Armory Sponsor
Posted: 9/22/2009 1:33:42 PM EDT
| Since AAC will be limiting civilian sales on SCAR-H suppressors soon, I was thinking about picking one up. I'm having a tough time finding testing on them though. How do they fare compared to their 762SD-08? |
|
Quoted:
Without explaining why I don't think Miter threads are a good system, the 7.62SD with the dual retention springs (08 or later model) would be a better silencer in my opinion. Thank you for the input. I'm not hung up on the Miter-style mounting platform. I'm more concerned about the level of sound reduction as well as overall reliability. |
|
I personally prefer the 762-SD over the SCAR-H SD if you are wanting a fast-attach suppressor from the AAC product line. The mounts for the 762-SD are available in many other threads. Mounts for the SCAR-H SD are only available in 5/8x24. You should NOT use the SCAR-H SD with an SPR/M4 mount as the surface engagements are actually different.
The SCAR-H SD mount leaks gas a lot worse than the 762-SD mount. My 762-SD mounts don't leak at all. The 762-SD is always 100% repeatable for any POI shift you might see. The SCAR-H mount allows you to "tune" the can to the weapon but I simply don't like trying to remember what number I need to install the suppressor on to hit my zero. Call me lazy I suppose. 
The SCAR is only slightly quieter. The SCAR-H has a full Inconel baffle core so for some hard use MGs that is a better option. The 762-SD is cheaper. Buy once, cry once but don't overbuy. It is also slightly lighter weight. Muzzle brakes are available for 762-SDs. Only the Blackout MITER mount is available for the SCAR-H. The SCAR-H is a great suppressor. It just has features I don't really need for my intended tasks and therefore I don't want to spend the extra $$ for those features. My .02 anyway. Mark |
|
Quoted:
http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/gallery/albums/civilian/SEIFNSCARsuppressorJun2009b.jpg M14 - DC - FN XXXXX Yeah, we get it. You have a Smith Enterprises suppressor. It's only about the 30 millionth time you have posted a pic of it. But how well does it match up against the AAC cans? I know one thing it does not, it's weight. |
|
Quoted:
Without explaining why I don't think Miter threads are a good system, the 7.62SD with the dual retention springs (08 or later model) would be a better silencer in my opinion. Really? You don't like having multiple POI that is extremely easy to change? I can tell that your decision is very well thought out. I'd get either the current SCAR-H SD or wait for the 762SD mod. 10 depending on what you want in the silencer. The SCAR-H SD is heavier and adds more length, but is slightly quieter (1-3db). The 762SD mod. 10 will have the ratchet latch like the M42K '08 has, but it won't have the MITER system for adjustable POI. The 762SD mod. 10 is shorter and lighter, but will be slightly louder. P.S.- You're website is dead sexy GreenO. Where'd you get the ideas from? I wish I could be as cool as you. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Without explaining why I don't think Miter threads are a good system, the 7.62SD with the dual retention springs (08 or later model) would be a better silencer in my opinion. Really? You don't like having multiple POI that is extremely easy to change? I can tell that your decision is very well thought out. I'd get either the current SCAR-H SD or wait for the 762SD mod. 10 depending on what you want in the silencer. The SCAR-H SD is heavier and adds more length, but is slightly quieter (1-3db). The 762SD mod. 10 will have the ratchet latch like the M42K '08 has, but it won't have the MITER system for adjustable POI. The 762SD mod. 10 is shorter and lighter, but will be slightly louder. P.S.- You're website is dead sexy GreenO. Where'd you get the ideas from? I wish I could be as cool as you. Hey Paco the actual reason has something to do with cans flying down range. The miter thread pitch is too coarse leaving the fine tooth ratchet holding all the torque on firing. When it gets a little rounded from use, the silencer flies off. This might be 6000 rounds later, or sooner, but it looks like a design flaw to me. Multiple POI indexing points is cool, but not to people in the field because they might put the thing in the wrong place and have a bad day. All precision shooters want is a minimal and repeatable POI shift. I personally wouldn't want to put it on in the dark in the wrong spot and have a 2MOA shift instead of a 1/2 MOA one. It's not actually cool to think you're cool. That would be arrogance and arrogance is a character trait of a prick. I've worked around a lot of arrogant pricks here and there and none of them are in any way cool. I'm glad you like the website- I like it too- My graphic design guy is really good and I think he did a great job with it. It's a damn sight better than the old site, which was something I took some flack for. So it's good to put that to rest with a better looking website. