Re: Thread Adaptors
Honestly, it would be nice if you could learn to hit the QUOTE button. It makes reading your posts containing quotes from other posts much easier.
Now, back on topic...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RollingThunder51</div><div class="ubbcode-body">..
"So? What is your point?
I've seen that happen with SF and other suppressors. The problem isn't the suppressor (or mount) design. This has happened with thread mount solutions too. The real problem is some people don't understand that you can't just leave a suppressor on the host weapon for long periods of time. This is bad for ALL suppressors regardless of mounting solution used. The reason is that when the can cools after use condensation forms. This can (and eventually will) lead to rust. But it also can form a stick mess of fouling around the mount of suppressors with adapter mounting solutions. The problem can be exacerbated by using ammo with really dirty powder.
So, yeah. Some dude ran his can to the point it got stuck on the rifle. It happens. I do agree it is more likely to happen with fast-attach mounts. So, what is the point? Are you still suggesting thread-mount solutions are superior in all situations? Thread-mount and fast-attach both have their places. Both have strengths and potential weaknesses."
Ah, no Mark, that is not the problem. What happened to thousands and thousand of trouble free rounds? This is QD right? QD, not wait WUICD Wait until it cools detach, QD.
Qd has real limitations, not 1,000s and 1,000s of rounds without consequences. Every design of can and adapter, speed adapter, thread on does. No simple answers here. Back to the real world.
</div></div>
Yes, I've stated previously that FA mounting solutions do require cleaning/maintenance. Regarding my comments on suppressors getting stuck, I've seen it happen but not often. And when it did happen it was for the reason I mentioned - someone left the suppressor on the host weapon after firing sessions and it got stuck because of that. That is USER error.
Suppressor mounts (FA) do require user maintenance. No one ever suggested otherwise. I think we're all in agreement about that.
On my properly installed and properly maintained FA mounts I have frequently shot better than a thousand rounds in a single shooting session without issues. Heck, I've got one Sabre Defense 11.5" barrel I put over 30K documented rounds through as a demo gun. This was one of the vanadium Sabre barrels and Sabre wanted us to get it to a 50K round count so they could look at the throat and gas port erosion. It got shot on full-auto more frequently then semi and almost always with an M4-2000 suppressor. The particular suppressor had over 40K rounds put through it. I never once had trouble taking it off that or other host weapons.
To summarize, in my experience...
Fast-attach mounting solutions don't always degrade accuracy of the host weapon although there are certainly some bad FA designs on the market that do hurt accuracy. Some of the better fast-attach mounting solutions provide the same level of accuracy as a quality thread-mount solution.
Fast-attach mounting solutions DO require user maintenance to keep their surface areas clean.
Fast-attach suppressors don't always "fast-detach" when hot simply because the suppressor is too hot to touch with a bare hand. Well, duh. People with half a clue take an appropriate oven mit or something similar to remove the suppressor.
Quality fast-attach mounting solutions do provide for a consistent indexing of the suppressor.
Some fast-attach systems do compensate for potential of slight alignment issues by opening up the apertures. This, of course, trades some sound performance for less chance of baffle/end cap contact. For example, the first generation of "a certain suppressor company (I decided not to name them here)" suppressors had tighter apertures but around the time of the SCAR trials they opened up the apertures a bit after testing with high volumes of full-auto fire resulted in some end cap strikes. For the record the sound difference to the ear was negligible following the change.
Fast-attach suppressors with secure mounts are much less likely to shoot loose/loosen up when shot on auto-loading weapons. There certainly are exceptions to this. I've had thread-mount suppressors run 1500-round weekends in training classes on AR variants without ever loosening up. But in general a quality fast-attach solution is much less likely to work loose on that auto-loading host.
Not all fast-attach type mounts are great designs.
I don't really consider Ops Inc's mounting solutions to be "fast-attach" but for the purposes of this discussion their products are more aligned with the "fast-attach" crowd. I think it is one of the best designed mounting solutions available. It is rock-solid. It won't typically loosen up under full-auto fire. It always indexes back to the same spot. POI shift is minimal on every host I've ever used and it has been a lot. Apertures are tight and sound performance is incredible.
In general I think a dedicated thread-mount solution is preferable to a fast-attach mounting solution on a precision bolt-action host. I strongly suggest having the threads of the host cut specifically for the suppressor for achieve the best possible mounting interface. However, a guy wanting to use the same suppressor on a variety of host weapons might be better served with a quality fast-attach type mounting solution, especially if the hosts all have dissimilar threads.
Everyone has their own unique experiences. Some people might not have a lot of experience yet and their comments reflect that. Some people simply regurgitate information they heard/read somewhere else or are basing an opinion on one isolated incident/case. People really should look for trends over a larger number of test cases before forming an opinion. That rarely happens in the land of the "errornet".
There are exceptions to every issue. Nothing is absolute.
Suppressors are only part of the overall system. People need to understand the host weapon, host's threads, barrel length, barrel twist rate, ammo, environment, system user maintenance, etc. are all factors. So, when evaluating products people should give consideration to all the other factors present.
Continuing this discussion frankly isn't productive and won't help anyone. So, I'll just say...
Take care and have a nice day.
PS, sorry for the pre-coffee ramblings. I hope at least some of that is coherent. And also sorry for any misspelling, grammar errors, etc. I didn't have time to proof read this.
