Suppressors TiRant 45 Owners: Using TiRant 45 on 9mm

[TheJ]

Have any of you run your TiRant 45 on a 9mm host?

I got the 1/2x28 piston and threaded barrel for my full size M&P VTAC 9mm. It refuses to cycle at all on factory 115gr ammo. Maybe 10-20% stove pipe, the other 80-90% don't even cycle back far enough to stove pipe, the empty brass just stays in the chamber and requires a manual cycle.

Does the booster spring need to be replaced? Does it need heaftier ammo? Does the gun need a weaker recoil spring? Does it just need more break in (suppressor is pretty new, gun is well broken in)? Will it not work at all? I was under the impression the TiRant45 should still work on 9mm.

Let me know your thoughts and experiences.

 

[Eben]

Have any of you run your TiRant 45 on a 9mm host?

I got the 1/2x28 piston and threaded barrel for my full size M&P VTAC 9mm. It refuses to cycle at all on factory 115gr ammo. Maybe 10-20% stove pipe, the other 80-90% don't even cycle back far enough to stove pipe, the empty brass just stays in the chamber and requires a manual cycle.

Does the booster spring need to be replaced? Does it need heaftier ammo? Does the gun need a weaker recoil spring? Does it just need more break in (suppressor is pretty new, gun is well broken in)? Will it not work at all? I was under the impression the TiRant45 should still work on 9mm.

Let me know your thoughts and experiences.

I have the same suppressor on a G19.
Since part of the deal is more quiet using subsonic ammo, I'm assuming the piston's spring is designed more for that, so try 147gr.

 

[TheJ]

I'll see if I can source some, but don't have any currently. Have you gotten yours to work on lighter projectile 9mm?

 

[SilentG21]

Thats what I was thinking...try 147 grn. If that doesn't work then try it on a Glock, HK, or SIG.

 

[TheJ]

Copy that. Will see if I can find 147gr or a threaded bbl for my P226 first. Anyone have any pet recipes for 147gr over 700x? Might be easier for my to find projectiles than loaded 147.

 

[SilentG21]

To the best of my knowledge most 147 grn is "subsonic" as long as it is not labeled +P. I hope you have positive results. I plan to use my Ti-Rant on my G34 once I get this 17L barrel threaded. Your situation makes me curious.

 

[wfjames22]

Copy that. Will see if I can find 147gr or a threaded bbl for my P226 first. Anyone have any pet recipes for 147gr over 700x? Might be easier for my to find projectiles than loaded 147.

http://ammoseek.com/ammo/9mm-luger/-handgun-147grains-

 

[TheJ]

To the best of my knowledge most 147 grn is "subsonic" as long as it is not labeled +P. I hope you have positive results. I plan to use my Ti-Rant on my G34 once I get this 17L barrel threaded. Your situation makes me curious.

Yes. It is. I was asking for recipes using 147s with 700x powder. For me to load and try out.

 

[BurnOut]

If it was me, I'd try a softer recoil spring before going through the trouble of loading up a bunch of 147s. Less money and effort, ya know?

I base this recommendation on the fact that the guys at Sprinco recommended that I run a softer (13 lb vs. stock 15 lb) spring on one of their recoil reducer setups when running suppressed (and it seems to function well).

That said, my setup is different than yours (G34 w/ 9mm conversion barrel, Osprey 45), so YMMV.

 

[ZY100]

My Tyrant 45 works just fine on my XDm 5.25 Comp...zero issues and the gun is stock except for the threaded barrel. I have been using the can on it since almost new, maybe 200 rounds through it before the can was on it. I reload 115 with 3.0 (pretty sure going off memory, it might be 3.1) of Titegroup does the trick.

I think a slightly lighter spring is you next best option to try. Sure it will be even quieter with sub 147s, but I want it to work with what I am going to load or buy (or have a friend shoot) most of the time.

ZY

 

[jasonfaz]

I use mine on a gen 4 G19 and had minor FTF and FTE issues with 115s. I went a little lighter on the spring and that solved the issue. I'll still see an issue here or there with 115s when using extended mags though.

I would also suggest sticking with 135 gr or heavier projos. The 115s were loud as hell. There are a couple 135gr sub sonic factory loads that are ridiculous quiet. All 147gr target loads should come in subsonic as should the 158s. Much better reliability too in my experience.

