Supressor Recommendations

T

THCJOHN

Private
Minuteman
Jun 11, 2019
5
1
#1
I'm purchasing a suppressor to run on my newest "AR." Let's call it a JR because I made it, not Armalite. I want a 3D printed 718 inconel but would consider a 17-4 stainless if it checks all the other boxes.

I'm running a 13.7" Roscoe purebred .223 wylde mid length barrel with a 10" MCMR, Vltor MUR, Superlative piston kit, ADAC-15 lower, Wilson ETU 2 stage. I plan to get the faxon 11.5 mid length barrel and switch it back and forth periodically for different situations. What I care about most is flash suppression, then noise reduction, then maneuverability, and lastly weight. I don't really give an ish about backpressure(piston operated). But it must be 3D printed.

I'm seriously eyeing the SCI-SIX. But I wonder if since it's designed with low backpressure in mind if I'm sacrificing flash and noise reduction. Perhaps someone knows of a suppressor that was engineered without backpressure as a consideration? Or am I just tripping over semantics and will low backpressure not have much of an impact on flash suppression.

Thanks,
John.
 
#6
I believe you have a few options however 3d printing is kind of the new kid on the block and only a few manufactures have picked that up

-SiCo Velos - 3d printed Inconel/718, low back pressure, decent flash suppression and overall a good middle of the road choice but you're tied to their mounting system
-LPM Torch - 17-4 welded, one of the best "tones" you'll find behind the Cat WB, low flash and decent noise deduction
-Cat WB 718 - 3d printed Inconel/718, low back pressure and probably the one with the least amount of flash, quietest of all with the best form factor but they don't make many and have to kind of be lucky to pick one up at the right time but worth it
-Otter Creek Polonium - 17-4 stainless welded, low flash, cheap, quiet at muzzle but one of the highest back pressure of all 556 cans

All of these will weigh just around that 16oz mark give or take
Flash greatly depends on ammo selection and can design over just "low back pressure"
The 17-4 cans listed are extremely durable so I'm not sure why you're 100% tied to 3d printed
 
#7
Been pretty impressed with the Griffin dual lok 5. Nice tone, no complaints with back pressure. Also take a look at the HRT version. The HRT is a little shorter than the dual lok 5 but is supposed to have even better flash suppression for slightly more sound.
 
#8
Rugged Radiant. Best of both worlds. It'll take hard use and is extremely light. Also noteworthy, Rugged customer service and quality are second to none.
 
#10
I know you asked for 3D printed (seems like an arbitrary objective), but I'm going to suggest something else in addition to all the other options that have been presented.

I would seriously consider Abels new .556 suppressor. From the pictures and videos that @hic28 shared with me a little while back, it looks like it suppresses flash very, very well.

 
Last edited:
#11
B&T SRBS, printed Inconel, no barrel or rate of fire restrictions, HUB, 'hybrid" design so low back pressure, but good sound suppression with a low "tone"- .
Silencer shop is paying your tax so effectively $750.


 
Last edited:
#12
higginsworksforme said:
I fondled someone's Rugged Alaskan and it felt about as heavy as a cigar.
Click to expand...

4ju6fj.jpg
 
#13
At 13.7 you don't need to worry about minimums but it depends on the muzzle device ecosystem you're invested in too. Bravo/HUB, ASR, Surefire, etc

Hard to beat the RC2 for flash suppression and "total signature reduction", it's heavy and bomb proof but not quiet because 556 isn't quiet.

I have an RC3 as well and the difference isn't perceptible to me, but it's a nicer shooting experience and gets your 3D printed criteria.

The SRBS from B&T is nice, a bit less weightier and has a Surefire collar but can be converted since it's HUB at the back end and at least in videos I've seen has less flash than the RC3.

If you want to be really goofy but have reduced back pressure and decent sound I wouldn't sleep on the Resilient Putnik, it's also HUB threaded and you can get a 1/2x28 JMAC with a HUB OD thread to run it on your AR and AKs. Has an axial vent and progressive core and I really like the sound of it, pretty unique
 
  • Like
Reactions: Camelfilter
#14
So many recommendations I have some research to do.

I actually bought the Surefire 4 prong after seeing almost everyone mention the RC2 or RC3. I guess I'm not really tied to a 3D printed can. If it does the job better and it's manufactured traditionally than I'm for it. The only real deal breaker is titanium.

I haven't bought the can yet, the RC2 is out of stock at Capital Armory right now. And the RC3 is too expensive to not come in FDE.
 
