UM/S2H/Suppressors/Scopes and More!

[Formidilosus]

Nice! Normal gas block, h2 buffer?

Yes, and yes.

How well do they stay on the barrel? Recoil and staying tight are my only real concerns

The twist and SNAP keeps them tight long enough to carbon lock. grin

 

[Chris_in_Idaho]

@Formidilosus
Any visible baffle erosion after a mag dump?

 

[Formidilosus]

@Formidilosus
Any visible baffle erosion after a mag dump?

On what?

 

[Chris_in_Idaho]

@Formidilosus

The OG/OG65 on the 14.5 AR you posted. Did the suppressor(s) have any visible baffle erosion afterward?

I was assuming you did a mag dump through it like you have on other suppressor evaluations.

 

[Formidilosus]

The OG/OG65 on the 14.5 AR you posted. Did the suppressor(s) have any visible baffle erosion afterward?

I was assuming you did a mag dump through it like you have on other suppressor evaluations.

Oh no. Absolutely not. The OG can take anything you want to put through it- that one has done at least 3 full 180 round cyclic events- zero visible baffle or bore erosion.

The OG65 test can has 3x 90 round cyclic events without issue. The 180 round cyclic event caused slight 1st baffle erosion- still fully functional and still being used. Understand that 180 rounds cyclic (near full auto), is way beyond what almost any “hunting” can withstand without drastic damage.

The US cans made to date can be used on semi autos, even rapid fire without issue.

 

[JDBAK]

How does the 6.5 compare to the triple 6 for suppression?

The 1.5 oz weight difference isn’t that important to me.

If I could do it all over again, I would have bought a max suppression can first, weight and size be damned, as for most shooting it would not become obsolete.

 

[Lawnboi]

Ripped off my CB brake and screwed on my OG 6.5 from the group buy today.

Shorter and lighter than the ultra 7, sounds about the same to me. Simple, no frills. Seems like a winner.

Thanks again for the group buy

 

[Lawnboi]

How does the 6.5 compare to the triple 6 for suppression?

The 1.5 oz weight difference isn’t that important to me.

If I could do it all over again, I would have bought a max suppression can first, weight and size be damned, as for most shooting it would not become obsolete.

I have a Tbac Magnus that’s my least used suppressor. It’s too long and heavy for most hunting, and if I’m shooting at the range or shooting matches I’m using my Magnus K with a brake on it, as earpro dosnt matter.

The Magnus full size is cool to shoot, it’s quiet, but you still have the sonic crack, that’s loud to begin with. More than a few shots hunting I’m always wearing ear protection. So it ends up being my least used suppressor.

 

[WI-Carcosa]

@Lawnboi said it very well. The OG 6.5 is the equivalent in sound to the ultra 7 gen 2 30 in my mind. I have 45 rounds through my OG 6.5 on a 20” 6.5 PRC and it sounds the same or a touch better to me than the ultra 7 30 on my 22” 6.5 PRC side by side. Little different tone as well but nothing extraordinary different at shooters ear in my opinion. With the 4” in front, durability, and weight this is a great go to can going forward for anything 6.5 and smaller.

 

[jdvangeystel]

H

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Has anyone received shipping confirmation on suppressors bought during the Blem sale? I placed an order on November 17th and talked to them on the 18th about where to ship it too- I was told it would ship ASAP and I still have yet to get shipping confirmation and I’ve emailed them twice asking about it and can’t get a reply either


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My experience has been that they typically ship about two weeks after an order (sample size of two, where I ordered bead blasted finish each time). They haven’t sent me shipping confirmation for the prototype I ordered.

 

[Aux Arc]

Oh no. Absolutely not. The OG can take anything you want to put through it- that one has done at least 3 full 180 round cyclic events- zero visible baffle or bore erosion.

The OG65 test can has 3x 90 round cyclic events without issue. The 180 round cyclic event caused slight 1st baffle erosion- still fully functional and still being used. Understand that 180 rounds cyclic (near full auto), is way beyond what almost any “hunting” can withstand without drastic damage.

The US cans made to date can be used on semi autos, even rapid fire without issue.

