-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Suppressors OSS Modular Suppressors
- Thread starter Ranger822
- Start date
That has ATF nightmare written all over it. I dont even know where to start.
Each one of the "items" in their "system" is a silencer on its own as far as I can tell.
They say you can swap the cores around from 5.56 to 7.62 or 300win mag to 338 Lapua, which would constitute in and of itself, another silencer(or 3 or 4) because the ATF has determined that silencer parts(replaceable cores) are silencers. So if you have ONE baffle, that ONE baffle is a silencer. The ATF has also determined that only manufacturers can replace cores or baffles, so there is another conundrum.
I am sure there are about 50 other problems with this "system" for the average civilian. Maybe if you are a LEO(and doing agency purchase) or the Mil picks it up they might have a decent system, but for a civilian I see ALL KINDS of issues.
Each one of the "items" in their "system" is a silencer on its own as far as I can tell.
They say you can swap the cores around from 5.56 to 7.62 or 300win mag to 338 Lapua, which would constitute in and of itself, another silencer(or 3 or 4) because the ATF has determined that silencer parts(replaceable cores) are silencers. So if you have ONE baffle, that ONE baffle is a silencer. The ATF has also determined that only manufacturers can replace cores or baffles, so there is another conundrum.
I am sure there are about 50 other problems with this "system" for the average civilian. Maybe if you are a LEO(and doing agency purchase) or the Mil picks it up they might have a decent system, but for a civilian I see ALL KINDS of issues.
I have handled the first gen models. I cannot recommend them until I see the current offering.
Last edited:
Perhaps what appeals most is the idea being able to use one suppressor for several weapons. I have read where smaller calibers can use slightly larger caliber suppressors. Maybe a better redirect is say I have a suppressor for .30 caliber how far down in caliber can one go and still have some effective sound reduction, assuming there is a universal thread attachment/adapter?
If you want a can to use on multi calibers get a .30 can and be done with it. There are 3 or 4 on the market that are marketed as multi caliber capable.
The 762SDN-6 with 5.56 I think is only 4db louder than the M4-2000, but has a much deeper tone so it sounds quieter to the ear. Thunder Beast 30BA is also multi caliber. I think the YHM Titanium .30 can is also multi. I am sure there are a few others too.
When you start talking about changing cores, etc... you start talking about having multiple suppressors in the eyes of the ATF and each $200 that goes with that. There is also, like I already said, the pesky issue that only the manufacturer can replace the core or baffles, so I guess you send the can in any time you want to change cores. There is the other pesky issue that a can has to be registered in only one caliber and you can never change the bore diameter of that can(as far as I know). If you buy a 9mm can, you cant hog it out to .45, illegal. Same with a .223 can, cant hog it out to .308, illegal. Well I guess you can have it done, but then you are "creating a new silencer" in the eyes of the ATF and get to pay another $200.
There is just WAY to much wrong with what this guy is trying to do, I would REALLY like to see how they are dealing with the ATF with all of this "modularity".
The 762SDN-6 with 5.56 I think is only 4db louder than the M4-2000, but has a much deeper tone so it sounds quieter to the ear. Thunder Beast 30BA is also multi caliber. I think the YHM Titanium .30 can is also multi. I am sure there are a few others too.
When you start talking about changing cores, etc... you start talking about having multiple suppressors in the eyes of the ATF and each $200 that goes with that. There is also, like I already said, the pesky issue that only the manufacturer can replace the core or baffles, so I guess you send the can in any time you want to change cores. There is the other pesky issue that a can has to be registered in only one caliber and you can never change the bore diameter of that can(as far as I know). If you buy a 9mm can, you cant hog it out to .45, illegal. Same with a .223 can, cant hog it out to .308, illegal. Well I guess you can have it done, but then you are "creating a new silencer" in the eyes of the ATF and get to pay another $200.
There is just WAY to much wrong with what this guy is trying to do, I would REALLY like to see how they are dealing with the ATF with all of this "modularity".
Hey you guys Johnny from OSS here. Let me clarify things. Since we do not have baffles the part you are changing is classified as a flash hider. ATF has given us the go ahead and the only tax stamp item is the exterior housing(octagon) on the BPR. NO OTHER PART IS A TAX STAMP ITEM. Also as far as "trying to be more quit" that has never been our goal, our goal is zero back pressure which causes blowback and a increased cyclic rate. As far as decibel level we exceed ear safe and that's our only goal, to be ear safe. Anything else just happened with the design. We have zero poi shift and proved that this weekend in New Hampshire with a very large weapons manufacturer. If you want proof email me at johnny@oss-online and I will let you know when we are in your area doing a demo and I will prove everything we claim. There are at least 10 users on here who have shot our product and will back it up. Feel free to call Jacob Bynum at Rifles Only he is one of our biggest advocates. As far as pieces randomly welded? That's interesting as every single one of our parts is machined. Once again if you have any questions ask away. If you want proof we can arrange that. Feel free to bring out any one of your cans from any other manufacturer and we will be glad to have a shoot off as far as poi shift, decibels, back pressure , blowback and increased cyclic rate.
All the best,
Johnny
All the best,
Johnny
Not to mention, a polygon is weaker Than a round tube of the same thickness. So, the can is either weaker, or heavier than it should be. If they overlooked that, what else in the design did they blotch? I see a lot of other issues as well.
Going off what you said. They use this internal "bore" to attach the can to the gun. You thread the can on over it. Its not made with precision, when we measured them no two were alike.
I've got a lot of time with many different suppressors, I would not buy or use an OSS suppressor ever.