#15
THCJOHN said:
So many recommendations I have some research to do.

I actually bought the Surefire 4 prong after seeing almost everyone mention the RC2 or RC3. I guess I'm not really tied to a 3D printed can. If it does the job better and it's manufactured traditionally than I'm for it. The only real deal breaker is titanium.

I haven't bought the can yet, the RC2 is out of stock at Capital Armory right now. And the RC3 is too expensive to not come in FDE.
Click to expand...
If you can stomach dealing with a local SOT, Boss has RC2s on sale in stock https://bossfirearms.com/surefire-socom556-rc2-suppressor-5-56-de/

I believe that Capital Armory can facilitate someone transferring to them and then you would go through the normal purchase process with them, I asked them about 3 weeks ago, the dude sounded unsure so I'd call to make sure.
 
#16
Rc2 is old ass tech. Rc3 is way less backpressure but it's a pretty shitty can otherwise. Wanting a bunch of arbitrary specs is pointless... what you want is a tool that can handle what you throw at it.

A titanium dominus Sr is full auto rated and will be way lighter. 3d printing is cool tech but no real advantage other than ease/cheaper manufacturing.

If it's on an AR that is not a full auto dump gun...then why would you want 16+oz of shit hanging off the front? Sounds pretty retarded to me. I would prioritize weight, flow through and minimal poi shift.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NiteQwill
#17
RC2 might be "old ass tech" but it's still remarkably effective.

I do like the TBAC Dominus-SR and it remains my favorite do-everything can. On a budget, I like the Otter Creek Polonium. The CGS Helios QD is another interesting choice.

At this moment, the best can might be whatever you can get with a reasonable wait time. If a dealer places an order with TBAC right now, it's going to be sometime next spring before they have the can in hand. You can try to catch one at a distributor as they come in stock, but there's way more demand than supply at the moment so buyers shouldn't be too picky.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 912173, clcustom1911 and DeathBeforeDismount
#18
DeathBeforeDismount said:
Rc2 is old ass tech. Rc3 is way less backpressure but it's a pretty shitty can otherwise. Wanting a bunch of arbitrary specs is pointless... what you want is a tool that can handle what you throw at it.

A titanium dominus Sr is full auto rated and will be way lighter. 3d printing is cool tech but no real advantage other than ease/cheaper manufacturing.

If it's on an AR that is not a full auto dump gun...then why would you want 16+oz of shit hanging off the front? Sounds pretty retarded to me. I would prioritize weight, flow through and minimal poi shift.
Click to expand...


Lighter isn't a concern, the softness of titanium when it's really hot is. I refuse to buy a titanium supressor. Might as well buy a $60 solvent trap from China. Even with the extra weight up front it's still lighter than the 14.5" .308 JR I'm currently using for this role.

3D printing allows for more intricate baffle and gas passageway designs that are not possible through traditional manufacturing. However most all of these designs seem to be geared toward reducing backpressure for DI guns. My guns aren't DI so I don't really care too much about backpressure. And poi shift isn't too much of a concern because this can will live on this gun, optic gets zeroed with the can installed, done deal.
 
#19
THCJOHN said:
Lighter isn't a concern, the softness of titanium when it's really hot is. I refuse to buy a titanium supressor. Might as well buy a $60 solvent trap from China. Even with the extra weight up front it's still lighter than the 14.5" .308 JR I'm currently using for this role.

3D printing allows for more intricate baffle and gas passageway designs that are not possible through traditional manufacturing. However most all of these designs seem to be geared toward reducing backpressure for DI guns. My guns aren't DI so I don't really care too much about backpressure. And poi shift isn't too much of a concern because this can will live on this gun, optic gets zeroed with the can installed, done deal.
Click to expand...
That's a very ignorant take. You should really educate yourself on the durability of cans like Thunderbeast, Huxworx, KGM and other titanium cans. Unless you are doing mag dump after mag dump, they are just as durable and reliable as inconell or stainless.

You sound like a spec whore. Someone who reads a bunch of bullshit and makes purchase decisions based on analysis paralysis. Instead, you have people in the real world, who run these products (including on SBRs and high volume carbines) without issue. Unless you are doing cyclic drills or laying down suppressive fire with a MK48, I would bet money you cant even afford enough ammo to shoot it fast enough to destroy one of these.

You can still have intricate baffle and passageway design via 5/6 axis machining and EDM. 3D printing certainty makes it more economical but its not the end all be all.

Why do you need such a low flash can? Do you raid meth labs for a living?
 
