Are these SLS, or something else? The striations are interesting and look like it's built lengthwise in layers, which smells like an SLS or similar process. I'm curious how they've worked around the durability issues with layered building like this. The fact they've arranged the layers lengthwise to avoid maximum stress on joints is smart.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Suppressors Thermal Defense Solutions 3D printed suppressors
- Thread starter MPDS13
- Start date
I believe this is the parent company--if you're in the industry, maybe you'll recognize the machines they're using:
https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=889668894705823&id=628147574191291&__tn__=-R
https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=889668894705823&id=628147574191291&__tn__=-R
Interesting, I've not run into any SLM parts personally, I just would have assumed it wouldn't have the layer marks as the material is actually melted together. Learn something new every day! Makes sense they'd need to use SLM or something like it with the pressures and temps involved. Thanks for the tip.
The most heat-resistant resins can handle 200-300c. 22lr might be ok (I'd have to see the design and associated FEA for pressure and thermal considerations) with a low ROF, but that's not going to handle a centerfire rifle well.
I have paperwork filed for a Bantam and i'm considering a 30 cal can threaded 14X1 for an AK. Anybody here have any experience with them?
I've shot the Badger II 7.62 on a 10.5" .300 Blackout with subsonic loads.
Light in weight. No first round pop. 128 dB one meter to the left, on a super hot, high DA day. Not nearly so much back pressure as the SF 300 SPS. Nice "tone", at least to my ears.
Can't say how it would behave on a 7.62x39.
Light in weight. No first round pop. 128 dB one meter to the left, on a super hot, high DA day. Not nearly so much back pressure as the SF 300 SPS. Nice "tone", at least to my ears.
Can't say how it would behave on a 7.62x39.
They make a 14x1LH version for the AK. I would imagine the decrease in back pressure may help the AK be less gassy but I have not seen any first hand reviews.
With what meter?
What's the patent number that TDS/ORNL keeps referencing? I'm not sure what they're claiming is patented or licensed since everything shown in the cutaways that were previously posted in this thread is from patents between 1909 and 1930.
The meter is not mine and I can’t address its current state of calibration.
I’m using the Bantam II on 5.56mm uppers with barrels 12.5”, 14.5”, and 16”, plus a 20” .224V. Quiet enough for me. Less back pressure than other designs. And way, way smaller & lighter. Great accuracy. Sound meter readings are down my list of priorities.
I’m using the Bantam II on 5.56mm uppers with barrels 12.5”, 14.5”, and 16”, plus a 20” .224V. Quiet enough for me. Less back pressure than other designs. And way, way smaller & lighter. Great accuracy. Sound meter readings are down my list of priorities.
I think looking at where these cans meter compared to other cans removes some important contextual information. If you consider the ratio of sound:size:weight I'm not sure there is anything directly comparable. And most importantly considering a 14X1mm option for AKs back pressure is a huge variable. If the design of these suppressors keeps gas out of the receiver I want one.
Strongly considering one of these suppressors as an option. Lightweight is a priority for me.
How feasible would it be to expect a QD system for these cans in the future? I would only be using them maybe 1/3 of the time, and having to remount my muzzle brake each time would get tiresome.
How feasible would it be to expect a QD system for these cans in the future? I would only be using them maybe 1/3 of the time, and having to remount my muzzle brake each time would get tiresome.
I noticed you posted some meter numbers in this thread a while ago but the post got deleted. Was that intentional?
I can understand the guys who say they don't care about the meter numbers, but for the majority of us who only know what we see online it's useful to have some reliable data that can be compared to other options, especially if it includes the ear numbers so we can see some indication of the backpressure performance. Of course, it's up to the reader to process the data in the context of other factors such as size, weight, etc.!
I have been shooting three of their suppressors, The Bantam, Strix, and Badger. I REALLY like the direct connect design. Like previously stated there is no first round pop and all of the rounds are consistently quiet. The Bantam is great for its tiny size and light weight (6oz). The 7.62 cans are stupid quiet with full power ammo.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention, hadn’t heard of them till now. I’d rather have a jam nut then crush washers, but these are really nice!I am trying to see if anyone has had any experience with these suppressors. Mainly the 556 models. I know they are still new to the market, so its unlikely that anyone has had time to get their tax stamp approved. But, if there are any dealers or individuals that have been to demo days or suppressor shoots and have any info on how these perform. That would be greatly appreciated. There are only a few videos and reviews online that I can find and most of them are about their .30 cal cans. I am not too worried about getting the quietest can. But, one that is light and thin that just takes the bite out of a 556 SBR.
