Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/24/2003 11:01:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2003 12:42:54 PM EDT by Green0]
I can't post pictures... if anyone has posting ability I have a picture that is worth a thousand words.- e-mail at quillbro@yahoo.com and I will send you an e-mail with attachment.

Troy industries has updated their CQB Spec suppressor. (for all those of you who noticed they also updated the price approx $900).

It looks like it is no longer a multi-cal can

Life expectancy has been increased to 30,000rds


But I figured in light of the recent rave over phony cans this would be of interest.

This Real sound suppressor was designed by people who used to work for OPS Inc. they now own Troy Ind.

The suppressor attaches to a one piece unit that includes an A-2-like FH and barrel collar. (this is vaguely Ops Inc like).

The suppressor itself however has evolved into a sound suppressor that looks almost exactly like the Ops Inc suppressor for the SPR. The suppressor looks to be 8-9inches long and extends 4inches past the FH.

The suppressor is knurled 3/5ths of the length of the suppressor.

it is entirely constructed of 300-series SS
36DB reduction (that's very high)


E-mail quillbro@yahoo.com and I can e-mail the picture as well. (it looks like it might be a while before it gets posted anywhere.)
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 12:32:31 PM EDT
Please Email me ASAP.
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 12:50:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2003 12:59:55 PM EDT by Green0]
address? GOT it. E-mail sent
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 1:27:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2003 1:41:48 PM EDT by DevL]
The way the mount is stepped up for the collar and the way it looks like it would be right in front of the M203 step makes me wonder how odd this would look on an M4 barrel. I notice they sell only straight profile barrels there. [img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid85/p192838eaa9b763b80c31ea4b3f19d5b0/fabeb2dc.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 2:21:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2003 2:22:41 PM EDT by amuroray]
Troy industries website? Contact #?
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 2:30:22 PM EDT
[url]www.troyind.com[/url]
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 2:57:22 PM EDT
36 db reduction and only adds 4" to OAL? Wow...
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 5:30:53 PM EDT
this could be a new option. thanks for the info.
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 5:32:17 PM EDT
I am assuming that this would be a class 3 item....
Link Posted: 10/24/2003 6:03:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By AC_Doctor: I am assuming that this would be a class 3 item....
View Quote
That would be correct.
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 8:19:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/25/2003 8:25:36 AM EDT by Green0]
"The way the mount is stepped up for the collar and the way it looks like it would be right in front of the M203 step makes me wonder how odd this would look on an M4 barrel. I notice they sell only straight profile barrels there." Well I think it would go great on an SPR clone. This looks right up the SOPMOD II alley (the artists renditions of what they were looking for resembled this.) That long ugly collar ensures proper allignment and probably allows this suppressor to meet the new 1.5 MOA POI change when attached. (the old standard was 3MOA.) Yeah I think that might even cover the 203 step on a M4 barrel. (Not a problem in block II when the 203 will mount to the RAS.) They picture straight tapered barrels plated with nickel Boron. They sell (or at least that was what I thought) standard LMT uppers with regular profiles. The Nickle Boron plating is excellent but there are a lot of obstacles to overcome in getting plated barrels in desired quantities to sell. They might be selling them now last I asked was about a year ago.
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 8:54:07 AM EDT
Checked out their website and no word on it, though it appears they are updating both their suppressor section and their AR section. It will be interesting to see what they come up with.
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 9:02:39 AM EDT
The updated price is allready there so these are obviously in production.
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 9:44:31 AM EDT
Will it stand up to Full Auto fire
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 10:38:41 AM EDT