#20
E. Bryant said:
RC2 might be "old ass tech" but it's still remarkably effective.

I do like the TBAC Dominus-SR and it remains my favorite do-everything can. On a budget, I like the Otter Creek Polonium. The CGS Helios QD is another interesting choice.

At this moment, the best can might be whatever you can get with a reasonable wait time. If a dealer places an order with TBAC right now, it's going to be sometime next spring before they have the can in hand. You can try to catch one at a distributor as they come in stock, but there's way more demand than supply at the moment so buyers shouldn't be too picky.
Click to expand...
No kidding. My Magnus RR just shipped like 2 day ago.... took 8 months to build.
 
  • Like
Reactions: E. Bryant
#21
DeathBeforeDismount said:
That's a very ignorant take. You should really educate yourself on the durability of cans like Thunderbeast, Huxworx, KGM and other titanium cans. Unless you are doing mag dump after mag dump, they are just as durable and reliable as inconell or stainless.

You sound like a spec whore. Someone who reads a bunch of bullshit and makes purchase decisions based on analysis paralysis. Instead, you have people in the real world, who run these products (including on SBRs and high volume carbines) without issue. Unless you are doing cyclic drills or laying down suppressive fire with a MK48, I would bet money you cant even afford enough ammo to shoot it fast enough to destroy one of these.

You can still have intricate baffle and passageway design via 5/6 axis machining and EDM. 3D printing certainty makes it more economical but its not the end all be all.

Why do you need such a low flash can? Do you raid meth labs for a living?
Click to expand...

Metallurgy is metallurgy. While a titanium can be extremely durable, it will never be as durable as a stainless steel can, and a stainless steel can will never be as durable as an inconell can. I understand that for most consumers there wouldn't be a noticeable difference. However, I am not most consumers.

You can call me a spec whore all you want, I have no problem with that. Specifications are the only relevant data that is offered by the manufacturers that design, build, and (hopefully) extensively test these products. This is the data that I will use until I can field the product myself and develop my own data or use other people's experiences that have used the products in the same manner I'm going to.

Most of the contracts I've been involved in lately are K&R recoveries. More often than not these guys(and girls) keep the hostage(s) in the same location as their drug packaging facility or counterfeiting operation or there's a meth lab adjacent to the hostage location. Sometimes there is a bonus to make sure they don't have the means to conduct any more K&R, usually insurance jobs, in these cases it is what we call a "target rich environment." Expenses(ie: ammo) is paid for by the client.

There's also the fact that I hold several different types of FFL and want to start manufacturing, dealing, and exporting firearms such as the one I'm looking for the suppressor for. I will be dumping mag after mag after mag to accelerate wear and assess failure points.

All this and I just don't want a Ti supressor. Is that really such a big deal?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: NiteQwill
#22
Take a look at the Radical Defense LS5 in Haynes 282 (nickel/cobalt super alloy, machine gun rated). VERY quiet, in fact, quieter than any can Thunderbeast tested at Silencer Summit. It's supposed to be low back pressure but it's not on par with say Huxwrx (first hand experience). They're supposed to be very, very good in flash mitigation as well although I've not seen an independent, at dark, test on that yet. There's a lot of wizardry going on internally and can even be had in a low IR signature coating or traditional cerakote. The LS version is not light but is on par with others made out of inconel/cobalt/stainless. www.rdusa.com

RD does quite a few dead serious cans for actual machine guns in different calibers. The LS series is available in the aforementioned Haynes as well as titanium and they do have a shorter version called the CS in both alloys. For flash mitigation, longer will be better, especially with a short barrel in 5.56.

Piston vs. DI means very little in terms of gas to the face. A high back pressure can will produce a ton of gas on a piston gun as most of the gas comes out the barrel during the cycling of the BCG. I own two piston guns and it is an issue. So my advice, go with a low back pressure design over a traditional baffle design. The RD has both.

I posted a link below of a few being tested at night, pretty much knew early on he was leaning towards the Cobalt but there's some tested that others mentioned above.

I own two RD's in 30 cal. Both are HUB but the interior diameter of the CS version is limiting in terms of what muzzle devices you can use due to diameter. They come with a very good flash hider muzzle device.

IMG_6195 2.jpg


 

Attachments

  • IMG_6195.jpg
    IMG_6195.jpg
    306.7 KB · Views: 11
#24
I actually tested that on Saturday but not on a 5.56 host. Tested with 300 blackout and subs and I could hear a slight sound increase with the CS can over the LS when pulling out my left side ear pro. With ear pro in, no difference to me. BUT...the range I was at reflects sound back due to the roof and slot you shoot through.

