Suppressors Welding Titanium

Since we're getting off topic...

Good job Kevin, jumping on a potential customer for asking for a little better info. That's the best way to earn a guys business. Watching some of your responses in the Fix thread, it doesn't suprise me.

There's a reason Tbac uses milspec testing procedures. Quantifiable, repeatable results that anyone with the right equipment can duplicate. Ray has done a lot of other videos with numbers at the ejection port and shooters ear and he states that. The milspec tests gives anyone a fair playing field if they want to go head to head numbers with someone else.

One more thing Kevin, you tell the guy to start his own business so he can do whatever he wants. Why would he do that when Tbac already does?! Your marketing is pretty good, however, you're products have to speak for themselves to this crowd. We're not your typical group of internet sheep.
Sure. Every mfg, claims their testing is correct. That their silencers are the quietest. I've spent 25 years doing this, most of that at the highest level. I've tested everything. My background, accomplishments, and .mil contracts speak for themselves. Our sales tell me I'm doing things correctly again with Q. We aren't getting worse at design and mfg.
 
Aren't CGS group the guys that claimed extremely low numbers on their 9mm suppressor and the real performance ended up being many db higher (although still good)? I'm prettty sure they are.

I don't understand why companies cannot test like TBAC who do proper and honest testing. They show their cans doing well, they show their cans doing poorly. They show others cans doing well, they show others cans doing poorly. Unless you are bottom-tier and/or not a total scumbag, it should be pretty fucking easy to just do proper at the ear metering.
 
I don't feel a company should say anything about their competitors. That may be just me but I prefer to see a company stay above the bullshit of trash talking each other. Let your product prove ite worth for itself. If someone is doing it better, you better step up or get left behind. I don't think it takes trashing another guys product.

You think you're the best? Prove it? Don't want to prove it because you don't think you have to? That's cool too. Just don't expect people to take your word for it.
There just isn't a forum or testing standards for the silencer industry. Companies have always cloaked themselves behind consumer ignorance and bullshit. Everyone should be forced to earn their way on merit.
 
There just isn't a forum or testing standards for the silencer industry. Companies have always cloaked themselves behind consumer ignorance and bullshit. Everyone should be forced to earn their way on merit.


There are standards from dear old .mil, but they aren't very relevant.

I don't see what is so hard about making your own test, and sticking to it. For 99% of civilian consumers, we care about one thing: db at the ear. Just invent your own standard around that and start testing cans and publishing results. As long as you keep it consistent and report the environmental conditions you cannot control (like barometric pressure) I don't see why that wouldn't work. Yeah it is a bit more work but fills a HUGE gap in the current market which as you point out Kevin is the lack of honest info around suppressor performance and standards. You are one of the few people in a position to remedy this! Not to mention if your cans perform as well as you say they do (and from what I've seen from early data, they do) then you also get a leg up in marketing because yours will end up at the top of the heap or very near it on semi-autos and bolt guns alike.
 
There are standards from dear old .mil, but they aren't very relevant.

I don't see what is so hard about making your own test, and sticking to it. For 99% of civilian consumers, we care about one thing: db at the ear. Just invent your own standard around that and start testing cans and publishing results. As long as you keep it consistent and report the environmental conditions you cannot control (like barometric pressure) I don't see why that wouldn't work. Yeah it is a bit more work but fills a HUGE gap in the current market which as you point out Kevin is the lack of honest info around suppressor performance and standards. You are one of the few people in a position to remedy this! Not to mention if your cans perform as well as you say they do (and from what I've seen from early data, they do) then you also get a leg up in marketing because yours will end up at the top of the heap or very near it on semi-autos and bolt guns alike.
We actually test our and competitor's silencers with current equipment. The problem is that without a 3rd party, we post numbers, then companies like Griffin, CGS, Gemtech, etc. post numbers 2-10dB better 2 days later. It's just become silly.

I've designed and made the quietest silencers for 2 decades. I don't have to prove that anymore. Most of the better silencer companies make quiet enough stuff, people should buy for other reasons at this point.
 
Where can we buy your silencer?

Your metering is false, just like it was with your .22 can and when you claimed your .260 silencer was 116 dB. We metered your .22 can at a mediocre 122 dB. You designs are copies of AAC, SIG, and Q silencers, even the aesthetics.

Well, that's not nice. No one at CGS lied about the Hydra, I've said from the beginning it was 118-124dB depending on host and ammo. No one from CGS ever said our 260 silencer was 116dB either. That'd be silly. We've beaten over 40 different rifle silencers on multiple hosts with multiple ammo types and multiple test sessions on the meter and at the ear. Just because you and everyone else couldn't eliminate muzzle pop doesn't mean we couldn't. You're more than welcome to come to Artesia and try it out yourself. We have a nice 152,000 acre ranch to shoot on. You and I both know we have very credible witnesses that can back up everything. And one of them was present at the metering of those two silencers I put up yesterday.

But don't worry, because of your unnecessarily rude outburst, tomorrow I'll put up the sound testing we did of our unreleased Siren against your El Camino and full length Erector. Want to guess who won?

Maybe you're talking about tubeless silencers? Because that's been done by Ase Utra since 2005.

But you are right about one thing, you can't buy one yet. The .gov can buy it though. The Hyperion will be available on the civilian market most likely by SHOT. Eventually everything CGS makes will be available on the civilian market, we're small and growing, we'll get there.

It's fake. There is no silencer 7 dB quieter than the Full Nelson.

The CGS Hyperion is 7dB quieter in that test, that's not even the best variance we've had.

We actually test our and competitor's silencers with current equipment. The problem is that without a 3rd party, we post numbers, then companies like Griffin, CGS, Gemtech, etc. post numbers 2-10dB better 2 days later. It's just become silly.

I've designed and made the quietest silencers for 2 decades. I don't have to prove that anymore. Most of the better silencer companies make quiet enough stuff, people should buy for other reasons at this point.

We actually test our and our competitors silencers with Mil Std specified equipment that can actually meet the standards and make the proper measurements.

You've designed? Or your employees Mike Smith, Ethan Lessard, Robert Silvers, Hunter Terhune designed?
 
Last edited:
Yea, I'm calling horse shit on it being 7 dB quieter. That's a hell of a difference.

It's a hell of a difference because it's new technology. I'll make some better videos for you guys so you can see the distance measurements and stuff and see the shooter and the meter all in one screen.

