5.56 Semi Auto Suppressors - Titanium?

[rybe390]

Hey everyone,

Tldr: I'm currently figuring out what my next suppressors are going to be as I'm trying to stop hot swapping suppressors and get dedicated cans for each rifle. I'm looking at a kgm r6 for a 16" "reCCe" rifle and wonder if titanium can handle harsh-ish semi auto use. I have a 30 cal suppressor already that lives on a competition bolt gun.

I'd like to explore a lighter weight 5.56 can to stay on a 16" lightweight barelled rifle almost permanently. I am looking very closely at the kgm r6, as the weight, length, and features are very appealing. The ocl polonium is also a contender here, but at near double the weight, I'm wondering if I could get away with a titanium suppressor on a semi-auto platform. I never plan for full auto fire.

My concern is with putting a titanium suppressor on something semi-auto. I don't do any mag dumping into dirt, but I will on occasion run something like a 3 gun course with 2-3 magazines in a short amount of time, or hammer out some bill drills at the range, etc. The last thing I'd want is a semi-auto gun I have to run at bolt action speeds 24/7.

Questions:
Can titanium suppressors stand up to very typical semi-auto use?
With 5.56, what typically suppresses better? A smaller 5.56/6mm can, or something higher volume but with a bigger hole aka 30 cal at higher volume?

Thanks everyone for the input and feedback! I'm looking at a lot of suppressors in the near future, and a dedicated suppressor for this 16" semi-auto is top of the list.

 

[Zak Smith]

If they are made right, they can. The Dominus-SR is rated for ten cycles of the 8 mag SOCOM/SURG firing schedule.

 

[Simonsza1]

Love my dominus

 

[Ape_Factory]

Look at the HUXWRX Flow 5.56 suppressor. 3D printed flow through design. Won't require gas adjustment to the rifle, can on or off, less gas to your face and essentially no increase in back pressure. Ranked highly in PEW's test on an SBR and it's a nice, tidy, light package. It's not titanium, stainless rather, but it's not a lead weight either (about the same as the Dominus). Full auto rated and I don't think there are any barrel length restrictions. Built-in flash hider and despite the fact they are sealed, you can easily and effectively clean it.

 

[alamo5000]

The only thing I've ever heard about titanium suppressors (in general) is a guy in extremely brutal winter weather went hunting. It was extremely cold and he left his gun in the truck over night to keep in acclimated. Long story short, when he pulled the trigger in -20 degrees F weather the can split right along where the engraving was done.

I personally wouldn't be caught in that kind of weather, much less hunting in it, but that is the only documented case of failure that I have heard of.

That said there are several tubeless supressors made of other materials that give you a real weight advantage. For example the Griffin Explorr 5.56 can weighs in at only 9oz. The 7.62 version weighs only 10oz and both are made out of stainless steel. For comparison purposes the Q Trash Panda is also a 7.62 suppressor and it's titanium but it weighs 11.8oz.

Also on average on a apples to apples basis a titanium can will be a couple hundred bucks more expensive.

 

[Raffy]

Other than weight and strength how does a titanium can compare to a steel one? How does titanium vs steel absorb heat and dissipate heat over time? Doesn't titanium absorb it faster than steel but also dissipates it faster as well?

 

[Zak Smith]

There is a company known for Ti cans that split along the engraving. I don’t think the company exists anymore

 

[kthomas]

There is a company known for Ti cans that split along the engraving. I don’t think the company exists anymore

Templar Tactical/Crux.

Never got the .30 cal Archangel suppressor that I paid close to $1k for. Not sure if that's more painful then actually getting a can that ends up splitting.

Apparently the engraving on the outer sleeve went too deep, which led to issues. Then same company did some things that wasn't considered kosher by the ATF involving repairs. I think there's some ongoing legal battles, but said company doesn't exist anymore.

 

[rybe390]

That said there are several tubeless supressors made of other materials that give you a real weight advantage. For example the Griffin Explorr 5.56 can weighs in at only 9oz. The 7.62 version weighs only 10oz and both are made out of stainless steel. For comparison purposes the Q Trash Panda is also a 7.62 suppressor and it's titanium but it weighs 11.8oz.

Thanks for mentioning the Griffin Explorr, that is a solid spec and I hadn't seen it before.

 

[alamo5000]

Thanks for mentioning the Griffin Explorr, that is a solid spec and I hadn't seen it before.

They are excellent cans. I have the 30 cal version. To me these are probably the best overall can for an AR. People are going to read that and go 100 different directions about cans that are quieter or whatever...but hear me out.

On an AR especially shooting 5.56 you will be wearing ear pro. You might sneak off one or two shots, but any more that that is not wise. With these cans you do give up some muzzle sound (slightly louder than some of the other cans I have) but the focus with these cans is on gas flow balance. By that I mean the muzzle isn't constricted so much that nothing gets out (thus causing more back pressure and a much louder heavier port pop). It's designed with a balance in mind. So yes you give up a couple of DB at the muzzle, but you gain a few (quieter) at the ear.

