Triple 6 Update/Delay

[JoeK]

with the notion that OTB suppression is better with a tighter bore clearance and prominence of 6mm and .22cal around here it seems like T6 should be one of the most popular.

 

[andrew_hood27]

Well, you will keep your money for a long time. That is below the sonic crack of the bullet and is in the realm of 9-12” long 338 cans.

@Formidilosus @AirlockIndustries is showing their 6.5mm bore suppressor testing at ~123db on a 22” .223.

(Not trying to stir the pot, just throwing out a data point).

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus @AirlockIndustries is showing their 6.5mm bore suppressor testing at ~123db on a 22” .223.

(Not trying to stir the pot, just throwing out a data point).

Read in context- the person I quoted wanted 16” 6.5cm and 16” 223- not 22” barrels 223. The sonic crack is more than 124dB. And there is a very large differed between a 22” barrel and a 16” for lots of cartridges.

 

[andrew_hood27]

Read in context- the person I quoted wanted 16” 6.5cm and 16” 223- not 22” barrels 223. The sonic crack is more than 124dB. And there is a very large differed between a 22” barrel and a 16” for lots of cartridges.

Ok cool, I kind of figured I was missing something. Thanks for the reply.

 

[Schmo]

I want to give everyone an update on the Triple 6. We have been "done" with the design for a couple weeks now, however, as we are working through the final testing we come to the conclusion that it really doesn't do anything that the OG65 doesn't already do. We don't want to launch this can as "good enough" when we know that we can make it better. A 6mm can is very near and dear to US and we want to knock it out of the park with the design, not look back 6 months from now and wish we had done better or wish we had applied the knowledge gained in that ammount of time. We want to take more time to continue development, testing and improvement. As of right now we are likely delaying launch until March ish, Today looking at the production schedule and windows for printing prototypes, we think this gives us plenty of time to develop something that is measurably better.

I will provide development updates in this thread as they emerge. I am sorry to anyone that we promised would be able to have this suppressor on a much shorter timeline. Feedback and thoughts from everyone will be greatly appreciated, this decision is largely based on the feedback we have gotten from our other suppressor launches.

Really appreciate this! If I can give my two cents: keep the current db rating, but through design & testing change it to a 2” muzzle forward, 4” reflex. I know that is a whole lot easier said than done. In my book, that would be enough of a meaningful change.

 

[Formidilosus]

Really appreciate this! If I can give my two cents: keep the current db rating, but through design & testing change it to a 2” muzzle forward, 4” reflex. I know that is a whole lot easier said than done. In my book, that would be enough of a meaningful change.

Haha. There is no technology that exists that will allow a one baffle can (2”) to be functional.

 

[Schmo]

Haha. There is no technology that exists that will allow a one baffle can (2”) to be functional.

Hey it was worth a shot

 

[Formidilosus]

Hey it was worth a shot

Yeah….



3” though……

 

[Schmo]

Yeah….



3” though……

Okay I’m in with that. Trying to figure out how to have an 18” barrel and be suppressed at 20”. 21” is close enough…