I don't know how the cans are dealt with through ATF, but after looking at them at the Bushnell Brawl, there were some cool things about them. They self tighten since they are spiraled on the inside, and they did shed heat quickly, and they were super quiet. I do agree with KYS though on trying to reinvent the wheel. And as far as adding modulkes to make it quieter, why wouldn't it just be as quiet as you could make it in the first place? I did like the design, but, not sure on the method of achieving suppression and how it works with ATF. To me, it seems like a 1 piece solid can is the way to go for now.
Hey you guys Johnny from OSS here. Let me clarify things. Since we do not have baffles the part you are changing is classified as a flash hider. ATF has given us the go ahead and the only tax stamp item is the exterior housing(octagon) on the BPR. NO OTHER PART IS A TAX STAMP ITEM. Also as far as "trying to be more quit" that has never been our goal, our goal is zero back pressure which causes blowback and a increased cyclic rate. As far as decibel level we exceed ear safe and that's our only goal, to be ear safe. Anything else just happened with the design. We have zero poi shift and proved that this weekend in New Hampshire with a very large weapons manufacturer. If you want proof email me at johnny@oss-online and I will let you know when we are in your area doing a demo and I will prove everything we claim. There are at least 10 users on here who have shot our product and will back it up. Feel free to call Jacob Bynum at Rifles Only he is one of our biggest advocates you can also talk to Nick Irving or Travis Haley. As far as pieces randomly welded? That's interesting as every single one of our parts is machined to precision. Yes 3-4 years ago they were hand built, we were much much smaller then. Once again if you have any questions ask away. If you want proof we can arrange that. Feel free to bring out any one of your cans from any other manufacturer and we will be glad to have a shoot off as far as poi shift, decibels, back pressure , blowback and increased cyclic rate.
Also the reason behind the octagon is simple, heat rises to the highest point. On a tube that is in your center line of aim, from my military background and long gun specific I hated false mirage. The octagon clears your center line of aim of false mirage by dissipating the head to the outer points.
Like I said we are not reinventing the wheel we are creating it. We can say that we have a product that has zero back pressure, which equals no increased cyclic rate/bolt velocity and zero stuff blowing back in your face. No one else does this.
All the best,
Johnny
Also the reason behind the octagon is simple, heat rises to the highest point. On a tube that is in your center line of aim, from my military background and long gun specific I hated false mirage. The octagon clears your center line of aim of false mirage by dissipating the head to the outer points.
Like I said we are not reinventing the wheel we are creating it. We can say that we have a product that has zero back pressure, which equals no increased cyclic rate/bolt velocity and zero stuff blowing back in your face. No one else does this.
All the best,
Johnny
I am definitely the novice here - but what counts most is showing me the facts at the range. When, if you are in the Denver/Colorado Springs area let me know, I would really like to see how different suppressors compare with the new OSS suppressor system. Seeing and hearing is believing. One thing is for sure, before I spend a lot of money, go thru the extra hassle of the paperwork, I definitely want a suppressor that will perform supremely well.
With being said, any other folks with some input on this thread, and if not, would adding that my main goal would be to suppress a TRG22 in .308 or 6.5 Creedmore and have the option to also suppress something like a an AR platform chambered in 6.8 SPC or 5.56 NATO? Doable with one suppressor or is that asking way too much?
With being said, any other folks with some input on this thread, and if not, would adding that my main goal would be to suppress a TRG22 in .308 or 6.5 Creedmore and have the option to also suppress something like a an AR platform chambered in 6.8 SPC or 5.56 NATO? Doable with one suppressor or is that asking way too much?
Last edited:
Johnny,
Not trying to be an ass, but there are a couple things there that kind of go against the laws of physics. I'm glad to hear about the ATF giving you the go ahead there though, they rarely ever use common sense in decisions, so props to you there.
Not trying to be an ass, but there are a couple things there that kind of go against the laws of physics. I'm glad to hear about the ATF giving you the go ahead there though, they rarely ever use common sense in decisions, so props to you there.
Johnny,
I'm going off what I saw and held in my hands. Your suppressors may be different in design but your attachment methods strikes me as odd. You deny the internal cores that thread onto the barrel were all perfectly machines and all the same? Because the ones I saw were all different. No one is discrediting the work but the design seems pretty busy to me.
On a bolt gun we don't have to worry about cyclic rate, blowback, or back pressure. The use of a suppressor actually helps guys with shorter barrels gain some FPS back. So those points are negated for most of the users you will encounter here. If you ever come to the Kentucky area I will be happy to bring some cans and bolt guns out to test them against what you offer. Until then, from what I have seen first hand, I don't understand the benefits of this design or how/why they are assembled as they are.
For me the check list goes like this. When I buy a can it has to meet these requirements:
1) Accuracy change, I want improved groups or in line with what the gun can produce with no can
2) Cost for the features you get, am I paying for materials or some shrouded assembly process.
3) POI change, is it repeatable
4) attachment method - thread on, QD and if a QD do I have to have a specific pattern to install the device. i.e. the Surefire FA762SS contour.
5) Sound suppression - not really my last choice but if all the other fall in line, what type of decibel reduction do I get? It's a trade off, if my POI change is minimal and accuracy is improved I can live with a few DB's more of sound. But ultimately we buy these to see a serious reduction in noise for our ears and those around us.
KYS,
I 100% agree that our design is over engineered for a bolt gun as well as pistol. In the fall we will be coming out with Bolt gun specific which will be along the lines of what you are used to seeing. A little of my background without going into unit specific. I was on the SOCOM board for weapons, suppression and optics.
As far as the cores , we were never given a weapon to measure off of just a cad drawing from said agencies armorers. That was the stop gap. George and I talked about this at the Bushnell Brawl.
As I stated in the beginning of this , what we currently have negates all the issues with a gas system. Thats what the design is for , to mitigate back pressure which causes blowback ,increased cyclic rate etc. All these issues are why when I was deployed we would rarely use suppressors. And when we would use them, lets say at night, the initial first round bloom would give away our signature. We can say that we have negated these issues.
