Suppressors AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
- Thread starter Kino
- Start date
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
Guys spending their money on the 51 tooth mount AAC Suppressors may be sick if they happen to have one like mine that doesn't lock up tightly on the mount. My uncle bought a M4-2000 at the same time as I did and his has also has a terrible amount of wobble/play when the suppressor backs off to the first tooth on the mount it can lock onto.
I bought 4 mounts and only one locks down well. Using the other 3 mounts, my 3/4 MOA AR15 become a 3 to 4 MOA rifle at 100 yards. Totally unacceptable.
Guys spending their money on the 51 tooth mount AAC Suppressors may be sick if they happen to have one like mine that doesn't lock up tightly on the mount. My uncle bought a M4-2000 at the same time as I did and his has also has a terrible amount of wobble/play when the suppressor backs off to the first tooth on the mount it can lock onto.
I bought 4 mounts and only one locks down well. Using the other 3 mounts, my 3/4 MOA AR15 become a 3 to 4 MOA rifle at 100 yards. Totally unacceptable.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
Thanks for the report! To be sure I've got the scenario right, was Tim using the new 30 cal Reaper on a 5.56 rifle?
I'm one of the ones waiting on the numbers on the Reaper, mine should be at my dealer in the next 2 weeks so I can get my paperwork out. It'll be going on a 10" Noveske 300 BLK SBR, can't wait to meet the little monster.
Thanks for the report! To be sure I've got the scenario right, was Tim using the new 30 cal Reaper on a 5.56 rifle?
I'm one of the ones waiting on the numbers on the Reaper, mine should be at my dealer in the next 2 weeks so I can get my paperwork out. It'll be going on a 10" Noveske 300 BLK SBR, can't wait to meet the little monster.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
Just so were comparing apples to apples
You are talking about the Sentinel - right?
http://www.suppressedarmament.com/556-suppressors/sentinel.html
Is this an FA rated can?
Is this rated for 10.5" FA?
I have admired the Aribiter TI from afar for a while now
http://www.suppressedarmament.com/762-suppressors/arbiter.html
Good luck
Just so were comparing apples to apples
You are talking about the Sentinel - right?
http://www.suppressedarmament.com/556-suppressors/sentinel.html
Is this an FA rated can?
Is this rated for 10.5" FA?
I have admired the Aribiter TI from afar for a while now
http://www.suppressedarmament.com/762-suppressors/arbiter.html
Good luck
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
I had an aac m4 2000 back in 2008 and it didn't take too many times of shooting it to decide I was none too impressed. It's odd too because aac makes great stuff. For instance I own a cyclone from them and that thing is awesome.
I had an aac m4 2000 back in 2008 and it didn't take too many times of shooting it to decide I was none too impressed. It's odd too because aac makes great stuff. For instance I own a cyclone from them and that thing is awesome.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
I have a few AAC cans that rely on the 51t mounts. I have found an easy way to make them lock up tight. I took an idea that someone had and modified it to make more sense. The only downside is.... if you dont know someone with a machine shop you probably cant do this. I have the setup now to do them in a few minutes.
Contact me if you want it done!
I have a few AAC cans that rely on the 51t mounts. I have found an easy way to make them lock up tight. I took an idea that someone had and modified it to make more sense. The only downside is.... if you dont know someone with a machine shop you probably cant do this. I have the setup now to do them in a few minutes.
Contact me if you want it done!
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kino</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was at the range today testing a new build and a guy had a new AAC M4-2000. I noticed that he was wearing ear pro so that caught my eye. He then proceeded to send rounds down rangeand DAMN that thing is loud for can!!!!! We had packed up and was leaving when he got there but Tim from SAS pulled out his new 7" titanium can and there was NO COMPARISON!!!! The SAS was SO much quieter than the AAC the guy packed his shit before we could try some POI and return to zero chat!!!! From purely sound reduction alone, you guys spending your money on an AAC is going to be sick and I mean REAL sick if shooting beside an SAS!!! I wish Tim had his meter stuff with him!! </div></div>
Any details about what calibers and barrel lengths were being shot for each of these?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kino</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was at the range today testing a new build and a guy had a new AAC M4-2000. I noticed that he was wearing ear pro so that caught my eye. He then proceeded to send rounds down rangeand DAMN that thing is loud for can!!!!! We had packed up and was leaving when he got there but Tim from SAS pulled out his new 7" titanium can and there was NO COMPARISON!!!! The SAS was SO much quieter than the AAC the guy packed his shit before we could try some POI and return to zero chat!!!! From purely sound reduction alone, you guys spending your money on an AAC is going to be sick and I mean REAL sick if shooting beside an SAS!!! I wish Tim had his meter stuff with him!! </div></div>
Any details about what calibers and barrel lengths were being shot for each of these?