Email recieved: "Yes, this mount will allow your 14.5" barrel to reach 16" (it adds 2") and avoid the SBR tax. The suppressor is rated for 30,000 rounds various fire. The cost is $975 retail, $85 for extra mounts and $25 installion per mount. They will be pinned and welded, and will install on any standard M-4, A2, A3, A4 profile barrel. Yes, you can send in your upper(s) and have the mount(s) installed while you wait on the suppressor paperwork to clear. The mounts and suppressors reduce muzzle blast, recoil and muzzle rise with a positive effect on accuracy. Please inform us when you are ready to ship your upper. We are looking forward to enhancing your carbine's performance." Now I notice they didnt answer one of the questions I asked: "How many continuous rounds of fire can the suppressor withstand?" I guess this means they have either not tested many to failure or dont want us to know. I personally dont care. I own a semi auto. I also agree this thig looks like it was designed just for the SOPMOD 2 upgrade. It has all the little details like ability to use a blank adaptor, etc that are specified.
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 1:06:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DevL: They will be pinned and welded, and will install on any standard M-4, A2, A3, A4 profile barrel.
View Quote
How do these compare to a "SPR" countour barrel? I assume the calibers are NOT interchangeable?
Link Posted: 10/25/2003 1:12:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2003 12:31:57 PM EDT by DevL]
You can put a 6.8mm suppressor and flash hider on a 5.56 but it wont be as quiet.
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 11:08:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2003 11:17:46 AM EDT by Green0]
How do these compare to a "SPR" countour barrel? [b]The contour is the same .75in diameter forward of the gas block[/b] I assume the calibers are NOT interchangeable? [b]It looks like the .308 cans are larger (same diameter a little longer) (in order to achieve the same DB reduction) So I don't even know if you would lose any reduction if you bought a .308 and used it for all three calibers and anything in between. But it would be larger than standard.[/b] The old CQB spec was rated for sustained full auto fire which probably means about 250rds at a crack. The knurling on the can increases surface area and aids in cooling. If you go to the Ops Inc site they have a summary of their full auto test on an HK21 Belt fed .308.[b] I would assume this new can uses all the techniques that allow the OPS Inc cans to hold up well and results should be similar.[/b] Here are (OPS INC) guarantees "As in the past, we guarantee our devices for 30,000 rounds or 2 years, which ever comes first. On the HK21 7.62mm belt fed machine gun, 1400 rounds were fired in a total of 15 minutes. The baffles did not become deformed under this extreme temperature. Previously, that was our only concern while firing for prolonged periods with full auto weapons." [b]That is 90rounds a minute or 6 times the milspec sustained rate of fire for the M-16A2. How does this apply to the M4? I don't know but I'll bet you'ld be safe to fire a few 30rd mags automatic and switch to semi whenever you get a chance. The big deal here is that those temperatures in auto build quickly. that 90 RPM might be perfect to allow cooling to occur at the rate it builds.[/b] 15th model OPS INC CQB MBS Look familiar?.. (it's a little shorter and less efficient so really this new Troy can looks like it would fit into the OPS line between the SPR MBS and this) [img]http://opsinc.us/img/product/silencer.223.04.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 12:55:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2003 1:01:37 PM EDT by DevL]
Well they responded to my Email and its very interesting: "The first baffle is the A1 style muzzlebrake (It's not Inconel); because the muzzlebrake (and therefore the first baffle) is a constant, it helps keep the POI consistent with and without the suppressor. We do recommend using ammo with a flash suppressant, such as Black Hills. The suppressor is rated for full auto. We recommend following rates of fire suggested my the firearms manufacturer. The suppressor will not be abused if your not abusing the firearm (and the durable $85 muzzle brake bears the brunt of the blast, not the suppressor). The muzzlebrake/collar weighs 4 oz. and covers half of the 203 notch in the M-4 barrel. We don't have any pics on that configuration barrel at this time. This is truly a well thought-out design that draws little attention to your carbine without the suppressor attached, helps keep your carbine on target, and allows for quick, easy, and secure mounting of the suppressor." All I have to say is WOW on the reccomended number of rounds fired. I didnt realise it was a muzzle brake and not a flash hider. I think it would look goofy on an M4 and the barrel would end up getting crud stuck between the over hang of the collar and the notch in the barrel. The more I think about it the more I think this really would be better on an SPR or some kind of dedicated precision rig than an M4. It would also be better on a SBR where you intended to make the suppressor a semi permanant attachment. The longer barrels make flash suppression less of an issue and the shorter barrels allow the same over all length as an M4 or even less with the suppressor attached. I would absoloutely hate to be near that upper in the pic if it went off indoors without the can installed. Talk about hearing damage!