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Without explaining why I don't think Miter threads are a good system, the 7.62SD with the dual retention springs (08 or later model) would be a better silencer in my opinion. . Hey Paco the actual reason has something to do with cans flying down range. The miter thread pitch is too coarse leaving the fine tooth ratchet holding all the torque on firing. When it gets a little rounded from use, the silencer flies off. This might be 6000 rounds later, or sooner, but it looks like a design flaw to me. GreenO, I do my best to stay out of things with you. However, I must ask you a few questions: 1. Have you ever seen a SCAR-H go down range after the latch "got a little rounded from use" ? 2. If so, please PM me the owners info 3. If not, why state it as fact? I am all for open disscussion about a design (even if you don't like it) but facts are facts and opinions are... well opinions Mike Mers |
|
Quoted:
http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/gallery/albums/civilian/SEIFNSCARsuppressorJun2009b.jpg M14 - DC - FN XXXXX . The 762sd is much quiter to the ear than the M14 by far, Same barrel length on both BA 308's and BA 223's shot side by side . Never have heard the 762sd vs the SCAR yet. |
| If all you were looking for was a fast attach .30 cal can, I think the 762 SD is hard to beat. I have one on an AR10 that is fun fun fun to shoot. Having the SCAR will be nice, because as you know, it will be limited, and there is something to be said for that. I like having a quality item that you dont see as much. But the fact that it isnt as common is also limiting. Mark already pointed out the SCAR's limited mounts other limitations exist as well, including potential replacement wait times, availability of mounts etc. |
|
Use does not wear the latch. Mounting it while not holding the latch away from the teeth wears it. It takes hundred of mounts to wear the latch and if it wears AAC will replace it. I had a SPR/M4 go downrange but that was due to a baffle strike, not from latch wear and I had mounted and unmounted hundreds of times without holding the latch off the teeth while attaching. You can hold the lever away from the teeth each mounting and the latch will never wear out. I think its a non issue. The SCAR-H is a lot less heavy and long in use than the stats would suggest. Once you know the best position its not hard to mount it correctly or remember it if you only use it on one host.
Murderman has an SPR/M4 which has is used on different rifles and while they have different mounts, they all have the least shift with the same position, indicating its probably suppressor dependant and you will proabably only have to remember ONE position for each MITER silencer rather than a different number for each silencer/mount combo. We have not tried enough to be sure if that holds true across all our rifle/mount combos though. I will take a quieter and lower blow back can everytime. |
|
Quoted:
Hey Paco the actual reason has something to do with cans flying down range. The miter thread pitch is too coarse leaving the fine tooth ratchet holding all the torque on firing. When it gets a little rounded from use, the silencer flies off. This might be 6000 rounds later, or sooner, but it looks like a design flaw to me. Multiple POI indexing points is cool, but not to people in the field because they might put the thing in the wrong place and have a bad day. All precision shooters want is a minimal and repeatable POI shift. I personally wouldn't want to put it on in the dark in the wrong spot and have a 2MOA shift instead of a 1/2 MOA one. Have you ever seen this-ever??? As a dealer/maker when you post comments like this w/o backing this makes you look bad. Basically you think it sucks, have no proof. This is bashing. If you know soemthing please tell me. I have the spr/m4 and have yet to see wear on it, and I dont hold the latch off the FS when turning the can on. No wear that I can see. This horseshit of putting it on in the dark, field use is also BS, screw the sucker all the way on, set your sights, know the POI shift for each rifle for the sights, just like any other can if you're so worried. Or you can just know the setting for each rifle from the can and not mess with the sights You actually have 2 options with this can vs just one with a screw on/non ratchet can. I can't believe youre so short sighted on this |
|
Quoted:
Shooting both guns the 762sd was quietest by a little, at 20 ft to the side the 762sd was quietest and at 50 and 100 yrds down range
