn’t execute on time. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Only thing I got out of this whole drama is that these people are bringing CAT cans to market for $400 cheaper with better more HUB friendly designs using the same materials. Pretty based. Seriously, this just proves CAT is upselling you A LOT. Makes me glad I stopped at the WB. |
|
Originally Posted By UMP45_Enthusiast: Only thing I got out of this whole drama is that these people are bringing CAT cans to market for $400 cheaper with better more HUB friendly designs using the same materials. Pretty based. Seriously, this just proves CAT is upselling you A LOT. Makes me glad I stopped at the WB. And I havent seen any blem sales, QC issues, or extensive backlog/lead times from exigent. Ridgeback ive seen a couple posts of cans with metal shavings left inside. And I have a customer still waiting on a 6k I ordered on June 1st. Maybe itll come this week and meet their 6-8week lead time. And they are American owned companies. Not owned by a dude in South Africa |
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: And I havent seen any blem sales, QC issues, or extensive backlog/lead times from exigent. Ridgeback ive seen a couple posts of cans with metal shavings left inside. And I have a customer still waiting on a 6k I ordered on June 1st. Maybe itll come this week and meet their 6-8week lead time. And they are American owned companies. Not owned by a dude in South Africa I removed it and used the can lol |
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: Yeah. Definitely some "pot calling the kettle black" nonsense. Delta P was doing outer flow paths from the blast chamber in 2018 with the brevis III. But somehow CAT invented it? Nonsensical drama that the reddit crowd eats up because they discovered suppressors last week. I was thinking about this again the other night because I had remembered seeing the Thermal Defense 3d printed suppressors at a gun shop quite a few years ago and those were the first I had ever seen.  So I asked Grok for a little history of their suppressors. "When did thermal defense develop their 3d printed suppressors?" "**Around 2007 (first printed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory), with Thermal Defense Solutions (TDS) commercializing improved versions starting around 2018.** The core designs and technology for these additive-manufactured (3D-printed / selective laser melting) Inconel suppressors originated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). They were developed under a Naval Special Warfare / U.S. SOCOM program using advanced modeling and simulation for gas dynamics, heat management, and performance. ORNL holds the relevant patents; the technology was later licensed exclusively to TDS. According to a TDS representative (Ed), the designs were first printed in 2007 at ORNL. The military program did not fully adopt them as originally planned, so the work sat for a period before TDS (a small team with aerospace/rocket-engine manufacturing experience, co-located with Volunteer Aerospace) took the exclusive license, refined the designs (making them lighter, quieter, stronger—described as Gen2+), and brought commercial models to market. TDS publicly introduced their commercial 3D-printed Inconel suppressors (e.g., Bantam, Specter/Badger, and related models) around SHOT Show 2018. These are monolithic one-piece designs printed from Inconel 718 powder, enabling complex internal geometries (such as helical features) that are difficult or impossible with traditional machining, along with benefits in durability, heat resistance, reduced backpressure, and flash suppression. In short: the foundational 3D-printed suppressor technology dates to ~2007 at ORNL; TDS developed and launched the commercial products based on it starting in 2018." Interesting, isn't it? |
|
Originally Posted By chevrofreak:I was thinking about this again the other night because I had remembered seeing the Thermal Defense 3d printed suppressors at a gun shop quite a few years ago and those were the first I had ever seen. |
|
Originally Posted By CJofFL: Since you’re referring to 3D printed suppressors in general, you may be interested in this Griffin Armament video… https://youtu.be/Zml5eqAV7Bg Not just 3d printed in general, but the helical outer flow paths that are being used by everyone now. That Thermal Defense design sure looks a lot like the CAT, Ridgeback and Exigent stuff that caused the drama. |
|
Originally Posted By chevrofreak: Not just 3d printed in general, but the helical outer flow paths that are being used by everyone now. That Thermal Defense design sure looks a lot like the CAT, Ridgeback and Exigent stuff that caused the drama. Silencerco, CAT, Ridgeback, Exigent, thermal defense. Probably Dillon and many more. |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
192
EE: 0% (0)
KY, USA
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: Silencerco, CAT, Ridgeback, Exigent, thermal defense. Probably Dillon and many more. It’s the copy paste of printed suppressors for sure. The “I don’t want to do much/any testing but decided I want to make suppressors today” starter pack |
|
Originally Posted By SGT-Fish: Silencerco, CAT, Ridgeback, Exigent, thermal defense. Probably Dillon and many more. What is interesting is that the patents are still valid until 2032 and it looks like just about all of them are in violation of the design elements. |
|
Originally Posted By AndrewKing: It’s the copy paste of printed suppressors for sure. The “I don’t want to do much/any testing but decided I want to make suppressors today” starter pack Why re-invent the wheel? Im sure they still do a lot of testing. None of the designs are actually direct copies as Jay/Pew Science infers. They share a lot of design ideas and features, but its obvious that they took those ideas and incorporated them into their own designs. Which is common in every single industry. |
Armory Sponsor