Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Posted: 1/19/2015 1:09:33 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 2:44:38 PM EST by NikolaFermi]
Looks like SilencerCo just launched a new site to my knowledge and the K cans are now listed.


Octane K 45 Spec Sheet

Osprey K 45 Spec Sheet

ETA: Video

Link Posted: 1/19/2015 1:13:53 AM EST
Hopefully with the release of the K version someone will have a killer deal on the reg Fullsize octane 45. I'm in the market for another one and the K version just doesn't do it for me
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 1:16:20 AM EST
Wow, loud numbers.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 1:39:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 1:53:22 AM EST by skipper469]
Not really seeing the big benefit going to a K can on these. Just my opinion. On the Osprey 9mm you lose 10db going to the K can. 132db on the standard Octane .45 and 139.8db on the Octane .45 K. No thanks. I'm a huge Silencerco fan, but the Osprey and Octane K cans just don't appeal to me. I'm happy with my standard Octanes.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 5:54:21 AM EST
Wow, not that impressive coming from SiCo. I was hoping for the Octane K to at least compete with the Griffin REV series, but I guess I'll be going that route for my next 9mm can.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 6:04:36 AM EST
Woulda considered an Osprey 9mm k, I'll pass on a 45k. Octane K looks like a complet disappointment, as much as I like SiCo, Griffin Revolution seems to be the new king of versatility.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 6:23:58 AM EST
I want a an Octane in .45, I have the 9MM. I also have two Ospreys, one in 9 the other in .45.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 7:23:03 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 7:23:45 AM EST by 1stID]
Yeah, by their own numbers, for the Osprey, you gain 8 dB from the 9mm to the K, and it's only a half inch shorter.

For a short can, check out the AAC Ti-rant 9s. It's only 5 inches long. I have one and have used it on a Glock 19 and HK USP. Does a great job on both.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 8:43:13 AM EST
Also interesting to see that the Osprey 45 with 9mm meters at 125.2 dB while the Osprey 9 meters at 127.0 dB.

Yeah, the "K" models are probably not for me. The only shorty that somewhat interests me right now is the Ti-Rant 9s.

Link Posted: 1/19/2015 9:15:08 AM EST
Don't understand the complaints, these are quieter than the short Ti-rants, no?

I don't shoot .45, yet these still seem compelling for 9mm hosts. I bet 9mm K versions would be killer.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 9:52:21 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:
Don't understand the complaints, these are quieter than the short Ti-rants, no?

I don't shoot .45, yet these still seem compelling for 9mm hosts. I bet 9mm K versions would be killer.
View Quote


I think they are comparable on the 9. AAC gives dB reduction while Silencerco gives absolute dB numbers.

In the industry comparison video done by SWR,

the unsuppressed baseline is 159.31 dB
The Octane 9 meters at 126.83 dB = 32.48 dB reduction
The TiRant 9 meters at 125.85 dB = 33.46 dB reduction

AAC's specs say 35 to 38 dB for the Ti-Rant 9, so the numbers are in the ballpark.

The 9s does 22 dB dry which would put it at around 137-138 dB

The Octane 45K does ~136 dB but the length of the can is 6.85 inches

The 9s is 5.07" which makes it a more compelling short 9mm can.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 9:53:33 AM EST
I think the issue is that the Tirant 9s is 5 inches, and this K model is 6.5 inches, so quite a bit longer, and with the Osprey, larger from the rectangular size.

The numbers AAC lists forthe 9s on their web site are not impressive - 19 dB I think. I bought one during the Great Panic of 2013, not expecting that much, but it's really quiet. I put a dollop of wire pulling gel in it, and it's quiet. WIth plugs in, as my range requires, all you really hear is the sound of the plate being knocked down. In comparison, a .380 is loud to fire with only plugs due to a close concrete wall.

Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:16:54 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Engineer:
The 9s does 22 dB dry which would put it at around 137-138 dB

The Octane 45K does ~136 dB but the length of the can is 6.85 inches

The 9s is 5.07" which makes it a more compelling short 9mm can.
View Quote

I see. I was going by the SS vid on the 9s, which had it around 141-142.

Didn't really appreciate the length difference.