That 'overall balance' of gas and sound makes it excellent for an AR. Plus it's extremely light. If I didn't already have a bunch of cans I would buy one in 5.56. Even with that said, I still might buy one in 5.56 simply because I like the 30 cal version so much. In hindsight if I were buying cans all over again most if not all would be those or something similar. That said I love what I have and the Explorr series didn't exist back when I started.

Another good thing is Griffin allows you to upgrade. For example I bought a can back like 2015 or something like that. In between now and then baffle technology has improved as has the overall design of cans. So I mailed my can back to them and they replaced all the baffles with the latest and greatest thing. It cost me a couple hundred bucks but I got something like 10-12 Db (better) at the ear because of generational improvements while being within 1-2 Db of the original at the muzzle. With pretty much everyone else you just need to buy a whole new can but at least with Griffin you can upgrade existing cans.

In any case those Explorr series cans are awesome. Extremely light and rugged. Also if you ever get a baffle strike they just saw the baffles off and weld a new stack in place. Also they engrave them up closer to the mount area, behind any baffles. If you get a strike, no factor to fix it. Like I said, I am tempted to buy another can even though I really don't need it. But the one I have already is awesome. They are definitely not the quietest by any measure (ear/muzzle) but the overall package of what it delivers is great.

 

[FuhQ]

Hey everyone,

Tldr: I'm currently figuring out what my next suppressors are going to be as I'm trying to stop hot swapping suppressors and get dedicated cans for each rifle. I'm looking at a kgm r6 for a 16" "reCCe" rifle and wonder if titanium can handle harsh-ish semi auto use. I have a 30 cal suppressor already that lives on a competition bolt gun.

I'd like to explore a lighter weight 5.56 can to stay on a 16" lightweight barelled rifle almost permanently. I am looking very closely at the kgm r6, as the weight, length, and features are very appealing. The ocl polonium is also a contender here, but at near double the weight, I'm wondering if I could get away with a titanium suppressor on a semi-auto platform. I never plan for full auto fire.

My concern is with putting a titanium suppressor on something semi-auto. I don't do any mag dumping into dirt, but I will on occasion run something like a 3 gun course with 2-3 magazines in a short amount of time, or hammer out some bill drills at the range, etc. The last thing I'd want is a semi-auto gun I have to run at bolt action speeds 24/7.

Questions:
Can titanium suppressors stand up to very typical semi-auto use?
With 5.56, what typically suppresses better? A smaller 5.56/6mm can, or something higher volume but with a bigger hole aka 30 cal at higher volume?

Thanks everyone for the input and feedback! I'm looking at a lot of suppressors in the near future, and a dedicated suppressor for this 16" semi-auto is top of the list.

If it's a dedicated 5.56 can... Get an Otter Creek Labs Polonium! MSRP is only $550, and it's absolutely amazing. Hearing safe on my 14.5" M4, and low back pressure. Duty-rated (full-auto). Solid stainless steel. 1.375x24 HUB threads. And compact size. Suppresses better than my Sandman-S on the same rifle.

I will be posting up a video on my channel in the next week or so with mine...

Polonium & Polonium-K | Otter Creek Labs

The polonium is made to be a quiet, duty rated, hard use, 5.56 suppressor.

ottercreeklabs.com

Otter Creek Polonium – Hansohn Brothers

hansohnbrothers.com

Otter Creek Labs Polonium 5.56 AR15 SBR Suppressor Test — PEW Science

Otter Creek Labs Polonium Silencer Test with back pressure data. Real sound signature data with the Suppression Rating from PEW Science. Hearing Safe determinations for your use case. How does it do as a 5.56 SBR suppressor? Can it suppress 5.56? Is the Otter Creek Labs Polonium the best 5.56 AR

pewscience.com

Tim at Alabama Arsenal did a phenomenal video on it...

 

[Cypress87]

If it's a dedicated 5.56 can... Get an Otter Creek Labs Polonium! MSRP is only $550, and it's absolutely amazing. Hearing safe on my 14.5" M4, and low back pressure. Duty-rated (full-auto). Solid stainless steel. 1.375x24 HUB threads. And compact size. Suppresses better than my Sandman-S on the same rifle.

I will be posting up a video on my channel in the next week or so with mine...

Polonium & Polonium-K | Otter Creek Labs

The polonium is made to be a quiet, duty rated, hard use, 5.56 suppressor.

ottercreeklabs.com

Otter Creek Polonium – Hansohn Brothers

hansohnbrothers.com

Otter Creek Labs Polonium 5.56 AR15 SBR Suppressor Test — PEW Science

Otter Creek Labs Polonium Silencer Test with back pressure data. Real sound signature data with the Suppression Rating from PEW Science. Hearing Safe determinations for your use case. How does it do as a 5.56 SBR suppressor? Can it suppress 5.56? Is the Otter Creek Labs Polonium the best 5.56 AR

pewscience.com

Tim at Alabama Arsenal did a phenomenal video on it...

Hearing safe and low back pressure? You must be on some goooood crack.

