10.3 vs. 14.5 (NT4 knights) question

Armory » Silencers

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 10.3 vs. 14.5 (NT4 knights) question

Posted: 3/28/2017 10:30:13 AM EDT

Hi all,

I have a 10.3" Daniel Def. mk18 wanna be. the NT4 is a decent can on this little guy, but I have been considering going to a 14.5" barrel upper to run the nt4 on. A few questions - one, will going to the 14.5" socom barrel extend the life of the can or does this even matter with this can? two, will I hear any noticeable difference with regard to decibel reduction (absent using a testing device)? Thanks in advance gents.

Posted: 3/28/2017 12:47:34 PM EDT

[#1]

The NT$, oops, Freudian slip, NT4 is probably the heaviest duty can out there: since the 10.3 isn't going to hurt it, the 14.5 isn't going to help it much IMO.

IOW, shoot away with either.

Posted: 3/28/2017 12:59:13 PM EDT

[#2]

"NT$"

ahaahahah - so true. Thanks man.

Posted: 4/17/2017 12:30:47 PM EDT

[#3]

Some of my research has lead me to believe that the 10.3" is brutal on the Knights can (or any can) but the NT4 can take most of the abuse. Depending on the firing schedule, about 6000 rounds could wear out the first blast baffle. Does anyone have any experience with running a knights can on a 10.3"?

I think the 14.5" would extend the can's life - but I am certainly no expert. Any help or info would be appreciated. Thanks,

Posted: 4/17/2017 12:39:26 PM EDT

[#4]

This KAC NT4 has around 10k w/ the majority being on 10.5/10.3. Some of it on a 14.5. No difference in sound, just gas blow back.

Posted: 4/17/2017 1:06:39 PM EDT

[#5]

There is a theoretical benefit to baffle life and sound reduction by going to a 14.5" barrel, and a real, tangible benefit to balance and overall length by keeping the 10.5" barrel.

Posted: 4/17/2017 1:51:15 PM EDT

[#6]

Thanks gents. So it sounds like I should probably stay with the 10.3" barrel and nt4 combo. I also hate the idea of running a 14.5" that is a registered SBR.- more like hate the law requiring that

Posted: 4/17/2017 2:40:05 PM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:
There is a theoretical benefit to baffle life and sound reduction by going to a 14.5" barrel, and a real, tangible benefit to balance and overall length by keeping the 10.5" barrel.

View Quote

Wow well put. Thats the most intelligent way of arguing barrel length vs baffle wear that I have heard.

Because how many of us are really going to "wear out" a suppressor.

Posted: 4/19/2017 5:44:08 AM EDT

[#8]

You could also use one of these to help with blast baffle erosion. MAMS NT4 comp, triple tap, and hate to say it, a griffin armament NT4 comp.

Posted: 4/19/2017 8:44:06 AM EDT

[#9]

I would probably go with the MAMS NT4 comp. But does it really protect the can longer by acting as a first baffle? I read on another site that KAC doesn't warranty the triple tap with can use. (source was Kevin B).

Posted: 4/19/2017 1:39:13 PM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:
I would probably go with the MAMS NT4 comp. But does it really protect the can longer by acting as a first baffle? I read on another site that KAC doesn't warranty the triple tap with can use. (source was Kevin B).

View Quote

I run comps on all my sbr's fpr that reason. I also run my sbr's suppressed 90% of the time.

Posted: 4/19/2017 1:50:39 PM EDT

[#11]

From what I understand, the 10.3's run about 8500-10,000 rounds and then 2-3 of the baffles are severely erroded. The 14.5's according to what I've read run to life at about 35,000-45,000 rounds with end of life being due to severe leading to the point that volume is pretty much gone. That's of course based on military exposed lead base ammunition, so if you were to run copper based that might extend or change those numbers.

Posted: 4/19/2017 3:45:56 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:
I would probably go with the MAMS NT4 comp. But does it really protect the can longer by acting as a first baffle? I read on another site that KAC doesn't warranty the triple tap with can use. (source was Kevin B).

View Quote

I remember that being mentioned. The real culprit for that "policy", was because during full auto testing on belt fed MGs, there was a possibility of the triple tap expanding or ballooning inside the NT4. Making it almost impossible to remove. I don't have any full auto's, yet, and it was a crazy amount of rounds shot to where it caused that issue. Probably on like a M249 or similar.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 10.3 vs. 14.5 (NT4 knights) question

Armory » Silencers

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us