Also what you saw at GAP was 2 generations ago, since then we have every machine you can imagine. I will most definitely make a stop when I am out your way to show you, brief you and have you shoot it. I can guarantee you will not be disappointed.
Like I said, if anyone has any questions feel free to ask away on here or email me at [email protected].
Have a good one,
Johnny
I 100% agree that our design is over engineered for a bolt gun as well as pistol. In the fall we will be coming out with Bolt gun specific which will be along the lines of what you are used to seeing. A little of my background without going into unit specific. I was on the SOCOM board for weapons, suppression and optics.
As far as the cores , we were never given a weapon to measure off of just a cad drawing from said agencies armorers. That was the stop gap. George and I talked about this at the Bushnell Brawl.
As I stated in the beginning of this , what we currently have negates all the issues with a gas system. Thats what the design is for , to mitigate back pressure which causes blowback ,increased cyclic rate etc. All these issues are why when I was deployed we would rarely use suppressors. And when we would use them, lets say at night, the initial first round bloom would give away our signature. We can say that we have negated these issues.
Also what you saw at GAP was 2 generations ago, since then we have every machine you can imagine. I will most definitely make a stop when I am out your way to show you, brief you and have you shoot it. I can guarantee you will not be disappointed.
Like I said, if anyone has any questions feel free to ask away on here or email me at [email protected].
Have a good one,
Johnny
Have you even seen and or shot one or are you just saying that because its different?
I can vouch for both Johnny's background and the cans OSS makes. You may not like the design or it's features but make no mistake, it's the real deal, it does what it was designed to do, which might not appeal to some on the civilian side. But don't believe me, link up with Johnny and go shoot one for yourself, Call Jacob at Rifles only or the others he mentioned and ask them what their thoughts are.
I'm not sure of it either, but I'm inexperienced with them as well, but one thing's forsure. Johnny has handled himself very professionally and that's rare this day and age with companies full of testosterone and ego. I would definitely love to see or shoot the product.
Johnny, if your ever around Charlotte North Carolina, PM me.
Johnny, if your ever around Charlotte North Carolina, PM me.
I am on the same fence as Poison. I would like to be 100% clear that the ability to add and remove baffle stacks is kosher with the ATF.
I don't see how they can rule that the modularity of a suppressor cannot change once its designed and made. But with this system you are able to add tube length at will, or take it apart.
I just don't see how they can rule that you never (technically) have a fixed OAL of said item.
Thanks for clarifying for us.
I don't see how they can rule that the modularity of a suppressor cannot change once its designed and made. But with this system you are able to add tube length at will, or take it apart.
I just don't see how they can rule that you never (technically) have a fixed OAL of said item.
Thanks for clarifying for us.
That's all find and dandy Papa, you want to risk that in a federal court room should you be questioned by someone with less knowledge? Shit happens, lets mitigate that by seeing the classification. And how do you suppress a firearm with no baffles?
What is the point of adding chambers to the suppressor if it contains no baffles? These is where the design is confusing.
How are you adding and taking away length to a suppressor? They clearly ask for a OAL on the form 4.
What is the point of adding chambers to the suppressor if it contains no baffles? These is where the design is confusing.
How are you adding and taking away length to a suppressor? They clearly ask for a OAL on the form 4.
Last edited:
Johnny,
Here are a few of my issues. I'm not posting these points to be a punk and bust you out, Im posting them so you can post a response, if you feel like it, which should clear up a few things.
I have done quite a bit of R&D contracting for a couple of the big silencer companies for a few years. I don't anymore do to health reasons, so Im not affiliated with any of them, with the exception of one, and I don't take their money, just send them designs, and if they choose to use it, they pay my tax stamp and give me one of the first cans produced. I will leave them nameless as I really don't have an emotional attachment, and I don't want it looking like they are attacking you as a competitor. I will say, they will be producing a locked breach, semi auto .45 ACP carbine with an upper that matches the profile of one of their cans. It is a gun that I designed and passed on to them in exchange for a number of said guns.
1. I tested several can shapes for heat dispersion, specifically to reduce mirage, and one square stackable can for .mil eval. We tried round, octagonal, hexagonal, rectangular, and square. once the can was warm from firing, the temperature was consistent all the way around the can, and mirage on the same weapon, ammo, etc. was the same do to the heat conductivity of the metals I assume. (I'm not a metallurgist, but took a whopping one metallurgy class in college).
2. In order to debunk a certain company's "zero POI shift" claims, I made 5,10,15, and20oz. tubes 1.5" in diameter with no baffles or end cap. The only variable was additional weight. It changed poi on every host, even if it was minor. It generally seems to come down to additional weight, not baffle design (some baffle designs do have an effect on POI shift) that causes POI shift, as well as barrel type. I don't think you can hang anything on the muzzle of some barrel profiles, and not see a shift.
3. No back pressure. A portion of the suppression comes from slowing the expansion of gasses. This in itself, no matter how it is achieved, will cause some blowback. Using a $150k camera will show that once the bullet exits, a slight vaccum which will also cause some blowback. One of the best methods of managing blowback that I have found is to have a backwards baffle if you will, a cone with the small end pointing in the direction of the bullets travel, placed to where the muzzle of the barrel contacts the inside of the cone. This peels off gasses as they try to make their way back into the host weapon, and prevents a sizable amount of gas from going where you don't want it. The back pressure also causes the cyclic rate increase, obviously, so I wont bother typing the same thing in regards to that. How do you test for this? Are you using a high speed camera or using audio vs. time?
I understand if you cant answer this do to protecting your design, but if you are not using baffles, how are you capturing and cooling the gasses? Sintered Metal cores? Ive played with that too, and it has some of the issues still.