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/gallery/albums/civilian/SEIFNSCARsuppressorJun2009b.jpg M14 - DC - FN XXXXX . The 762sd is much quiter to the ear than the M14 by far... By far? How far? standing behind a berm with the shots 30 ft to the side and over head the 762sd was the quietest by far. There was a can at the shoot thats made for 300wm and it was quieter than both 762sd and M14 |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Without explaining why I don't think Miter threads are a good system, the 7.62SD with the dual retention springs (08 or later model) would be a better silencer in my opinion. Really? You don't like having multiple POI that is extremely easy to change? I can tell that your decision is very well thought out. I'd get either the current SCAR-H SD or wait for the 762SD mod. 10 depending on what you want in the silencer. The SCAR-H SD is heavier and adds more length, but is slightly quieter (1-3db). The 762SD mod. 10 will have the ratchet latch like the M42K '08 has, but it won't have the MITER system for adjustable POI. The 762SD mod. 10 is shorter and lighter, but will be slightly louder. P.S.- You're website is dead sexy GreenO. Where'd you get the ideas from? I wish I could be as cool as you. Hey Paco the actual reason has something to do with cans flying down range. The miter thread pitch is too coarse leaving the fine tooth ratchet holding all the torque on firing. When it gets a little rounded from use, the silencer flies off. This might be 6000 rounds later, or sooner, but it looks like a design flaw to me. Multiple POI indexing points is cool, but not to people in the field because they might put the thing in the wrong place and have a bad day. All precision shooters want is a minimal and repeatable POI shift. I personally wouldn't want to put it on in the dark in the wrong spot and have a 2MOA shift instead of a 1/2 MOA one. It's not actually cool to think you're cool. That would be arrogance and arrogance is a character trait of a prick. I've worked around a lot of arrogant pricks here and there and none of them are in any way cool. I'm glad you like the website- I like it too- My graphic design guy is really good and I think he did a great job with it. It's a damn sight better than the old site, which was something I took some flack for. So it's good to put that to rest with a better looking website. That is a valid point, but general operation in the dark requires development of muscle memory for tactile input through experience with one's gear. I would argue that MITER indexing is no more difficult to learn than the switch positions of a PEQ-15A, for example. Can you count turret clicks in the dark or tie your shoelaces; both take practice. What I find works best is closing one's eyes to completley eliminate any visual input, so as to shift all brain power to the other senses. This is a very interesting thread, but the hour is getting late after a long hard day at work, so my additional comments on the SPR/M4 and SCAR-H will have to wait until tomorrow. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Without explaining why I don't think Miter threads are a good system, the 7.62SD with the dual retention springs (08 or later model) would be a better silencer in my opinion. . Hey Paco the actual reason has something to do with cans flying down range. The miter thread pitch is too coarse leaving the fine tooth ratchet holding all the torque on firing. When it gets a little rounded from use, the silencer flies off. This might be 6000 rounds later, or sooner, but it looks like a design flaw to me. GreenO, I do my best to stay out of things with you. However, I must ask you a few questions: 1. Have you ever seen a SCAR-H go down range after the latch "got a little rounded from use" ? 2. If so, please PM me the owners info 3. If not, why state it as fact? I am all for open disscussion about a design (even if you don't like it) but facts are facts and opinions are... well opinions Mike Mers You're right I shouldn't state it as a fact; it's a theory. What I do think is factual is not many people put a lot of rounds through civilian cans. Devls failure of his Miter mounted SPRM4 and it's loss of two mounting positions begged the question was this a baffle strike, or did the teeth wear enough that torque of firing exceeded their hold, and allowed the cans ratchet mount to loosen a few clicks, causing the silencer to droop, allowing a baffle strike to occur, leading to latch failure, and sending the can flying downrange. It seemed to me like the latter. It could be the other way around. Either way most silencers will tolerate a baffle strike without flying off the mount. It's a little strange