-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Suppressors NEW Dead air Nomax 33
- Thread starter culater
- Start date
This looks nice, but it's more than 2" longer and twice the weight of the Rugged Alaskan 360Ti. Heck, it's a few ounces heavier than the stainless-steel version of the Alaskan. Maybe it'll do a good job of filling the niche between that and the larger .338 cans like the Ultra 338.
More options are always welcome in this space.
Nice to see that it's rated for .33XC - I believe most .33 cal cans at this time are limited up to something like .338LM/RUM.
Given all the recent issues that have plagued DA, I'm curious to see how these hold up. Especially now that they are employing a new manufacturing technique with additive manufacturing.
Are these being made in house at DA?
Nice to see that it's rated for .33XC - I believe most .33 cal cans at this time are limited up to something like .338LM/RUM.
Given all the recent issues that have plagued DA, I'm curious to see how these hold up. Especially now that they are employing a new manufacturing technique with additive manufacturing.
Are these being made in house at DA?
I don’t believe DA is doing any of their own manufacturing, just design and QC
DA doesn't do QC.
Not sure if you are trying to state a fact or just frustration... I'm going from an actual conversation with DA's main Process Engineer.
Well, fact is DA has more QC failures in the history of American silencer manufacturing than any other single company. We can extrapolate that to DA has no QC. DA's main Process Engineer should probably take DA off his resume, probably the "Engineer" part too.
Pretty much what I expected…. No doubt there has been some bad press over the QC issues. He didn’t detail the process and I didn’t ask but that was what I was told.
DA is a design and marketing company who subs out the manufacturing, no surprise there. No idea what’s going on behind the scenes but I don’t think they went to 3D printing simply to have new process, more likely to deal with the QC issues from previous subcontractor. Again, I don’t have any real info on this just reading the tea leaves on the situation.
I get it, it hurts a little. It's hard to claim, however, DA has QC while also saying DA went to another subcontractor because the previous subcontractor had no QC (DA still uses the previous subcontractor). It isn't just bad PR, DA previous sold QC rejected military silencers to commercial users as "overruns". DA sold warped Sandman silencers. DA sold Ti silencers that had superficial welds and failed with light use. DA returned failed silencers as fixed that then had the welds fail again. DA sold S5 silencers that had massive QC failures, refused to issue a recall, and then refused to discuss the failures and remedies. The list goes on and on and on.
Peace bro, peace…. I’m just setting a couple things out there. You can be as much of a hater as you like.
I see DA as a design and marketing company - as I stated above. I’ve no intimate knowledge of QC policy or procedure - also stated above. If DA stands behind their product, what is the problem? Obviously the designs are good and the marketing is top notch.
Until the new 3D suppressors are in the wild no real assumptions can be made. Hopefully they have straightened out their issues and it’s full steam ahead…
I'd like to see that claim be proven, other than some fuddlore gun counter stories... I have one of those supposed "rejects" and it's not warped and is perfectly straight and true... So, not sure where you're getting that "reject" factoid from.
Also, selling shit cans that aren't straight came right out of the SilencerCo playbook... Octane's were notoriously well-known for being warped and having off-center baffles and end caps, and terrible welds.
My point is, every big company out there has had some form of fuckups and issues throughout their history... It happens. Did DA handle this recent stuff well with the Sierras? Not really, from an outside perspective, but I didn't buy a Sierra, so I didn't have to deal with that shit, and my opinion means very little. Just like all of ours does, unless we were one of the ones affected by it.
Last edited:
I'd like to see that claim be proven, other than some fuddlore gun counter stories... I have one of those supposed "rejects" and it's not warped and is perfectly straight and true... So, not sure where you're getting that "reject" factoid from.
Also, selling shit cans that aren't straight came right out of the SilencerCo playbook... Octane's were notoriously well-known for being warped and having off-center baffles and end caps, and terrible welds.
My point is, every big company out there has had some form of fuckups and issues throughout their history... It happens. Did DA handle this recent stuff well with the Sierras? Not really, from an outside perspective, but I didn't buy a Sierra, so I didn't have to deal with that shit, and my opinion means very little. Just like all of ours does, unless we were one of the ones affected by it.
I didn't say the "overruns" were warped. DA changed the manufacturing process after the solicitation acceptance and the cans were rejected by the end customer's QC. Kinda hard to be an "overrun" when they're contract rejects.
Rumors are i3D Mfg. Same folks who does the DMLS for the CGS and CAT product line.
Similar threads
Accessories
RRS TVC-33 Versa / Anvil 30