4. Attachment for adding length. As a machinist, I can tell you that attaching one part to another requires clearance, even if it is minute. But, many conditions including temperature (which changes drastically in a silencer) dirt/debris, carbon. moisture and others effect the way parts fit together, which generally effects POI to some degree, even if it is minor. But minor at 100 yards isn't so minor at 1,000. Even if it has very little, it would be impressive, but I have doubts (no offense) when you claim there is zero.
My brother is a mechanical engineer (PE) that works with Hydrogen pumps. He helped me design a QD mount based off of a hydrogen pump, which you may not be familiar with. Hydrogen pumps are very quick and easy to connect and disconnect and don't allow hydrogen to escape, and it happens to be one of the smallest elements. (Im not a scientist so I may sound dumb there) It will do so even when dirty and oily, under some pretty poor conditions. It has the tightest clearances that will possibly work, and even it will effect long range POA/POI. We took it too AAC because their mounts are dismal at best, in my opinion, and they had NO intrest. Another silencer company was happy to work with us on this, and may end up putting it into production, if they think they can manufacture it reasonably. If I can make it on a 1928 southbend lathe, Im sure they can using CNC/CAM.
Having used a can on an SBR and a precision rifle in combat in a few countries, I cant personally see the advantage of the modularity, but please keep in mind Im rather low speed and high drag. Just because I don't see the use, doesn't mean I think there isn't one. Simplicity seems to rule in combat from my experience though.
Once again, not trying to be abrasive, just looking for answers. Thanks for your service, too.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the above points, if you have time. There are a couple more that came to mind, but those were the main ones.
Thankyou, Delta4-3.
Here are a few of my issues. I'm not posting these points to be a punk and bust you out, Im posting them so you can post a response, if you feel like it, which should clear up a few things.
I have done quite a bit of R&D contracting for a couple of the big silencer companies for a few years. I don't anymore do to health reasons, so Im not affiliated with any of them, with the exception of one, and I don't take their money, just send them designs, and if they choose to use it, they pay my tax stamp and give me one of the first cans produced. I will leave them nameless as I really don't have an emotional attachment, and I don't want it looking like they are attacking you as a competitor. I will say, they will be producing a locked breach, semi auto .45 ACP carbine with an upper that matches the profile of one of their cans. It is a gun that I designed and passed on to them in exchange for a number of said guns.
1. I tested several can shapes for heat dispersion, specifically to reduce mirage, and one square stackable can for .mil eval. We tried round, octagonal, hexagonal, rectangular, and square. once the can was warm from firing, the temperature was consistent all the way around the can, and mirage on the same weapon, ammo, etc. was the same do to the heat conductivity of the metals I assume. (I'm not a metallurgist, but took a whopping one metallurgy class in college).
2. In order to debunk a certain company's "zero POI shift" claims, I made 5,10,15, and20oz. tubes 1.5" in diameter with no baffles or end cap. The only variable was additional weight. It changed poi on every host, even if it was minor. It generally seems to come down to additional weight, not baffle design (some baffle designs do have an effect on POI shift) that causes POI shift, as well as barrel type. I don't think you can hang anything on the muzzle of some barrel profiles, and not see a shift.
3. No back pressure. A portion of the suppression comes from slowing the expansion of gasses. This in itself, no matter how it is achieved, will cause some blowback. Using a $150k camera will show that once the bullet exits, a slight vaccum which will also cause some blowback. One of the best methods of managing blowback that I have found is to have a backwards baffle if you will, a cone with the small end pointing in the direction of the bullets travel, placed to where the muzzle of the barrel contacts the inside of the cone. This peels off gasses as they try to make their way back into the host weapon, and prevents a sizable amount of gas from going where you don't want it. The back pressure also causes the cyclic rate increase, obviously, so I wont bother typing the same thing in regards to that. How do you test for this? Are you using a high speed camera or using audio vs. time?
I understand if you cant answer this do to protecting your design, but if you are not using baffles, how are you capturing and cooling the gasses? Sintered Metal cores? Ive played with that too, and it has some of the issues still.
4. Attachment for adding length. As a machinist, I can tell you that attaching one part to another requires clearance, even if it is minute. But, many conditions including temperature (which changes drastically in a silencer) dirt/debris, carbon. moisture and others effect the way parts fit together, which generally effects POI to some degree, even if it is minor. But minor at 100 yards isn't so minor at 1,000. Even if it has very little, it would be impressive, but I have doubts (no offense) when you claim there is zero.
My brother is a mechanical engineer (PE) that works with Hydrogen pumps. He helped me design a QD mount based off of a hydrogen pump, which you may not be familiar with. Hydrogen pumps are very quick and easy to connect and disconnect and don't allow hydrogen to escape, and it happens to be one of the smallest elements. (Im not a scientist so I may sound dumb there) It will do so even when dirty and oily, under some pretty poor conditions. It has the tightest clearances that will possibly work, and even it will effect long range POA/POI. We took it too AAC because their mounts are dismal at best, in my opinion, and they had NO intrest. Another silencer company was happy to work with us on this, and may end up putting it into production, if they think they can manufacture it reasonably. If I can make it on a 1928 southbend lathe, Im sure they can using CNC/CAM.
Having used a can on an SBR and a precision rifle in combat in a few countries, I cant personally see the advantage of the modularity, but please keep in mind Im rather low speed and high drag. Just because I don't see the use, doesn't mean I think there isn't one. Simplicity seems to rule in combat from my experience though.
Once again, not trying to be abrasive, just looking for answers. Thanks for your service, too.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the above points, if you have time. There are a couple more that came to mind, but those were the main ones.
Thankyou, Delta4-3.
