OT maybe, but Phantom or Vortex

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - OT maybe, but Phantom or Vortex

Posted: 12/27/2005 12:23:42 PM EDT

Ok guys, is the Phantom or Vortex better? Plead your case. Thanks

Posted: 12/27/2005 12:25:10 PM EDT

[#1]

Flash hiders.

Posted: 12/27/2005 12:35:25 PM EDT

[#2]

If you look at the link in the previous post, you'll see that they're about the same when it comes to suppressing flash. But a Phantom does it for about $23 while a Vortex requires $45 to do the same job. Also, if you get the Phantom with the closed bottom, it won't kick up the dust as much as a Vortex will if you're shooting from a prone position.

Posted: 12/27/2005 12:49:50 PM EDT

[#3]

The Vortexs don't require a lock washer to install, and they are widely reputed to tighten groups by up to 30%, but the Phantom has a closed bottom and is cheaper. So it kind of depends on what you think you're gonna do with it. Both seem to suppress closely, but if you look on pages 2 and 3 you'll see that the vortex is slightly better on short barrels.

Posted: 12/27/2005 12:55:16 PM EDT

[#4]

vortex is also made of a much much tougher steel, if that matters to you...

Posted: 12/27/2005 2:09:33 PM EDT

[#5]

Vortex cost twice as much and weighs twice as much and goes "Riiinnnggggg...." every shot. I got a Phantom strictly because I prefered the aesthetics of the Phantom and its lack of an annoying ring. They function identically. The strength of the steel is of no consequaence. I have seen photos where SBRs did better with a Phantom than a Vortex, usually the Vortex is a tiny insignificant amount better at supression than the Phantom.

Posted: 12/27/2005 2:37:37 PM EDT

[#6]

I put vortex's on my DMR types because of the accuracy improvement, and phantoms on everything else because they're lighter, cheaper and closed bottom. I've never had my personal vortex ring on me, I think that's kind of a "hit or miss" thing with them. If I ever build a SBR, I will likely go with the phantom, like I said above, the flash suppression is pretty much too close to call.

Posted: 12/27/2005 4:00:31 PM EDT

[#7]

I have a Vortex mounted on my RRA M4 LEO.

Nothing like it, simply awesome.

Posted: 12/27/2005 4:13:51 PM EDT

[#8]

I read on one of the M14 boards that the Vortex made the M14/M1A's shoot more accurately as well. A buddy of mine just bought one, I may get one as well. I thought they looked a little odd in the past but now I think they look very pratical and work great.

Bill

Posted: 12/27/2005 4:38:27 PM EDT

[#9]

i like both

Posted: 12/27/2005 7:23:18 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
The Vortexs don't require a lock washer to install, and they are widely reputed to tighten groups by up to 30%,

Really?

Are you saying that a Vortex increases the accuracy of a barrel, or that shooting the same rifle with a Vortex will be 30% more accurate than shooting it with a Phantom.

Either way - how does that work?

Posted: 12/27/2005 7:31:30 PM EDT

[#11]

Phantom(s)

I have two on 14.5" M4 barrels and one on a 17.3" FAL para barrel.

Posted: 12/27/2005 7:55:29 PM EDT

[#12]

The post I read on the M14 site stated that the rifle was more accurate, noticably, than with the USCI FH. Another intresting thing is that the Vortex tighents itself each time you fire it due to the angle of the tines or tangs. No washer needed. Maybe the lack of a tourqed FH helps improve the accuracy. I have heard that over tighting a FH will screw up accuracy.

Bill

Posted: 12/27/2005 11:48:58 PM EDT

[#13]

read it was because of something like turbulence around the bullet caused by the vortex.

could also see the less stress on the barrel end/crown without having to "time" the vortex

Posted: 12/28/2005 12:00:37 AM EDT

[#14]

I have a Vortex on one of my M4geries and it works the best

I planning on getting another Vortex for the other M4gery an my 9mm Colt

Posted: 12/28/2005 1:35:13 AM EDT

[#15]

thanks for all the good stuff guys.

Posted: 12/28/2005 3:01:07 AM EDT

[#16]

you can fit a blank adaptor on a Vortex

Posted: 12/28/2005 1:54:33 PM EDT

[#17]

The way it is explained on the CCF website is as follows, while far from an empirical, scientific test, I do think it does a pretty good job of conveying the idea.

