SilencerCo Scythe Ti failures

[HuntHarder]

For me, personally, I don’t care about the POI if I end up out in the field with a broken collarbone or orbital bone.

I care about the POI. I have hunts coming up that I intend to use my Scythe on. If it decides to let go on my first shot at my intended game, at least I should still connect .
As far as broken bones, it's rare, if this is your fear, I would never shoot that can again if I were you. It is a possibility tho.

 

[brianwesson1]

Based off my one experience recoil was like shooting it without a brake. Not saying it couldn’t happen though. I had my cover on and it shredded it so maybe the cover absorbed some of the energy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Q_Sertorius]

As far as broken bones, it's rare, if this is your fear, I would never shoot that can again if I were you. It is a possibility tho.

I already came to the same conclusion. I have a partially reconstructed shoulder that is operating at 30% efficiency. I’m selling the Scythe.

Edit - anyone who wants to buy it from me has until 11:15 EST to DM me with an offer.

 

[mtwarden]

Does anyone know the rd count / rate of fire, at which titanium starts to approach that 800* mark? Seems like that would important info to avoid damaging or weakening the can. I US and Airlock put that in their info, but I would guess the average user, has no idea where that threshold is approached.

Not Silenco, but another lightweight Ti manufacturer (Air Lock Industries) recommends:

• Fire rate: 15RPM & not more than 1 round per second – then let cool (NEVER exceed 800 degrees F)

 

[HuntHarder]

Not Silenco, but another lightweight Ti manufacturer (Air Lock Industries) recommends:

• Fire rate: 15RPM & not more than 1 round per second – then let cool (NEVER exceed 800 degrees F)

Thanks, begs the next question. What is an acceptable durability test given these parameters? Does the average consumer want the test to consist of 30 RPM or double it's rating, to prove it's durability? Or do we like tests consisting of repeated mag dumps "near cyclic"?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Thanks, begs the next question. What is an acceptable durability test given these parameters? Does the average consumer want the test to consist of 30 RPM or double it's rating, to prove it's durability? Or do we like tests consisting of repeated mag dumps "near cyclic"?

Durability testing is different than destructive testing.

 

[Formidilosus]

This is not a defense of the Scythe, but do you think that the uncorking pressure might be higher for 5.56 than for some other cartridges?

I again ask-

“The first question is: if it structurally failed in the same manner as they all are failing; and yet no other can structurally failed… does the firing schedule matter?”

Again not defending it but that seems to be beyond what the intended use case is for it. It’s not rated for full auto so I’m not surprised that 3 mags of cyclic killed it. Looking forward to reading the eval to see how long it survived

I asked a question in a specific way to you last night to get you and others reading to think critically. The purpose of a “stress test” is to reveal underlying, obvious, overt, etc flaws in a design. You have a specific product that has consistent and repeated structural failures in extremely light normal use- a stress test should reveal the underlying issue present. It does not matter if the can is “rated” for it or not- if 6 other Ti cans had structural failure or damage, and those cans are not known to fail; then the can structurally being damaged by it is revealing the issue with the can.

NO Ti or Steel centerfire can should have a structural failure or structural damage from 90 rounds of 5.56. Slight to moderate baffle or bore erosion- sure. A threaded aluminum end cap coming out, no real issue, even slight belling in the end cap at the bore is not concerning . But- bulging of the main body or can separation, baffles being bent, blown out, or having large erosion; that’s BAD. That is showing that there is no margin for error or safety.

The real issue with this kind of test seems to me to be that titanium can get weakened by going above 800 degrees, but that doesn’t mean that it will fail right then. A can might survive a 90-round magazine dump and then fail on the fifth round some other day. But I think Form knows that better than I do.

Ehh not really. Or at least you should not see issues with can designed and made properly. The stress test isn’t saying that you should do that to your can, it’s a way to reveal obvious problems with a can, or can design- read what I wrote above.

There are numerous failures in this thread where the failure occurs after what I consider a prolonged period of regular but gentle use and it comes apart before the tenth shot of that particular day. That’s what worries me most about the Scythe. I can put a couple of hundred rounds of a relatively mild cartridge through it (e.g. 6.5mm Grendel) and not have any issues, but then it can let go on me on round 205 or 220. And Murphy’s law says that won’t be at the range doing normal practice, but the instant I let someone else use it or take a shot at a buck.

So again, you don’t see a correlation to that, with a stress event that has the same can failing, when all others did not?

 

[Formidilosus]

As the titanium, lightweight can game continues to progress, I suspect there will be others that fail similar tests. Essentially the companies are just taking performance/ weight savings too close to the edge of failure. IF the Scythes were only failing on "near cyclic 90 rd dumps," that would not bother me at all. My use case would never approach that threshold. The problem with the Scythe is, some are failing with 20 rds, some a 100, some havn't failed with 1000's. Big cartridges, small cartridges, short shot strings, long shot strings.

A hunting, ultra lite, titanium can, should never see "near cyclic" 30, 60 or 90 rd mag dumps. If this is your intended use, there are better options out there.

You are missing the point of a stress test. Read my last post.

Does anyone know the rd count / rate of fire, at which titanium starts to approach that 800* mark? Seems like that would important info to avoid damaging or weakening the can. I US and Airlock put that in their info, but I would guess the average user, has no idea where that threshold is approached.