Johnny will be in the Raleigh area some time at the end of July - 1st couple of weeks in August to deliver my 6 new cans from OSS. Feel free to drop me an email and I'll keep you in the loop: [email protected]
And I am still not sold. several people who are more well versed than i have stated the reasoning behind this and I will not bother to re-type.
Am i open to changing my posistion, sure am. But right now I am not sold on the design nor do I see the advantages.
Based on your above post, I can only assume that you do not fully understand how the different pieces work with one another. Have you gone to the OSS website and read the description of each component? I can't comment on the ATF issue, Johhny would be the person best to answer those questions.
http://oss-online.com
Delta 4-3 and everyone else, I hope this answers your questions. If not please call me, number is in last paragraph.
This was still using your traditional baffle trap design still. Our gasses are moving thru a series of 6 tubes. Think turbine motor that is pulling, no it does not spin. The gasses move a total of 41" To name a few who have tested this for us, ARDEC, Lawrence Livermore, and Oakridge laboratories. Our external housing is actually T6Aluminum. When they were running the test for heat they used a MK48 with 100 rounds , on full auto. The hottest it got up to was 686 degrees Fahrenheit. They also sent us thermal imaging pictures which I will soon post . It shows that instead of a tear drop that mirage generally produces ours bled off the edges of the octagon.
With our suppressor you have a core that slides back over the barrel. It also acts as a muzzle brake and flash hider. This part stays on and you will mount to the same spot everytime, its not a ratchet system or indexed and never moves. Keep in mind that our gasses flow opposite thread pattern so it self torques every shot, this way it does not loosen like other reflex designs
I am starting a you tube channel that has plenty of high speed video , I will say that a premier gun manufacturer that issues the military most of their piston guns did the testing. They actually saw a decrease in bolt velocity by 2-4% with our can vs their gun stock. the reason being is that our core that you mount to it is shorter than the flash hider they had stock. decrease in barrel length = decrease in bolt velocity. We fixed that and brought it up to zero so its stock and not negative bolt velocity. Keep in mind that the gasses are traveling 41" and exit the front vs coming back in the chamber like traditional suppressors. I like to use this analogy, lets say you have .265 tolerances ,the gas is going to exit the easiest path which is the chamber vs traveling thru a series of baffles. Our can does not block the energy we allow it to move 41" we have zero corners in order to not stop movement. Sorry the analogy, if we are all in a big building thats on fire waiting in line to go out the standard door up front, and then all of a sudden a garage door opened behind us ,which would you go out? Thats traditional suppressor design. We literally allow the gasses to flow instantly when they exit the muzzle vs a series of deflectors that cause choke points.
We currently have 22 active patents good for 20 years and 9 pending vs your traditional 1-2 that are generally method of attachment. As I said gasses flow through a series of tubes . I will answer the ATF question now as well. 1 yes I will post a letter . As far as how we got it to work, the locking block that acts as a flash hider/muzzle brake is what would be baffles in most cans, all ours do is deflect gas. It does not suppress anything with just that and we did a demo for them with just that on and they saw it was clearly not a suppressor. The only time decibel reduction happens is when you put the BPR external housing on it so thats what they deemed our suppressor/ class 3 Item. The way we make it ear safe is with the SRM. BPR adds .9" past your muzzle and the SRM adds 3" so a total length gained of 3.9" . With 7.62 the SRM is 1 " in additional length for extra volume. It is physically impossible to attach the SRM to anything other than the BPR. We possibly showed them a companies flash hider that has a baffle in it that is not a class 3 item to hammer this home and said you can not attach the SRM to any weapons system and they saw that. Mind you this has been on on going fight for over 6 months. On your weapons to change caliber all you change out are the defectors that well, deflect gas into the tubes. This is for the SRM and the BPR.
I completely understand what you are saying . Like I said the BPR deflectors stay on the gun to act as a muzzle brake/ Flash hider. That is what the round is coming thru and the BPR that contains tubes threads onto the end of that. As far as the SRM , the core has a nipple that locks into place ,you literally can feel it, to the BPR. I stated the labs that did this testing.
For clarification this is not a bigger you know what contest on my part. I will say that over the past 11 years I have spent over 2/3rds of it deployed with a pretty prestigious unit. The modularity aspect comes in here. You know when you fast rope in ,do an exterior breech, flow thru the hallways and take a shot? That over pressure feeling? the BPR takes that away , no over pressure etc. If you want ear safe then you just put the SRM on. The BPR is designed to stay on 100% of the time. When its shot out you replace the deflectors for less than $less than $100 for the BPR and $150 for the SRM core. $250 and we bring you back to a zero round count as thats what is taking the initial blast. We have had it tested and on 5.56 at a rate of 20 RPM you will get 10,500 rounds, 60 RPM and its 8,500 rounds and full auto is 4,500 rounds. The reason you get so much life is once again we have no corners or choke points and allow the energy to flow. So modularity again. When you reach that point you will loose 1 maybe 2 decibels. Instead of buying an entirely new can wouldn't you want to just replace the worn deflectors for $250 vs buying a new can? Another analogy. If your tires wear out on your car do you buy a new car or replace the tires?
I will say again as cliche as it sounds, we make our way around states a lot. Not one dealer has said no after they shoot it and do side by side comparisons. Yes the current system is way over kill for a bolt gun ,you know this, I know this. We are making bolt gun specific since none of the gas issues are relevant in fall time frame. I know its new, its different than anything out there. But, I can say if you shoot it you will love it. Also in fall we will be reducing our SBR line, I say this though, if you can have a 14.5 " barrel and come in at a barrel length of 18.4 inches is it worth loosing what you do with an SBR when it comes in at around the same length suppressed. Regardless we will release an SBR can that is not over the barrel and is direct attach. I will post that letter soon, and I will have High speed video up on our youtube channel next week, showing 1. zero initial flash, 2. zero back pressure or increased bolt velocity and blowback, and 3. how our gasses flow out of the front. Literally boreline psi is almost zero. In closing, because I am thinking that most on here are good hearted Americans. If you have any questions, reach me on here, email me [email protected] or call me 910-303-6147 with any questions. Please keep the calls between 9am and 9pm mountain time. If I do not answer then leave a message and I will call you back that day. Thanks for your time and curiosity I hope to hear from you soon.