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
The M4-2000 was made for a decade or more. The Model doesn't denote which configuration it is.
There were several design changes, and the latest models are quite good.
In independent reviews by Major Malfunction and Silencer Research, the M4-2000 tested near the top of every test.
The louder M4-2000's were probably ~27DB suppressors, and the best ~32DB suppressors
5DB's makes a big difference, as would a lot of use and subsequent erosion of the bore of any suppressor.
There of course also was a time when AAC would EDM a bore to a customers dimension- so it could be a 5.56mm unit with a 30 caliber bore even.
The M4-2000 was made for a decade or more. The Model doesn't denote which configuration it is.
There were several design changes, and the latest models are quite good.
In independent reviews by Major Malfunction and Silencer Research, the M4-2000 tested near the top of every test.
The louder M4-2000's were probably ~27DB suppressors, and the best ~32DB suppressors
5DB's makes a big difference, as would a lot of use and subsequent erosion of the bore of any suppressor.
There of course also was a time when AAC would EDM a bore to a customers dimension- so it could be a 5.56mm unit with a 30 caliber bore even.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
Hello.
I have both the SAS 5.56 can and the AAC M4-2000 can. And I can tell you, that it doesn't matter what type of ammo you use. And if there on the same length barrels the SAS
can is soooooooo........ much quieter than the AAC can. The 51T and 18T mount will work ok if you work on them a little. And never.... run the 18T or 51T QD threads dry always run them wet with an anti-seize paste. If you run them dry, sometimes they will start backing off the QD adaptor, no matter how hard you crank the Can down. The AAC can's will back off, if you don't watch what your doing. I've seen an AAC can bullet baffle strike, and its not a pretty sight.
Be careful with the AAC M4-2000 cans.
Just my 0.02 worth.
Thank you
Hello.
I have both the SAS 5.56 can and the AAC M4-2000 can. And I can tell you, that it doesn't matter what type of ammo you use. And if there on the same length barrels the SAS
can is soooooooo........ much quieter than the AAC can. The 51T and 18T mount will work ok if you work on them a little. And never.... run the 18T or 51T QD threads dry always run them wet with an anti-seize paste. If you run them dry, sometimes they will start backing off the QD adaptor, no matter how hard you crank the Can down. The AAC can's will back off, if you don't watch what your doing. I've seen an AAC can bullet baffle strike, and its not a pretty sight.
Be careful with the AAC M4-2000 cans.
Just my 0.02 worth.
Thank you
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_20/367591_Anyone_heard_of_SAS_cans_.html
Is this the companion thread?
This guy seems to be describing the owner of SAS digging on his product in person? If I'm not mistaken (which could be the case).
The SAS on a 24" barrel compared to the M4-2000 on a 12" barrel is apples and oranges as a comparison.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_20/367591_Anyone_heard_of_SAS_cans_.html
Is this the companion thread?
This guy seems to be describing the owner of SAS digging on his product in person? If I'm not mistaken (which could be the case).
The SAS on a 24" barrel compared to the M4-2000 on a 12" barrel is apples and oranges as a comparison.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
Hello,
As I stated in my post when all things are equal, like ammo and barrel length.
The SAS can Is quieter. IMHO
I have shot about 6500 rounds through both cans. And the SAS is still the quieter can of the two ! Softer Pop and easier on your ears.
Thank you
Hello,
As I stated in my post when all things are equal, like ammo and barrel length.
The SAS can Is quieter. IMHO
I have shot about 6500 rounds through both cans. And the SAS is still the quieter can of the two ! Softer Pop and easier on your ears.
Thank you
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mp5sd/n/k</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello,
As I stated in my post when all things are equal, like ammo and barrel length.
The SAS can Is quieter. IMHO
I have shot about 6500 rounds through both cans. And the SAS is still the quieter can of the two ! Softer Pop and easier on your ears.
Thank you
</div></div>
What is the bore diameter and outside dimensions of the SAS can you are using?
The M4-2000 bore is ~.300" at the muzzle and that helps to account for poor threads, hot barrels/ marginally stable projectiles etc.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mp5sd/n/k</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello,
As I stated in my post when all things are equal, like ammo and barrel length.
The SAS can Is quieter. IMHO
I have shot about 6500 rounds through both cans. And the SAS is still the quieter can of the two ! Softer Pop and easier on your ears.
Thank you
</div></div>
What is the bore diameter and outside dimensions of the SAS can you are using?
