Anyone have any experience with the rimfire flow through suppressors? Any benefits over a standard suppressor? Looking at them for AR15 22 rifles.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rimfire Flow through suppessor
- Thread starter 2brothers641
- Start date
My question is why? There isn't that much volume in a 22lr. Rimfire cans are quiet and work great. Personally have a TBAC 22 td.
Look through the silencer summit and you will see numbers to compare the ones that were there.
Look through the silencer summit and you will see numbers to compare the ones that were there.
I dont think there is enough gas volume plus most rimfire systems are blowback, not DI gas operated.
My TBAC22 got out of jail last week and I dont think I could be happier with a can.
My TBAC22 got out of jail last week and I dont think I could be happier with a can.
I have a Huxwrx RAD 22, I wanted a few more 22 cans when wait times disappeared and that was all Mile High had. I wasn't dying to have one for any of it's features, it's just what was sitting there and it was cheap so I gave it a go.
Really happy with it, it's quiet, has less first round pop than my Sparrow, and seems to stay much cleaner in a given firing cycle between a Tacsol 10-22, Tikka T1X, and a Volquartsen pistol. I cannot explain this because the vents aren't dirty at the front so it isn't like the fouling is flying out of it, but I'm not looking a gift horse in the mouth. I'd buy another one, but there are a million 22 cans out there that are good.
I still shoot one of the original TBAC 22 cans that you can't even disassemble and I love it too. I can't say there are distinct advantages to the Huxwrx but it seems to be as good as most of the other decent cans.
Really happy with it, it's quiet, has less first round pop than my Sparrow, and seems to stay much cleaner in a given firing cycle between a Tacsol 10-22, Tikka T1X, and a Volquartsen pistol. I cannot explain this because the vents aren't dirty at the front so it isn't like the fouling is flying out of it, but I'm not looking a gift horse in the mouth. I'd buy another one, but there are a million 22 cans out there that are good.
I still shoot one of the original TBAC 22 cans that you can't even disassemble and I love it too. I can't say there are distinct advantages to the Huxwrx but it seems to be as good as most of the other decent cans.
Thanks for the replies. I stumbled across Huxwrx which is what originally peaked my interest but couldn't figure out an actual benefit over the TBAC or DA Mask.
You better buy a can that you can completely disassemble if you’re using it for rimfire. If you shoot any sort of volume it’ll fill up pretty quick.
This. A flow through rimfire can is a HUGE risk. That thing will be plugged up so damn fast and be virtually impossible to clean.
Out of the five rimfire cans I have, the Rad22 is the least accurate on most any platform host. Semi rifle, bolt rifle, semi pistol all fared better accuracy wise with any other rimfire can I had (TBAC, DA Mask, SiCo Spectre 2, AAC Halcyon). I did notice that semi auto hosts stayed a little cleaner with the flow through design of the Rad22. As with most rimfire cans there was not much difference in sound performance vs. other rimfire cans i.e. it sounded just as good as anything else I have.
Blowback systems are potentially even more susceptible to excessive backpressure. This is particularly true when we start using rimfire cans with rounds that have more ass than 22LR (note that most of these are rated for use with "magnum" rounds and 5.7x28).
I picked up the HUXWRX FLOW 22 Ti a couple months ago. Haven't formally tested it yet, but it sounds good to my ears on a 22LR pistol. Can't say that I'm as pleased yet with it on the .22 WMR Walther; gonna drop a red dot on the slide and see if the extra mass helps.
Such a dumb idea that the highest-ranked can in Pew Science's 22LR testing is... wait for it... a flow-through. The CAT/SR/A1 performed substantially better at both the muzzle and ear than other traditional silencers on both semi-auto and bolt applications.
I'm not rushing out to replace my TBAC 22 Take-Downs and Rugged Oculus... uh, Oculuses? Oculi? ... anyways, those cans aren't getting replaced. But to suggest that nothing better is possible is kinda ignorant. So pretty much on-par for the silencer world.
Last edited:
It’s called a joke man… It’s because the .22LR has so little powder it’s pointless to even worry about flow-through tech on it.
So, it appears like this thing isn’t user-serviceable in the traditional sense. Right?
If it's pointless then how come it works so well, particularly on blowback semi-autos which constitute the majority of rimfire use?
The FLOW Ti is not, but the RAD is.
I'm curious to see if they foul as badly as the typical rimfire can. The host's action certainly stays cleaner.
Yeah, since the total amount of crud stays the same, does it then exit the front or get lodged in the can?
