User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/17/2017 7:57:53 PM EDT
I took my SpecwarK off earlier to inspect it and I noticed what looked like some erosion to me. I couldn't get a clear shot of the second baffle to save my life but it looks a good amount worse than first one. Its a very ragged hole. Based off the picture the first baffle is minuscule in comparison. Where if the first baffle was all the wear I saw I wouldn't bother with it. The other baffles look fine. At first I thought it was a baffle strike but it is to uneven for it to be that right? Once I ruled out it being a baffle strike in my head I wondered if it was carbon buildup. I took a scrapper to it real quick and didn't see much of a difference after a scraped a bit of it. I have just over a tad of 1000 rounds through it. I had a carbine class this weekend and I didn't notice any accuracy issues. There will be a follow up email to Silencerco but anything you guys think? I'll be pretty disappointed if this low of a round count can cause erosion. Now if this is one of those things that after a while it will get to a point and it will stop that is fine with me, I just don't want further issues down the road. So what does the Hive think?
ETA: Shot exclusively on 10.3" Ar with flash hider.  Attached FileETA: This picture you will have to zoom but you can see some of the second baffle.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2017 7:59:25 PM EDT
[#1]
What gun
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2017 8:00:34 PM EDT
[#2]
Sorry, edited.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2017 8:06:53 PM EDT
[#3]
That is surprising given the baffles are stellite. Maybe change to a muzzle brake if you are going to continue using it on the SBR? See what sico says, otherwise shoot it and forget about it. Send it in for rebuild when it needs it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2017 8:09:19 PM EDT
[#4]
Looks like minimal erosion from the picture, nothing to be concerned about from what I can see. This is going to happen with any can and even more so with a shorter barrel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2017 9:55:55 PM EDT
[#5]
Need better pics. Try setting the phone on the opening and turning the flash on. This works well on iPhones.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 3:23:32 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 5:37:18 PM EDT
[#7]
Dang. I guess a muzzle brake does make a difference as far as the baffles go. I have at least 1K+ thru my SpecWar K (muzzle brake on 5.56 11.5”) and it doesn’t look that bad.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 7:46:27 PM EDT
[#8]
That's pretty amazing erosion for stellite, to be honest. That's usually a sign of much higher round count and a ton of full auto fire. The shape of that baffle makes it pretty insensitive to erosion, though. A super sharp baffle like Sig's will erode quickly and the bore then grows in diameter. You should still be good for a long time, but watch it and contact SiCo as soon as you see it getting worse.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 8:58:58 PM EDT
[#9]
You'd be really upset if you had my surefire can that's had prob 6k or so if youre upset about that
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 9:29:47 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You'd be really upset if you had my surefire can that's had prob 6k or so if youre upset about that |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 10:28:00 PM EDT
[#11]
That's more wear than I would expect at 1,000 rounds, but...a 10.3" 5.56 with a flash hider will tend to do that kind of thing. Brakes help a TON.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 10:50:53 PM EDT
[#12]
Thinking about it, if the second baffle is worse off than the first then it's one of two things:
--Metallurgical issue with the stellite (I'd definitely call SiCo) --Maybe a baffle strike chipped it and then bounced off the 2nd baffle causing damage to it also. After hard shooting it may look eroded. Speaking of the robustness of this baffle, when it was developed, we shot it until the can was cherry red for a few cycles. We did the same with an M4-2000 and then cut both in half. The inconel baffles in the M4-2000 had eroded significantly and the bore had grown in size. The Saker/Specwar baffles had very little erosion and the bore remained the same diameter. Here's the funny part--the baffles were prototyped out 17-4 stainless. The moral of the story is that when it comes to erosion, a superior shape with an inferior material can handle erosion better than a superior material with an inferior geometry. When the production versions of this baffle were made, it got even better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2017 11:38:02 PM EDT
[#13]
Second pic, I think there maybe a baffle strike on the second baffle. I zoomed in on my iPhone and it looks like there is fresh metal exposed through the carbon build up which to me would suggest a slight strike. Have you tried alignment rods to check concentricity?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2017 12:04:22 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Second pic, I think there maybe a baffle strike on the second baffle. I zoomed in on my iPhone and it looks like there is fresh metal exposed through the carbon build up which to me would suggest a slight strike. Have you tried alignment rods to check concentricity? the initial strike was before the end here....makes me cringe just looking at it BUT i sure learned a good lesson.. 