 

[rybe390]

If it's a dedicated 5.56 can... Get an Otter Creek Labs Polonium! MSRP is only $550, and it's absolutely amazing. Hearing safe on my 14.5" M4, and low back pressure. Duty-rated (full-auto). Solid stainless steel. 1.375x24 HUB threads. And compact size. Suppresses better than my Sandman-S on the same rifle.

I will be posting up a video on my channel in the next week or so with mine...

Polonium & Polonium-K | Otter Creek Labs

The polonium is made to be a quiet, duty rated, hard use, 5.56 suppressor.

ottercreeklabs.com

Otter Creek Polonium – Hansohn Brothers

hansohnbrothers.com

Otter Creek Labs Polonium 5.56 AR15 SBR Suppressor Test — PEW Science

Otter Creek Labs Polonium Silencer Test with back pressure data. Real sound signature data with the Suppression Rating from PEW Science. Hearing Safe determinations for your use case. How does it do as a 5.56 SBR suppressor? Can it suppress 5.56? Is the Otter Creek Labs Polonium the best 5.56 AR

pewscience.com

Tim at Alabama Arsenal did a phenomenal video on it...

I'm super aware of the polonium and it is insanely high on my list! Sound signature and price is hard to beat.

I'm just also exploring options that might be near 1/2 the weight when mounted, as that is super appealing too. Not that the polonium is a big chunk to begin with.

 

[Clayman]

I would personally go polonium k over polonium on semi autos. The polonium has significant back pressure.

Huxwrx flow556k would be great imo. Compact and relatively lightweight. Almost zero increase in backpressure and it sounds great. It's impressive how good these sound with no meaningful increase in backpressure.

I also personally love my cgs helios qd ti on my 16-18" rifles. It's not that great on shorter barrels but on longer barrels it sounds great and has low backpressure. It's not the quietest but it balances weight, backpressure and suppression very well.

 

[WhoIsPat]

I'm not a metallurgist but I do believe that even though companies who make titanium suppressors say that you're good to go no matter what up to a certain temperature degree, repeated high temperature cycles is going to be eating away at the life of the can and eating away at the titanium which is why titanium cans spark.

It all depends on how much you care though. I feel titanium works well for bolt guns but I'd go for 17-4 or Inconel on a higher rate of fire AR.

 

[Clayman]

Most manufacturers just say keep it below 800⁰f degrees. Ti thickness, geometry, flow rate, etc will determine how quickly it heats up but I'd guess somewhere around 3-5 mags depending on design.

 

[FuhQ]

Hearing safe and low back pressure? You must be on some goooood crack.

Have you shot with one?

From my experiences, it has about the same backpressure/gas in the face as my Sandman-S cans…Which is very minimal for a baffled can. And yes, IMO, it is hearing safe.

 

[jb0311]

IMO, it is hearing safe.

What decibel level is the can, and what is hearing safe in you opinion? I ask because I wouldn't really consider "hearing safe" an opinion at all but data driven. Not being confrontational here, just asking because I feel like a lot of people consider things hearing safe as long as their ears aren't ringing after. I wouldn't consider any immediate noise over 120db to be hearing safe. Prolonged is a whole other story. I can tell you its definitely not safe on a 14.5" barrel, for you or anyone around you.


Edited to add: Also not sure where you are getting the low back pressure claim from. This is direct from PEW:

The Otter Creek Labs Polonium is a full-size 5.56mm machine gun rated rifle silencer that possesses extremely competitive sound signature suppression performance with many silencers on the market, while possessing higher back pressure compared to some designs. Users should note that the Polonium is capable of shooting projectiles as large as 6mm (.243).

The sound signature suppression performance of the Polonium on the MK18 weapon system is significant; the suppression performance to bystanders (muzzle Suppression Rating) is extreme for its size. It should also be noted that the back pressure (flow restriction) of the Polonium is significant, and on-par with that of the SilencerCo Saker 556. Users fielding such silencers on the AR15 weapon system may be advised to take flow restriction into consideration. Methods by which users may mitigate some of the adverse effects of high silencer flow restriction on the MK18 include increased buffer mass, spring force, and/or adjustable gas port orifice size. So-called “tuning” of the AR15 weapon system, for both suppressed function and optimized signature, is outside the scope of this article.

 

[jb0311]

I'm super aware of the polonium and it is insanely high on my list! Sound signature and price is hard to beat.

I'm just also exploring options that might be near 1/2 the weight when mounted, as that is super appealing too. Not that the polonium is a big chunk to begin with.

Would not take this advice for a ar-15 platform if you are at all concerned with back pressure (which you should absolutely consider). Sound signature is great for the size, but don't expect it to be hearing safe either.

 

[kthomas]

Every suppressor is "hearing safe" if you don't actually value your hearing...

 

[E. Bryant]

The only thing I've ever heard about titanium suppressors (in general) is a guy in extremely brutal winter weather went hunting. It was extremely cold and he left his gun in the truck over night to keep in acclimated. Long story short, when he pulled the trigger in -20 degrees F weather the can split right along where the engraving was done.

6Al-4V titanium actually gets a bit better in terms of tensile strength as you go from 0°C to about -100°C. Below -200°C, it rapidly drops, so a stainless steel can may be a better choice if hunting at cryogenic temperatures.