Aren't CGS group the guys that claimed extremely low numbers on their 9mm suppressor and the real performance ended up being many db higher (although still good)? I'm prettty sure they are.

I don't understand why companies cannot test like TBAC who do proper and honest testing. They show their cans doing well, they show their cans doing poorly. They show others cans doing well, they show others cans doing poorly. Unless you are bottom-tier and/or not a total scumbag, it should be pretty fucking easy to just do proper at the ear metering.

It was 114dB with Freedom Munitions Hush 165gr. To the ear and on the meter it's quieter than some 22LR silenced handguns. We actually did a metering session yesterday of the Kraken full size and SK on my VP9. If I remember correctly it averaged 116.9 for the full size Kraken. You can see that video at this link here: Link

When me and Adam from NFA Review first shot the Kraken prototype in his back yard I had never heard FM Hush ammo before. We had the Kraken on a Beretta 92 and it blew my mind, like I thought something was wrong. But then he got the idea to take out a silenced 22LR with a DA Mask firing subsonic ammo to see how close they were and it was amazing, we were quieter with the Hush ammo. With normal subs the Kraken still does great, something like 122-124dB if I remember right. As for the 114dB number, people are just going to have to get that 165gr Hush ammo and try it for themselves so they can see the light. Performance and meter data really matters when you're comparing two silencers on the same day, with the proper Mil Std spec'ed meter, in the same positions, with the same ammo, with the same host, etc. Red Hill was certainly one of the louder metering days we've had. I'm going to try to get out there with Bill again in July. Either that or I'll have him out to where we are.

Rugged also uses Hush 165gr 9mm for their posted numbers, Dead Air posts both Hush and normal subs, which I personally think is a better idea.

If you guys are interested in seeing updates on better metering videos and stuff, I usually put up the videos on my personal IG page first (@pacoramirez101). I plan to have one camera on the meter and one camera on the shooter and gun and then showing the distance from mic measurements with a tape measure on screen and then doing the test off a tripod all in one continuous take so no one can claim tampering.

I know it's hard to believe in, but it's valid and proper testing. It's new technology and we're a relatively new company that isn't too well known. I would've been the first to call BS if I saw a company claiming it too, but short of firing through it in person there's only so much you can do to convince someone. I think the above video parameters I mentioned will help instead of just showing the meter screen by itself. If I could afford it I'd fly you guys out here to try it yourself. But if any one of you guys wants to make the trip you're more than welcome. We'll make a day of it and go to the 152,000 acre ranch. Just give advanced notice obviously.
 
Last edited:
Well, that's not nice. No one at CGS lied about the Hydra, I've said from the beginning it was 118-124dB depending on host and ammo. No one from CGS ever said our 260 silencer was 116dB either. That'd be silly. We've beaten over 40 different rifle silencers on multiple hosts with multiple ammo types and multiple test sessions on the meter and at the ear. Just because you and everyone else couldn't eliminate muzzle pop doesn't mean we couldn't. You're more than welcome to come to Artesia and try it out yourself. We have a nice 152,000 acre ranch to shoot on. You and I both know we have very credible witnesses that can back up everything. And one of them was present at the metering of those two silencers I put up yesterday.

But don't worry, because of your unnecessarily rude outburst, tomorrow I'll put up the sound testing we did of our unreleased Siren against your El Camino and full length Erector. Want to guess who won?

Maybe you're talking about tubeless silencers? Because that's been done by Ase Utra since 2005.

But you are right about one thing, you can't buy one yet. The .gov can buy it though. The Hyperion will be available on the civilian market most likely by SHOT. Eventually everything CGS makes will be available on the civilian market, we're small and growing, we'll get there.



The CGS Hyperion is 7dB quieter in that test, that's not even the best variance we've had.



We actually test our and our competitors silencers with Mil Std specified equipment that can actually meet the standards and make the proper measurements.

You've designed? Or your employees Mike Smith, Ethan Lessard, Robert Silvers, Hunter Terhune designed?

Bullshit.

And yes, I designed the Ti-Rant, Titan, QD mounts, Omni, Prodigy, Mk-13SD, Cyclone, 762-SD, N6, 300SD, M4-2000, 416-SD, SR5, SR7, 10/22-SD, etc. And I was in charge of and managed all programs at AAC. Your patent searches show you this. These products actually won .mil contracts and have NSN's. Oh, and we created the largest, most successful commercial silencer company to date.

It was a successful team, but what have AAC, Mike, Robert, and Hunter done since Ethan and I left? Everyone here knows what Ethan and I have done the past few years.

You simply post outrageous "testing" results against accomplished, innovative companies to gain attention. You and Griffin copy other companies. Big deal.
 
It's fake. There is no silencer 7 dB quieter than the Full Nelson.
What if you’re wrong tho sweetie?

It’s no wonder these are TBAC’s people.

Such a salty little hoe.

You’re so smart too and so rich and so amazing we all bow at your feet. No way any one could ever be more accomplished. Definitely no way another company could make a better can.

No one should ever question the word of Silencer Jesus.
 
Well before this devolves any further I think there is a pretty obvious solution. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, send your suppressors to each other, and/or a neutral third party for testing. Have them tested head to head at the shooter's ear on various platforms with various ammo on the same day. Problem solved. It shouldn't be hard for two manufacturers to get that done, and there are plenty of 3rd parties with proper meters you can use (including TBAC).

And Kevin I'm sorry but I don't buy the "but every manufacturer would post different numbers" excuse for not releasing test data or doing tests. I already addressed that. If you aren't a scumbag (like SAS who are and did rig test results) then you simply work as a scientist. Do the testing, publish the results and environmental data. If someone (like SAS or Griffin or whomever) publishes in the same way the same tests and there is radically different results, you know they are lying (or there is an error to correct) and that will be easy to show. If they don't publish the same way and leave out important detail again, you know they are probably fudging numbers and that is easy to show. Either way you AND THE PUBLIC end up way ahead. Same for CGS, given the large gap in information in the market you only stand to gain from detailed testing released to the public.
 
Already Done son

@HansohnBrothers

Has a Hyperion
Has a Full Nelson
Has a recently calibrated BK2209
Has a fix rifle.
Has no reason to be biased.
Has my blessing and numerous requests via email to get this done on video.

But I’m gonna warn you to be careful what you ask for. When the results don’t favor Silencer Jesus...he’s gonna be salty. We will all witnesses the wrath of Silencer Jesus.

A lawsuit will probably unfold. That’s the real money maker for Silencer Jesus. Not Silencers. That’s what happens when Silencer Jesus doesn’t get his way.
 