All the best,
Johnny
This was still using your traditional baffle trap design still. Our gasses are moving thru a series of 6 tubes. Think turbine motor that is pulling, no it does not spin. The gasses move a total of 41" To name a few who have tested this for us, ARDEC, Lawrence Livermore, and Oakridge laboratories. Our external housing is actually T6Aluminum. When they were running the test for heat they used a MK48 with 100 rounds , on full auto. The hottest it got up to was 686 degrees Fahrenheit. They also sent us thermal imaging pictures which I will soon post . It shows that instead of a tear drop that mirage generally produces ours bled off the edges of the octagon.
With our suppressor you have a core that slides back over the barrel. It also acts as a muzzle brake and flash hider. This part stays on and you will mount to the same spot everytime, its not a ratchet system or indexed and never moves. Keep in mind that our gasses flow opposite thread pattern so it self torques every shot, this way it does not loosen like other reflex designs
I am starting a you tube channel that has plenty of high speed video , I will say that a premier gun manufacturer that issues the military most of their piston guns did the testing. They actually saw a decrease in bolt velocity by 2-4% with our can vs their gun stock. the reason being is that our core that you mount to it is shorter than the flash hider they had stock. decrease in barrel length = decrease in bolt velocity. We fixed that and brought it up to zero so its stock and not negative bolt velocity. Keep in mind that the gasses are traveling 41" and exit the front vs coming back in the chamber like traditional suppressors. I like to use this analogy, lets say you have .265 tolerances ,the gas is going to exit the easiest path which is the chamber vs traveling thru a series of baffles. Our can does not block the energy we allow it to move 41" we have zero corners in order to not stop movement. Sorry the analogy, if we are all in a big building thats on fire waiting in line to go out the standard door up front, and then all of a sudden a garage door opened behind us ,which would you go out? Thats traditional suppressor design. We literally allow the gasses to flow instantly when they exit the muzzle vs a series of deflectors that cause choke points.
We currently have 22 active patents good for 20 years and 9 pending vs your traditional 1-2 that are generally method of attachment. As I said gasses flow through a series of tubes . I will answer the ATF question now as well. 1 yes I will post a letter . As far as how we got it to work, the locking block that acts as a flash hider/muzzle brake is what would be baffles in most cans, all ours do is deflect gas. It does not suppress anything with just that and we did a demo for them with just that on and they saw it was clearly not a suppressor. The only time decibel reduction happens is when you put the BPR external housing on it so thats what they deemed our suppressor/ class 3 Item. The way we make it ear safe is with the SRM. BPR adds .9" past your muzzle and the SRM adds 3" so a total length gained of 3.9" . With 7.62 the SRM is 1 " in additional length for extra volume. It is physically impossible to attach the SRM to anything other than the BPR. We possibly showed them a companies flash hider that has a baffle in it that is not a class 3 item to hammer this home and said you can not attach the SRM to any weapons system and they saw that. Mind you this has been on on going fight for over 6 months. On your weapons to change caliber all you change out are the defectors that well, deflect gas into the tubes. This is for the SRM and the BPR.
I completely understand what you are saying . Like I said the BPR deflectors stay on the gun to act as a muzzle brake/ Flash hider. That is what the round is coming thru and the BPR that contains tubes threads onto the end of that. As far as the SRM , the core has a nipple that locks into place ,you literally can feel it, to the BPR. I stated the labs that did this testing.
For clarification this is not a bigger you know what contest on my part. I will say that over the past 11 years I have spent over 2/3rds of it deployed with a pretty prestigious unit. The modularity aspect comes in here. You know when you fast rope in ,do an exterior breech, flow thru the hallways and take a shot? That over pressure feeling? the BPR takes that away , no over pressure etc. If you want ear safe then you just put the SRM on. The BPR is designed to stay on 100% of the time. When its shot out you replace the deflectors for less than $less than $100 for the BPR and $150 for the SRM core. $250 and we bring you back to a zero round count as thats what is taking the initial blast. We have had it tested and on 5.56 at a rate of 20 RPM you will get 10,500 rounds, 60 RPM and its 8,500 rounds and full auto is 4,500 rounds. The reason you get so much life is once again we have no corners or choke points and allow the energy to flow. So modularity again. When you reach that point you will loose 1 maybe 2 decibels. Instead of buying an entirely new can wouldn't you want to just replace the worn deflectors for $250 vs buying a new can? Another analogy. If your tires wear out on your car do you buy a new car or replace the tires?
I will say again as cliche as it sounds, we make our way around states a lot. Not one dealer has said no after they shoot it and do side by side comparisons. Yes the current system is way over kill for a bolt gun ,you know this, I know this. We are making bolt gun specific since none of the gas issues are relevant in fall time frame. I know its new, its different than anything out there. But, I can say if you shoot it you will love it. Also in fall we will be reducing our SBR line, I say this though, if you can have a 14.5 " barrel and come in at a barrel length of 18.4 inches is it worth loosing what you do with an SBR when it comes in at around the same length suppressed. Regardless we will release an SBR can that is not over the barrel and is direct attach. I will post that letter soon, and I will have High speed video up on our youtube channel next week, showing 1. zero initial flash, 2. zero back pressure or increased bolt velocity and blowback, and 3. how our gasses flow out of the front. Literally boreline psi is almost zero. In closing, because I am thinking that most on here are good hearted Americans. If you have any questions, reach me on here, email me [email protected] or call me 910-303-6147 with any questions. Please keep the calls between 9am and 9pm mountain time. If I do not answer then leave a message and I will call you back that day. Thanks for your time and curiosity I hope to hear from you soon.
