Non-subsonic ammo suppressors?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Non-subsonic ammo suppressors?

Posted: 1/23/2006 6:02:36 AM EDT

Are there any out there? I know LRM makes a integral suppression system for the LRM-169 that has some sort of gas bleed off that allows it to fire standard 115grain 9mm ammo instead of subsonic.

Are there other suppressors out there that you can fire "normal" ammo through and get nearly the same decibal reduction as if you were firing subsonic?

Posted: 1/23/2006 6:19:21 AM EDT

[#1]

The suppressor would need to envelope the barrel and the barrel would need to be ported to allow gas leakage to slow it down so essentially it would have to be an integral suppressor.

Bob

Posted: 1/23/2006 6:27:11 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
The suppressor would need to envelope the barrel and the barrel would need to be ported to allow gas leakage to slow it down so essentially it would have to be an integral suppressor.
Bob

I see.

With that said, what companies out there do integral suppressor conversions on any rifle you want?

Posted: 1/23/2006 7:35:35 AM EDT

[#3]

John Tibbets, of John's Guns. John Norrell of John Norrell Arms, are two names that come immediately to mind. However I find the stand alone cans to be much more useful/versatile.

Posted: 1/23/2006 7:54:04 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
John Tibbets, of John's Guns. John Norrell of John Norrell Arms, are two names that come immediately to mind. However I find the stand alone cans to be much more useful/versatile.

I would agree with that for one major point: states that are not suppressor friendly. If you want to shoot what you have suppressed there you are hosed with an integral, which is one reason I'm a little hesitant. I do, from time to time, shoot in NJ. Not to mention I live in MD where at any given momen tthe gun laws could swing in the same direction of NJ. So having some permanent, while looking really cool, does have its negative side.

I do, however, like the idea of not having to buy special ammo for a suppressed gun.

Posted: 1/23/2006 10:01:58 AM EDT

[#5]

Are you talking about a specific caliber, or just generalizing?

Posted: 1/23/2006 10:19:26 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
John Tibbets, of John's Guns. John Norrell of John Norrell Arms, are two names that come immediately to mind. However I find the stand alone cans to be much more useful/versatile.

I would agree with that for one major point: states that are not suppressor friendly. If you want to shoot what you have suppressed there you are hosed with an integral, which is one reason I'm a little hesitant. I do, from time to time, shoot in NJ. Not to mention I live in MD where at any given momen tthe gun laws could swing in the same direction of NJ. So having some permanent, while looking really cool, does have its negative side.

I do, however, like the idea of not having to buy special ammo for a suppressed gun.

You don't need special ammo to shoot with a can. You can shoot regular ammo as well through it. The biggest advatage to a can is it masks the report of the rifle, which will give away the position of the shooter. You can't tell what direction a shot came from just by hearing the sonic crack of the round.

There are plenty of situations where a sub-sonic load does come in handy though. I like them for hunting small game with a can. Especially skittish animals like tree rats.

Posted: 1/23/2006 11:03:20 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Are you talking about a specific caliber, or just generalizing?

Well, I'm asking generlized for the benefit of anyone else wondering this, but I am thinking 9mm specifically.

Quoted:
You don't need special ammo to shoot with a can. You can shoot regular ammo as well through it. The biggest advatage to a can is it masks the report of the rifle, which will give away the position of the shooter. You can't tell what direction a shot came from just by hearing the sonic crack of the round.

There are plenty of situations where a sub-sonic load does come in handy though. I like them for hunting small game with a can. Especially skittish animals like tree rats.

For some reason I always think that shooting "normal" ammo can damage the can.

Another question about the integral:
Ky_Bob mentioned porting of the barrel to able to shoot regular rounds and still get suppression.

I'm thinking about the Beretta Cx4 in particular here. I'd like to have it suppressed but I'm not crazy about the adding length. So is it possible/feasible to have the suppressor put over the barrel and have the barrel ported?

Posted: 1/23/2006 11:08:25 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Are you talking about a specific caliber, or just generalizing?

Well, I'm asking generlized for the benefit of anyone else wondering this, but I am thinking 9mm specifically.

Quoted:
You don't need special ammo to shoot with a can. You can shoot regular ammo as well through it. The biggest advatage to a can is it masks the report of the rifle, which will give away the position of the shooter. You can't tell what direction a shot came from just by hearing the sonic crack of the round.

There are plenty of situations where a sub-sonic load does come in handy though. I like them for hunting small game with a can. Especially skittish animals like tree rats.

For some reason I always think that shooting "normal" ammo can damage the can.

Another question about the integral:
Ky_Bob mentioned porting of the barrel to able to shoot regular rounds and still get suppression.

I'm thinking about the Beretta Cx4 in particular here. I'd like to have it suppressed but I'm not crazy about the adding length. So is it possible/feasible to have the suppressor put over the barrel and have the barrel ported?

The H&K MP5SD (or whatever the hell the model number is) uses this design but I have no idea how close to the chamber the porting starts. I am guessing that it would be fairly close.