Well I hope they do the test sooner rather than later. I also hope both Q and CGS will start doing testing and publishing as outlined above to address this lack of information available to the public.
 
Bullshit.

And yes, I designed the Ti-Rant, Titan, QD mounts, Omni, Prodigy, Mk-13SD, Cyclone, 762-SD, N6, 300SD, M4-2000, 416-SD, SR5, SR7, 10/22-SD, etc. And I was in charge of and managed all programs at AAC. Your patent searches show you this. These products actually won .mil contracts and have NSN's. Oh, and we created the largest, most successful commercial silencer company to date.

It was a successful team, but what have AAC, Mike, Robert, and Hunter done since Ethan and I left? Everyone here knows what Ethan and I have done the past few years.

You simply post outrageous "testing" results against accomplished, innovative companies to gain attention. You and Griffin copy other companies. Big deal.

That's very interesting, especially because Hunter came up with the TiRant baffles on his own in his basement. How do I know? Because when I was visiting AAC he and Mike Smith and a couple others told me all about it and I thought that was the coolest thing in the world. The QD mounts were designed by Mongo, according to Mongo, and he doesn't have a reason to make that up. Granted it could be he just refined it for AAC, but either way the 18T mount and its evolutions are just a copy of HK's barrel ratchet and spring for flash hider retainment, like on the HK93. I know that because I've had two old HK rifle barrels sitting in my office for the last 1.5 years with that feature on them. That feature on the flash hider was taken and put on a silencer. Very simple to see that. There's nothing wrong with that either.

Taking things from HK and Brugger & Thomet and Ase Utra and A-Tec and Roedale and the rest of the European and international markets and making them into your own with a re-skin and baffle change then taking credit for the original technology seems to be your thing still. There's not much wrong with that either, but marketing it to make people think you invented it isn't helping anyone. Since HKs patent on thread together baffles expired, your marketing of the Erector series to make potential customers think you invented it, "innovated it", is just doing a disservice to the customer. Not everyone buying silencers is as hyper educated in what's available and who makes what why and what's inside and who did it first, and so they start to believe you invented it because you use buzzwords like "innovation" and saying everyone else who makes a thread together baffle stack would be a copy of the Erector series to plant that seed in their head. But that's marketing, to a point.

While your designers did do it better than anyone else previously by styling, material choice, construction, and baffle design, your problem is it makes you think it gives you license to trash other companies that want to utilize HKs freely available technology. Then your potential customers see what they think is other silencer companies "copying" Q by using thread together baffles or exterior welds or whatever it may be and they rush to your defense and help you beat down the voices of other companies and spread your rumors for you. I used to be the one who would do exactly that for you ten years ago without being asked at the drop of a hat, but that was a huge mistake.

You could look up the CGS Hydra Orion baffle patent application, where in the drawings you'll find simple thread together baffles that I modeled up referencing HKs patent. The really funny part is that was filed in December 2015, before Q was even a company. [sarcasm]Why don't you stop copying CGS? [/sarcasm]

That whole bit makes you think you can call out and bully other companies for "copying" you, even though it's not your tech to begin with. You weren't even the first to do it in the US. Sit down.

And come on now, everyone knows the Titan/Prodigy/MK13SD all share the same basic core design, "Hyposone Technology", that came from Robert Silvers. All one needs to do is go on Silencer Talk to figure that out.

The M4-2000 in the Mod 08 config and the 416-SD in Mod 08 config are the same silencer with a different roll mark. That's what AACs employees were telling everyone. But the original 416SD with the banded tube, some plug welds, and IIRC the first to have the 51 tooth mount is a separate silencer, albeit probably with a 2006/7 M4-2000 core. Some people may get confused by that. You shouldn't name them separately without specifying generation when it could be inferred that they're the same thing just so you can add to your alleged design resume. Maybe you came up with the infamous "butthole" end cap circa 2006. Quite fitting.

In your case, when you tell people that you "designed" something, you need to specify which generation and model you're claiming to have completely designed by yourself, or say you didn't design it by yourself and give credit where credit is due. Because designing the original M4-2000/762SD in 2004 or 2006, whenever it came out, is a lot different than designing the Mod 08 versions by yourself. But we already know that you didn't design the Titan all by yourself, so why are you sitting here taking credit for the whole design? When I saw you at Texas Gun Fest in Austin I asked you how Mike Smith was doing, and you told me he was quote, "lazy and wasn't a hard worker". Which I thought was weird because he designed most of AACs stuff and I know him to be a really good person. And another one of AACs employees also told me that the SR5/SR7 was a Silvers/Smith project.

When Ethan was at AAC he worked on the Honey Badger project primarily according to other AAC employees and, if I remember right, also the MG-SD belt fed silencer. Then at SIG he was a handgun engineer on the P320 and probably a few other firearms before/concurrently he started doing SIGs silencer line. But that was the extent of his involvement in AAC silencers. Ethan is a great person and does innovate great stuff, we both know that, but don't overstate his involvement with AAC silencers to make yourself look good now while trashing all of those other designers that did the vast majority of the design and innovation that made AACs silencers great.

I've heard so many stories of early AAC silencers just being copies of Gemtech silencers back in the early/mid 2000s, and all those stories I didn't believe for years turned out to be very true. Attaching your name to your designers patents because you own the company doesn't mean you designed the whole thing. Maybe you had a role in the development and input your own ideas, which is a valid reason to put your name on a patent, but you can't sit there and take credit for the whole thing when it's got AACs actual designer(s) listed as the inventor(s).

Maybe you'd like to tell the class about how when you were copying Gemtech stuff in the early 2000s you even copied their manual right down to the same exact typos? I think most would've forgotten about that by now, but not me. Or maybe you'd like to tell everyone where the Evo series ASAP booster housing assembly really came from? Because I remember defending you on that during the Tundra debacle on Arfcom, but I was very wrong to come to your defense. So maybe you had a hand as a project manager in telling the designers "yes" or "no" on products and suggested some geometry or feature changes in a design as any good project manager would, but you didn't completely design all of those silencers by yourself. I know that's not true, your own employees know that's not true, and the people that actually did design them know that's not true.

You trash the AAC employees that testified against you in the Remginton lawsuit. You told me all about Cory, remember?

And let's not forget the two new accounts in this thread that immediately went to bat for Q, despite one of them saying the welds weren't right and the reason why one could fail. Quite suspicious timing.