Each is different internally, with a mixture of what look to be "standard" baffles along with flow routes on the outer diameter of the can. The CS looks substantially different inside than the LS though so they take the length into account and the CS has a larger diameter. It's 18oz with the mount so not light. My LS is titanium.

The CS sounded good enough that I think it'll likely live on the 300 blackout rifle to keep it short even though I really bought it as a hard use can for either 308 or 5.56. Problem is, the interior diameter doesn't work with the Huxwrx muzzle device which is too large in diameter. They work with the LS but not the CS. I have a number of Huxwrx cans so that's sort of my go-to and my other HUB cans have been converted over with the Huxwrx HUB QD mount. So now I have to find a permanent host. Decisions.

The Thunderbeast Arms Silencer Summit data can be found here: https://thunderbeastarms.com/sound/summit2023/

For me, at ear is more important than muzzle but that may be different for you. The CS lost 6dB vs. the LS for SEdBA (shooter's ear). So the LS is a good bit quieter and again, beat out everything else whether it was standard baffle or low back pressure. With the LS on my 308 gas gun, I do get a whiff of gas every now and again. Vs. my Flow 762, I get none and the recoil is a bit less with the Flow. But from the TB SS data, the LS is quieter than the Flow.
 
#25
Also, the CS5 is a good bit quieter than something like the Dead Air Sierra5 which I also own and both are about the same length before a mount is added. I've had a few people comment on how good that can sounds (Sierra) and how quiet it is. The Flow 762, on a 5.56 12.5" host, is quieter than the Sierra5. It's plainly obvious if you're off to the side as a bystander. But it's titanium and won't last as a hard use can.

So even though the CS5 is short, it does very well and is right there with all the top cans within 1-2 dBA for shooter's ear. I have to believe the LS will have superior flash suppression though.
 
#27
I think so if you want to look at it through the quiet lens only. I did swap them out repeatedly as I was breaking in a new barrel and had to put some rounds down range. My 308 is a 16" rifle. I did not remove ear pro to test it out, LOL, just with the 300 blackout (9" barrel). Groups were pretty much the same all day with either but the best group came at the end of the day with a buffer weight swap of all things and the LS3 was on the rifle at the time.

I had an ear pro get a bit loose years back, same rifle, and the shot report was analogous to a cattle prod to the head for about five seconds. That was with muzzle brake but regardless, I wasn't going to risk it.

The CS3 (30 cal, CS5 is 5.56) absolutely takes the edge off the 308 and with ear pro, I really couldn't tell the difference between them, maybe a slight edge to the LS. The CS3 bore is smaller than the LS3 likely due to trying to keep back pressure the same. I did not have to make any changes between cans. If I'd brought along the Flow 762, I would have used about 3-4 clicks less gas on the Riflespeed gas block (adjusts 1-12, 1 being the least amount of gas), so about 1/4 less gas in that adjustment range (not in totality). Not a huge difference but a difference none-the-less.
 
#28
Surefire RC2 556 is the correct answer. Almost zero first round pop/flash, very quiet, and built like a brick shit house.

If anything goes wrong inside, you send it back, they re-core it, and you get it back to you directly.

3D print problem = whole new suppressor + wait time through FFL.
 
#29
clcustom1911 said:
3D print problem = whole new suppressor + wait time through FFL.
Click to expand...
Which is about two days, currently. Plus he's an FFL. Your suppressor suggestion isn't necessarily wrong though and the RC2 is absolutely proven and I'd consider it too, just think there are better options these days. Additive manufacturing is proven technology with obvious advantages. The RC3 is printed and the whole industry is headed that way as the possibilities for effective designs are endless vs. subtractive machining. Also, depending on the damage and where it is, there are additive cans that can be fixed by the manufacturer.
 
#30
THCJOHN said:
However, I am not most consumers.
Click to expand...

If your very-special usage schedule somehow exceeds that of TBAC's testing to the SURG standard:



... then I'll accept that maybe you need some sort of fancy material. Until then, stop acting like a princess.

There's more to designing a product than just the raw material characteristics. Ti doesn't turn to melted butter at whatever temperature has been mentions in owner's manuals and AR15.com posts in the past; Inconel isn't the end-all-be-all. It's both material and geometry that matter. If you've got the same hard-on for Inconel cans that I have for carbon-fiber bike parts, fine; that's why we get to make our own purchase decisions.
 
