Suppressors QD vs Thread On

Individual1

i1
Full Member
Minuteman
Sep 29, 2012
104
19
Panama City, FL
Buddy of mine.. Who isn't an expert, but maybe he knows something.. Says that the quick detach supressors wear out after a while, get baffle strikes, resulting in having to have the supressor rebuilt? Can anyone elaborate or confirm this? I just got a new 5.56 rifle that already has a AAC 51T on it, and was thinking about getting the AAC N6 since I might get a 308 down the road. Thx!
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

I'd do a thread on can. There is nothing wrong with a QD can. Except one thing, you have to buy multiple thread on breaks for each rifle to attach the can to the rifle. @ $100 a pop. Much simpler with a thread on.

xdeano
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

Even IF the QD adaptor wore down faster than the threads on the BBL itself, you can replace the adaptor - but you have to cut/retread the BBL.

I'll never go back to threadon, my Thundertrap is great but it doesnt seem to go back to zero like my QD cans. Look at a mount like the surefire, it's not going to wear out and POI is excellent and you get a great brake when it's not on.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

Short of building a gun for extreme precision with a titanium can, I'd go with that N6. Super versatile (looks like you're looking for that), and I like having some kind of muzzle device even if the suppressor isn't in use. I still usually shoot my 5.56 AR unsurpressed.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

Everyone has a opinion, some like the QD, some like thread on. I like thread on myself, simple and easy. I use mine on a couple different host and never had a problem taking it off and on with little to no POI shift.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MattDamnit</div><div class="ubbcode-body">QD or bust </div></div>

Care to elaborate on why you think that?
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

I like thread on cans for firearms that I rarely shoot without suppressing. I have a QD can for all of my semi auto rifles however as I can use the one SDN-6 on my M1A my 300blk, 6.5 grendel, 5.56, and my 223 varmint barreled upper. Technically only 2 rifles but I do love the AR platform. I have one thread on rimfire can that I do not like due to cleaning issues so I am working on getting another thread on rimfire can and will use the old can on the rimfire I shoot the least.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

If I were going for accuracy, the only QD cans I'd look at would be TBAC or Surefire. Those guys have their QD systems right..
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KrazyL</div><div class="ubbcode-body">QD if it will be used on more than one rifle, thread on if you want true accuracy and lighter weight. </div></div>

What? Why? The only reason I can think of for using a brake/QD "adapter" system is if the applications have different thread patterns. The brake is an adapter not a QD mount. AAC does make a true QD system but it bears no use to the civilian market.

OP, if your barrels are the same thread pattern a brake is of no use to you unless you intend to shoot your rifles without the can.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: insectguy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was going to go with a 30P-1, but I have two rifles: a Sako TRG 22 (M18-1 threads), and a Remington 40XC (5/8x24 threads). The better option for me was the 30BA. </div></div>

that is where I am at. Multiple rifles with different pitches. Get one can and multiple Brake attachments. Seems like the best of both worlds.

30BA seems like the best option out there. Plus a local company
grin.gif
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

QDs and thread-on suppressors both need torquing when attaching but you can attach a suppressor to its QD without torquing. Switching a QD suppressor between weapons does not require any tools (but welder's gloves can come in handy).

Compared to the threads on a thread-on suppressor, the OD threads on the QD and the mirroring ID threads on the suppressor are very coarse/robust, meaning it's less fussy about getting started, virtually impossible to cross-thread, and easy to mount on the first try, even if you're in a rush.

In theory, A QD could negatively affect repeatability if it doesn't remount the suppressor to precisely the same location each time because even tiny changes in the suppressor's position will change the bending moment its weight applies to the barrel. However, I've done round-robin test firing of my FN PBR with and without a QD-mounted suppressor and it consistently shoots to the same POI, even after multiple removals/remounts. So if this positioning problem does affect some QD-mounted suppressors, it isn't a universal problem.

QDs aren't free. You don't have to have one for every rifle you want to run the suppressor on, but it definitely makes it handier. However, when you remove the thread-on supressor from the weapon, the threads on the barrel are exposed and vulnerable. When you remove a QD suppressor, the QD remains on the rifle, doubling as a thread protector and a flash hider/muzzle brake. Thread protectors aren't free either.

If you get a right-hand thread-on suppressor, you can't use it on AKs because their muzzle threading is left-handed. QDs are available in either RH or LH threads, so the same QD suppressor can be used on both ARs and AKs.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sendero_man</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: insectguy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was going to go with a 30P-1, but I have two rifles: a Sako TRG 22 (M18-1 threads), and a Remington 40XC (5/8x24 threads). The better option for me was the 30BA. </div></div>

that is where I am at. Multiple rifles with different pitches. Get one can and multiple Brake attachments. Seems like the best of both worlds.

30BA seems like the best option out there. Plus a local company
grin.gif
</div></div>
I ordered the same thing for the same reasons......
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fred_C_Dobbs</div><div class="ubbcode-body">QDs and thread-on suppressors both need torquing when attaching but you can attach a suppressor to its QD without torquing. </div></div>

I'd like to know how you torque a "thread-on suppressor" and at what ft-lbs are you torquing to?

Hand tight is plenty.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: insectguy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I was going to go with a 30P-1, but I have two rifles: a Sako TRG 22 (M18-1 threads), and a Remington 40XC (5/8x24 threads). The better option for me was the 30BA. </div></div>

I did this also, so I can spin it on my 5.56 rifles also.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

How much value do you guys put on the ability of a brake-attached suppressor's brake to absorb the brunt of the blast vs the blast baffle of a thread on suppressor?

I know it could take a lot of shots to wear down this blast baffle, but a suppressor is an expensive and annoying to obtain product. A brake that gets worn down is easier and cheaper to replace.

If a brake added significant life to a suppressor I would be inclined to lean heavily towards that method for that reason alone. What say those with experience?
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Drew H</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How much value do you guys put on the ability of a brake-attached suppressor's brake to absorb the brunt of the blast vs the blast baffle of a thread on suppressor?

I know it could take a lot of shots to wear down this blast baffle, but a suppressor is an expensive and annoying to obtain product. A brake that gets worn down is easier and cheaper to replace.

If a brake added significant life to a suppressor I would be inclined to lean heavily towards that method for that reason alone. What say those with experience? </div></div>

It would depend more on barrel length. A 10 inch barrel is going to kill stuff much quicker than a 24.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

I hate brakes are horrible to shoot next to! If you plan on running the can on a short barreled rifle they do give you a little piece of mind knowing your not blazing through your blast baffel.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dirtyname</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Fred_C_Dobbs</div><div class="ubbcode-body">QDs and thread-on suppressors both need torquing when attaching but you can attach a suppressor to its QD without torquing. </div></div>

I'd like to know how you torque a "thread-on suppressor" and at what ft-lbs are you torquing to?

Hand tight is plenty. </div></div>
Agreed.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

I prefer screw on cans. My only experience with a qd was with an older model Gem-Tech, and gas would leak around the attachment point and get channeled right back in your face. It was not pleasant.
 
Re: QD vs Thread On

I see no other option for myself other than QD. I don't want to be fiddling with thread protectors and what not when going between multiple rifles. If I was buying a can for a particular bolt gun/precision rifle that wasn't going to be removed often, I'd go with a thread on can.

However, I can't really recommend the AAC 51t mounts for their accuracy, especially the MITER mount. When attached, mine increased my group size by a factor of 10, and AAC told me that wasn't out of the ordinary.