Or are those just all blasphemous lies too?

I will say this: Q does innovate and does make great stuff and has great designers, and you yourself are great at marketing products and hiring the right people. It was the opportunity you gave me 11 years ago when I was just a random nobody 16 year old kid from California that gave me hope to one day be a great designer in the silencer industry. AAC was the first silencer website I found and back then I thought it was the coolest thing in the world and I was excited to have the opportunity to be a part of it one day. But that opportunity came and went and I couldn't take advantage of it. But I've moved on from there to bigger and better things and helped start CGS Group LLC, where our company and your company had good and civil interactions and you were friendly with us, just like we were friendly with you. That was until you decided to start spreading lies about CGS to your 23,000 Instagram followers and on forums and wherever else your voice was able to be heard. Most recently where you bring up CGS most if not all of your Q & A** Podcasts saying how we're liars and ruining the industry. That's despicable and wrong. That's why we are where we are now. Not because of anyone but you, and you have no one to blame but yourself.

If there's anything people are finally learning about you, it's that you really like to take credit for the achievements of others in your incubator, and those outside of it too. You're the Erlich Bachman of the silencer industry.

30848554_10213694793338845_6360118312508027599_o.jpg
ETA - Reuploaded image (due to address timeout)
ETA- Reuploaded image (due to address timeout)


30848554_10213694793338845_6360118312508027599_o.jpg


31363306_10213694793338845_6360118312508027599_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
So, about welding titanium....

Yes, about welding titanium. Q does not weld titanium properly according to titanium welding standards, and the welding standards do apply to silencers. It's that simple. Read my post (#123), particularly the last couple paragraphs, here: Link

But if Silencer Jesus wants to keep following his own welding path and doing things the way he's been doing them because he's content with it and he's happy with their tests and methods, then that's perfectly fine. But he doesn't need to go around and trash everyone else and trying to say his welds are "stronger" or "the strongest in the industry".

You said yourself "Titanium is typically used in critical applications including reactor piping which must withstand shock from sea states or enemy fire."

Kind of like how a gunshot that could linearly separate a bad weld in a silencer is a sudden extreme shock. Which is still critical in a silencer because it's a thin wall pressure vessel. If you could, just because I'm curious, please email me at jjpforso ( @ ) gmail.com I'd be interested in reading a bit about the industry you worked in. Or if you wanna email me a link that's fine too.

NASA disagrees. That know that rejection based on color is inaccurate, that you have to do a physical test.

Please post pics of one of your colorless cores after being shot. Amazing, those colors come right out. Should you reject those? If you are confident in your welds, remove the outer tube and save your customers 4 oz.?

The underlined quote should tell you everything you need to know about how much Silencer Jesus knows about welding.
 
There we go - someone with some backstory knowledge to possibly bring out some truth in all of this. Thanks for that side of the story. It definitely lines up with his personality. I hope you guys do kick Q's ass with your suppressors so that he's forced to have his engineers make even better stuff! Win win. Your post is definitely the kind of rebuttal that Kevin has been asking for with his accusations and tone. Glad someone stepped up to the plate!

Loved the Silicon Valley reference!
 
Last edited:
With all of this serious discussion going on... can anyone tell me how they are better than a solvent trap?
I'll add that I would love to know why, "...bullets with a propensity to yaw demonstrate significant reductions in yaw and drag when shot through a two stage symmetric suppressor versus unsuppressed or with a conventional mouse-hole/K-baffle..."
And what is it that makes a two stage symmetric suppressor better in this regard?

Also, exactly what is a two stage symmetric suppressor? :D:p:cool:
 
I'll add that I would love to know why, "...bullets with a propensity to yaw demonstrate significant reductions in yaw and drag when shot through a two stage symmetric suppressor versus unsuppressed or with a conventional mouse-hole/K-baffle..."
And what is it that makes a two stage symmetric suppressor better in this regard?

Also, exactly what is a two stage symmetric suppressor? :D:p:cool:

LOLOLOLOL....that just might kill this "suppressor" war as it was starting to resemble the late, great "sling" wars lololol
 
I'm just trying to bring this back on topic. I'm about to make my first suppressor purchase ever and this particular subject interested me. This whole thread started with an obvious but subtle dig by TBAC directed towards Q, followed by a rebuttal as one would expect. Some banter back and forth is fine, but then it went off the rails. I don't really care about backstories because I'm sure all parties have valid points. Sounds like bad blood that I really don't care about.

What I did is not really relevant or appropriate for public discussion, but what I can say is I looked at and approved many welding procedures covering steel, stainless steel, Cr-Mo steel, Aluminum, Copper-based alloys, Nickel-based alloys (e.g. Inconel, Hastelloy, Monel), Cobalt alloys (e.g. Stellite), and Titanium. As previously stated the requirements for Titanium are quite stringent compared to the other material alloys. We wouldn't permit blue welds. However, one must realize that we didn't have the luxury of doing a fitness-for-service evaluation with mock up testing for every single weldment and joint geometry on a 100,000 ton warship (groove, fillets, overlays, single pass, multi pass, etc.). So you play it safe and just go with the least amount of risk.

Here's a great link to the The Welding Institute for all those unfamiliar with titanium welding, as it covers a lot of the basics.
https://www.twi-global.com/technica...elding-of-titanium-and-its-alloys-part-1-109/

Scroll down and when it references contamination, the key word is MAY. As in, discoloration MAY be problematic but it is entirely dependent on service conditions.

A company manufacturers a handful of suppressor models and configurations, not thousands. Therefore I presume they have the means to do actual testing on production units to determine if it satisfies the user requirements.

It sounds like Kevin acknowledges the challenges in welding titanium as he mentioned a vacuum is ideal (it is, using the right process). But it appears he consciously chose to take some liberties in his welding procedure. Maybe to stay below a cost ceiling. Maybe because he felt it wasn't needed. Same reason why other manufacturers choose not to PVD or EDM. There are different ways to skin a cat.

I'm not defending Q. I'd prefer silver welds. But demonstrate to me that their welds have led to systemic failures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paco ramirez
I'm just trying to bring this back on topic. I'm about to make my first suppressor purchase ever and this particular subject interested me. This whole thread started with an obvious but subtle dig by TBAC directed towards Q, followed by a rebuttal as one would expect. Some banter back and forth is fine, but then it went off the rails. I don't really care about backstories because I'm sure all parties have valid points. Sounds like bad blood that I really don't care about.