The M4-2000 bore is ~.300" at the muzzle and that helps to account for poor threads, hot barrels/ marginally stable projectiles etc.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kino</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Griffin Armament</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_20/367591_Anyone_heard_of_SAS_cans_.html
Is this the companion thread?
This guy seems to be describing the owner of SAS digging on his product in person? If I'm not mistaken (which could be the case).
The SAS on a 24" barrel compared to the M4-2000 on a 12" barrel is apples and oranges as a comparison.
</div></div>
Funny you should post a link to the OWNER of the AAC can! One thing is for sure is that YOU was not there that day. I was.So unless you where there don't make assumptions on something you know shit about.If you are in bed with AAC or sell their junk so be it but the fact remains that there cans rely on a shitload of hype and marketing to make sales. Just ask around all the "happy" customers....... And I assure you it was not a 24" tube, which in fact it was a 20". This perticular day at the range was not intended to be a comparison but if it was I have NO doubts which can would have came out on top and it would be the SAS. The M4 2000 that was there was a NEW can on a 12.5" SBR which looked like it was new off the rack and it was a run of the mill 556 specific can- nothing special. What sparked the whole thing and this thread was the fact that not only was the AAC M4 2000 loud, it was VERY loud and the owner and his buddy was and needed to wear earpro. Tim posted up over at barfcom some more facts that happened that day (since he was there). People interested in actual performance should look past the over priced bullshit of some of the "top" can manufactures to see the truth. Another example of SAS compared to AAC is the Arbiter compared to the SD. Want to go there??? I have a buddy from work that I shoot with about every other week and if I had bought it compared to the Arbiter I would be sick every time I shot next to an Arbiter! Not to mention the cash I could have put towards more precision ammo! SAS is where I will spend my money and so will a person who can get past fancy marketing........ </div></div>
Well given that the M4-2000 is a 32-33DB suppressor your observation here has serious holes.
You can't fairly and honestly compare one model of suppressor on a 20" barrel to another model on a 12" barrel. And anyone who knows anything about sound suppressors should know that. The output pressure from the 20" barrel is approximately half the pressure from the 12" barrel.
There are a few 5.56mm suppressors in the world of M4-2000 comparable size (6.625"x1.5")that will do better than 33DB sound reduction, but they don't do better by any significant margin.
In 10 years of following independent test results from credible sources I've only seen 2 suppressors out perform the most recent model M4-2000 by more than 1DB and they only outperformed it on only one platform (10.5" barrel). One of these suppressors was longer than 6.625", making it less comparable.
I have no real reason to defend the product, I'm only talking facts. No need to shoot the messenger.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kino</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Griffin Armament</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_20/367591_Anyone_heard_of_SAS_cans_.html
Is this the companion thread?
This guy seems to be describing the owner of SAS digging on his product in person? If I'm not mistaken (which could be the case).
The SAS on a 24" barrel compared to the M4-2000 on a 12" barrel is apples and oranges as a comparison.
</div></div>
Funny you should post a link to the OWNER of the AAC can! One thing is for sure is that YOU was not there that day. I was.So unless you where there don't make assumptions on something you know shit about.If you are in bed with AAC or sell their junk so be it but the fact remains that there cans rely on a shitload of hype and marketing to make sales. Just ask around all the "happy" customers....... And I assure you it was not a 24" tube, which in fact it was a 20". This perticular day at the range was not intended to be a comparison but if it was I have NO doubts which can would have came out on top and it would be the SAS. The M4 2000 that was there was a NEW can on a 12.5" SBR which looked like it was new off the rack and it was a run of the mill 556 specific can- nothing special. What sparked the whole thing and this thread was the fact that not only was the AAC M4 2000 loud, it was VERY loud and the owner and his buddy was and needed to wear earpro. Tim posted up over at barfcom some more facts that happened that day (since he was there). People interested in actual performance should look past the over priced bullshit of some of the "top" can manufactures to see the truth. Another example of SAS compared to AAC is the Arbiter compared to the SD. Want to go there??? I have a buddy from work that I shoot with about every other week and if I had bought it compared to the Arbiter I would be sick every time I shot next to an Arbiter! Not to mention the cash I could have put towards more precision ammo! SAS is where I will spend my money and so will a person who can get past fancy marketing........ </div></div>
Well given that the M4-2000 is a 32-33DB suppressor your observation here has serious holes.
You can't fairly and honestly compare one model of suppressor on a 20" barrel to another model on a 12" barrel. And anyone who knows anything about sound suppressors should know that. The output pressure from the 20" barrel is approximately half the pressure from the 12" barrel.
There are a few 5.56mm suppressors in the world of M4-2000 comparable size (6.625"x1.5")that will do better than 33DB sound reduction, but they don't do better by any significant margin.
