Armory Sponsor
Posted: 2/5/2009 5:08:55 AM EDT
|
.........I know I know this topic has been beaten to death but please here me out.
I am either going to go with a YHM or AAC. I have to go with the .30 cal models as this is a dual purpose can for both a 5.56 and 6.8. So I can get the yhm for 599 which INCLUDES a mount. Major Malfunction will setup my trust and send the form 3 to ADCO. Adco charges 50 bucks to do the transfer. So with the 200 tx stamp plus the 50 for transfer and the can with mount comes to a total of 850. Or I can get the AAC 7.62 for "850" (don't want to post dealer pricing, you can call for price). 50 dollar transfer plus 200 tax stamp plus can w/o the mount (mounts are 99 dollars) runs me 1200 which is a little less but not much due to dealer pricing on the can. I think I may have answered my own question actually doing the math here. So is the AAC really worth the extra money? Thanks |
|
I have never shot a AAC .30 cal. I do have a YHM .30. I've fire 5.56, 6.8 and .308 through it fine. Sounds quiet for my needs and I got it BNIB out the door for $500 + $200 + $25= $725 about 2 years ago. AAC makes some very pretty cans and from what I've heard are very quiet. But I just can't see paying upwards of $1000 just to plink at the range. If you use sub sonic ammo it is hard to tell the difference between them in my opinion. I do not know if the AAC has compatible mounts for 5.56. But if your not going to use it for that it is a moot point.
ETA: I thing Surefire makes a 6.8 can. Perhaps the mount for 5.56 will fit it as well. You'll save on weight over the .308 can. I'm not very knowledgeable on the surefire cans. |
|
Quoted:
its like two different classes of cans lmt vs dpms to give an analogy. go to silencer research and check out the testing. I've heard silencer research is skewed to favor AAC. Isn't the guy doing the research contracted by AAC? I could be wrong though. But I do agree on the analogy. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
its like two different classes of cans lmt vs dpms to give an analogy. go to silencer research and check out the testing. I've heard silencer research is skewed to favor AAC. Isn't the guy doing the research contracted by AAC? I could be wrong though. But I do agree on the analogy. While I can't prove it's not skewed I highly doubt it because I've always heard people speak of his tests in very high regard. I would imagine that that rumor was started by someone who wasn't happy with the results he got. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
its like two different classes of cans lmt vs dpms to give an analogy. go to silencer research and check out the testing. I've heard silencer research is skewed to favor AAC. Isn't the guy doing the research contracted by AAC? I could be wrong though. But I do agree on the analogy. While I can't prove it's not skewed I highly doubt it because I've always heard people speak of his tests in very high regard. I would imagine that that rumor was started by someone who wasn't happy with the results he got. Most likely. In all honesty one of the reasons I got a YHM can was his test YHM vs AAC. $1000 vs $500 for difference of 1 to 2 decibels. For my needs I chose the lower cost route. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
its like two different classes of cans lmt vs dpms to give an analogy. go to silencer research and check out the testing. I've heard silencer research is skewed to favor AAC. Isn't the guy doing the research contracted by AAC? I could be wrong though. But I do agree on the analogy. While I can't prove it's not skewed I highly doubt it because I've always heard people speak of his tests in very high regard. I would imagine that that rumor was started by someone who wasn't happy with the results he got. John's (silencer research) are not skewed to favor AAC. You are thinking of RSilvers and Silencer Talk. RSilvers does work for AAC. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
its like two different classes of cans lmt vs dpms to give an analogy. go to silencer research and check out the testing. I've heard silencer research is skewed to favor AAC. Isn't the guy doing the research contracted by AAC? I could be wrong though. But I do agree on the analogy. While I can't prove it's not skewed I highly doubt it because I've always heard people speak of his tests in very high regard. I would imagine that that rumor was started by someone who wasn't happy with the results he got. John's (silencer research) are not skewed to favor AAC. You are thinking of RSilvers and Silencer Talk. RSilvers does work for AAC. I stand corrected. |
|
AAC makes a 6.8 version of the m4-2000 you may want to check out. lighter and shorter than a .30 can and you can still use it for both 6.8 and 5.56. I'm thinking of going this route myself.
I would probably do the YHM as well to save money except for the fact of having to use that big .308 can. As a bonus, I like the AAC QD flash hider looks better than YHM. |
Armory Sponsor