What I did is not really relevant or appropriate for public discussion, but what I can say is I looked at and approved many welding procedures covering steel, stainless steel, Cr-Mo steel, Aluminum, Copper-based alloys, Nickel-based alloys (e.g. Inconel, Hastelloy, Monel), Cobalt alloys (e.g. Stellite), and Titanium. As previously stated the requirements for Titanium are quite stringent compared to the other material alloys. We wouldn't permit blue welds. However, one must realize that we didn't have the luxury of doing a fitness-for-service evaluation with mock up testing for every single weldment and joint geometry on a 100,000 ton warship (groove, fillets, overlays, single pass, multi pass, etc.). So you play it safe and just go with the least amount of risk.

Here's a great link to the The Welding Institute for all those unfamiliar with titanium welding, as it covers a lot of the basics.
https://www.twi-global.com/technica...elding-of-titanium-and-its-alloys-part-1-109/

Scroll down and when it references contamination, the key word is MAY. As in, discoloration MAY be problematic but it is entirely dependent on service conditions.

A company manufacturers a handful of suppressor models and configurations, not thousands. Therefore I presume they have the means to do actual testing on production units to determine if it satisfies the user requirements.

It sounds like Kevin acknowledges the challenges in welding titanium as he mentioned a vacuum is ideal (it is, using the right process). But it appears he consciously chose to take some liberties in his welding procedure. Maybe to stay below a cost ceiling. Maybe because he felt it wasn't needed. Same reason why other manufacturers choose not to PVD or EDM. There are different ways to skin a cat.

I'm not defending Q. I'd prefer silver welds. But demonstrate to me that their welds have led to systemic failures.

Sounds about right to me. There is a post on Reddit about a Q silencer having a weld failure you can see here.

Here's the post -

Reddit User : "If Q silencers were having trouble due to weld failures, we’d all have heard about it. They aren’t."​
Capitol Armory : "I would have to disagree with this. With firearms, suppressors, cars, and everything else it's nothing people hear right away. It takes time. Not many people actually even have Q cans in their possession. I certainly hope we don't have those problems--- however, we really won't know for a few years out. I've personally had a weld failure on a Q can. Then again, I've seen a whole bunch of cans failure... you can break anything. It's just going to take some time to see the frequency and if it's actually a problem or not. You also tend to hear "problems" when the item is in wide circulation and it's "cool" to discuss the problem---- be it true or not. Specific case--- I've seen hordes of people online saying they were at this range when a specific can failed, or their buddy had the can fail, or a cousins dad had it fall apart. I saw the pictures months before it was on the internet from someone who took them with their own cell phone. It was an isolated incident that turned into an urban legend and people thought it was a widespread problem. Just have to use caution when there's sources on the internet reporting a giant problem."

That's not to say the weld failure is or isn't systemic, we just don't know yet. But what can be said is that if it was done properly to the correct standards there's quite possibly less of a chance to have had a weld failure.

To follow up from what I posted earlier, here's the preproduction CGS Siren vs Q Erector (full length) vs Q El Camino video like I promised: Link
 
There we go - someone with some backstory knowledge to possibly bring out some truth in all of this. Thanks for that side of the story. It definitely lines up with his personality. I hope you guys do kick Q's ass with your suppressors so that he's forced to have his engineers make even better stuff! Win win. Your post is definitely the kind of rebuttal that Kevin has been asking for with his accusations and tone. Glad someone stepped up to the plate!

Loved the Silicon Valley reference![/QUOTE
I'm just trying to bring this back on topic. I'm about to make my first suppressor purchase ever and this particular subject interested me. This whole thread started with an obvious but subtle dig by TBAC directed towards Q, followed by a rebuttal as one would expect. Some banter back and forth is fine, but then it went off the rails. I don't really care about backstories because I'm sure all parties have valid points. Sounds like bad blood that I really don't care about.

What I did is not really relevant or appropriate for public discussion, but what I can say is I looked at and approved many welding procedures covering steel, stainless steel, Cr-Mo steel, Aluminum, Copper-based alloys, Nickel-based alloys (e.g. Inconel, Hastelloy, Monel), Cobalt alloys (e.g. Stellite), and Titanium. As previously stated the requirements for Titanium are quite stringent compared to the other material alloys. We wouldn't permit blue welds. However, one must realize that we didn't have the luxury of doing a fitness-for-service evaluation with mock up testing for every single weldment and joint geometry on a 100,000 ton warship (groove, fillets, overlays, single pass, multi pass, etc.). So you play it safe and just go with the least amount of risk.

Here's a great link to the The Welding Institute for all those unfamiliar with titanium welding, as it covers a lot of the basics.
https://www.twi-global.com/technica...elding-of-titanium-and-its-alloys-part-1-109/

Scroll down and when it references contamination, the key word is MAY. As in, discoloration MAY be problematic but it is entirely dependent on service conditions.

A company manufacturers a handful of suppressor models and configurations, not thousands. Therefore I presume they have the means to do actual testing on production units to determine if it satisfies the user requirements.

It sounds like Kevin acknowledges the challenges in welding titanium as he mentioned a vacuum is ideal (it is, using the right process). But it appears he consciously chose to take some liberties in his welding procedure. Maybe to stay below a cost ceiling. Maybe because he felt it wasn't needed. Same reason why other manufacturers choose not to PVD or EDM. There are different ways to skin a cat.

I'm not defending Q. I'd prefer silver welds. But demonstrate to me that their welds have led to systemic failures.
Yeah, we just never had one fail. We have actual engineers, not snarky...just most silencer companies do not, and the safety factor designed in to the silencers created a situation where the easiest welds worked as well as any performed by weld consultants. Additional costs we spent on other improvements. It worked, we won all of the contracts.
 
Sounds about right to me. There is a post on Reddit about a Q silencer having a weld failure you can see here.

Here's the post -

Reddit User : "If Q silencers were having trouble due to weld failures, we’d all have heard about it. They aren’t."​
Capitol Armory : "I would have to disagree with this. With firearms, suppressors, cars, and everything else it's nothing people hear right away. It takes time. Not many people actually even have Q cans in their possession. I certainly hope we don't have those problems--- however, we really won't know for a few years out. I've personally had a weld failure on a Q can. Then again, I've seen a whole bunch of cans failure... you can break anything. It's just going to take some time to see the frequency and if it's actually a problem or not. You also tend to hear "problems" when the item is in wide circulation and it's "cool" to discuss the problem---- be it true or not. Specific case--- I've seen hordes of people online saying they were at this range when a specific can failed, or their buddy had the can fail, or a cousins dad had it fall apart. I saw the pictures months before it was on the internet from someone who took them with their own cell phone. It was an isolated incident that turned into an urban legend and people thought it was a widespread problem. Just have to use caution when there's sources on the internet reporting a giant problem."