Home - Thermal Defense Solutions
thermaldefenseinc.com
Its not a suppressor its a device my government officials want me to use as part of The New Green Deal, it captures carbon particles which is saving the earth from total destruction.
5 months since the last post. Anyone get hands on with them and have a review to share? Any updates on a QD solution?
The Bantam II lives full time on my 16" Recce:
Reasons:
Accuracy
Repeatability
Low back pressure
Incredibly light weight
Reasons:
Accuracy
Repeatability
Low back pressure
Incredibly light weight
So I don't know how I missed this originally.
After reading thread and watching video ......I'm pretty mind blown
Oak Ridge Laboratories (go get yourself up to speed if you don't know the history here and also present capabilites) designs a 3D printed suppressor and civilians now have access to it? = EPIC
Seeing the bullets in slow mo....anyone else notice you can see rifling on the bullets as they fly out?
This is next level!!!
MSTN, I appreciate your feedback on this and a HUGE THANK YOU for sharing.
One thing I havent seen mentioned is any evaluation or testing of cold bore shift. Do you have any feedback on cold bore shift?
After reading thread and watching video ......I'm pretty mind blown
Oak Ridge Laboratories (go get yourself up to speed if you don't know the history here and also present capabilites) designs a 3D printed suppressor and civilians now have access to it? = EPIC
Seeing the bullets in slow mo....anyone else notice you can see rifling on the bullets as they fly out?
This is next level!!!
MSTN, I appreciate your feedback on this and a HUGE THANK YOU for sharing.
One thing I havent seen mentioned is any evaluation or testing of cold bore shift. Do you have any feedback on cold bore shift?
The Bantam II lives full time on my 16" Recce:
Reasons:
Accuracy
Repeatability
Low back pressure
Incredibly light weight
Do you have a dealer you would recommend going through the purchasing process with? I contacted four of the ones Thermal Defense had listed on their site and I either had to be a member with the shop or a couple of them said I had to be there in person to do the purchasing as a matter of store policy for Class 3 items. Kind of a bummer for out of state folks..
I saw a report that the Bantam has a huge flash signature in the dark, but I'm having trouble figuring out how this would be physically possible. MSTN - did you notice this at all? Can you confirm or deny a fireball out of the Bantam?
I've noticed with one particular brand of practice ammo (ASYM 55 FMJ) a highly visible fireball every fifth or so shot out of the Bantam II on a 10.5" barrel. With this ammo I'd see this occasionally but much less often using a SF SOCOM RC2. This may happen with other types of ammo, of course, as well. If I switched to "serious" ammunition like MK 318 MOD 1 SOST, no flash was encountered. But, who among us buying our own ammo can afford to practice with the serious stuff more than a little?
With this practice ammo in a 16" gun with the Bantam II out front, no flash.
With this ammo in the 10.5" SBR with the Badger II 5.56 out front, no flash.
Based on my experience, I'd say the combination of this ammunition and the Bantam II on an SBR will lead to occasionally spectacular fireballs out front. Change ammo, go to a longer barrel, or switch to a bigger suppressor, and the problem is eliminated.
They call the Bantam II the "Bantam" for a reason. It's small - just 5" long and a little over 8 ounces. You can't expect miracles from it. My own Bantam II is a permanent fixture on my 16" rig:
I've now got a Badger II 5.56 in residence on my now ancient 10.5" SBR:
Putting my $$$ where my mouth is, there's now a TDS Nocturnal out front on my .300 BLK, as well:
I really like the TDS cans on my gas guns. They're unique - the lightest in the game, with good accuracy and repeatability, plus minimal back pressure and great signature reduction.
With this practice ammo in a 16" gun with the Bantam II out front, no flash.
With this ammo in the 10.5" SBR with the Badger II 5.56 out front, no flash.
Based on my experience, I'd say the combination of this ammunition and the Bantam II on an SBR will lead to occasionally spectacular fireballs out front. Change ammo, go to a longer barrel, or switch to a bigger suppressor, and the problem is eliminated.
They call the Bantam II the "Bantam" for a reason. It's small - just 5" long and a little over 8 ounces. You can't expect miracles from it. My own Bantam II is a permanent fixture on my 16" rig:
I've now got a Badger II 5.56 in residence on my now ancient 10.5" SBR:
Putting my $$$ where my mouth is, there's now a TDS Nocturnal out front on my .300 BLK, as well:
I really like the TDS cans on my gas guns. They're unique - the lightest in the game, with good accuracy and repeatability, plus minimal back pressure and great signature reduction.
