User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 12:01:20 AM EDT
[#1]
$495?!?
Count me in |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 1:33:57 AM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 9:05:25 AM EDT
[#3]
Besides the price, this is what I was happiest to see:
"On sound, TBAC has tuned the suppressor around volume level at the shooter's ear. It's a little louder at the muzzle than it could be in order to reduce pop out of the ejection port." I saw a video recently with Mike & Gary from Dead Air, where they indicated that their suppressors may meter higher at the muzzle, but that they design them around suppression at the shooter's ear. Why everyone doesn't do this, I don't know. When I'm shooting, I don't care what it sounds like at the muzzle, I care about my ears. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 9:15:03 AM EDT
[#4]
Why does it look like a ribbed dildo?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 10:57:01 AM EDT
[#5]
Well @TBACRAY, how about some details??????
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 10:57:40 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why does it look like a ribbed dildo? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 11:01:30 AM EDT
[#7]
The article eludes to using it on a 5.56 AR but doesn't actually state the suppressor bore. We can assume it is a 5.56 sized silencer but maybe it is a .30 caliber to aid in the "reduced back pressure" statements. At that price point it may be a good option for 300 BLK, if it is sized for it of course.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 11:09:56 AM EDT
[#8]
Typical direct thread suppressor? Meh.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 12:08:15 PM EDT
[#9]
I saw it recently. It’s definitely bad ass. I will be ready to buy the upper when they drop. Really slick package very well balanced and basically indestructible from the FA testing I saw. Real nice can. All for 495? Count me in.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 2:02:14 PM EDT
[#10]
We will have more details available very soon
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 2:06:25 PM EDT
[#11]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 2:44:46 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why everyone doesn't do this, I don't know. When I'm shooting, I don't care what it sounds like at the muzzle, I care about my ears. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 4:52:19 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some people may be more concerned with reducing the ability of others to locate and return fire. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why everyone doesn't do this, I don't know. When I'm shooting, I don't care what it sounds like at the muzzle, I care about my ears. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 10:18:51 PM EDT
[#14]
Here's a video from a couple months ago. This is the 556TD on a 10.5" In the video I said something about 9.3" Don't remember what I was thinking back then. 10.5" pinned will be a 1 stamp. I'll get some videos of the complete upper tomorrow if weather allows.
https://youtu.be/SKgaa6nCuw0 It shoots very smooth. I shot 44 mags through one a few weeks ago and had no carbon on the right side of my face at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 10:27:55 PM EDT
[#15]
Looks pretty interesting. I'm not able to see the video though...maybe I'm doing it wrong.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 10:38:41 PM EDT
[#16]
Ray you are killing me, it says video unavailable!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 11:16:21 PM EDT
[#17]
Sorry I forgot to hit Publish. Its there now. Like I said I'll try to get the upper out tomorrow. 10.5 upper feels very good with this can on it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 11:39:55 PM EDT
[#18]
In for more info.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2017 11:57:02 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In for more info. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 12:02:49 AM EDT
[#20]
26-27oz!? Eek. I was interested until I heard that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 12:21:29 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
26-27oz!? Eek. I was interested until I heard that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 12:30:37 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where did you see 26-27 oz? I haven't seen a weight mentioned here or SH. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
26-27oz!? Eek. I was interested until I heard that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 12:51:50 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Video says it is a stout 26-27 ounces. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
26-27oz!? Eek. I was interested until I heard that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 1:28:25 AM EDT
[#24]
Ok, here are the details on the 556 TAKE DOWN, consider these pretty solid but subject to change,
https://thunderbeastarms.com/products/556-take-down The 556 TAKE DOWN is pretty much a replacement of the 223A that is quieter on an AR-15 and is user disassemble-able, and about half its price. We should have the dedicated upper info online in a day or two |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 2:45:58 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
26-27oz!? Eek. I was interested until I heard that. Heck, I passed on one of those sub $300 Sig 5.56 cans because they were 22 ounces Except for being user serviceable the Spartan does the same thing at under 13 ounces |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 4:20:32 AM EDT
[#26]
Hi,
The 556 Take Down was originally designed to meet the 2017 SURG solicitation (in conjunction with an upper obviously), which includes pretty stringent dB (ear and muzzle) and cost requirements, firing schedule / thermal requirements, as well as the ability to fully service and replace the core without removing the suppressor from the upper, and some other stuff that typically does not apply to the commercial market (like blank firing adapter compatibility and survivability when fired with live ammo by accident). The result of that design problem was this set of features. Going all out for a 10" F/A capable suppressor with a QD, light weight, etc, like we did for precision rifle with the Ultras, would have been more expensive and also not met the other requirements (e.g. nominal cost core replacement without removing suppressor from "integrated" upper). It is very likely that we will address that application in the future. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 9:59:25 AM EDT
[#27]
It feels good on a SBR.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 8:21:32 PM EDT
[#28]
For full auto use on barrels as short as 7" the cost/weight/performance-strength trade offs seem to have been met really well at that price point. I'd like to hear a little more about the benefit of the ribbed exterior.
I imagine the primary market for this will be on registered hosts where pinning won't be required. Nitride treatment of the baffles makes a lot of sense. Looking forward to hearing user reports in the months ahead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 8:41:48 PM EDT
[#29]
It's nice to see a spec for "full-auto rated". "8 30-round magazines fired back to back from a 10" upper, magazines alternating burst/rapid fire and full automatic magazine dumps."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 8:47:48 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For full auto use on barrels as short as 7" the cost/weight/performance-strength trade offs seem to have been met really well at that price point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 10:37:43 PM EDT
[#31]
I've beat the shit out of a a few of these. I ran full SURGE cycles and much much worse. They are good to go. The ribs really aid in cooling. The SURG solicitation was looking for unicorn feathers. This is what we came up with for it. I love it for my truck and house gun. I did 44 mags the other day and the right side of my face was clean.
Live rounds with the blank firing adapter in is a fun test. I think this can has a place with practice guys that like to train a lot. I like it. Sorry was to windy for numbers and video. Go figure wind in WY. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 10:53:07 PM EDT
[#32]
I have a TBAC 223A that I run on my 7 inch M-16. I am very happy with it.
Great to see TBAC bringing out a repairable version thats a touch lighter. Not many companies offer cans rated for the little 7 inch guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 11:10:31 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
26-27oz!? Eek. I was interested until I heard that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2017 11:26:43 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a TBAC 223A that I run on my 7 inch M-16. I am very happy with it. Great to see TBAC bringing out a repairable version thats a touch lighter. Not many companies offer cans rated for the little 7 inch guns. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2017 8:44:32 PM EDT
[#35]
Literally zero interest in this. It's barely cheaper than an M4-2000 or Saker K which will both take the abuse and weigh substantially less even with their QD mounts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/21/2017 8:53:33 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a TBAC 223A that I run on my 7 inch M-16. I am very happy with it. Great to see TBAC bringing out a repairable version thats a touch lighter. . 223A is listed as 22.5 oz. 556 Takedown as 27.0 oz. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2017 3:41:23 AM EDT
[#37]
Keeping it strong enough while still being able to take it apart, and keeping the cost down, contributed significantly to its weight. We have other heavy-duty cans on the todo list, but they will be more expensive.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/22/2017 9:27:50 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Keeping it strong enough while still being able to take it apart, and keeping the cost down, contributed significantly to its weight. We have other heavy-duty cans on the todo list, but they will be more expensive. |
|
|
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.