That's not to say the weld failure is or isn't systemic, we just don't know yet. But what can be said is that if it was done properly to the correct standards there's quite possibly less of a chance to have had a weld failure.

To follow up from what I posted earlier, here's the preproduction CGS Siren vs Q Erector (full length) vs Q El Camino video like I promised: Link


There was no weld failure. He had a Ti failure. He shot it on a full-auto AK until the TI failed from excessive heat. I have the silencer. There are no weld failures. I think he misspoke or or is ignorant to what actually happened.

Your previous novel is mostly all false. Sprinkles of truth on your teenage bullshit story.

If you have questions, just ask. Your narrative and obsession with my history is cute, but false. Finish school, bring the silencers you brag about to market.

I stand by my previous statements.
 
There was no weld failure. He had a Ti failure. He shot it on a full-auto AK until the TI failed from excessive heat. I have the silencer. There are no weld failures. I think he misspoke or or is ignorant to what actually happened.

Your previous novel is mostly all false. Sprinkles of truth on your teenage bullshit story.

If you have questions, just ask. Your narrative and obsession with my history is cute, but false. Finish school, bring the silencers you brag about to market.

I stand by my previous statements.


Brittingham 26:82

You're right, I shouldn't be too nice to Silencer Jesus since all he's done for my company is trash it on every platform. That makes it really difficult to get dealers, distributors, and customers interested in our products, but I'm sure you already knew that. After all, your motto is "If you can't make something quieter or better, tell everyone the other guy's stuff is bad or BS".

But no, I'm not going to ask you anything because you've already demonstrated time and time again that you're incapable of telling the truth without twisting it in one way or another. That is if we're lucky enough for any part of it to be true.

This is a good one for people to see.

Go ahead and weld one of your rifle silencers starting from the front cap in order back to the blast baffle, then do your torture testing and let everyone know how that goes for the silencer. That'll test your welds.

I certainly shouldn't give Silencer Jesus that much credit for being where I am now. I can thank Robert's Silencer Talk forum platform and the good people that comprise CGS Group for that.

But good luck with your silencers and stuff, and that whole Bartlein/Tooley thing #SuperLimitedEditionBarrels

Edited to add screenshots (reuploaded 10/28/18 due to address timing out):
ETA - Reuploaded screenshots dude to address timeout)

30171330_10213698609154238_3418272373281809281_o.jpg
30420834_10213698609234240_4138389662703080853_o.jpg
30171779_10213698609194239_8357153125426514840_o.jpg

30420834_10213698609234240_4138389662703080853_o.jpg

30171330_10213698609154238_3418272373281809281_o.jpg

30171779_10213698609194239_8357153125426514840_o.jpg

30171330_10213698609154238_3418272373281809281_o.jpg


30171779_10213698609194239_8357153125426514840_o.jpg


30420834_10213698609234240_4138389662703080853_o.jpg


30821348_10213698626954683_2061068983454211852_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rwest309
Yes, color = oxidation of contaminants or alloys, which means you're not getting full strength. We weld Titanium with Lasers or Electron Beams almost exclusively here where I work, and when you see a weld with any color, you know someone didn't wait long enough after closing the tank to start the weld.

That said, I've welded titanium motorcycle exhaust's in less than ideal conditions (big rubbermaid tote purges as well as possible with argon)... You're getting color no matter how careful you are in conditions like that... for the application though, who cares? It's non-structural, and with the heat of the exhaust on something like a header, it's going to blue from oxidation in minutes anyway... My buddy was pissed when I "ruined" his brand new Taylor Made Racing exhaust for his S1000RR... He mounted it, and after we stopped an hour later, he couldn't even find the weld with how blue the rest of the exhaust was...


What about NASA though? According to Q NASA says color is GTG? Their cans are “The Best” “The Quietest” “Most Innovative” “Science” “Tapers” “EDM” “PVD” “Most Accurate “ and whatever else they claim?
 
What about NASA though? According to Q NASA says color is GTG? Their cans are “The Best” “The Quietest” “Most Innovative” “Science” “Tapers” “EDM” “PVD” “Most Accurate “ and whatever else they claim?
I'm pretty sure NASA doesn't make or use silencers. Since that is the case, why does what NASA says mean anything? From my read @JT1 did welding inspection for the military. Last I checked the military does use silencers. I would say for silencers listen to the people that use the thing (the military), the ones whose butts are legally on the line if something goes wrong (the inspectors) who are inspecting according to standards, and the people that say how things should be made for best results ( the multiple standards organizations and societys who make the standards). Not the smooth talking sales man bringing up somebody that doesn't use the thing that is ALWAYS brought up in trying to sell something in the gun industry. To me "NASA" in gun advertising is the same as organic, free range, gluten free, and the like buzz words.
boneless-luten-free-vegan-grass-fed-free-range-bananas-75c-18730445.png
 
Since we're getting off topic...

Good job Kevin, jumping on a potential customer for asking for a little better info. That's the best way to earn a guys business. Watching some of your responses in the Fix thread, it doesn't suprise me.

There's a reason Tbac uses milspec testing procedures. Quantifiable, repeatable results that anyone with the right equipment can duplicate. Ray has done a lot of other videos with numbers at the ejection port and shooters ear and he states that. The milspec tests gives anyone a fair playing field if they want to go head to head numbers with someone else.

One more thing Kevin, you tell the guy to start his own business so he can do whatever he wants. Why would he do that when Tbac already does?! Your marketing is pretty good, however, you're products have to speak for themselves to this crowd. We're not your typical group of internet sheep.

This is how people act when called out on their BS, they get extremely hostile, defensive, try to degrade or embarrass the person so the Stop questioning them, if the product was everything as the person in described it to be, he wouldn’t Be hostile towards potential customers with real world questions or constantly degrade the competition. The products would speak for themselves. The military would be knocking at their door, they’re not. Surefire Sued Kevin and Won IIRC that is why he no longer says anything but good things about Surefire. He always says “these are great cans, nothing wrong with them” when referring to Surefire.

There is a lot of BS behind the scenes, Kevin (James Bond) or Q (Ethan) Q the company for this statement, like to boost about others being Bootlegs, well what has Kevin or Q designed that is totally revolutionary New From the Ground up Design?