Going back to the OP's questions: when discussing suppressors, material is only one factor relating to performance. As opposed to engine parts (where the basic geometry may have been constrained well before I was born) or aerospace components (where we're trying to ride some sort of knife edge of strength to weight/volume), there's a bit of forgiveness available to the designer. For example, if one is worried about the drop in the UTS of titanium above a certain temperature, one can add some cross-section to the areas most affected by high temps and maintain sufficient design margin.

Also understand the enormous difference between rapid semi-auto firing and actual full auto. You get the gun-game crowd thinking that "hard use" is taking a class or comp where 500 rounds are shot over the course of a weekend, and thinking they need a suppressor built for a belt-fed. Barrel length also matters.

 

[AirgunnerPCP]

Every suppressor is "hearing safe" if you don't actually value your hearing...

To add, there's not a centerfire can out there that's hearing safe when firing normal, supersonic loads. Unless you take away the supersonic crack you're doing damage to your hearing. Just because you don't feel like there's isn't damage being done doesn't mean it isn't.

 

[143lrsd]

RELENTLESSLY QUIET Silencer Suppressor build a silencer

Standing on the shoulders of the GEN3 Honoris Rifle Suppressor, the MG7 pushes the suppression-centric design further. Now in a tubeless embodiment, we have leveraged the years of development and testing to craft a tough, light and above all, quiet suppressor. The MG7 was designed for more…

rexsilentium.com

I have several Rex cans including this one and it works well on 5.56, even full auto…. Which is kind of fun. Won’t break the bank either.

 

[kthomas]

To add, there's not a centerfire can out there that's hearing safe when firing normal, supersonic loads. Unless you take away the supersonic crack you're doing damage to your hearing. Just because you don't feel like there's isn't damage being done doesn't mean it isn't.

There's a whole conversation to be had about dB levels, hearing thresholds & exposure levels, etc.

However, it's easier to just remember that center-fire supersonic ammo through suppressors will still cause hearing damage. Yes, dB and exposure levels will influence how much damage may occur during any one event.

If you value your hearing, I would advise to still wear hearing protection no matter what suppressor you are using. Once it's gone, it doesn't come back.

 

[FuhQ]

What decibel level is the can, and what is hearing safe in you opinion? I ask because I wouldn't really consider "hearing safe" an opinion at all but data driven. Not being confrontational here, just asking because I feel like a lot of people consider things hearing safe as long as their ears aren't ringing after. I wouldn't consider any immediate noise over 120db to be hearing safe. Prolonged is a whole other story. I can tell you its definitely not safe on a 14.5" barrel, for you or anyone around you.


Edited to add: Also not sure where you are getting the low back pressure claim from. This is direct from PEW:

The Otter Creek Labs Polonium is a full-size 5.56mm machine gun rated rifle silencer that possesses extremely competitive sound signature suppression performance with many silencers on the market, while possessing higher back pressure compared to some designs. Users should note that the Polonium is capable of shooting projectiles as large as 6mm (.243).

The sound signature suppression performance of the Polonium on the MK18 weapon system is significant; the suppression performance to bystanders (muzzle Suppression Rating) is extreme for its size. It should also be noted that the back pressure (flow restriction) of the Polonium is significant, and on-par with that of the SilencerCo Saker 556. Users fielding such silencers on the AR15 weapon system may be advised to take flow restriction into consideration. Methods by which users may mitigate some of the adverse effects of high silencer flow restriction on the MK18 include increased buffer mass, spring force, and/or adjustable gas port orifice size. So-called “tuning” of the AR15 weapon system, for both suppressed function and optimized signature, is outside the scope of this article.

Where am I getting the backpressure opinion from? My personal experiences with it. Is it as low as an OSS, no, but it’s still about the same amount of gassy as my Sandman-S cans on the same rifles. Granted, I’m also running an H2 buffer in it, so that might help noticeably compared to a standard carbine buffer, and I’m not running an AGB or a Bootleg BCG, just standard M16. It ejects brass at 3 o’clock, as if the gun was tuned just for that can. Same as with my Sandman-S cans.

As for hearing safe, your opinion is just as valid as mine. That’s why I stated “IMO”. Because opinions are not facts.

And yes, you are being confrontational, because you want to be.

 

[jb0311]

Where am I getting the backpressure opinion from? My personal experiences with it. Is it as low as an OSS, no, but it’s still about the same amount of gassy as my Sandman-S cans on the same rifles. Granted, I’m also running an H2 buffer in it, so that might help noticeably compared to a standard carbine buffer, and I’m not running an AGB or a Bootleg BCG, just standard M16. It ejects brass at 3 o’clock, as if the gun was tuned just for that can. Same as with my Sandman-S cans.

As for hearing safe, your opinion is just as valid as mine. That’s why I stated “IMO”. Because opinions are not facts.

And yes, you are being confrontational, because you want to be.