 IMG_1320 by scott h, on Flickr
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2017 12:49:18 PM EDT
[#15]
That seems normal-ish, I suppose, from my experience. I noticed erosion after a single magazine on a Specwar K using a FH and 10.3" barrel.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2017 2:40:05 PM EDT
[#16]
Update: I received a reply from SiCo yesterday and they said I should be fine its just carbon buildup. So this morning I tried to take more pictures and I think I managed to get the second baffle clearly in the picture. The rest of the baffles look fine. I will send them a follow up with these pictures and see what is said.
 Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/20/2017 10:16:10 PM EDT
[#17]
New pics are great!
I'm surprised to see it looks that bad (to me). I have Surefire cans (inconel, not stellite) with thousands of rounds on them and no erosion of the baffle apertures. Edited to add: all on 10" SBR's with flash hiders, not brakes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2017 7:36:08 AM EDT
[#18]
Delete
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2017 9:24:54 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thinking about it, if the second baffle is worse off than the first then it's one of two things: --Metallurgical issue with the stellite (I'd definitely call SiCo) --Maybe a baffle strike chipped it and then bounced off the 2nd baffle causing damage to it also. After hard shooting it may look eroded. Speaking of the robustness of this baffle, when it was developed, we shot it until the can was cherry red for a few cycles. We did the same with an M4-2000 and then cut both in half. The inconel baffles in the M4-2000 had eroded significantly and the bore had grown in size. The Saker/Specwar baffles had very little erosion and the bore remained the same diameter. Here's the funny part--the baffles were prototyped out 17-4 stainless. The moral of the story is that when it comes to erosion, a superior shape with an inferior material can handle erosion better than a superior material with an inferior geometry. When the production versions of this baffle were made, it got even better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2017 10:35:10 AM EDT
[#20]
Wow yeah that second baffle looks pretty beat up. I don’t think that’s carbon added onto the bore, that looks like material removed from the bore.
My 556k has only 500 rounds through it but they were on a 10.3” with a flash hider mount and I have essentially zero erosion or irregularity of baffle shape. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2017 4:40:55 PM EDT
[#21]
all the talk about how sig silencers would erode fast due to the geometry of the baffles i decided to try for myself.
me and 2 friends went out today with 600 rds of m193, we mag dumped all 20 magazines as fast as possible to keep the heat up and constant. first baffle is dirty but looks absolutely brand new. I know 600 rds isnt fast but i was expecting to see some kind of mark or something with the way people were acting like the can would just melt away before your eyes because of how it was made. Using the muzzle brake, not flash hider. ill post a pic of it later, thing is a major bitch to get off without a wrench. Was kinda worried about sigs mounting system at first when i saw how simple it was, really didnt want to go searching for a can after launching it 25yds down range but god damn....that thing does not want to come off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2017 8:27:10 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Isn't it just the first baffle that's stellite? I thought the rest were stainless steel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2017 9:47:07 PM EDT
[#23]
What ammo? What firing schedule? Looks pretty bad for 1000 rounds.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2017 8:26:13 AM EDT
[#24]
Were you shooting any frangible ammo?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2017 9:43:31 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Were you shooting any frangible ammo? It was much.... much... MUCH worse than that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2017 10:09:41 AM EDT
[#26]
My surefire is grooved pretty good
Old pic, its worse now Still sounds fine 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2017 9:59:34 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:My surefire is grooved pretty good |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2017 4:15:44 PM EDT
[#28]
Kind of looks like the port in the baffle is very finely focusing gas through that slot, and that focused particulate matter and heat are hurting that second baffle. The first baffle doesn't have to deal with the focused combustion material because there is distance between the muzzle and that baffle, and the gas is reaching it balanced and symetrically. Using a muzzle brake wouldn't help much as that aperture is still going to focus that gas on that surface. It is probably a better design for longer barrels like 14.5".