Nothing, prove me wrong? They are all bootlegs of older products. They don’t want people to realize they can build their own Honey Badger for Half The Cost and Same Weight. LWRC Pistol Lower has the same Recoil system, so does the MVB ARC (ARC is Heavy though), but it’s all out there.

I wonder why nobody even showcased any of the Q products at SHOT this year? Kevin’s Attitude On Social Media Maybe? Where did Robbie Johnson, Lyndsey Bunch, and the rest of the people who started Q go? Why did they go?

Ask the Hard Questions and watch the responses given by the Great Kevin Brittingham Sorry, Bond, James Bond, Wait where is the Lamborghini? Or Q Ethan Lessard
I'm pretty sure NASA doesn't make or use silencers. Since that is the case, why does what NASA says mean anything? From my read @JT1 did welding inspection for the military. Last I checked the military does use silencers. I would say for silencers listen to the people that use the thing (the military), the ones whose butts are legally on the line if something goes wrong (the inspectors) who are inspecting according to standards, and the people that say how things should be made for best results ( the multiple standards organizations and societys who make the standards). Not the smooth talking sales man bringing up somebody that doesn't use the thing that is ALWAYS brought up in trying to sell something in the gun industry. To me "NASA" in gun advertising is the same as organic, free range, gluten free, and the like buzz words. View attachment 6898443

This was my exact point, being Sarcastic, as there is a lot of Fuckery behind the scenes at Q!
 
Silencer Jesus has spoken.

Anyway....we sent our original Hydra to @TBACRAY as well as a Kraken. We didn’t have a bk 2209 at the time. Totally fine with sending stuff to other industry guys with significant experience. I just like to be selective based on ethics. Ray is one at the top of that list. Ray approached us at Shot as totally unknown company offering honest opinion and encouragement. I have been around Ray at a few other events and seen the way he interacts with people and listen to what they say about him when he is not around. He’s good to go.

Sneaky little Silencer Jesus went to a Dealer and bought a Hydra SS and AL instead of just asking his bastard step children up front who would have gladly given them free of charge.

He metered them with the Larsen Davis meter of the gods and Sent the results via disappearing private message. Unfortunately screenshots make that permanent. FWIW These are Q numbers not mine so I can’t take any responsibility for this

5531D947-E9D0-441A-B221-6D4AF2811521.jpeg


@HansohnBrothers has metered the Kraken on video as well. IIRC It was sub 120db with whatever 147 Ammo they were shooting. Ask them for the Info though again I don’t need to speak for them.

So basically either way you want to look at it we built a 22 can in 2015, on Paco’s first attempt at a design, that by Q meter numbers, came in under 2db from Silencer Jesus latest greatest invention or we currently have a 9mm can that will outperform all these rimfires with subs and tons of third party video to back it up.

Also I would encourage anyone on here to find something from me or CGS publicly criticizing Q or any other silencer manufacturers product for that matter. Doesn’t happen. I’m definitely not that guy.

For what it’s worth I can also assure you that no one person on this site has purchased more product from Silencer Jesus.

10 Fix Rifles
Honey Badger
Honey badger suppressor
Trash Panda
Thunder Chicken
Full Nelson
Half Nelson
Erector
El Camino

I think i am at around 30k in tithes to the cult of Silencer Jesus. All purchased direct through Q. So we are not just bastard step kids we are also real good customers.

My take on it all. If this is what you’re into then it Absolutely will not disappoint. The cans are obviously nice. Packaging and marketing materials are next level. The Fix Rifles are little pieces of heaven. They shoot phenomenally and are the most innovative thing I have seen in decades. I want the mini fix and an 8.6 Creedmoor so bad I can taste it but probably never get one unless Silencer Jesus judges us worthy.

That said from an actual industry competitor standpoint I am a lot more worried about @TBACRAY cans up against ours in a .mil down select. Not just because Ray / Zaks stuff is highly regarded in the circles we run in but because q doesn’t have anything that competes with what we make. We don’t even Meter our rifle cans In the same db bracket. Also Ray is a good guy. Always humble always quick to lend a hand. People speak highly of Ray and his product. That’s what I want out of life. Haven’t really heard a lot of good stuff about the other guy except what he says about himself.

Although obviously an insecure and jealous god, I would definitely like to allow Silencer Jesus a bit more time to think about what he wants to say in reference to the competence or abilities of CGS employees to run mil spec silencer tests. I don’t know if he recalls some of them being instrumental in his success with this .mil and SOCOM stuff in their previous jobs.

I guess all his old buddies and anyone else that tells you something you don’t want to hear are just liars blasphemers teenagers or maybe just plain incompetent to the all knowing Silencer Jesus.

Nothing triggers like Truth.
 
Last edited:
FWIW I purchased some Q cans last night. I'm sure I'd be happy with TBAC, Dead Air, and a few others I considered. Maybe next time around Ill give them my dollars. But at the end of the day the Q models offered the most of what I wanted. If the welds fail on me, now that would be ironic wouldn't it...

Military standards vary significantly, and within those standards there is even more variance with requirements and inspection dependent on intended application. Sometimes standards don't exist so procurement is done on a case basis. So I would be hesitant to compare the operating conditions of a $900+ thin hollow tube vs other military applications that can cost thousands or millions of dollars.
 
paco ramirez and rwest309 that was an ok video on the Erector vs. your .22lr can. I'd encourage you to list environmental data and film both the shooter and meter at the same time however, makes for not only a better video but a less questionable set of results. What I really want to ask though is about NFA Talk.org's results you can find here. They have the Erector and your .22lr can within .1db of one another at the shooter's ear on pistols and a little louder on rifles. Suffice to say, the results are significantly different from your own, but again so is the metering position (as far as we know).

While certain parts of .mil may still care about the 1m left of muzzle results, I don't think many/any civis (not to mention socom as far as I understand) still do. At the ear (generally right) is what is cared about generally, and I hope you and the third parties you mention will take this to heart as TBAC has done with their video testing (which is again, exceptional comparatively).

Also on a personal note, your posts ITT have made me seriously consider a CGS can (provided we get more testing validation) and I cannot wait for more to be publicly available, well done.

As for Kevin, you seem confused, I'm not saying your cans aren't available to the public, I'm saying your testing data isn't. You identified correctly that there is a lack of data for the public in regards to suppressor performance. You are in one of the rare positions to help address this using the relatively simple methods mentioned above. I encourage you to do so as well.
 