Somewhere around 800° lightweight Ti cans will start to glow red. There is no hard rule there, but it is in that ballpark. On a 10.5” 5.56 shot near cyclic, that’s around 70-90 rounds.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I’m not disagreeing with you.

I asked the question about uncorking pressure as a query towards determining whether 5.56 might not be worse than other cartridges for a weak suppressor. In other words, might it be putting more stress on the Scythe than a larger caliber?

What use do you think is the safest for a Scythe? Paperweight? Single shot 24” .30-30? Bolt action .300 Blackout?

Edit - Do you have any advice for someone who currently owns a Scythe Ti?

 

[HuntHarder]

You are missing the point of a stress test. Read my last post.





Somewhere around 800° lightweight Ti cans will start to glow red. There is no hard rule there, but it is in that ballpark. On a 10.5” 5.56 shot near cyclic, that’s around 70-90 rounds.

Thanks, knowing that all Scythes have failed at weld points, with no rhyme or reason on firing schedule or cartridge, it's clear it is either a design flaw or poor welds.

Other manufacturers put limits on barrel length, cartidge maximums and rate of fire. What is an acceptable way to test those?

 

[Brontosaurus]

I’m not disagreeing with you.

I asked the question about uncorking pressure as a query towards determining whether 5.56 might not be worse than other cartridges for a weak suppressor. In other words, might it be putting more stress on the Scythe than a larger caliber?

Don’t feel compelled to answer this question, but what use do you think is the safest for a Scythe? Paperweight? Single shot 24” .30-30? Bolt action .300 Blackout?

I think what he's saying is that all the science behind it doesnt matter much. 6 cans didnt fail the test and one did. If all the other UL hunting cans with similar specs can do something and the other one cant, it says something. Maybe throw the scythe on a 22?

 

[Formidilosus]

I’m not disagreeing with you.

I asked the question about uncorking pressure as a query towards determining whether 5.56 might not be worse than other cartridges for a weak suppressor. In other words, might it be putting more stress on the Scythe than a larger caliber?

There are three main things that cause suppressor failure:

In simple terms-

1). Total volume of powder/gas- think high powder capacity. At times you can see the indents that unburned powder kernels make in the end caps.

2). Smaller donated, high pressure- a 6UM will fail cans that a 300 win mag will not.

3). Heat and fatigue. Either getting so hot that the cans turns white and the metal fails totally (takes a lot more than 90 rounds); or repeated cycles of extremely hot, cools, hot, cools.


Think of the 90 rounds near cyclin with a 5.56 as the Drop Eval in the scope evals. It is a stress event shows failures that are also seen I normal use- there is a correlation. Just like the drop portion in the scope evals, it is not the whole “test”, but it is a very obvious revealer of underlying fragility issues. The difference however is a scope losing zero is not daggers to the shooter or bystanders (generally), a suppressor failing can and is a danger to the shooter and bystanders.

Don’t feel compelled to answer this question, but what use do you think is the safest for a Scythe? Paperweight? Single shot 24” .30-30? Bolt action .300 Blackout?

I would not choose to use one. If it was the only can I had, and I could not get another, I would only use it on rifles where if (when) it separates there is no change of being injured from the can launching- so pretty much 223 and 300BO.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I think what he's saying is that all the science behind it doesnt matter much. 6 cans didnt fail the test and one did. If all the other UL hunting cans with similar specs can do something and the other one cant, it says something. Maybe throw the scythe on a 22?

I agree completely with the validity of the test.

 

[TxLite]

 

[Formidilosus]

Other manufacturers put limits on barrel length, cartidge maximums and rate of fire. What is an acceptable way to test those?

Well, there’s actually a question first:

Do you believe that manufactures test their cans to the limit with live firing and the cartridge and barrel combos they state, see where they cans fail, and then set their “limits” from that exact life firing tests with a built in safety margin?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I would not choose to use one. If it wa she only can I had, and I could not get another, I would only use it on rifles where if (when) it separates there is no change of being injured from the can launching- so pretty much 223 and 300BO.

Thank you. I appreciate the answer on that point.

 

[HuntHarder]

I think what he's saying is that all the science behind it doesnt matter much. 6 cans didnt fail the test and one did. If all the other UL hunting cans with similar specs can do something and the other one cant, it says something. Maybe throw the scythe on a 22?

The 6 other cans need similar specs for this to be relevant imo. Which cans were tested?

 

[Formidilosus]

View attachment 935262

Haha.

Being serious- I’m not sure why people believe that I like or dislike anything (except the TBAC UL5- that item sucks… grin). I did not just randomly wake up and decide that scopes lose zero when they shouldn’t, or that R700 triggers fail, or that smaller calibers kill well, or that suppressors fail in certain ways.

 

[ThreeOhSeven]

Is it physically possible for any part of the can to blow back towards the shooter at failure?

 

[Formidilosus]

The 6 other cans need similar specs for this to be relevant imo. Which cans were tested?

No they don’t- the reason the Scythe fails is precisely because of its specs.

All the cans tested were Ti hunting suppressors. None were rated for “full-auto”- which in and of itself is a nonsense marketing term with no definition. “Full auto” does not damage cans.