In 10 years of following independent test results from credible sources I've only seen 2 suppressors out perform the most recent model M4-2000 by more than 1DB and they only outperformed it on only one platform (10.5" barrel). One of these suppressors was longer than 6.625", making it less comparable.
I have no real reason to defend the product, I'm only talking facts. No need to shoot the messenger.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
I was actually interested in this thread as I have a 12.5 SBR I shoot with an AAC M4/2K. And, at the same time was thinking of a SAS TI Arbiter for a 308. What started out as interesting has turned into a bitch fest. Kino, Griffin Armament did nothing more than post a link to AR15.com for the other side of the story. Griffin is always here to post some very interesting suppressor tests to help the Hide members decide on what to buy. I don't see why attacking him helps this thread.
I am gone...
p.s. I always shoot with ears on while shooting cans. If you are shooting supersonic there still will be sounds that will damage your hearing. You may not hear the ringing now but when you get older you will. The sounds are still above 135DB +/-...Take it from someone with Tinnitis.
I was actually interested in this thread as I have a 12.5 SBR I shoot with an AAC M4/2K. And, at the same time was thinking of a SAS TI Arbiter for a 308. What started out as interesting has turned into a bitch fest. Kino, Griffin Armament did nothing more than post a link to AR15.com for the other side of the story. Griffin is always here to post some very interesting suppressor tests to help the Hide members decide on what to buy. I don't see why attacking him helps this thread.
I am gone...
p.s. I always shoot with ears on while shooting cans. If you are shooting supersonic there still will be sounds that will damage your hearing. You may not hear the ringing now but when you get older you will. The sounds are still above 135DB +/-...Take it from someone with Tinnitis.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kino</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Was the SAS 5.56 compared to the AAC M42000 by these "reputable" and independant testors???? </div></div>
The only independent test data I was able to find of the SAS 5.56mm product was something I had to actually reference to answer this your only question that doesn't point to paranoid conspiracy theories.
NFA talk is the only independent testing source that has tested the product that I'm aware of. The problem there is that they haven't tested the M4-2000 with the same ammunition type, so there is no comparable data with the same meter available.
They also fire 30 rounds instead of the industry standard 10. So if we want to compare test results we have to grab an M4-2000 test with M855 ammo on a 10.5" barrel from another source, and also average the first 10 rounds for the M47 from the NFA talk test spreadsheet.
When we do that we get
134.74DB for the SAS M47 on 10.5" Direct impingement barrel with M855.
136.2DB for the M4-2000 on a 10.5" Gas piston 416 with M855.
If you wanted to compare those results as if they were absolutely comparable (despite different operating systems meters, and testing days) it would <span style="font-weight: bold">show a 7" suppressor outperforming a 6.625" suppressor by 1.46DB.</span>
Certainly not a broad enough margin for most people to care. In my experience it takes 2-3DB's to notice.
At similar sound reduction, important factors are, weight, length, bore diameter, materials, design, and construction methods.
Knowing nothing else about the SAS product, I can't really attempt to draw a conclusion as to which is better.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Kino</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Was the SAS 5.56 compared to the AAC M42000 by these "reputable" and independant testors???? </div></div>
The only independent test data I was able to find of the SAS 5.56mm product was something I had to actually reference to answer this your only question that doesn't point to paranoid conspiracy theories.
NFA talk is the only independent testing source that has tested the product that I'm aware of. The problem there is that they haven't tested the M4-2000 with the same ammunition type, so there is no comparable data with the same meter available.
They also fire 30 rounds instead of the industry standard 10. So if we want to compare test results we have to grab an M4-2000 test with M855 ammo on a 10.5" barrel from another source, and also average the first 10 rounds for the M47 from the NFA talk test spreadsheet.
When we do that we get
134.74DB for the SAS M47 on 10.5" Direct impingement barrel with M855.
136.2DB for the M4-2000 on a 10.5" Gas piston 416 with M855.
If you wanted to compare those results as if they were absolutely comparable (despite different operating systems meters, and testing days) it would <span style="font-weight: bold">show a 7" suppressor outperforming a 6.625" suppressor by 1.46DB.</span>
Certainly not a broad enough margin for most people to care. In my experience it takes 2-3DB's to notice.
At similar sound reduction, important factors are, weight, length, bore diameter, materials, design, and construction methods.
Knowing nothing else about the SAS product, I can't really attempt to draw a conclusion as to which is better.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JSTARSZ</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was actually interested in this thread as I have a 12.5 SBR I shoot with an AAC M4/2K. And, at the same time was thinking of a SAS TI Arbiter for a 308. What started out as interesting has turned into a bitch fest. Kino, Griffin Armament did nothing more than post a link to AR15.com for the other side of the story. Griffin is always here to post some very interesting suppressor tests to help the Hide members decide on what to buy. I don't see why attacking him helps this thread.