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 1:21:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/26/2003 1:37:31 PM EDT by AK_Mike]
Wow, that is ALL really interesting! Green0, one thing to note on multicaliber use. You take into account the same aspects I do when I think about the issue. A .308 can is usually larger in dimension/internal volume. However the axial bore hole through the baffles is larger allowing more gas to pass through, making the baffles less efficient. One would think the larger volume/additional baffle stages would counter the larger baffle holes, but I suppose it would matter greatly the design and dynamics of the specific suppressor. I am not a suppressor designer, only an admirer and user, so I know not. I am confident that the cans are not interchangeable except that they all take the same mount, which like DevL - I thought was a flash hider and NOT a muzzle brake - sure fooled me. An A2 flash hider only no slots on the bottom, so I supposed could be considered a muzzlebrake in a minimal fashion, even though it doesn't have a proper expansion chamber. I am not surprised by the 30,000 round longevity count. Normally, it's a matter of how the initial blast plate degrades as to the endurance, not the following baffles. That's why some mfg's use iconel for just that blast plate, and not the rest, financially speaking. I think the specific full auto fire rate has a [b]LOT[/b] to do with the endurance. Breach that rate and the can will fail much sooner. There is also a point at which a can's temperature under use will reach the rate of cooling and thus get no hotter - which is different for each can of course. I think the M4-96D's point is something like 750 or 850 deg. This is important when considering how long that can will hold up under sustained fire as then it comes down to the properties of materials used and they way it's welded/constructed. Another thing, my personal slant. Unless you are using subsonic ammo meaning you are still going to have that supersonic crack, how much more suppression do you really need? The M4-96D is quiet enough for me, though it doesn't take the sustained full auto fire I would like. I would rather take that extra dB suppression and trade it for endurance. I think there are already cans out there that are good enough, that is, until I get my Shrike...
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 1:25:45 PM EDT
Holy crap, I want one. Anybody know if it'll work on a HK91? Or maybe I should just get my PSS threaded.
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 6:22:04 PM EDT
The sound should increase by 2-4 decibels between .25 and .35 bore ID.... But the increased volume of the suppressor should negate that. I wouldn't be suprised if the .308 can did 36DB in .223. I see the only downside as being the fact that the .308 suppressor is longer. It might even have less pressure and take more abuse (with the larger bore ID). Why they designed the mount to cover a M4 M203 mount is beyond me (unless they were either thinking SOPMOD BLOCK II [with modular 203] or not thinking about a military contract at all.)
Link Posted: 10/26/2003 8:11:07 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Green0: The sound should increase by 2-4 decibels between .25 and .35 bore ID.... But the increased volume of the suppressor should negate that.
View Quote
That does nto bear out in my experience.
Why they designed the mount to cover a M4 M203 mount is beyond me (unless they were either thinking SOPMOD BLOCK II [with modular 203] or not thinking about a military contract at all.)
View Quote
#1 BlockII and SCAR - plus the USMC's new GL
Link Posted: 10/27/2003 8:25:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/27/2003 11:58:23 AM EDT by Green0]
Have you ever bored out a suppressor? the only time i did I bored a .223 can to 9mm and it got noticable louder. Generally people say that that has to be at least 3 decibles for a human ear to notice the change. I wouldn't reccomend going that route on a mediocre 30DB can but these are allready producing a 36DB attenuation so I doubt suppression with a 5.56 in a .308 suppressor could be much worse than 30DB (esspecially if you could order the muzzle break in .223 - that way the blast baffle would be the right diameter- suppression would probably still be close to 36DB.) Coldblue mentioned a long time ago that KAC made some bored out M4 QD's for AK-47's and those few 7.62x39 M-16's that went to the SEAL's in Afghanistan. I asked him how that effected suppression with 5.56 rounds and he said (IF I RECALL CORRECTLY) the reduction was around 28DB (down from 32DB) so not a major difference considering- he also said that they were still quiet enough to fire the 5.56 comfortably indoors without ear protection.
Link Posted: 10/27/2003 12:37:44 PM EDT
I tried emailing and calling Troy Industries today with no luck. Are they a full time business or is this a side project from someone? If I understand this correctly the muzzle brake and collar are one piece and that piece runs $85.00? Have I got that right? IPSC_GUY sends
Link Posted: 10/27/2003 12:44:19 PM EDT
Yes that is correct its one piece. They Emailed me back within 24 hours everytime I have Emailed them. Did you use the main Email address?
Link Posted: 10/27/2003 1:29:53 PM EDT
One real world experience is from another poster who noted that his Gemtech TPR-S in .308 was louder when attached to a .223 via bilock. Again, I think it has to do with internal design to a great degree of significance. Larger internal volume is made less effective if the ID bore is larger as that gas is not as contained in that increased volume. It just may be that ratio of increased volume does not match the loss of efficiency caused by the larger ID. You can't suppress what you can't trap - being extremely general. My Gemtech Operator (Ruger 22/45) has a bolt lock on it and using it, thus removing the noise of the bolt cycling, reduces the sound generated by only 1-2 dB, and the difference can be heard, but I have above average hearing almost across the entire range. However, being so insignificant, I rarely use that feature, and I don't think they even offer it much anymore. Book references officially lists 1dB as the smallest change that the human ear can detect, but the same book I am looking at right now that says that also has a chart that says 3dB is "barely perceptable". 28dB down from 32dB (4dB) can be significant. 3dB is known as the "half power point". A sound level change of 3dB is double (or half) of the previous sound level. However, the book I am referencing again says the human ear perceives a change of 10dB to be twice as loud. While many books reference this information, I happen to be looking at my handy "Pocket Ref" book - an invaluable compendium of concise references. However, I still think that as long as the round is supersonic, and the noise level generated is below pain threshold, a few dB either way is not so important. 7-10dB is another matter, however.
Link Posted: 10/27/2003 2:46:08 PM EDT
Green0, I have never bored out a suppressor - but I have seen .308 cans used on 5.56mm weapons. In my experince with those, the .30 cal can is audibley louder than the 5.56mm one. That said I am not an expert in the field and it was my MKI ear that was used to detect the changes. My entire interest in suppression is weapon signature related, removing the thump from the crack/thump thus making the shooter near impossible to detect directionally.
Link Posted: 10/27/2003 11:05:04 PM EDT
I have two interests in suppression: 1 The goal for pistols (as quiet as possible) 2 the goal for rifles anything durable and quiet enough to protcet my hearing (I am 60% deaf in one ear) don't want it to happen to the other one too. I think a 36DB suppressor for a .308 should easilly bring the sound to below 140DBwith 5.56 wether or not it will be the most quiet can (who knows) the big deal is that it allows the user to bring all calibers from 5.56 to .308 to below the 140DB threshold of hearing damage. That means 24-25DB or more reduction. Troy ind. people have probably allready tried the .308 suppressor on a 5.56 weapon and probably allready know how well it works. Odds are that the suppressor that has a caliber specific muzzle break mount with blast baffle enclosed will fair better when used on a different caliber weapon than most other competing designs. (the blast baffle in TROY IND designs directs gas back through the rear of the suppressor meaning that the caliber specific muzzle break will do most of the suppression work.) This is why these people were able to build there last CQB SPEC Can with a 30DB reduction from .223 to .308. [b]Troy Ind probably has people who understand the good of one can that can be used on a host of weapons- they have probably allready tested this .308/5.56 setup.[/b]
Link Posted: 10/28/2003 2:46:23 PM EDT
Does anyone know if the mounts need to be pinned and welded to the barrel? What about barrels 16" and longer that are not subject to SBR regulations? -Red-
Link Posted: 10/28/2003 2:52:26 PM EDT
I doubt they need to be pinned and welded. That is just legal BS.
Top Top