Thread: 338 suppressors

Originally Posted by Bill999

You dont like overbarrel suppressors?

Nope!

Im interested in the pro's of QD suppressors too. I would have thought lightweight, overbarrel was the way to go. My suppressed guns wear a suppressor permanently so cant see the need for QD. Also QD means barrel forward.

I was speaking with the Beretta gunsmith , and he said they brought some in for the Police to try ( BL 223 cans ) , and they where the agents then, the Police liked them , and cut the agent OUT , and Police went straight to AU & ordered 2000 , so after doing the leg work & being the offical agent , and htne getting screwed , they decided not to bother with AU any more, and I donot blame them .
If you cannot get them out of Finland because they want to be wankers , then get them from the UK or Europe etc .
I am trying to get SL7 30 & 338 cans for my self at the moment , see how that goes .
Later Chris

the pro's of the muzzle forward & QDs , are
1 ) as its muzzle forward , the rear shape / contour is NOT important , makes barrel profile & fitting easier .
2 ) most QDs have a locking mech , which is a catch / lever / ratchet , etc thats positively stops the can from un-intentially un-screwing it self .
3 ) in most cans the large rear volume is not as effective in suppressing the sound as , baffles are forward of the muzzle , look at most telescoping/reflex types and they have very small lenght/baffles forward of the muzzle , .

these are just generalisations , some like the surefire , are a mix of QD & reflex designs , but the muzzle brake is very long and barrel contour is complex for the fittng of their brake .

In 338LM , I think that either Ase Utara , Or Brugger &Thomet would be hard to beat in this cal , the NEA could be nice as well , but for me the AU SL7 BL is what I want , as the can should be good , and the big plus for me is it has a locking mech , to stop the can from un-screwing it self .


Later Chris

QD does not mean they are all barrel forward , look at the suppressors from Surefire in the USA , for 308 & 338LM bolt guns etc , they telescope alot . they have a locking mech to stop them unscrewing as well .

I just want short, and if that means utilising the area around the barrel to increase internal volume then so be it. each to their own I suppose

overbarrels have very little volume in the rear section unless you go quite wide, weight/volume ratio is less efficient, can't be swapped between multiple guns (as made by most NZers anyway), also trap heat in the barrel etc

QD I am interested in because

-easier to swap between can/no can
-locking
-looks cool

Downsides: Heavier, no-one makes them in this country

Thanks for the pros. Locking issue can be negated by creating an anti clockwise vortex with the expelled gases.

I looked at my mates over barrel, had about 6" forward of the muzzle. Same as most muzzle cans.

The Finnish brand " Reflex " , have a very small amount forward of the muzzle , maybe 2-4 inches , and all are about 12 inches long , they have T4 & T8 models , this refers to the number of stamped sheet metal thin baffles , spaced about 5-10mm apart , the assault rifle models , ie the AK , FN , G3 , M16 etc are usually only 4 baffles , ie T4 models , the ones for bolt guns , can be either T4 or T8 , the models for the Sako TRG series are T8 .
The older ATec cans have about 5 inches back , and about 7 inches forward , for 12 inches OAL .
They are also called 2 point mounts , ie the muzzle thread and the shoulder ( being 4-7 inches rearward approx ) , as they have two points of contact , they tend not to unscrew un - intentially as much as std single point mounts , they can also be made to put the last 5-7 inches of barrel into tension ( ie stretch the barrel ) , this increases accuracy & also stops the can un-screwing by its self as well .
In most cases metal ( CM or SS ) cans have downsized from the older reflex /telescoping cans , to muzzle forward , this is because in doing so they save in weight & size , and the very small difference in absolute sound reduction , is not worth the extra weight & size .
Look at say the M89 can made in the 80s , as a very good relfex design ( big & long & heavy ) , when cost & size did not matter , and only absolute performance counted , its a huge can , the US Navy used them for a while , but then most guys moved onto the AWC Thundertrap , which was about 1/2 the size , and offered enough sound suppression for them , in a handier package .
Remember , the above is for Steel & SS reflex designs , most NZ relfex/telescoping cans are aluninium , in reference to weight .

Later Chris

Be careful about leaving a can on your rifle all the time , as they draw in alot of moisture , and well cause corrision in the muzzle end of the barrel , as well as the actual barrel threads etc , also harder to clean the barrel with the can still on .
It can get to the stage of having to cut the can off , I use a high temp anti-seize paste on the threads ( the one with nickel in ) .
But if you do leave the can on all the time , at least store the rifle can down , then all the crap thats in the can will not drop back down the barrel etc .

Cheers Chris

Originally Posted by Beavis

I looked at my mates over barrel, had about 6" forward of the muzzle. Same as most muzzle cans.

my gunworks can does as well, another overbarrel only goes forward less than 4 inches,
all depends how its made

I cant tell the difference in noise, not that Iv put them side by side

If I made my own Id see what the min length forward I could get away with without comprimising suppression too much

that or just get a modular and remove baffels till it is to my liking, like I do on my ar

Is this the smallest lightest Titanium 338 suppressor ???

Archangel338 – 338 Cal 9.25″ Ti Suppressor | Templar Suppressors, Customer Precision Rifles