that it's one of the only silencers flying off like that. The M42000 wouldn't fly downrange upon taking a baffle strike, so why does the SPRM4 with Miter threads do it? I think the AAC cans are mostly very nice. I didn't post anything specific until Paco pissed me off and I did recommend an alternate AAC product. I have no problem with the product being an AAC product, this was a discussion forum and opinions were asked and my opinion is the Miter thread pitch is too coarse for the application. I understand being a designer and getting riled at the thought of a flaw in a design, but these things occaisionally happen. How many SPRM4's or SCAR cans with miter mounts have more than 6000 rounds fired? How many of those have hundreds of mounting/dismounting cycles? When the can takes a hit, latch or not, and flies off spin stabilized that represents a thread that is too coarse to do it's job properly. That should never happen. I'd like you to get any other industry company to say "yes the suppressor flying off spin stabilized without tearing the threads off is what we look for when selecting a thread pitch for mounting our silencers." Call this a freak accident. Could you repeat this with an Ops Inc can? NO. It would be impossible to re-create this incident with an Ops can. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Without explaining why I don't think Miter threads are a good system, the 7.62SD with the dual retention springs (08 or later model) would be a better silencer in my opinion. Really? You don't like having multiple POI that is extremely easy to change? I can tell that your decision is very well thought out. I'd get either the current SCAR-H SD or wait for the 762SD mod. 10 depending on what you want in the silencer. The SCAR-H SD is heavier and adds more length, but is slightly quieter (1-3db). The 762SD mod. 10 will have the ratchet latch like the M42K '08 has, but it won't have the MITER system for adjustable POI. The 762SD mod. 10 is shorter and lighter, but will be slightly louder. P.S.- You're website is dead sexy GreenO. Where'd you get the ideas from? I wish I could be as cool as you. Hey Paco the actual reason has something to do with cans flying down range. The miter thread pitch is too coarse leaving the fine tooth ratchet holding all the torque on firing. When it gets a little rounded from use, the silencer flies off. This might be 6000 rounds later, or sooner, but it looks like a design flaw to me. Multiple POI indexing points is cool, but not to people in the field because they might put the thing in the wrong place and have a bad day. All precision shooters want is a minimal and repeatable POI shift. I personally wouldn't want to put it on in the dark in the wrong spot and have a 2MOA shift instead of a 1/2 MOA one. It's not actually cool to think you're cool. That would be arrogance and arrogance is a character trait of a prick. I've worked around a lot of arrogant pricks here and there and none of them are in any way cool. I'm glad you like the website- I like it too- My graphic design guy is really good and I think he did a great job with it. It's a damn sight better than the old site, which was something I took some flack for. So it's good to put that to rest with a better looking website. That is a valid point, but general operation in the dark requires development of muscle memory for tactile input through experience with one's gear. I would argue that MITER indexing is no more difficult to learn than the switch positions of a PEQ-15A, for example. Can you count turret clicks in the dark or tie your shoelaces; both take practice. What I find works best is closing one's eyes to completley eliminate any visual input, so as to shift all brain power to the other senses. This is a very interesting thread, but the hour is getting late after a long hard day at work, so my additional comments on the SPR/M4 and SCAR-H will have to wait until tomorrow. You may be right and you never have an issue. HK once made a weapon that ported gas or didn't port gas into the silencer with a selectable feature. They abandoned it and the book I read said they did so because they didn't want to risk one guy on an entry team having the wrong selection for the ammunition and blowing a raid with a noisy supersonic 9mm round. Governments usually plan for contingencies when buying equipment. And I think thats smart- most likely if it can be screwed up, someone will do it. Even if you forget one time it could have really small or really huge implications for a precision rifle to be off by 2MOA. |
I happen to own both an SPR/M4 and a SCAR-H as shown in the foreground of this pic from a recent chrono test session. Coincidentally, that is also DevL's weapon 2nd from the farthest.