What's the Nocturnal?
I'm glad somebody has contact with them, they are practically nonexistent on social media and the Internet in general. Do they just not need public attention or are they really bad at this stuff?
I'm glad somebody has contact with them, they are practically nonexistent on social media and the Internet in general. Do they just not need public attention or are they really bad at this stuff?
I have a Bantam and the weight and performance are awesome but the customer service and communication from TDS was so bad I would never buy another can from them. It seems they have enough government money coming in to just not care.
Did you have any problems with the can? Is that why you tried to contact them?
Ok, I keep seeing that guys want lightweight, me too but what I'm seeing is their 30 cal can weighs 16 oz. My Nomad 30 weighs 14 oz. I guess I'm confused about the excitement on thermal printing. Any reasoning that I'm not seeing?
It's a good question. Based on what I'm reading, there are a couple advantages to the TDS can over the Nomad. Inconel vs SS, forward venting vs more traditional baffle. Giving you a can that can take a much higher rate of fire than the Nomad, whilst controlling heat, gas and flash better.
Do the material and design giving these advantages mean a slightly heavier can? Apparently so.
That said, I'm looking long and hard at the Nomad Ti. 9.6 oz!!
It's been a while, but I have a vague memory that the 7.62 was initially said to be lighter, but an early post in this thread indicates a design update increased the weight. Maybe they targeted durability over weight based on customer interaction (they seem to be focused on .gov). Is the Nomad rated for machine gun use?
The real lightweights are the 5.56 models.
Otherwise, as has been mentioned the lower back pressure design may be desirable compared to the Nomad for certain situations.
I'd love to see Pew Science evaluate these, but the company seems invisible right now.
For 5.56mm I have a Sig SRD556QD, a Griffin Recce5, and a TDI Badger. I am not a serious enough shooter to use any metering other than my ear. I think the Rec5 and Badger are fairly close to the same for volume. But, the Badger produces a lower tone which isn’t so striking. Where the Badger shines is really on the heat. The others have melted things I lean them against (Pelican case) and have gotten to “glow” temp. The Badger never heats up anywhere near the same, and I don’t have to stand around waiting for it to cool before packing up to leave.
I still have an OSS 7.62 Ti in jail. I'm not sure why I'd get a TDS over something from OSS honestly. Doesn't seem easy to purchase, likely more restrictive for gas guns, bout the same weight and cost yet a very small dealer network, harder to purchase, more barrel restrictions vs. the OSS and OSS has a ton of info not offered by TDS. https://osssuppressors.com/content/uploads/2018/05/HX-QD-762-Ti-White-Paper-0221.pdf
I've visited EOS at their Austin site, truly amazing tech. They have a facility in Austin and another up in Detroit. They're a German company, very smart people that have been in the additive manufacturing business for a very long time. It'll never replace traditional manufacturing, it's simply another tool in the toolbox.
I've visited EOS at their Austin site, truly amazing tech. They have a facility in Austin and another up in Detroit. They're a German company, very smart people that have been in the additive manufacturing business for a very long time. It'll never replace traditional manufacturing, it's simply another tool in the toolbox.
FYI for anybody like me who was wondering what happened to this company--I finally got a little more info.
Evidently one of the original principals (Major General Gary Harrell) passed away and that created a major disruption. They eventually merged with another company and products are now coming back to the market under the name Disavowed Innovations Group (based in Ohio).
https://www.disavowedgroup.com/
https://www.facebook.com/DisavowedInnovations
According to their latest post products are on their way to dealers and it sounds like some Pew Science testing is in process.
From what I can see on their website there are a few new models, looking forward to seeing some data!
Evidently one of the original principals (Major General Gary Harrell) passed away and that created a major disruption. They eventually merged with another company and products are now coming back to the market under the name Disavowed Innovations Group (based in Ohio).
https://www.disavowedgroup.com/
https://www.facebook.com/DisavowedInnovations
According to their latest post products are on their way to dealers and it sounds like some Pew Science testing is in process.
From what I can see on their website there are a few new models, looking forward to seeing some data!
Thanks for posting this. Hopefully they test well and are able to increase their distribution and manufacturing capacity. I flirted strongly with buying a couple from MSTN a while ago, but backed away when I could never get any responses from the manufacturer. Didn't give me a lot of confidence in the viability of their business at the time. I'd still be a buyer when they get it together.
Similar threads