You start stomping your feet every time someone challenges your opinions on here. I don't see anyone attacking you, the only reason I even mentioned anything is because you consistently give bad advice calling cans hearing safe when they are not. If you want to destroy your hearing, go for it, but others read these threads and my actually think you have a clue what you're talking about. Hearing safe is not an opinion at all, like you claim. It's well researched data. I'm using the link YOU provided lol. A well regarded suppressor testing entity goes out of their way to say they are the exact opposite of low back pressure as well and even compare it to another can that is known for high backpressure, but yeah, your opinion is what we are going with here

 

[rybe390]

Jfc people. I'm asking about titanium being run hard, the thread is not about running suppressors without ears, which for the record is retarded.

Back to it, it seems like there are some lightweight options out there in tubeless steel designs aka explorr, and some very hard use rated titanium cans aka dominus, helios qd, etc.

Like E.Bryant mentioned, there is a difference between full auto rated and a hard semi auto weekend as described. I'm trying to explore 1) if that hard semi auto firing schedule should keep temps at titanium safe levels and 2) if there are any other suppressors out there at say 12oz and under that fit the bill?

Thanks for the discussion folks. A lot of good info here, helpful suggestions, and some off topic discussion.

 

[FuhQ]

You start stomping your feet every time someone challenges your opinions on here. I don't see anyone attacking you, the only reason I even mentioned anything is because you consistently give bad advice calling cans hearing safe when they are not. If you want to destroy your hearing, go for it, but others read these threads and my actually think you have a clue what you're talking about. Hearing safe is not an opinion at all, like you claim. It's well researched data. I'm using the link YOU provided lol. A well regarded suppressor testing entity goes out of their way to say they are the exact opposite of low back pressure as well and even compare it to another can that is know for high backpressure.

Nobody is stomping their feet except the same troupe that constantly fucks up every thread with the same drivel, because they have some personal problem with me.

That said, I challenge you with this, since you think I’m so dumb, and you’re so smart…

If 140 DB is so well scientifically-proven to be outdated and incorrect, then why, in a perpetually technologically advancing market as suppressors are, has nobody in the industry challenged this number to be dropped lower to ____ DB, to create a new threshold that is truly hearing safe?

 

[jb0311]

Jfc people. I'm asking about titanium being run hard, the thread is not about running suppressors without ears, which for the record is retarded.

Back to it, it seems like there are some lightweight options out there in tubeless steel designs aka explorr, and some very hard use rated titanium cans aka dominus, helios qd, etc.

Like E.Bryant mentioned, there is a difference between full auto rated and a hard semi auto weekend as described. I'm trying to explore 1) if that hard semi auto firing schedule should keep temps at titanium safe levels and 2) if there are any other suppressors out there at say 12oz and under that fit the bill?

Thanks for the discussion folks. A lot of good info here, helpful suggestions, and some off topic discussion.

Yep, and sorry for derailing the thread. Hard to leave that info unchallenged because while it is your thread, others read it as well and we don't want others destroying their hearing thinking they can run a sbr without ear pro.

My main point before the derailing is I really wouldn't consider the polonium at all for what your use will be, hearing pro or not. For a bolt gun, yeah it's a good, affordable option with good suppression for the package.

If in budget, I wouldn't think twice about going with the Dominus. Great performance, backpressure, construction, and CS. Only downside, as mentioned is the price, but worth the cost.

 

[CaptArab]

I can't see getting anything other than a flow through can for a semi. They're up there at the very top for shooters ear numbers with no increase in bolt speed or gas which means you don't have to dink with tuning.

I'll TBAC for my bolt actions but flow through designs are soooo much nicer on gas guns.

 

[carbonbased]

I can't see getting anything other than a flow through can for a semi.

I think one reason that say, the heavy stainless Surefire RC2 is popular with the mil crowd is that it has an especially a low flash signature. May not matter to many regular people, however.

To my limited knowledge, flow-through cans tend not to have good flash reduction.

Also, compared to many cans the RC2 has low NV signature until you put a bunch of rounds through it. It is reportedly louder than many cans, however.

All this according to Mr. Garand Thumb. Take of it what you will.

One more thing: if you plan on using a piston gun, having some back pressure is a good thing.

 

[jb0311]

I think one reason that say, the heavy stainless Surefire RC2 is popular with the mil crowd is that it has an especially a low flash signature. May not matter to many regular people, however.

To my limited knowledge, flow-through cans tend not to have good flash reduction.

Also, compared to many cans the RC2 has low NV signature until you put a bunch of rounds through it. It is reportedly louder than many cans, however.

All this according to Mr. Garand Thumb. Take of it what you will.

One more thing: if you plan on using a piston gun, having some back pressure is a good thing.

Can confirm this as well. I was considering an OSS for a couple of 10.5 and 12.5" sbrs for night hunting/ shooting and got behind a friends and they were not NOD friendly in my experience. Not sure if that is down the line for flow through but it would stand to reason that is the case. No experience downrange with them as we used surefire at the time (a decade or so ago) but not sure what they use now.

 

[rybe390]

They are excellent cans. I have the 30 cal version. To me these are probably the best overall can for an AR. People are going to read that and go 100 different directions about cans that are quieter or whatever...but hear me out.