 

[BurnOut]

Regarding bullet weight in suppressed guns in general (assuming that you want to stay subsonic), it only makes sense to go with the heaviest projectile you can find/stabilize in order to maximize kinetic energy on target (no mall ninja stuff; think knocking over steel targets or similar). Kinetic energy is an effective function of what? Speed and mass, right? Well, you're limited in terms of speed (again, if you want to stay subsonic), so the only way to maximize delivered kinetic energy is by increasing projectile weight. In many cases, it's not practical to increase projectile weight to the point where it meets/beats the lighter, faster round, but there's usually no such thing as a free lunch (read: shooting as quietly as possible has tradeoffs associated with it).

Now, that said, with 9mm I absolutely understand the desire to run 115-124gr rounds due to availability/price of loaded ammo (and, for that matter, 9mm projectiles over 124-ish gr in weight). These days, I find that 115-124 gr 9mm is generally inexpensive enough (for plinking rounds) that it isn't worth the time/effort to reload (at the volumes that I shoot, anyhow).

 

[jasonfaz]

While I technically agree with what you said about kinetic energy I would not suggest that the KE aspect renders using the heaviest projo the best choice for sub loads. I feel you should still account for recoil, trajectory and projo design relative to how the bullet performs terminally after hitting the target. All of those could very well lead to a different projectile based on the intended application. For example, it takes more powder to move a 158gr at 950fps out of a 4.5" tube that it would sending a 135gr at the same speed. The slightly heavier recoil may affect ones ability to keep the muzzle on target and ultimately change your ability to accurately place rounds where you want them to go. Even more so if your target distances are highly variable as the heavier projo moving at the same speed as a lighter projo would drop quicker.

Furthermore, if you happen to shoot every projo weight - 135, 147, 158 - equally (from an accuracy perspective) but your application consists of home/self defense rather than comp/steel shooting one might consider available projo designs in each category and the material used in construction. A lighter HP designed to expand at lower MV would be a better choice than a heavier FMJ. It all depends...

 

[BurnOut]

While I technically agree with what you said about kinetic energy I would not suggest that the KE aspect renders using the heaviest projo the best choice for sub loads. I feel you should still account for recoil, trajectory and projo design relative to how the bullet performs terminally after hitting the target. All of those could very well lead to a different projectile based on the intended application. For example, it takes more powder to move a 158gr at 950fps out of a 4.5" tube that it would sending a 135gr at the same speed. The slightly heavier recoil may affect ones ability to keep the muzzle on target and ultimately change your ability to accurately place rounds where you want them to go. Even more so if your target distances are highly variable as the heavier projo moving at the same speed as a lighter projo would drop quicker.

Furthermore, if you happen to shoot every projo weight - 135, 147, 158 - equally (from an accuracy perspective) but your application consists of home/self defense rather than comp/steel shooting one might consider available projo designs in each category and the material used in construction. A lighter HP designed to expand at lower MV would be a better choice than a heavier FMJ. It all depends...

I can agree with that... I didn't intend to convey that I believe projectile weight to be the only consideration for suppressed/subsonic applications; that is not the case. My assumption (and I admit that it may be flawed) is that *for the common semi-automatic pistol calibers* the heavy-for-caliber projectiles are designed to perform at these lower velocities. That is to say that 140+gr 9mm hollow points, 175+gr .40 hollow points, and 210+gr .45 hollow points are intended to be used at subsonic velocities, and will mushroom as well as they ever would at those low speeds.

 

[TheJ]

A little update:

I spoke with AAC, and they said that the setup should work with 115s no problem, and that they use them all the time on the same setup.

They concluded that the new aftermarket barrel was probably locking up too tightly, absorbing most of the recoil energy unlocking the barrel from the slide. They suggested I run the pistol with the new barrel and NO suppressor for 100-200 rounds, and keep the locking surfaces well lubed. They also suggested I lube the piston in the can well.

I went to the range during my lunch break, and got through some break in of the piston and barrel, but less than half what they recommended. I tried it again at that point, and I'm now at 50-60% reliable operation, where I used to be at 0% reliability. I think with another 100 rounds through it she will be running 100%.

Thanks for the input here too!

--J