I am gone...
p.s. I always shoot with ears on while shooting cans. If you are shooting supersonic there still will be sounds that will damage your hearing. You may not hear the ringing now but when you get older you will. The sounds are still above 135DB +/-...Take it from someone with Tinnitis. </div></div>
Sorry this thread has turned this way also. I don't feel like I attacked anyone, I just asked Griffin in they was connected in any way to AAC since THEY stated "they have no reason to defend" the AAC cans, in which they STILL have evaded to answer.Wonder why?? Wonder why they then would insinuate that I have a "paranoind conspiricy theory" which is their words not mine. Looking at the products that they sell or "manufacture", they look extremely close to AAC products.
SAS does not do hardly any PR stuff simply because they don't have the time nor like getting into the pissing contest that always seem to come up.Their cans and many happy customers speak for themselves. The many disgruntled AAC customers speak for themselves also.
An EFP 3 meters from my victor going pop took care of the tinnitus thing many years ago. That was just down the road from FOB Warrior (Kirkuk) or it could have been those long happy "walks" through the hindu Kush down to Jalabad road...............
Done with this thread, sorry for the jerry springer drama.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JSTARSZ</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was actually interested in this thread as I have a 12.5 SBR I shoot with an AAC M4/2K. And, at the same time was thinking of a SAS TI Arbiter for a 308. What started out as interesting has turned into a bitch fest. Kino, Griffin Armament did nothing more than post a link to AR15.com for the other side of the story. Griffin is always here to post some very interesting suppressor tests to help the Hide members decide on what to buy. I don't see why attacking him helps this thread.
I am gone...
p.s. I always shoot with ears on while shooting cans. If you are shooting supersonic there still will be sounds that will damage your hearing. You may not hear the ringing now but when you get older you will. The sounds are still above 135DB +/-...Take it from someone with Tinnitis. </div></div>
Sorry this thread has turned this way also. I don't feel like I attacked anyone, I just asked Griffin in they was connected in any way to AAC since THEY stated "they have no reason to defend" the AAC cans, in which they STILL have evaded to answer.Wonder why?? Wonder why they then would insinuate that I have a "paranoind conspiricy theory" which is their words not mine. Looking at the products that they sell or "manufacture", they look extremely close to AAC products.
SAS does not do hardly any PR stuff simply because they don't have the time nor like getting into the pissing contest that always seem to come up.Their cans and many happy customers speak for themselves. The many disgruntled AAC customers speak for themselves also.
An EFP 3 meters from my victor going pop took care of the tinnitus thing many years ago. That was just down the road from FOB Warrior (Kirkuk) or it could have been those long happy "walks" through the hindu Kush down to Jalabad road...............
Done with this thread, sorry for the jerry springer drama.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
Kino I don't agree with the way you attacked everyone who was trying to have a reasonable discussion. I don't have a dog in this fight, I just don't think it's productive. Immediately anyone who says anything about AAC works for them? Anyone who tries to bring logic to the discussion is ridiculed? Your lucky you didn't get banned for the way you acted in this thread.
BTW "having no reason to defend" means that they have no vested interest in AAC and wish to discuss the topic as an objective party. Their statement requires no further clarification despite your demands.
It appears you live in "Very Southern Indiana" which is where SAS happens to be from- Evansville, IN on the border with Kentucky.
Kino I don't agree with the way you attacked everyone who was trying to have a reasonable discussion. I don't have a dog in this fight, I just don't think it's productive. Immediately anyone who says anything about AAC works for them? Anyone who tries to bring logic to the discussion is ridiculed? Your lucky you didn't get banned for the way you acted in this thread.
BTW "having no reason to defend" means that they have no vested interest in AAC and wish to discuss the topic as an objective party. Their statement requires no further clarification despite your demands.
It appears you live in "Very Southern Indiana" which is where SAS happens to be from- Evansville, IN on the border with Kentucky.
Re: AAC M4-2000 vs. SAS 7" Ti
In an attempt to answer the question- of course I'm not associated with AAC.
AAC is a subsidiary of Remington, owned by a multi-million dollar corporation (Cerebus).
Hearing Protection LLC (the company I own) is a small, veteran owned and operated business.
In an attempt to answer the question- of course I'm not associated with AAC.
AAC is a subsidiary of Remington, owned by a multi-million dollar corporation (Cerebus).
Hearing Protection LLC (the company I own) is a small, veteran owned and operated business.