#31
E. Bryant said:
If your very-special usage schedule somehow exceeds that of TBAC's testing to the SURG standard:



... then I'll accept that maybe you need some sort of fancy material. Until then, stop acting like a princess.

There's more to designing a product than just the raw material characteristics. Ti doesn't turn to melted butter at whatever temperature has been mentions in owner's manuals and AR15.com posts in the past; Inconel isn't the end-all-be-all. It's both material and geometry that matter. If you've got the same hard-on for Inconel cans that I have for carbon-fiber bike parts, fine; that's why we get to make our own purchase decisions.
Click to expand...

You didnt read his post? He is a contract killer taking down cartels in drug labs. Probally some combination of John Creasy and Terry Thorne

Hey @NiteQwill , we found your real life action Hero.

1722970775448.jpeg


1722970558229.jpeg
 
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: FuhQ, E. Bryant and NiteQwill
#32
THCJOHN said:
I'm purchasing a suppressor to run on my newest "AR." Let's call it a JR because I made it, not Armalite. I want a 3D printed 718 inconel but would consider a 17-4 stainless if it checks all the other boxes.

I'm running a 13.7" Roscoe purebred .223 wylde mid length barrel with a 10" MCMR, Vltor MUR, Superlative piston kit, ADAC-15 lower, Wilson ETU 2 stage. I plan to get the faxon 11.5 mid length barrel and switch it back and forth periodically for different situations. What I care about most is flash suppression, then noise reduction, then maneuverability, and lastly weight. I don't really give an ish about backpressure(piston operated). But it must be 3D printed.

I'm seriously eyeing the SCI-SIX. But I wonder if since it's designed with low backpressure in mind if I'm sacrificing flash and noise reduction. Perhaps someone knows of a suppressor that was engineered without backpressure as a consideration? Or am I just tripping over semantics and will low backpressure not have much of an impact on flash suppression.

Thanks,
John.
Click to expand...

CAT WB 718
 
#33
1000035538.jpg


CGS SCI SIX 1x16lh, CAT ALLEYCAT Ti 556 1x16lh, CAT WB 718 inconel 1x16lh, OCL Polonium K

WB has similar muzzle performance as the SCI SIX but with lower backpressure and better at ear performance.


I would not describe the SCI SIX as low backpressure. It's lower than an RC2 and some other options but it's not "low" imo.

The CAT Alleycat 718 might be a better fit for you actually. A bit longer but better performance.
 
#36
THCJOHN said:
Metallurgy is metallurgy. While a titanium can be extremely durable, it will never be as durable as a stainless steel can, and a stainless steel can will never be as durable as an inconell can. I understand that for most consumers there wouldn't be a noticeable difference. However, I am not most consumers.

You can call me a spec whore all you want, I have no problem with that. Specifications are the only relevant data that is offered by the manufacturers that design, build, and (hopefully) extensively test these products. This is the data that I will use until I can field the product myself and develop my own data or use other people's experiences that have used the products in the same manner I'm going to.

Most of the contracts I've been involved in lately are K&R recoveries. More often than not these guys(and girls) keep the hostage(s) in the same location as their drug packaging facility or counterfeiting operation or there's a meth lab adjacent to the hostage location. Sometimes there is a bonus to make sure they don't have the means to conduct any more K&R, usually insurance jobs, in these cases it is what we call a "target rich environment." Expenses(ie: ammo) is paid for by the client.

There's also the fact that I hold several different types of FFL and want to start manufacturing, dealing, and exporting firearms such as the one I'm looking for the suppressor for. I will be dumping mag after mag after mag to accelerate wear and assess failure points.

All this and I just don't want a Ti supressor. Is that really such a big deal?
Click to expand...
How much do you bench?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: FuhQ
#37
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: DeathBeforeDismount, earthtrekker1775 and FuhQ
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GRIFFIN_ARMAMENT
Suppressors Introducing the Recce 5K™ Suppressor From GRIFFIN ARMAMENT
Replies
9
Views
2K
thedude824
T
C
12.5” Build recommendations.
Replies
3
Views
513
MSTN
MSTN
carbonbased
Broken-down man wants gas+dB AR suppressor advice
Replies
41
Views
1K
Inline6
I
GRIFFIN_ARMAMENT
Suppressors Introducing The NEW DUAL-LOK™ HRT-762™ Suppressor From GRIFFIN ARMAMENT
Replies
0
Views
682
GRIFFIN_ARMAMENT
GRIFFIN_ARMAMENT
A
Suppressors Radical Defense LS3 Ti in the house
Replies
24
Views
1K
Dave
Dave
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts