Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 4/7/2012 6:01:55 AM EDT
A local dealer has a Ranger 2 in stock for $509 Plus tax.

I've decided on a .223 can and I'm just curious if difference between Ranger 2 and 3 is significant to hold off till I find a Ranger 3?

Link Posted: 4/7/2012 6:43:11 AM EDT
Ranger 3 has m4 2000 baffles so I'd wait personally
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 10:06:46 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/7/2012 10:08:21 AM EDT by gbcop]
Please enlighten the new to NFA, lol. What's the difference?? The decibel reduction from what I've seen is the same. #1 is the can makes factory 5.56 hearing safe(Under 140 decibels)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT!!! It is greatly appreciated! Just trying to find out what makes improved baffles better.

Thanks again!!!
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 10:48:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/7/2012 10:51:20 AM EDT by Green0]
Rumored to have M4-2000 baffles which isn't substantiated in company website information. Same 6" length, same 28-30DB sound reduction, lighter weight consistent with the lightened rear cap geometry for pin and weld installation compatibility.

Due to the $550 cost of the product, and the high cost of inconel baffles, I would bet it still has 3 baffles internally. Giving the product identical baffling to the $1050 product for $550 doesn't economically compute, nor does the 28-30DB sound reduction from the 4DB higher performance rated 7 baffle stack.

Looking at that, I would say if you don't need to pin and weld, and don't care about a couple ounces of weight, don't worry about it.

I guess technically it's not a lie- because the prior Ranger 2 also had M4-2000 baffles... it just had 3 of them and not 7. While not a lie, that association seems to be miss-leading by design.
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 11:12:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Green0:
Rumored to have M4-2000 baffles which isn't substantiated in company website information. Same 6" length, same 28-30DB sound reduction, lighter weight consistent with the lightened rear cap geometry for pin and weld installation compatibility.

Due to the $550 cost of the product, and the high cost of inconel baffles, I would bet it still has 3 baffles internally. Giving the product identical baffling to the $1050 product for $550 doesn't economically compute, nor does the 28-30DB sound reduction from the 4DB higher performance rated 7 baffle stack.

Looking at that, I would say if you don't need to pin and weld, and don't care about a couple ounces of weight, don't worry about it.

I guess technically it's not a lie- because the prior Ranger 2 also had M4-2000 baffles... it just had 3 of them and not 7. While not a lie, that association seems to be miss-leading by design.


THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT!!

Not sure what pin and weld is, but i dont think it fits my needs.
My intentions for the can is to move from one AR to another for hog hunting, maybe deer hunting.
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 3:54:05 PM EDT
Pin and weld is for people in no SBR states who want to make a 11.5" barrel into a 16.87" barrel for legal short-er suppressed 5.56mm rifles.
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 4:33:46 PM EDT
Thanks for explaining . Thankfully don't have to worry about that in my state.
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 6:51:39 PM EDT
I've had a Ranger 2 for a couple years now and would buy another one.

With F4's at 6-8 months I would buy something in-stock if I were in the market.

Then again, with NFA, the only way I buy is in-stock unless you don't mind waiting even longer than normal. That being said, it's a lifetime purchase, so get what you want.
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 7:22:56 PM EDT
AAC claims its quieter than the Ranger 2. You can also torque it on.
Link Posted: 4/7/2012 9:37:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/7/2012 9:39:06 PM EDT by SC-Texas]
The ranger 2is hell tough. I have serial #1

It is not queit when compared to the sprm4 or the m4-2k

I was told it had m42k baffles at shot show.

How many it has is not known
Link Posted: 4/24/2012 5:05:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/24/2012 7:57:32 PM EDT by Quake_Guy]
was just told by dealer that the Ranger 3 is not full auto rated...
Link Posted: 4/24/2012 6:03:46 PM EDT
No way
Link Posted: 4/24/2012 7:46:55 PM EDT
Side question: Why is the SPR/M4 no longer on their website?
Link Posted: 4/24/2012 8:14:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Burnsy87:
Side question: Why is the SPR/M4 no longer on their website?


It's discontinued, along with the M4-1000, the 6.8 SPC silencers, the 762-SD, the Cyclone-K, and the ECO-9.
Link Posted: 4/25/2012 10:12:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By GeneralPurpose:
Originally Posted By Burnsy87:
Side question: Why is the SPR/M4 no longer on their website?


It's discontinued, along with the M4-1000, the 6.8 SPC silencers, the 762-SD, the Cyclone-K, and the ECO-9.


I was interested in the small amount of length added to my SBR, that's why I grabbed the MITER mount for the SPR/M4.

Crap.
Link Posted: 4/25/2012 12:39:01 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/25/2012 4:38:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Burnsy87:
Originally Posted By GeneralPurpose:
Originally Posted By Burnsy87:
Side question: Why is the SPR/M4 no longer on their website?


It's discontinued, along with the M4-1000, the 6.8 SPC silencers, the 762-SD, the Cyclone-K, and the ECO-9.


I was interested in the small amount of length added to my SBR, that's why I grabbed the MITER mount for the SPR/M4.

Crap.


Look around, you might still be able to find an SPR-M4. Or just go with one of the newer cans.

Originally Posted By Dog1:
Originally Posted By GeneralPurpose:
Originally Posted By Burnsy87:
Side question: Why is the SPR/M4 no longer on their website?


It's discontinued, along with the M4-1000, the 6.8 SPC silencers, the 762-SD, the Cyclone-K, and the ECO-9.


Funny how that happened after they were bought out.


Eh, they got bought out a while ago. More specifically, they discontinued those silencers after releasing the 2012 batch of silencers. AAC has a lot of silencers to carry right now, and would have been making a ridiculous amount of cans if they hadn't killed those cans. It's all in the name of progress, or at least what they view as progress. They're definitely trending towards smaller cans, as seen by the introduction of the Mini-4 and Mini-7, as well as the replacement of the Cyclone-K with the Hunter and the 762-SD with the 762-SDN-6. AAC's sales of the SPR-M4 were definitely lower than the M4-2000 and others. The sales of the 6.8 SPC cans were undoubtedly very low, since most people just buy a .308 can to cover that need. I forgot to add into the other post, the Ranger 2 was also replaced by the Ranger 3. And the EVO-40 and 45 were both killed, while the 9 remains onboard. For now.

A lot of people, including myself, prefer end-mount cans for flexibility. The SPR-M4 was a very cool can, but one I never would have bought. I think AAC axed their old models and their low-volume models to make room for the new stuff. It wouldn't make any business sense to make 50 different cans. I don't think Remington/Freedom Group/whatever had anything to do with it.
Top Top