All the best,
Johnny
P03, feel free to ignore this question, but do you happen to be in an outfit of greenies that rymes with "fird smoup"? Pretty sure no one could ever crack that code! Lol.
Johnny, I'll give you a jingle tomorrow.
Johnny, I'll give you a jingle tomorrow.
Delta4-3 I come from fird smoup P03 was smeveth smoup .Also everyone, I did a lengthy reply that should answer all questions that is waiting for moderator approval.
Last edited:
Based on you directing me to the website it is clear you do not fully understand how each piece works either! I've read over the site and held the suppressors in hand.
There are different sections that screw together and both of those sections had DB ratings on their pages. So, that constitutes a "suppressor part" and could be deemed as a separate serial number. This also affects form 4 OAL which makes it hard to register if you cant give them the measurements of the item you are paying tax on. So 2 different tubes, 2 different extra chambers, and 2 different flash hider options.... this can and will get confusing for some.
But since you know the items in question so well, please explain to me how they work in accordance with ATF/NFA laws. Specifically suppressor parts, just how YHM got the hammer dropped on them for their pistol can pistons. I do not see these different chambers as any different.
I would be interested in seeing a demo of the bolt gun suppressor. When you get them online, if that could be worked out. The innovation and technology interest me, would like to see performance and construction changes in person.
I can only assume that by your response to my post directing you to the webpage that you took offense and are butt hurt, hence your smart ass reply, that was not my intent, a lot of nuance is lost in emails and online. I was simply trying to help you out.
As I said, I cannot address the ATF issues, thats Johnny's lane. Likewise your other questions/issues are addressed by Johnny a few posts up in post #29. As you can see by his post, your and others assumptions of how this device works are not accurate and it's understandable that you are skeptical of it and how it works because it defys the norms of how we know cans to be made and classified by the ATF. I think Johnny expalined how the different devices work and why the ATF classifies the BPR in the way it does and why the other parts are not considered cans and not part of the OAL for form 4.
I have no dog in this fight other than I know them to work really well at what they were designed to do and it's truely innovative in supprsor design (IMO). I look at it as leading a horse to water and as such I know some will be resistant, make false assumptions , and scream impossible all day long. I have no control or time for that. For those who want to, the info is out there and you have the man (Johnny) who makes them interacting here with you to answer your questions, alieve your doubts and even to set up demos for you so you can see the cans for yourself. Hopefully you and others will get a chance to demo one of Johnny's cans and see what it is capable of, I highly doubt you will be disappointed with it.
* No offense was used in the making of this post nor should it be viewed as offensive to any person*
I can only assume that by your response to my post directing you to the webpage that you took offense and are butt hurt, hence your smart ass reply, that was not my intent, a lot of nuance is lost in emails and online. I was simply trying to help you out.
* No offense was used in the making of this post nor should it be viewed as offensive to any person*
What cracks me up is that you take a bit of a hypocritical stance with each reply. You stuck your nose into a question I asked and had little to no knowledge on how to reply other then directing me to a website and a person I was already communicating with. (Thanks for that btw, it was a huge help) Then you want to cry about taking offense, butt hurting, and smart ass replies. Did you not like my reply Mr Kettle?
FYI - when someone says "no offense intended" they know damn well its offensive or they would not have to attempt to dilute the situation that is causing tension.
My best advice to you Papa, don't stick your nose in matters you seem to miss the point on. You know those smart ass guys that always reply with "go try google first", that is basically what you did with the whole "go check the website" reply. Am I upset? Hell no, this is the internet!
*Have a good day.
Still want to see the actual letter from the BATF on this one. Considering they considered the "mounts" debacle of years past.....and why they can no longer be included with the sale package of a can...you can understand why some of us are skeptical on this.
I just got off the phone with Johnny.
He answered all my posted questions plus some with legitimate answers. He also seemed like a very straight up guy. Knowing his background now, (We have crossed paths a few times unknowingly i.e. Range 37) forces me to believe he knows what he is talking about. I will be demoing the can next month. There, my foot is out of my mouth for now. Once he explained the design to me, it makes sense. Im looking forward to shooting one and getting some hands on experience.
He answered all my posted questions plus some with legitimate answers. He also seemed like a very straight up guy. Knowing his background now, (We have crossed paths a few times unknowingly i.e. Range 37) forces me to believe he knows what he is talking about. I will be demoing the can next month. There, my foot is out of my mouth for now. Once he explained the design to me, it makes sense. Im looking forward to shooting one and getting some hands on experience.
Easy there killer. I don't know who pissed in your wheaties today but you need to check your azimuth as you are way off course. I wasn't offended by anything you said, on the contrary, it appears I offended you inadvertently by asking you a question and I was attempting to clarify that it was not my intent to offend. I pointed you to the website as it is from the horses mouth and can better explain the product than I could or care to type out here. It had nothing to do with my not knowing about the product or not being able to answer the question, it was about pointing you to a credible resource and not relying on the internet speculation that was being spread in the beginning posts of this thread.
Let me make something crystal clear, I don't sugar coat things so if I was trying to offend you , I wouldn't beat around the bush, I would say it in a manner which would leave no doubt in your mind what I thought. However, that wasn't my intent and I was just trying to make that clear and I hoped the smiley face
would have clued you in. You have a nice day too
and I really mean that, in the friendliest way possible.
Sounds good. I have a range to use or if you want to make it open to public we can source a public range. Thanks.