Still, comparing 45K cans to the 9s isn't really apples to apples. Hope to see an Octane 9K one day.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:39:38 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:

Still, comparing 45K cans to the 9s isn't really apples to apples. Hope to see an Octane 9K one day.
View Quote


You and me both - I still like the CTA design and would like to maintain piston compatibility.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:50:10 AM EST
I would like to see an upgrade to the octane that uses the salvo design for the CTA that way you can pick the length / sound reduction. It would be nice if the aft just let them swap out the baffle stack on the darn thing so you could have a CTA 9mm stack and a .45 stack that you could choose how long you want it and what host its specific for. But thats never going to happen.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 12:46:17 PM EST
Why all the comparisons to the 9s?
Wouldn't the 45s be the one we should be comparing?
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 1:19:08 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jaysondiesel:
I would like to see an upgrade to the octane that uses the salvo design for the CTA that way you can pick the length / sound reduction. It would be nice if the aft just let them swap out the baffle stack on the darn thing so you could have a CTA 9mm stack and a .45 stack that you could choose how long you want it and what host its specific for. But thats never going to happen.
View Quote

That would be AWESOME.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 1:35:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 1:35:42 PM EST by Engineer]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By smb980:
Why all the comparisons to the 9s?
Wouldn't the 45s be the one we should be comparing?
View Quote


For me, it's because I have a lot more compact 9mm handguns than I have compact 45 handguns - and a compact handgun just begs for a compact can.

Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:20:04 PM EST
With AAC perhaps going bye-bye, I put the brakes on a 9-s and other options...the 45k does look interesting.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:31:44 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By whiplash10:
With AAC perhaps going bye-bye.
View Quote



Care to share your source?
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:39:47 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By whiplash10:
With AAC perhaps going bye-bye, I put the brakes on a 9-s and other options...the 45k does look interesting.
View Quote



What makes you think AAC is going away? They just introduced a new product.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:42:29 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 2:42:58 PM EST by whiplash10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By samson7x:



What makes you think AAC is going away? They just introduced a new product.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By samson7x:
Originally Posted By whiplash10:
With AAC perhaps going bye-bye, I put the brakes on a 9-s and other options...the 45k does look interesting.



What makes you think AAC is going away? They just introduced a new product.


Some article I read. who knows if it's true though

ETA: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/12/foghorn/john-hollister-derek-smith-quit-aac/
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:49:44 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By whiplash10:


Some article I read. who knows if it's true though

ETA: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/12/foghorn/john-hollister-derek-smith-quit-aac/
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By whiplash10:
Originally Posted By samson7x:
Originally Posted By whiplash10:
With AAC perhaps going bye-bye, I put the brakes on a 9-s and other options...the 45k does look interesting.



What makes you think AAC is going away? They just introduced a new product.


Some article I read. who knows if it's true though

ETA: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/12/foghorn/john-hollister-derek-smith-quit-aac/

I thought they just laid people off who didn't want to move.
AAC is too valuable of a brand to FG
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 4:23:30 PM EST
Let's not clutter this thread with unsubstantiated AAC BS. It's been discussed in other threads and it's not happening.

I think if you compare the K specs to the full size .45 specs, what you get in the smaller package is pretty compelling.

If they can do the same in 9mm versions down the road, I'm in for an Octane 9 K.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 4:40:04 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 4:41:50 PM EST by bradpierson26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:
Let's not clutter this thread with unsubstantiated AAC BS. It's been discussed in other threads and it's not happening.

I think if you compare the K specs to the full size .45 specs, what you get in the smaller package is pretty compelling.

If they can do the same in 9mm versions down the road, I'm in for an Octane 9 K.
View Quote

I agree. Loud is relative and can be acceptable if you know what you're getting in to.

I bought a Ti-rant 9mm and a Thompson Machine Micro 9mm (4.25") within a week of each other.
This was after evaluating a osprey .45 (same length as a ti-rant 9mm) on multiple hosts.

I don't care to chase decibels with centerfire cans so I'm okay with a 4.25" suppressor (more like a moderator) on hosts like a G26, kahr 9mm, smaller CZs.

I'm excited in the options for shorter, louder, cans. It's not like companies are discontinuing their longer, quieter cans. This is only good news. May not be as quiet as you want but it's steps in the right direction.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 6:57:23 PM EST
I have an octane 45 (well approved at least waiting on the mail) and I would jump on an octane 9-k but I think a 45k gives up too much internal volume on a 45 for what you would gain (lose) in length

Mike
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 7:57:37 PM EST
remember it wasn't that long ago that people told you it wasn't worth suppressing any 45 because it was too loud. The last generation of cans changed that... however, there are limitations to everything and going short gets you knocking on the 140 threshold when shooting .45.

For saving less than 1.5 inches, doesn't seem worth it... maybe a K version of the 9mm cans will make more sense.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 8:04:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 8:06:10 PM EST by UM-Iceman]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Quake_Guy:
remember it wasn't that long ago that people told you it wasn't worth suppressing any 45 because it was too loud. The last generation of cans changed that... however, there are limitations to everything and going short gets you knocking on the 140 threshold when shooting .45.