On an AR especially shooting 5.56 you will be wearing ear pro. You might sneak off one or two shots, but any more that that is not wise. With these cans you do give up some muzzle sound (slightly louder than some of the other cans I have) but the focus with these cans is on gas flow balance. By that I mean the muzzle isn't constricted so much that nothing gets out (thus causing more back pressure and a much louder heavier port pop). It's designed with a balance in mind. So yes you give up a couple of DB at the muzzle, but you gain a few (quieter) at the ear.

That 'overall balance' of gas and sound makes it excellent for an AR. Plus it's extremely light. If I didn't already have a bunch of cans I would buy one in 5.56. Even with that said, I still might buy one in 5.56 simply because I like the 30 cal version so much. In hindsight if I were buying cans all over again most if not all would be those or something similar. That said I love what I have and the Explorr series didn't exist back when I started.

Another good thing is Griffin allows you to upgrade. For example I bought a can back like 2015 or something like that. In between now and then baffle technology has improved as has the overall design of cans. So I mailed my can back to them and they replaced all the baffles with the latest and greatest thing. It cost me a couple hundred bucks but I got something like 10-12 Db (better) at the ear because of generational improvements while being within 1-2 Db of the original at the muzzle. With pretty much everyone else you just need to buy a whole new can but at least with Griffin you can upgrade existing cans.

In any case those Explorr series cans are awesome. Extremely light and rugged. Also if you ever get a baffle strike they just saw the baffles off and weld a new stack in place. Also they engrave them up closer to the mount area, behind any baffles. If you get a strike, no factor to fix it. Like I said, I am tempted to buy another can even though I really don't need it. But the one I have already is awesome. They are definitely not the quietest by any measure (ear/muzzle) but the overall package of what it delivers is great.

Do you have any 5.56 cans to compare your .30 cal explorr to on the same rifle? Have you use the .30 cal explorr on a bolt gun to see performance on a non gas gun? I would likely get the .30 cal as it has no weight penalty(and future proofing my suppressor), and I'm curious if the .223 or .30 cal would be quieter as the .30 cal has an extra baffle. Would only do that if performance wasn't too much worse.

 

[alamo5000]

6Al-4V titanium actually gets a bit better in terms of tensile strength as you go from 0°C to about -100°C. Below -200°C, it rapidly drops, so a stainless steel can may be a better choice if hunting at cryogenic temperatures.

I live in SE Texas so cold and me do not mix. LOL I've read a little bit about titanium suppressors before but to be honest I've never been tempted to buy one. I've never seen the need for it in my situation.

Going back to the OP's questions: when discussing suppressors, material is only one factor relating to performance.

I agree 100% with this sentence. Materials are just one factor. I've only heard 2nd hand information (as I am not a machinist or a welder) that certain metals are more difficult to work with in a machining and/or welding capacity. That said the soup isn't a single ingredient by any means. The sum total of design, parts, materials, workmanship, etc is the important part.

Also understand the enormous difference between rapid semi-auto firing and actual full auto. You get the gun-game crowd thinking that "hard use" is taking a class or comp where 500 rounds are shot over the course of a weekend, and thinking they need a suppressor built for a belt-fed. Barrel length also matters.

You can kill anything with enough abuse and/or neglect. On the flip side for my suppressors I've always been attracted to the bomb proof thought process. Not that I own a machine gun or that I shoot excessive amounts, but rather I hope to gain a lot more useful life out of my investment.

That all said a person can obtain an extremely durable suppressor without having a giant brick on the end of the muzzle. For the vast majority most don't have the ammo budget to shoot out a suppressor under normal use. That said, materials ARE important, but they definitely are not the only criteria to look at by any stretch. Hence going back to my point above, judge the whole soup, not just one ingredient is my overall feeling.

Going back to the OP's initial line of thinking, going straight for titanium only options might not be the best way to approach things. It would be like needing a car that goes 200mph, but then asking for car recommendations that are made out of carbon fiber. You can make a golf cart out of carbon fiber, but that doesn't mean it will meet the overall criteria that you need or want...

 

[E. Bryant]

If 140 DB is so well scientifically-proven to be outdated and incorrect, then why, in a perpetually technologically advancing market as suppressors are, has nobody in the industry challenged this number to be dropped lower to ____ DB, to create a new threshold that is truly hearing safe?

The answer to this question has been provided in detail a few times and yet you choose to ignore it, which is why people keep jumping on your responses.

 

[kswaterfowl]

I'm sure ther are other charts, but they are all pretty similar.

 

[alamo5000]

Do you have any 5.56 cans to compare your .30 cal explorr to on the same rifle? Have you use the .30 cal explorr on a bolt gun to see performance on a non gas gun? I would likely get the .30 cal as it has no weight penalty(and future proofing my suppressor), and I'm curious if the .223 or .30 cal would be quieter as the .30 cal has an extra baffle. Would only do that if performance wasn't too much worse.

Yes, I have I think five or six other cans that I can compare it to. I did all that long ago already. I don't own a bolt gun yet though. (My problem is I have exceedingly expensive tastes. LOL)

In general, like I said above for a semi auto those Explorr cans are excellent in all around performance. There are definitely quieter options out there (regardless of host) but once you throw the 'weight' category in there the total balance of the product is hard to beat.