The oddity in that is that there is a minor crack or wear feature in the first baffle so it looks like it wasn't liking the conditions either. That wear looks more consistent with 316 SS baffle wear I've seen in budget name brand cans. Unless there was some other contributor like bullet jacket separation or something like that, it strikes me as fairly agressive wear for 500 rounds. You can definitely get snarly looking 316SS baffles fast because that material is just too soft to excel as a baffle material. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2017 5:47:16 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Kind of looks like the port in the baffle is very finely focusing gas through that slot, and that focused particulate matter and heat are hurting that second baffle. The first baffle doesn't have to deal with the focused combustion material because there is distance between the muzzle and that baffle, and the gas is reaching it balanced and symetrically. Using a muzzle brake wouldn't help much as that aperture is still going to focus that gas on that surface. It is probably a better design for longer barrels like 14.5". The oddity in that is that there is a minor crack or wear feature in the first baffle so it looks like it wasn't liking the conditions either. That wear looks more consistent with 316 SS baffle wear I've seen in budget name brand cans. Unless there was some other contributor like bullet jacket separation or something like that, it strikes me as fairly agressive wear for 500 rounds. You can definitely get snarly looking 316SS baffles fast because that material is just too soft to excel as a baffle material.  Attached FileSo the second part this had me thinking. You said "looks like the port in the baffle is very finely focusing gas through that slot". My flash hider is one of the B.E Meyers/ASR mounts they made. When I first got it and being a suppressor noob the ring bothered me for some reason. After researching the topic I found that some people drilled small holes of varying depth to eliminate the ring. So I did just that. Could these holes possibly be my problem? In hindsight shooting a couple mags through the can makes the flash hider dirty enough to pretty much remove the ring. Lesson learned.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2017 7:56:43 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Could these holes possibly be my problem? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2017 9:51:53 PM EDT
[#31]
That's not at all normal for stellite. After seeing your other pics, there's definitely erosion going on that shouldn't be there. Since it's sharp bits that have broken off, I'm pretty certain it's from small strikes either by the bullet or from jacket separations. Stellite can be very hard and extremely erosion resistant, but when this property is maxed out, it also loses some toughness (ability to absorb energy). Often, there's a heat treat process done on the material that will pull back some of the high hardness and make it tougher. Anyway, if the bullet kisses the baffle, it will often "chip" off a little bit of material, but it won't bend or deform the baffle much at all.
The other option is that the castings were flawed and they're porous and they're literally eroding apart. That sounds scary, but it's a pretty low likelihood. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2017 11:28:28 AM EDT
[#32]
The holes in the end of the flash suppressor would have zero impact to this, because gas doesn't interact with those holes. The holes would theoretically imbalance the tines so that harmonic resonance is less likely to be sustained- I don't know how well they would work for that but that would be the concept of that.
The slot I was referring to is the porting feature in the baffle- it isn't in play in the first chamber, so that second baffle would be more impacted by it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2017 1:49:03 PM EDT
[#33]
I have a lot more rounds through mine (muzzle brake), but I have some strange albeit much different wear on my 2nd baffle.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2017 11:44:38 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a lot more rounds through mine (muzzle brake), but I have some strange albeit much different wear on my 2nd baffle. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/221802/FFECC3B6-6330-4722-AC21-3C131A0C39AB-337626.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/17/2017 10:21:32 PM EDT
[#35]
Got it back today. Overall it was about 2 weeks with shipping both ways. Can looks brand new. When I sent it in there was spray paint and melted plastic on it(Don't ask
). Can't even tell that it was on there. I'm not quite sure what the process consists of but I assume cut the end cap and asr mount off then push out the stack and weld new ends on? Regardless I was happy, until I looked down the stack  . It appears the first baffle is 45* off from the rest of the stack. Far enough off that simply looking down the stack it can be seen. Now it is on me that I don't have any kind of alignment rod to check this perfectly. But i screwed it on and checked down the bore and appears to be no obstruction that I can see. I have emailed SiCo but don't expect a response from them until Monday. If this is me worrying over nothing then by all means tell me. Any other non NFA item would really be no big deal, but with the process surrounding this I can't help but be a little worried.