For saving less than 1.5 inches, doesn't seem worth it... maybe a K version of the 9mm cans will make more sense.
View Quote

Actually....

Osprey savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 3.1oz
Octane savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 2.7oz
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 8:39:02 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:

Actually....

Osprey savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 3.1oz
Octane savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 2.7oz
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:
Originally Posted By Quake_Guy:
remember it wasn't that long ago that people told you it wasn't worth suppressing any 45 because it was too loud. The last generation of cans changed that... however, there are limitations to everything and going short gets you knocking on the 140 threshold when shooting .45.

For saving less than 1.5 inches, doesn't seem worth it... maybe a K version of the 9mm cans will make more sense.

Actually....

Osprey savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 3.1oz
Octane savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 2.7oz

You're right, but semantics. The 3.1oz seems much more significant to me
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:09:19 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bradpierson26:

You're right, but semantics. The 3.1oz seems much more significant to me
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bradpierson26:
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:
Originally Posted By Quake_Guy:
remember it wasn't that long ago that people told you it wasn't worth suppressing any 45 because it was too loud. The last generation of cans changed that... however, there are limitations to everything and going short gets you knocking on the 140 threshold when shooting .45.

For saving less than 1.5 inches, doesn't seem worth it... maybe a K version of the 9mm cans will make more sense.

Actually....

Osprey savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 3.1oz
Octane savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 2.7oz

You're right, but semantics. The 3.1oz seems much more significant to me


Was going to post the same thing. I would think I'd notice the weight before the .15". Then again...is 3oz perceptible?

Either way, good to have (more) options.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:21:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 10:22:43 PM EST by UM-Iceman]
nevermind
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:31:41 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By whiplash10:


Was going to post the same thing. I would think I'd notice the weight before the .15". Then again...is 3oz perceptible?

Either way, good to have (more) options.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By whiplash10:
Originally Posted By bradpierson26:
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:
Originally Posted By Quake_Guy:
remember it wasn't that long ago that people told you it wasn't worth suppressing any 45 because it was too loud. The last generation of cans changed that... however, there are limitations to everything and going short gets you knocking on the 140 threshold when shooting .45.

For saving less than 1.5 inches, doesn't seem worth it... maybe a K version of the 9mm cans will make more sense.

Actually....

Osprey savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 3.1oz
Octane savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 2.7oz

You're right, but semantics. The 3.1oz seems much more significant to me


Was going to post the same thing. I would think I'd notice the weight before the .15". Then again...is 3oz perceptible?

Either way, good to have (more) options.
Absolutely, in a pistol can. Moreso in a rimfire can, less in a rifle can.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:36:24 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 10:41:59 PM EST by whiplash10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TurkeyLeg:
Absolutely, in a pistol can. Moreso in a rimfire can, less in a rifle can.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TurkeyLeg:
Originally Posted By whiplash10:
Originally Posted By bradpierson26:
Originally Posted By UM-Iceman:
Originally Posted By Quake_Guy:
remember it wasn't that long ago that people told you it wasn't worth suppressing any 45 because it was too loud. The last generation of cans changed that... however, there are limitations to everything and going short gets you knocking on the 140 threshold when shooting .45.

For saving less than 1.5 inches, doesn't seem worth it... maybe a K version of the 9mm cans will make more sense.

Actually....

Osprey savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 3.1oz
Octane savings (45 to K): 1.65" and 2.7oz

You're right, but semantics. The 3.1oz seems much more significant to me


Was going to post the same thing. I would think I'd notice the weight before the .15". Then again...is 3oz perceptible?

Either way, good to have (more) options.
Absolutely, in a pistol can. Moreso in a rimfire can, less in a rifle can.


good point, thx. I have much less time behind pistol cans than rifle ones, and I can see your point.
Link Posted: 1/20/2015 8:02:09 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By mmclean:
Wow, not that impressive coming from SiCo. I was hoping for the Octane K to at least compete with the Griffin REV series, but I guess I'll be going that route for my next 9mm can.
View Quote


Pretty much this
Link Posted: 1/20/2015 8:07:58 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By OlyCar15:


Pretty much this
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By OlyCar15:
Originally Posted By mmclean:
Wow, not that impressive coming from SiCo. I was hoping for the Octane K to at least compete with the Griffin REV series, but I guess I'll be going that route for my next 9mm can.


Pretty much this

Sounds like they built them to compete for a military contract. Probably why they are not modular. Either way Silencerco puts out products fast. In a one year period they released the Saker 7.62, Harverster, Harvester Big Bore, Salvo 12, a new line of barrels and a line of ammunition. I have no doubt we will see a modular can soon.
Top Top