Bob

Posted: 1/23/2006 11:12:23 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Are you talking about a specific caliber, or just generalizing?

Well, I'm asking generlized for the benefit of anyone else wondering this, but I am thinking 9mm specifically.

Quoted:
You don't need special ammo to shoot with a can. You can shoot regular ammo as well through it. The biggest advatage to a can is it masks the report of the rifle, which will give away the position of the shooter. You can't tell what direction a shot came from just by hearing the sonic crack of the round.

There are plenty of situations where a sub-sonic load does come in handy though. I like them for hunting small game with a can. Especially skittish animals like tree rats.

For some reason I always think that shooting "normal" ammo can damage the can.

Another question about the integral:
Ky_Bob mentioned porting of the barrel to able to shoot regular rounds and still get suppression.

I'm thinking about the Beretta Cx4 in particular here. I'd like to have it suppressed but I'm not crazy about the adding length. So is it possible/feasible to have the suppressor put over the barrel and have the barrel ported?

Legaly you can't thread the barrel on a CX4. It is an imported gun and it falls under the 89 import ban. Threading the barrel is a no no. The only way around that would be to register it as an SBR then 922(r) doesn't apply and you can thread the barrel and put a can on it. There is a thread going on about just that right now.

As to the last part, I'm not sure I'm not can savy enough to know. One of the C2 guys would have to answer that for you.

Posted: 1/23/2006 11:19:56 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Legaly you can't thread the barrel on a CX4. It is an imported gun and it falls under the 89 import ban. Threading the barrel is a no no. The only way around that would be to register it as an SBR then 922(r) doesn't apply and you can thread the barrel and put a can on it. There is a thread going on about just that right now.

Yeah, I think I started that thread... and I still don't know which answer is right. At this point I'm going with Sinwgset's explanation.

Quoted:
I was told, in a call to the ATF office that the Storm was not imported as an AW, or as a parts gun, it was imported as a "Sporting Arm", it does not have evil features, and is not subject to 922r regulation therefore threading or putting an FH on it is legal, as the gun is not considered an AW.

I proceeded to thread/FH mine, and to be honest I'm not sweating bullets about the decision....but I guess the ATF folks I talked to could be wrong. At least I asked first.

According to what I have read of the 89' ban, here is the meat and taters:

According to the 925(d) business a firearm can be imported if it:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) it is not defined as a firearm under the National Firearms Act (NFA); (2) it is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes; and (3) it is not a surplus military firearm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, the Storm is not a surplus military rifle, is suitable for sporting purposes (bunghole stock, no FH, etc.), and it's not defined as an NFA firearm. Therefore, it's not 922(r) regulated. And, being no different than any other imported arm, can be modified with evil features.

Posted: 1/23/2006 11:23:00 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
The H&K MP5SD (or whatever the hell the model number is) uses this design but I have no idea how close to the chamber the porting starts. I am guessing that it would be fairly close.
Bob

The LRM-169 is also... I'll have to look around in the 9mm AR Porn thread and ask the guys where the suppressor starts on theirs. I didn't think about where the porting needs to start. I know you need 11 inches of barrel for the suppressor and the total length ends up being 14.5 inches.

Posted: 1/23/2006 11:28:57 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Legaly you can't thread the barrel on a CX4. It is an imported gun and it falls under the 89 import ban. Threading the barrel is a no no. The only way around that would be to register it as an SBR then 922(r) doesn't apply and you can thread the barrel and put a can on it. There is a thread going on about just that right now.

Yeah, I think I started that thread... and I still don't know which answer is right. At this point I'm going with Sinwgset's explanation.

Quoted:
I was told, in a call to the ATF office that the Storm was not imported as an AW, or as a parts gun, it was imported as a "Sporting Arm", it does not have evil features, and is not subject to 922r regulation therefore threading or putting an FH on it is legal, as the gun is not considered an AW.

I proceeded to thread/FH mine, and to be honest I'm not sweating bullets about the decision....but I guess the ATF folks I talked to could be wrong. At least I asked first.

According to what I have read of the 89' ban, here is the meat and taters:

According to the 925(d) business a firearm can be imported if it:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) it is not defined as a firearm under the National Firearms Act (NFA); (2) it is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes; and (3) it is not a surplus military firearm.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, the Storm is not a surplus military rifle, is suitable for sporting purposes (bunghole stock, no FH, etc.), and it's not defined as an NFA firearm. Therefore, it's not 922(r) regulated. And, being no different than any other imported arm, can be modified with evil features.

Makes total sence actually.

Posted: 1/24/2006 9:41:26 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
John Tibbets, of John's Guns. John Norrell of John Norrell Arms, are two names that come immediately to mind. However I find the stand alone cans to be much more useful/versatile.

Just e-mailed both of them to see if it's possible to do it on a Cx4.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Non-subsonic ammo suppressors?

Armory » General NFA Questions

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us