For 22LR only, my quibble is that for rifles just a half Oculus is perfect. Have one on a 10/22 with a 16”-ish barrel and love the shortness.
Obviously for a pistol one would want the full-length can, as the shorter the barrel the louder the blam.
What a line of poetry lol
Maybe in the future Hux will release a modular 22 can or just a wee version.
Hopefully the most of the crud exits the distal end of the can.
Shooting the FLOW Ti under NODS was pretty instructive. There's a lot of burnination occurring outside the can.
Agreed with your comments on the modular Oculus. The short config is tolerable on a 22LR pistol for a few rounds so it's a nice setup for pest control, but not the ideal for a range day. The shorter can on a 16" 22LR rifle is money. I've also been running the short config on a 16" 22WMR bolt gun for woodchucks, and that's completely adequate for the purpose.
I did not notice a falloff in accuracy with the RAD22 and Norma TAC22 or SK Match with the old sealed TBAC, Sparrow or Mask. What kind of ammo were you using?
Good information so far. So if I understand correct, if you have never used one then they are stupid and don't work. If you have then they seem to work well at suppression and possibly keep the action cleaner.
You forgot the fact that the baffle design makes it a complete pain in the ass to try to clean all the lead and carbon residue off.
I don't really shoot much suppressed .22 (essentially none), but I have to say that at first I too was skeptical of the benefits of a flow through suppressor on a .22. Can't say I ever even really considered a flow through for .22 stuff. I do have a .22 ar15 upper that does eventually need a dedicated .22 can though.
@E. Bryant you are making me consider suppressors I never considered before for this application.
@E. Bryant you are making me consider suppressors I never considered before for this application.
Lots of big talk for someone who hasn't used one.
Looks almost new after almost 1000 rounds:
Action looks pretty clean, too:
See that bit of carbon on the interior of the slide, right where the case mouth would be? That's less build-up than I'd see with 100 rounds from a normal can.
I’ll contribute when and where I want.
That’s what a forum is for…Questions, answers, and opinions…Not just the ones we like. You sound like a Democrat.I’ll contribute when and where I want.
If you want to weigh in on matters in which you don't have the relevant experience and knowledge, that is your privilege. In fact, the forum is way more entertaining when you do.
And the fact you claim that was 1000 rounds of rimfire ammo through that suppressor is also entertaining.
So feel free to post your experience with this suppressor that contradicts my claims. I'm confident you've never so much as laid a finger on one of these.
I don’t have that particular suppressor, but I’ve seen a lot of them, and own several, and I know how nasty .22LR ammo is, and I’ve never seen a single rimfire can be remotely near HALF that clean with 1,000 rounds on it. Most centerfire cans aren’t even that clean after 1000 rounds of supersonic ammo.
It's almost as if giving unburnt powder the ability to leave the suppressor (or "flow through", if you will) is a good thing, especially with "dirty" cartridges like .22lr...
That can looks really really clean.
Great. Another suppressor added to the potential list lol
Speaking of flow-through cans, someday I will get my RC3 out of jail and I can see how it works with CF. SOMEDAY.
That’ll teach me to apply before applications got all sped up haha. I heard that the speed-up does not apply to older applications
Now the question really becomes: Can we get that unburnt powder to symbiotically work with a tuner? Can? We?
Last edited:
Another brick down. Haters gonna say it's fake.
The slide isn't locking back every few magazines, so it may be time to clean & lube the TX22 for its first time ever.
The slide isn't locking back every few magazines, so it may be time to clean & lube the TX22 for its first time ever.
Been very happy with the Hux flow22 ti on a couple of my 22s. Can’t say I’ve seen a shift in poi with the flow. I use a da mask on the Vudoo. Yes shifted the JPRFX scope back to a spear and got a black one from EuroOptic.
Completely possible. I will suggest looking at not just the surface accumulation (or apparent lack thereof) but also the peripheral vents. Those are small features that would presumably be easy to clog.
Several types of ammo were being tested for accuracy as well as which can worked the best accuracy wise on a specific host. Some of my host guns showed preference to a specific can/ammo combination. During this testing I noticed that the Rad22 seemed to be the least accurate/consistent with any host/ammo combination I had.
I picked up a Flow 22Ti for use on a 10/22 and a few Mark pistols. I didn't decide to get one until I tried out the Bore Tech suppressor cleaning kit and Breakthrough suppressor cleaner on my other 22 cans.....both of which work very well. I am rarely disassembling my other 22 cans now with these cleaners. and find them clean when I do. They work very well. At worst I figure I can drop the whole can in the "dip" if needed but I have found it's not necessary with those cleaning systems. I wanted it for less crud in the guns and have found that the Marks and the 10/22 run reliably and cleaner much longer with the Flow Ti. Performance wise it sounds very good.