It states color is not necessarily an indicator, and the absence is color is not necessarily an indicator. That you must physically test both. Shoot their core see how it looks.

I've one multiple US .mil contracts we Ti silencers. No one else has. We do not have weld failures.


You left out a word, let me help you out, all the .mil contracts you HAD, Key Word HAD! That was a different company, different suppressors, & a different market.

Any .mil contracts for Q? Those are the welds being discussed, correct?
 
paco ramirez and rwest309 that was an ok video on the Erector vs. your .22lr can. I'd encourage you to list environmental data and film both the shooter and meter at the same time however, makes for not only a better video but a less questionable set of results. What I really want to ask though is about NFA Talk.org's results you can find here. They have the Erector and your .22lr can within .1db of one another at the shooter's ear on pistols and a little louder on rifles. Suffice to say, the results are significantly different from your own, but again so is the metering position (as far as we know).

While certain parts of .mil may still care about the 1m left of muzzle results, I don't think many/any civis (not to mention socom as far as I understand) still do. At the ear (generally right) is what is cared about generally, and I hope you and the third parties you mention will take this to heart as TBAC has done with their video testing (which is again, exceptional comparatively).

Also on a personal note, your posts ITT have made me seriously consider a CGS can (provided we get more testing validation) and I cannot wait for more to be publicly available, well done.

As for Kevin, you seem confused, I'm not saying your cans aren't available to the public, I'm saying your testing data isn't. You identified correctly that there is a lack of data for the public in regards to suppressor performance. You are in one of the rare positions to help address this using the relatively simple methods mentioned above. I encourage you to do so as well.

That test was done the same day as the Hyperion/Full Nelson test I posted earlier. As I mentioned above, expect the first videos using the parameters I specified in around a week. We have only one meter, so doing at ear numbers for the same gun shot as the muzzle number wouldn't be possible. The tests I showed were both 1M left of silencer muzzle and 1.6M off the ground and we use A Weighting as I believe Bill does as well for his tests. But maybe we'll be able to pick up another BK 2209 in the future to accomplish that.

I'll gladly do an 'at the right ear' comparison video for you with a bolt gun and semi auto host, just know there won't be accompanying muzzle numbers since we only have the one meter. I find people still care about both numbers, if anything both should be published, not just one or the other. But as I said, it's impossible to get both data points on the same shot with one meter. At least as far as I know.

If I remember right, in Bill's test that day the Siren beat the full length Erector on a rifle. But as to what you bring up, since the Erectors clips in the cones cannot be timed due to manufacturing variances such as having them built on different machines, etc, could be that some peoples Erector baffle clips just don't line up in a way that's beneficial to sound reduction when tightened together. I don't think we've changed anything on the Siren since that test, but in the near future we're introducing a part into it to limit FRP. KG Made can confirm that was a pretty weird day for sound measuring. For example, normally an Omega will give me a headache in the first couple shots, but that day it didn't for whatever reason. And that location, probably due in major part to sound reflection from trees (because you're literally in a rectangular bowl surrounded completely by trees), most everything super sonic sounded the same unless it was something extremely vented like MaxFlo that vents the majority of the gas to prevent gas blowback.

As for whether we're being truthful or not (we are), here's a guy on Reddit (5th post in I think) that was at the NFA Review Channel Shoot 2018 we attended a couple weekends ago that had some stuff to say about the Hyperion. At the event we brought our Keres 50 silencer which was mounted on a McMillan Tac 50 in a Cadex chassis, our Hekate 338 silencer mounted on a Sako TRG M10 in 338 Lapua Magnum, our Hyperion 264 mounted on a Bartlein barrel chambered in 260 Remington with a Surgeon action and Remington RACS chassis (same rifle as in the comparison video, but 264 bored silencer instead of 300), our Hyperion 300 K, our Helios 556 K, our Kraken full size, our Kraken SK, our preproduction Siren, our Hydra SS and Hydra AL, our blast diverter prototype, and I'm probably forgetting a couple things but that's the majority of it.

Glad to hear we're earning your trust, if there's anything more I can do please let me know. We value peoples input.
 
Last edited:
What if you’re wrong tho sweetie?

It’s no wonder these are TBAC’s people.

Such a salty little hoe.

You’re so smart too and so rich and so amazing we all bow at your feet. No way any one could ever be more accomplished. Definitely no way another company could make a better can.

No one should ever question the word of Silencer Jesus.

I hope you’re locked the fuck on in real life, because flinging insults like those would make it embarrassing for most to be associated with you in real life. Immature and stupid. Paco is not even 30 and can express himself sans bitchy personal insults. Learn from your associate.
 
I hope you’re locked the fuck on in real life, because flinging insults like those would make it embarrassing for most to be associated with you in real life. Immature and stupid. Paco is not even 30 and can express himself sans bitchy personal insults. Learn from your associate.

Not to excuse that post, but it's hardly one sided, not that you're implying that. We will certainly rise above that and strive to do better in the future.

- Josh

Edited to add this gem (when I received this threat a few months ago I went ahead and posted the messages myself in their entirety on IG/FB):

31437365_10213705644770124_5990559543085085362_n.jpg



One of his own bitchy insults, after we told him how great the Fix rifles were that we'd received after prepaying/ordering more than a year prior. And accompanying that conveniently in the same screenshot is the mention of 32 photos which were the messages I posted referenced above:
30171177_10213703684641122_4284347853834498421_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
I hope you’re locked the fuck on in real life, because flinging insults like those would make it embarrassing for most to be associated with you in real life. Immature and stupid. Paco is not even 30 and can express himself sans bitchy personal insults. Learn from your associate.

Not too sure what the first part means really but I totally saw your point when I read your post. I get what you mean about being bitchy and calling people names.

It is definitely stupid. And immature. Thanks for that lesson.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeep94
FWIW I purchased some Q cans last night. I'm sure I'd be happy with TBAC, Dead Air, and a few others I considered. Maybe next time around Ill give them my dollars. But at the end of the day the Q models offered the most of what I wanted. If the welds fail on me, now that would be ironic wouldn't it...

Military standards vary significantly, and within those standards there is even more variance with requirements and inspection dependent on intended application. Sometimes standards don't exist so procurement is done on a case basis. So I would be hesitant to compare the operating conditions of a $900+ thin hollow tube vs other military applications that can cost thousands or millions of dollars.
Thanks for the support. You will be happy with Q products.