I have been using the SPR/M4 for about a year now, but have only shot the SCAR-H one session. So far no problems with either. As far as the performance of the SCAR-H, it is extremely quiet on the 20" .308 bolt gun; we were all pleasantly surprised. On the 6.8 SBR, it was maybe a little dissappointing. I am by no means a suppressor expert, nor am I a manufacturer's rep. or dealer, but I am a Mechanical Engineer with 20 years experience, and offer the following opinions in that context on some of the considerations presented in this thread. Bookhound mentioned the aspect of excessive gas leaking with the MITER mounts, particularly for the SCAR-H. I was aware of his opinion in this matter prior to purchasing my SCAR-H. Considering the ratchet pawl design of the system, it is inherent that the suppressor will rotate counter-clockwise a very small amount to positively engage the pawl. Applying the 1/2 small scale division theory with the 51-tooth count equates to ~3.5 degrees of angular rotation from "hand tight". The suppresssor indexes radialy on the two shoulders, one just behind the prongs, and one just forward of the threads. As these surfaces do not appear to have any significant taper by my naked eye, the very slight longitudonal displacement created by the 3.5 degrees rotation would seem insignificant. That said, an annular gap most certainly exists, and high pressure gas will equally certainly find the leak path. What I have found with the SPR/M4 is that carbon build-up will aid in "sealing", and therfore I do my best NOT to clean the mount. I don't have enough rounds through the SCAR-H to make an assessment in this regard. Does it leak more than a screw-on, yep. It has also been mentioned that there are very limited mounting options for the SCAR-H. While this may be an important consideration for some, it is essentially moot to me in particular as I would probably be running Blackouts anyway since I do more reduced ambient light shooting than most. I don't think that anyone disagrees as to how effective Blackouts are at flash suppression. One of the "selling points" of the MITER system is POI shift control through availability of five different indexing points. In theory this sounds like a good idea, and I find it also to be so in practice. There is definitely a different POI shift for each of the positions. Strangely enough, the POI shift does not simply rotate around the POA as the suppressor is re-indexed; if anyone has figured this out, please let me know. The good thing is that the POI shift is repeatable for each of the positions. As DevL pointed out, the same position provides the minimum POI shift for my SPR/M4 on multiple hosts, which happens to be with the "1" at or near 12 o'clock. Coincidentally, the minimum POI shift for my SCAR-H also happens to occur with the "1" at or near 12 o'clock. Regarding the "suppressor lauch" sub-topic, I was standing next to DevL at the time of his experience. I will not comment specifically on that particular event, as I do not feel it my place to do so. That said, certain aspects of GreenO's hypothesis do have some merit, IMHO. While I don't know the specific metallurgy, it is apparent that both the MITER mount and the pawl are made of hardened steel. When two pieces of steel make repeated contact with each other without appropriate lubrication, one would expect wear to occur. How much and how fast is the question. The pawl engages the mount approximately 1/2 turn from fully seated, which would equate to about 25 clicks per mounting cycle. One must depress the pawl lever to remove the suppressor, so there is no contact during dismounting. But there is an extremely effective mitigation available; since one must depress the lever when dis-mounting, I have also gotten into the habit of depressing the lever when mounting. No contact equals no wear equals no "problem". While some might consider this defeating the convenience of the one way ratchet, I consider it second nature. I appreciate eveyone's feedback, as I am here to learn where I can, and offer input where I feel it may be beneficial to the discussion. |
|
Quoted:
murderman, it would be nice of everyone on this (and other) boards took the time to write such informative posts based on actual hands-on experience in the professional manner as you have done here. Well done, sir! 
Mark Indeed, very well done!
Mike Mers |
|
Thanks for the compliments, Mark and Mike; I try my best to offer insight only when it is primarily based upon direct emperical experience or hard data with the associated reasonably presumed understanding, rather than pure speculation or regurgitation of what one has "read somewhere". Back at ya!
I have re-read this entire thread this morning as I have some spare time, and have a couple of additional comments: Your caution / warning regarding the interchangeability of SPR/M4 and SCAR-H mounts cannot be overstated! AAC has intentionally made the front indexing shoulder 0.030" larger in diameter by my mic for the latter to mitigate inadvertent mounting of an SPR/M4 suppressor on a weapon with a bore larger than that of the suppressor itself; as we all know, that would be a pretty bad day. Equally important is NOT mounting the SCAR-H suppressor on an SPR/M4 mount even though it will physically "fit", as the sloppy radial indexing could easily lead to a baffle strike even with the increased suppressor bore, and POI shift would likely be fairly random. As you can see from the pic that I posted, I have two essentially identical 12.5 SBR's, with the only substantial difference being 5.56 versus 6.8. That is the reason why the respective furniture is different in color....so that I can tell them apart even when using NOD's. As a sidebar, one of my night shooting partners runs 9mm Glocks, while I run .40. My mags won't chamber in his weapon, but his will in mine. As such, all of my Glock mags have tape strips on the bottom of them, and if I don't feel the tape, the mag gets ejected. Back on topic, one other thing is regarding the weight / balance of the SCAR-H versus the SPR/M4. From published specifications, the former is alot heavier and longer, but in practice the difference is not particularly significant. This was another very pleasant surprise of trying the two side-by-side on nearly identical hosts; the 6.8 host is only 2 oz. heavier than the 5.56 without the can. The only negative that I have observed thusfar though my very limited use of the SCAR-H is that it is not the best choice for a 6.8 SBR overall performance wise. Can anyone guess what my next suppressor will be? 