The explanation for the accuracy enhancement has to be the flash suppressor eliminating "dirty air" from being created ahead of the bullet by expansion gas. If you watch a slow motion video of a bullet leaving a barrel you will notice for the first couple of inches out a barrel, the expansion gases actually speed forward past the bullet. We surmised that either one or both of the following two scenarios were taking place - 1st, expansion gases were creating dirty air ahead of the bullet or 2nd, as the expansion gases break past the rear edge of the bullet's base, they torque the bullet and give it a yaw and destabilizing it. When you have the vortex flash suppressor on the barrel, while the bullet is in the flash suppressor, the expansion gases are channeled off where they can't torque the bullet and by the time the bullet has exited the flash suppressor, whatever expansion gas remains behind the bullet has lost most of its energy (gas having very little mass dissipates its energy quickly).

The phenomenon is just too widespread to be discounted, from pistols to match rifles, it seems that almost any gun you put a vortex on will get better accuracy afterwards.

Posted: 12/28/2005 2:08:13 PM EDT

[#18]

I just sent a Vortex back to Smith to be replaced after it started to blossom (about .030"). It had about 1,000 rounds through it. They promptly sent me another one. I fully expect it to start to blossom again at some point as well.

Never-ever permanently attach a Vortex to make minimum length.

Posted: 12/28/2005 2:23:29 PM EDT

[#19]

I prefer the Vortex because it snugs up against the muzzle whereas the Phantom leaves a gap for crap to build up in. In fact, I had blue corrosion build up in the gap once. The Vortex is also easier to clean, IMO.

Posted: 12/28/2005 2:24:17 PM EDT

[#20]

By "blossom", you mean the tines began to spread out right? I've never heard of anything like that before.

Posted: 12/28/2005 2:29:42 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
I just sent a Vortex back to Smith to be replaced after it started to blossom (about .030"). It had about 1,000 rounds through it. They promptly sent me another one. I fully expect it to start to blossom again at some point as well.

Never-ever permanently attach a Vortex to make minimum length.

Lots of people do, and lots of people never have this problem.

I'm one of them.

Posted: 12/28/2005 2:40:21 PM EDT

[#22]

Many years ago I got an upper from Bushmaster, 14.5" with perm. Vortex.
It bloomed out and lost one of the vanes/prongs. Sent it to bushmaster and told them to put a phantom on it.

Still got the phantom.

Posted: 12/28/2005 3:07:01 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
I just sent a Vortex back to Smith to be replaced after it started to blossom (about .030"). It had about 1,000 rounds through it. They promptly sent me another one. I fully expect it to start to blossom again at some point as well.

Never-ever permanently attach a Vortex to make minimum length.

is this one of the old ones? I only heard about this happening to the older ones.

PS, i have both a modified vortex and phantom. My vortex is shortened. Anyways, the "ring" sound i get when wearing muff is kinda annoying. Also, if you bump your rifle on anything, you get the tune fork ring.

Posted: 12/28/2005 10:13:46 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
I only heard about this happening to the older ones.

much older

History of the Vortex UPDATED W/NIL-FLASH pics 30NOV05

Posted: 12/28/2005 11:07:59 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
thanks for all the good stuff guys.

So, which one did you buy?

Steve

Posted: 12/29/2005 6:58:50 AM EDT

[#26]

I own both. It is the ARFCOM way!

Posted: 12/29/2005 7:08:42 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
I own both. It is the ARFCOM way!

+1 but with Vortex groups are smaller...

MN

Posted: 12/29/2005 10:18:08 AM EDT

[#28]

I have never seen any evidence even shootingboth first hand of the Vortex being more accurate than the Phantom. Unless someone can show me some evidence I file that under AR15 MYTHS.

The extra weight might make one barrels hrmonics better but another barrel's worse. Unless you can show me multiple Phantom/Vortex back to back tests where all have the Vortex showing a statistically significant improvement I call BS!

Posted: 12/29/2005 10:25:19 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I only heard about this happening to the older ones.

much older

History of the Vortex UPDATED W/NIL-FLASH pics 30NOV05

The one I had blossom I purchased two years ago from Brownells. A friend of mine had his blossom about five years ago. Unfortunately, it was permanently attached to a 14.5" barrel.

Posted: 12/29/2005 1:06:49 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
The one I had blossom I purchased two years ago from Brownells. A friend of mine had his blossom about five years ago. Unfortunately, it was permanently attached to a 14.5" barrel.

date of purchase does not relate to date of manufacture, these aren't jugs of milk.