Like I was saying above, in 5.56 a couple of decibels isn't a reason to write off a can. With 5.56 you will be wearing ear pro. Personally I think any dedicated caliber can will be quieter vs something over bore (ie 30 cal on 5.56 rifle). Griffin used to have a ton of extremely thorough and consistent sound metering tests on YouTube, that is until YT messed with them enough and they eliminated all of their content.

I did just look and found those videos have migrated to Rumble. If you cross reference them you can see results on a variety of hosts. On a 16" AR platform the difference between the 30 cal and 5.56 versions are minimal at best. In Griffin's tests using the same machine, indoors, using the same hosts and the same ammo they are within one DB of each other. My Recce 5's though are around 4-5 DB quieter than either.





If you are going for max sound reduction the Recce 5 is much quieter, but like I said, on a 5.56 AR it won't matter because you will be wearing ear pro.

 

[alamo5000]

Another note on weight:

The overall balance of the rifle is going to be far more important in my opinion. If you plan on doing cross country hikes that would elicit a completely different response from me though.

Overall a slightly heavier can is much more tolerable so long as the overall balance of the rifle isn't out of whack. If you have a heavy can on a light-ish rifle, and it is really nose heavy, now that sucks. It will get annoying in like 2-3 seconds. On the flip side a slightly heavier but better balanced rifle won't be nearly that bad.

Basically my thought process is weight should be in the context of what host.

 

[rybe390]

6Al-4V titanium actually gets a bit better in terms of tensile strength as you go from 0°C to about -100°C. Below -200°C, it rapidly drops, so a stainless steel can may be a better choice if hunting at cryogenic temperatures.

Going back to the OP's questions: when discussing suppressors, material is only one factor relating to performance. As opposed to engine parts (where the basic geometry may have been constrained well before I was born) or aerospace components (where we're trying to ride some sort of knife edge of strength to weight/volume), there's a bit of forgiveness available to the designer. For example, if one is worried about the drop in the UTS of titanium above a certain temperature, one can add some cross-section to the areas most affected by high temps and maintain sufficient design margin.

Also understand the enormous difference between rapid semi-auto firing and actual full auto. You get the gun-game crowd thinking that "hard use" is taking a class or comp where 500 rounds are shot over the course of a weekend, and thinking they need a suppressor built for a belt-fed. Barrel length also matters.

I appreciate the response here.

I'm under no illusion I need a full auto suppressor as few actually do, and in fact would prefer something lighter weight in steel or titanium that can handle a few faster mags of semi auto and call it good.

The 800f threshold of titanium is the "big scary" on a semi-auto, and how many shots it might take to get there. Seems like there are some who've figured it out like tbac with the dominus. What I'm trying to figure out is would I be walking a fine line of blowing up a ti can with a heavier semi-auto firing schedule, or is it totally OK.

 

[alamo5000]

The 800f threshold of titanium is the "big scary" on a semi-auto, and how many shots it might take to get there.

Two mags and you are fine. The third and you will definitely exceed 800 degrees.

 

[Clayman]

In Griffin's tests using the same machine, indoors, using the same hosts and the same ammo they are within one DB of each other.

This type of testing is damn near absolutely meaningless for letting you know the hearing damage potential of a silencer. Peak db is not an accurate representation of the overall loudness of a gun shot to the human ear.

Think about it. All these companies get the same peak db readings regardless of location. It could be in a barn, indoor range, underground bunker, out in the free field, etc. If they are getting the same reading in these different locations it should be obvious how worthless the info is as it applies to objective loudness to a humans ear.

I think most people have shot at an indoor range, under shade covers, in tree lines, etc. It is significantly louder shooting indoors vs outdoors in an open field. So we know from experience that indoor is substantially louder than outdoors yet peak db doesn't show this at all. Peak db completely ignores the load shape and duration of the shot.

Anyway my point is comparing peak db's between silencers that are relatively close is meaningless. That data doesn't tell you what is louder to you the end user. You can have a silencer with a higher peak db in the pressure or impulse space be less damaging to the human ear vs one that's lower peak.

 

[Clayman]

What I'm trying to figure out is would I be walking a fine line of blowing up a ti can with a heavier semi-auto firing schedule, or is it totally OK.

That is going to be dependant on the silencer. Ti thickness, baffle geometry, flow rate, bore size, etc.

For example Jay from pewscience has fired 100 rounds full auto with a cgs helios qd ti with zero baffle degradation. However the bore of that silencer is like .365". A ti silencer with thinner baffles, different baffle geometry and tighter bore might have been damaged.

Also using a muzzle brake can be a "sacrificial" blast baffle putting less stress on the actual blast baffle.

Just figure somewhere between 3-5 mags in rapid succession could lead to damage depending on the design.

 

[rybe390]

Going back to the OP's initial line of thinking, going straight for titanium only options might not be the best way to approach things. It would be like needing a car that goes 200mph, but then asking for car recommendations that are made out of carbon fiber. You can make a golf cart out of carbon fiber, but that doesn't mean it will meet the overall criteria that you need or want...