|
|
About the launched suppressor....
The idea it might be a mount issue was brought up with AAC from the very start. They and I do not think it was a mount issue that caused the baffle strike. It was a bad round of steel cased Russian ammo. The silencer pawl on the latch was a litle worn and rounded from a bazzillion mounts and unmounts, yes. However, even after the "launch" in a couple of positions it would lock up as tight as ever and no amount of force could remove the suppressor by hand. The teeth on the mount were actually torn out at the tips by the pawl when it was launched. Not the entire tooth but it was clear there were damaged teeth where the tip had broken off/been ripped through due to massive force applied. Most of the baffle strikes I have seen exited the can and not all the force of the round was imparted to the can. My baffle strike bounced a round off the blast baffle, plowed through all the baffles on the side opposite the bore, and was captured by the end cap. The bullet never exited the can, but slammed against the end cap and bulged it, sending bullet fragments all over the inside of the can. So what we ended up with was a massive force imparted to the can, teeth with tips broken off all the way to the fully tighten point, and we were left with a can that could be unscrewed once remonted in the "launch" position as well as positions near the launch position. However, the pawl was sufficient that in less damaged sections, where you could not see the torn off tips taken engaging the pawl, the pawl on the can was still enough that no amount of torquing by hand could remove the can. You could see a clearly damaged spiral on the teeth of the mount. If the can was screwed on roughly opposite the failed side, the can could still lock up. To me this means one thing. The pawl never failed... the MOUNT failed through application of massive force that occured at the fully tightened position. This means a baffle strike occured with the mount screwed on all the way. Even after the failure there was enough pawl engagement area left that it could lock up in other positions... even after significant wear and a destructive failure of the mount it was attached to. On my current mount and pawl it is clear that the tips of the pawl are worn a little. The tips of the mount do not display this level of wear... mostly its either some finish wear or silver metal coming off the pawl and being depositied onto the mount. So if the pawl wears, the mount does not wear much, the mount was damaged to a greater degree than the pawl all the way to the tightest position... it could not have unscrewed itself, had a baffel strike, and then launched. It MIGHT be POSSBILE that it COULD unscrew slightly from a mild baffle strike and then get get blown the rest of the way off as it drooped and was impacted again with a follow up shot after follow up shot... or not. My can showed no signs of this. It was ONE bullet, no additional damage in a semi circual pattern as you would see as it unscrewed, and the hole in the endcap was perfectly undamaged as the bullet had deflected completely off the bore axis by the time it got to the front of the can. It may very well be that light baffle strikes would not cause the can to unscrew. This would be a better question for AAC to answer... too bad they are banned. To date, I have not heard of any baffle strikes with SCAR-H or SPR/M4 cans other than my own. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Shooting both guns the 762sd was quietest by a little, at 20 ft to the side the 762sd was quietest and at 50 and 100 yrds down range
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.imageseek.com/m1a/gallery/albums/civilian/SEIFNSCARsuppressorJun2009b.jpg M14 - DC - FN XXXXX . The 762sd is much quiter to the ear than the M14 by far... By far? How far? standing behind a berm with the shots 30 ft to the side and over head the 762sd was the quietest by far. There was a can at the shoot thats made for 300wm and it was quieter than both 762sd and M14 You don't happen to know the Manufacturer by any chance? I'm alright with a bigger suppressor on a .30 cal rifle as long as it performs... Nathan |
Armory Sponsor