Anyone else with real world experience? I started this thread out of curiosity but after reading some of these posts, I may actually roll the dice on one.
I've been waiting on 3 since September 9, so the timing is not it. Some get them quickly, but others not.
Well there is a word I have never heard before.
Trogdor the Burninator. At least watch it from 2:30 to the end.
Early internet video stuff.
Holy throwback batman.
I can still see my 6th grade librarian scowling at us for laughing our butts off when we were supposed to be using Mavis beacon .
Side note- I think back pressure really matters on a rimfire. I had one cheap rifle, a savage, that wouldn't run with a can. The back pressure would expand the case to where it was too tight in the chamber for the extractor to pull it out. Worked fine with my obsidian 9 (35 bore no back pressure). My oculus 22 would malfunction about 50% of the time.
On my Tikka 22lr, the oculus will get the action so filthy it's difficult to shove a round in after a box or two. With the 9, most the crap goes down the barrel and it takes 5-10x as much ammo to gum it up.
I mostly just use my obsidian 9 on my bolt 22 now since it stays clean and the size and weight mimics my 223 and 6.5 tikkas. Makes it feel like a big boy rifle. It's serviceable so there's really no downside.
I can still see my 6th grade librarian scowling at us for laughing our butts off when we were supposed to be using Mavis beacon .
Side note- I think back pressure really matters on a rimfire. I had one cheap rifle, a savage, that wouldn't run with a can. The back pressure would expand the case to where it was too tight in the chamber for the extractor to pull it out. Worked fine with my obsidian 9 (35 bore no back pressure). My oculus 22 would malfunction about 50% of the time.
On my Tikka 22lr, the oculus will get the action so filthy it's difficult to shove a round in after a box or two. With the 9, most the crap goes down the barrel and it takes 5-10x as much ammo to gum it up.
I mostly just use my obsidian 9 on my bolt 22 now since it stays clean and the size and weight mimics my 223 and 6.5 tikkas. Makes it feel like a big boy rifle. It's serviceable so there's really no downside.
HAHA!!
Yeah, I was "what in tarnation is burnination?"
I had to look it up.
I once had a 30 carbine AMT....it was like a Sgt. Rock cartoon in low light, there was so much burnination going on.
Has anyone done an analysis of what's in the Huxwurx's "suppressor sauce?"
I'm a big fan of Huxwurx center fire suppressors and my AR-15s wear nothing else. However, I'm skeptical of buying a .22LR can that I cannot dismantle and service.
Even more of a concern is that I have to purchase their proprietary "suppressor sauce." If I knew that I could make my own cleaning solution without being tethered to them for their sauce, then I might buy one.
I read, on another forum, that in the absence of the "suppressor sauce," Huxwurx says to soak the can in CLP for 24 hours.
Again, call me skeptical.
I'm a big fan of Huxwurx center fire suppressors and my AR-15s wear nothing else. However, I'm skeptical of buying a .22LR can that I cannot dismantle and service.
Even more of a concern is that I have to purchase their proprietary "suppressor sauce." If I knew that I could make my own cleaning solution without being tethered to them for their sauce, then I might buy one.
I read, on another forum, that in the absence of the "suppressor sauce," Huxwurx says to soak the can in CLP for 24 hours.
Again, call me skeptical.
CLP isn’t going to touch hardened lead deposits. CLR will do just enough that you can pry them loose with a wooden/bamboo skewer and some effort.
All of my rimfire suppressors are made by SIG. I gave the baffles the silicone oil treatment which, IMHO, works.
Regardless, I suppose I am different from most rimfire suppressor owners in that I leave my suppressors wet with a lot of CLP after cleaning.
The undesirable side effect is a lot of smoke for the first ten rounds. After that it's not bad. The abundance of CLP in the can leaves the fouling soft.
So my cleanup consist of donning on the rubber gloves cause the fouling really turns the hands black. Then I use paper towels and q-tips to wipe away everything.
Then a lot of CLP is applied for the next time that I shoot.
A lot of people may disagree with using too much oil but it's really shortened the time and effort on the cleanup sessions.
In the first four minutes he doesn't tell us anything that most of us already know. Skip ahead to about 4:00 for an explanation of the silicone oil treatment.