KYS,
Its really whatever you want to do, I can demo for you or for a large group. Either will work.
Johnny
Its really whatever you want to do, I can demo for you or for a large group. Either will work.
Johnny
And how about the Colorado Springs/Fort Carson? Seems like someone from Utah could drive up over the mountains on any given weekend - give a few weeks advance notice - I can send a message out to some folks in 10th Group they might like to drop in.
Damn Johnny come to Madison WI area and do a demo! I would love to see one!!! I took a Travis Haley class in May and he highly recommends your stuff. I would really like to see what it can do for an AR...also looking for a dedicated 300 blk can for an 8.2" noveske that can be a back up to a 308 bolt gun.
I just had a Demo with Johnny the OSS Suppressor system and I think there is a lot of misunderstanding here because conventional terminology does not fit this suppressor.
I went soup to nuts with him on the system, including viewing the internals, the cut away view, etc.
Once you have it in your hand, it's easy to see how the "wrapper" is the only controlled part of the system and why it was Okayed by the ATF. It does not block the gases but re-routes them, so the other parts are not baffles. In fact the tradition use of the word Baffles does not apply. That part is moving the gasses along the wrapper, and the internals are not working in the same sense of the baffles on other suppressors. Once you see it, the how each part creates a series of linear compartments. The flash hider part is very effective and once you assemble it to a complete system it's really quiet and really controllable. They demo'd the unit in multiple configurations and each one has a different signature and different effect.
There were on stock 14" BCM AR15s and the OSS system only added a few short inches to the overall length. The bulk of it goes back over the barrel, and then threads on forward so really there is a only a few inches in what would be the blast chamber. I did see the cut out model, which admittedly is 4 years old. That cut out makes the system look ugly as it was hand assembled. The new system, and for the last two years according to Johnny (and you can see this) the system is machined, clean and neat. It's a slick tight unit. So that throw together look that Adam is talking about has nothing to do with what the actual system looks like.
You can easily change caliber, replace the flash hide part and swap things out relatively quickly and very cheap. Replace part is about $50 and the caliber swap part is $250 so the same "wrapper" can be made to work with other systems for $250 a piece after you get the initial set up.
In terms of blowback, there is none, you can smell it, but you can't feel it at all. Zero back pressure. There was no aftermarket charging handle, no gas blocker, just a stock upper and the system did not screw with the function or blow anything back into your face at all.
Really it's in the wording and I think some new terms have to be used when talking about the OSS. The demo was straight up, start to finish, the system was peeled back and explained piece by piece and when you see it, you immediately get it, and why it works the way it does, why the ATF classified it the way they did, and how you can move from minimum to maximum.
There is gonna be a Night Demo with it, so we can see the flash hiding capabilities, but looking it, I have no doubt it will work as advertised.
I went soup to nuts with him on the system, including viewing the internals, the cut away view, etc.
Once you have it in your hand, it's easy to see how the "wrapper" is the only controlled part of the system and why it was Okayed by the ATF. It does not block the gases but re-routes them, so the other parts are not baffles. In fact the tradition use of the word Baffles does not apply. That part is moving the gasses along the wrapper, and the internals are not working in the same sense of the baffles on other suppressors. Once you see it, the how each part creates a series of linear compartments. The flash hider part is very effective and once you assemble it to a complete system it's really quiet and really controllable. They demo'd the unit in multiple configurations and each one has a different signature and different effect.
There were on stock 14" BCM AR15s and the OSS system only added a few short inches to the overall length. The bulk of it goes back over the barrel, and then threads on forward so really there is a only a few inches in what would be the blast chamber. I did see the cut out model, which admittedly is 4 years old. That cut out makes the system look ugly as it was hand assembled. The new system, and for the last two years according to Johnny (and you can see this) the system is machined, clean and neat. It's a slick tight unit. So that throw together look that Adam is talking about has nothing to do with what the actual system looks like.
You can easily change caliber, replace the flash hide part and swap things out relatively quickly and very cheap. Replace part is about $50 and the caliber swap part is $250 so the same "wrapper" can be made to work with other systems for $250 a piece after you get the initial set up.
In terms of blowback, there is none, you can smell it, but you can't feel it at all. Zero back pressure. There was no aftermarket charging handle, no gas blocker, just a stock upper and the system did not screw with the function or blow anything back into your face at all.
Really it's in the wording and I think some new terms have to be used when talking about the OSS. The demo was straight up, start to finish, the system was peeled back and explained piece by piece and when you see it, you immediately get it, and why it works the way it does, why the ATF classified it the way they did, and how you can move from minimum to maximum.
There is gonna be a Night Demo with it, so we can see the flash hiding capabilities, but looking it, I have no doubt it will work as advertised.
at the very least they look cool as hell! i would like to see a demo if/when you head to Atlanta. step on AACs toes a bit!
Im still waiting on the demo to come around. Like I said earlier, I saw their first Gen of suppressors that was going to an ATF sniper unit. Was not impressed with the craftsmanship or machining.
But I'm sure Johnny can come along and change that view.
But I'm sure Johnny can come along and change that view.
I attended a demo for these cans this morning. I shot beyond the normal demo ammo, using my own, after about ten other people warmed them up a bit. Im not a suppressor guru, but I know enough that I was very impressed. When they claim zero blowback, they back it up with reality. Myself and a friend put it side by side an M42k and both agreed that it was at least as quiet, though it was just personal perception, not on a meter.
Johnny's claim of no direct mirage is also accurate. I was highly impressed, and while that wont matter to many, especially since most here don't know me from adam, it's stillmy opinion after shooting his products.
Johnny's claim of no direct mirage is also accurate. I was highly impressed, and while that wont matter to many, especially since most here don't know me from adam, it's stillmy opinion after shooting his products.