This jives with me. You can get lightweight suppressors that aren't ti. Maybe not full auto, but more thanna few mags capable .

I'll be looking at the explorr series hard because of your recommendation, a steel suppressor that light is almost exactly what I may need.

 

[alamo5000]

This type of testing is damn near absolutely meaningless for letting you know the hearing damage potential of a silencer. Peak db is not an accurate representation of the overall loudness of a gun shot to the human ear.

Think about it. All these companies get the same peak db readings regardless of location. It could be in a barn, indoor range, underground bunker, out in the free field, etc. If they are getting the same reading in these different locations it should be obvious how worthless the info is as it applies to objective loudness to a humans ear.

I think most people have shot at an indoor range, under shade covers, in tree lines, etc. It is significantly louder shooting indoors vs outdoors in an open field. So we know from experience that indoor is substantially louder than outdoors yet peak db doesn't show this at all. Peak db completely ignores the load shape and duration of the shot.

Anyway my point is comparing peak db's between silencers that are relatively close is meaningless. That data doesn't tell you what is louder to you the end user. You can have a silencer with a higher peak db in the pressure or impulse space be less damaging to the human ear vs one that's lower peak.

Watch their intro to testing video. They explain all of that and more.

 

[alamo5000]

This jives with me. You can get lightweight suppressors that aren't ti. Maybe not full auto, but more thanna few mags capable .

I'll be looking at the explorr series hard because of your recommendation, a steel suppressor that light is almost exactly what I may need.

The design is great. Before the standard was you get a tube and stuff baffles into it so you have a tube + baffles.

With this type of design instead of stuffing baffles into a tube they skip the tube and weld the baffles together.

There are a few other companies that make suppressors like that but among the ones I know of Griffin is the best bet and bang for the buck.

 

[WhoIsPat]

For example Jay from pewscience has fired 100 rounds full auto with a cgs helios qd ti with zero baffle degradation. However the bore of that silencer is like .365". A ti silencer with thinner baffles, different baffle geometry and tighter bore might have been damaged.

I believe Jay said in one of his reviews of CGS cans that DMLS titanium is stronger than machined and welded titanium but by exactly how much was subject to further testing.

 

[AMGtuned]

Jfc people. I'm asking about titanium being run hard, the thread is not about running suppressors without ears, which for the record is retarded.

Back to it, it seems like there are some lightweight options out there in tubeless steel designs aka explorr, and some very hard use rated titanium cans aka dominus, helios qd, etc.

Like E.Bryant mentioned, there is a difference between full auto rated and a hard semi auto weekend as described. I'm trying to explore 1) if that hard semi auto firing schedule should keep temps at titanium safe levels and 2) if there are any other suppressors out there at say 12oz and under that fit the bill?

Thanks for the discussion folks. A lot of good info here, helpful suggestions, and some off topic discussion.

ECCO Machine 5x5?

17-4 stainless, tubeless, FA rated, 11oz, 139ish on a 10.5 5.56 (if memory serves)

www.eccomachine.net

 

[houndog]

OP - I'd honestly be a little wary about relying on a forum to tell you the outward limits of a particular can. Just because XYZ poster says can A can run through two mags full auto, but not a third doesn't mean it's true. And of course I suspect barrel length, type of ammo and, I suppose even the ambient temps could have some impact. Maybe just contact the mfg. of the can you're interested to get their input. They should at least be able to tell you what their warranty will cover.

Personally, given the cost of cans and the wait for ATF approval I tend to be extremely conservative. The one TI can I own, a Dead Air Nomad (which I really like) I run mostly on a couple of bolt guns. The one AR I put it on has a barrel length of 16" and I generally put no more than 10 rounds downrange and then wait for the can to be sufficiently cool that I won't burn the cr*p out of my hand if I touch it. No question that's overkill, but I know there's no way I'm going to overheat that can. It also helps that I live in a cr*ppy state that limits me to 10 round mags. Otherwise I just run a DA Sandman. Not the can I'd recommend if you are remotely concerned about weight, but I know I can put it on a 10.5" barrel, shoot the crap out of it and not worry about damaging the can.

Finally, keep in mind that although TI heats up faster than other materials, it also cools down pretty quick, so waiting a couple of minutes between mag dumps should really help.

And yeah, I agree with other posters, don't run a can without hearing protection. But then again, I'm also very careful about my hearing. When not shooting suppressed I'll put in foam earplugs and then muffs over them, even if I'm alone and shooting outdoors. Once your hearing goes, it's not coming back.

 

[alamo5000]

OP - I'd honestly be a little wary about relying on a forum to tell you the outward limits of a particular can. Just because XYZ poster says can A can run through two mags full auto, but not a third doesn't mean it's true.

No one here said anything about this subject.

 

[E. Bryant]

Watch their intro to testing video. They explain all of that and more.

Unfortunately Griffin has not yet released data using MIL-STD-1474E (AHAAH) criteria, or at least I haven't seen anything other than peak numbers.