ETA: After looking at this pictures full screen and not on my phone I feel they make it appear worse than what it actually looks like. I tried to hold it as straight as I could. Looking through the tube at a light source it appears to be a perfect circle all the way through. So this should pretty much be good to go and not a worry then right?  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2017 2:08:14 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Got it back today. Overall it was about 2 weeks with shipping both ways. Can looks brand new. When I sent it in there was spray paint and melted plastic on it(Don't ask ). Can't even tell that it was on there. I'm not quite sure what the process consists of but I assume cut the end cap and asr mount off then push out the stack and weld new ends on? Regardless I was happy, until I looked down the stack . It appears the first baffle is 45* off from the rest of the stack. Far enough off that simply looking down the stack it can be seen. Now it is on me that I don't have any kind of alignment rod to check this perfectly. But i screwed it on and checked down the bore and appears to be no obstruction that I can see. I have emailed SiCo but don't expect a response from them until Monday. If this is me worrying over nothing then by all means tell me. Any other non NFA item would really be no big deal, but with the process surrounding this I can't help but be a little worried.ETA: After looking at this pictures full screen and not on my phone I feel they make it appear worse than what it actually looks like. I tried to hold it as straight as I could. Looking through the tube at a light source it appears to be a perfect circle all the way through. So this should pretty much be good to go and not a worry then right? https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/331429/IMG_9100__1_-365845.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/331429/IMG_9104-365851.JPG |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2017 1:13:45 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Again that porting feature working to make that silencer perform is going to focus erosion on that 2nd baffle, so what you are looking at is not going to happen to that first baffle because it doesn't have gas hitting it at a 45 degree angle like the second. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2017 4:52:02 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Update: I received a reply from SiCo yesterday and they said I should be fine its just carbon buildup. So this morning I tried to take more pictures and I think I managed to get the second baffle clearly in the picture. The rest of the baffles look fine. I will send them a follow up with these pictures and see what is said. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/331429/IMG_8998-338923.JPG https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/331429/IMG_8997-338924.JPG |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2017 4:56:46 PM EDT
[#39]
What’s all this about Sig suppressors getting messed up? I? beat mine. Srd 556ti qd and it looks fine. Out if a 10.5 too
The mounting system is just as good as any other imo too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2017 6:37:27 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What’s all this about Sig suppressors getting messed up? I? beat mine. Srd 556ti qd and it looks fine. Out if a 10.5 too The Sig website currently shows the SRD762Ti-QD but not the 556 version. I didn't ask if the 762 version had a different first baffle from the 556 version. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/20/2017 2:37:32 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A Sig rep told me that they have temporarily halted manufacturing the SRD556Ti-QD because the first baffle was prematurely eroding. They plan to change the first baffle to a tougher metal but no ETA when that will occur. The rep said that the original model should be used on longer barrels due to the wear issue. The Sig website currently shows the SRD762Ti-QD but not the 556 version. I didn't ask if the 762 version had a different first baffle from the 556 version. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2017 2:39:28 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A Sig rep told me that they have temporarily halted manufacturing the SRD556Ti-QD because the first baffle was prematurely eroding. They plan to change the first baffle to a tougher metal but no ETA when that will occur. The rep said that the original model should be used on longer barrels due to the wear issue. The Sig website currently shows the SRD762Ti-QD but not the 556 version. I didn't ask if the 762 version had a different first baffle from the 556 version. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