Can you tell us what makes the US cans less susceptible to baffle erosion during these tests? It looks like US is using grade 23 titanium which has a higher fracture resistance than grade 5 which seems to be the standard with other suppressor companies.

All the other suppressors in your tests had baffle erosion or catastrophic failure during the 90 round rapid fire. Just curious what is different.

I was also curious what would happen if these cyclic tests were repeated. Looks like you went well beyond what you posted without issue.

It doesn’t matter as the tests you’ve done so far exceed what I will ever put a suppressor through, but have you tested one of these to failure? I thought I remembered reading you were going to but never did find any results. I like destructive testing, it’s fun to know where the limit is.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Can you tell us what makes the US cans less susceptible to baffle erosion during these tests? It looks like US is using grade 23 titanium which has a higher fracture resistance than grade 5 which seems to be the standard with other suppressor companies.

All the other suppressors in your tests had baffle erosion or catastrophic failure during the 90 round rapid fire. Just curious what is different.

There is probably more material thickness in the baffle causing it to heat up less in that duration than others. The peak temperatures weaken the material.

Just my speculation, make there is a different mechanism in play.

 

[Formidilosus]

Can you tell us what makes the US cans less susceptible to baffle erosion during these tests? It looks like US is using grade 23 titanium which has a higher fracture resistance than grade 5 which seems to be the standard with other suppressor companies.

All the other suppressors in your tests had baffle erosion or catastrophic failure during the 90 round rapid fire. Just curious what is different.

That is up to US to say if they want, however the Ti quite thick in the baffles, and the type is excellent. US actually tests their cans to destruction and iterates off of that.

I was also curious what would happen if these cyclic tests were repeated. Looks like you went well beyond what you posted without issue.

Depends on the can. The 90 round near cyclic event is stress inducing on cans, but does show hidden weaknesses quickly. 180 rounds near cyclic is absolute abuse and far exceeds the SOCOM reliability test.

The Reaper had no structural damage and moderate to severe heavy baffle erosion after 2x back to back 90 round events in a 10.5” 5.56. In between the 90 round events, it had a couple hundred 18” 300win mag and 7 PRC rounds through it.

The OG has no functional damage after multiple 180 round events, hundreds of short barrel magnum rounds, and several hundred training rounds on AR’s.

The OG65 had no structural damage after 2x back to back 90 round events, and after 1x 180 round events it had moderate to heavy baffle erosion- the can functions fine, but does average 3 dB louder now.

It doesn’t matter as the tests you’ve done so far exceed what I will ever put a suppressor through, but have you tested one of these to failure?

All of them except the OG- you can’t break that can in any real use. Well…. You have to define “failure”. No US can has become unsafe even after multiple 180 round cyclic events, or on 18” barreled 300 RUM’s. One Reaper was damaged to the point that I wouldn’t use it for real anymore due to heavy baffle erosion. It was still safe, but it was missing chunks of baffles and was noticeably louder.

I thought I remembered reading you were going to but never did find any results. I like destructive testing, it’s fun to know where the limit is.

All of the cans have been taken to damage beyond practical use, they just haven’t posted mist of them. None have been able to be damaged to structural failure like the vast majority of cans.

 

[Aux Arc]

That is up to US to say if they want, however the Ti quite thick in the baffles, and the type is excellent. US actually tests their cans to destruction and iterates off of that

Thanks for your response. I certainly don’t expect US to divulge any manufacturing secrets but its eye opening to see how much more abuse they seem to be able to take than other brands you’ve tested.

Well…. You have to define “failure”.

When I say “failure” I’m thinking catastrophic structural damage, like the scythe for example. And to think, I almost bought 2 of them when there was a free stamp deal. Baffle erosion is more of a wear issue I think. So it looks like US has been able to avoid catastrophic failures and mitigate wear even under extreme circumstances.

Anyway, I’m glad to see someone actually testing and providing the data on outcomes. I’ve talked to other companies about barrel/caliber restrictions before and I’m left wondering how they come up with their answers.

 

[Formidilosus]

Thanks for your response. I certainly don’t expect US to divulge any manufacturing secrets but its eye opening to see how much more abuse they seem to be able to take than other brands you’ve tested.

When I say “failure” I’m thinking catastrophic structural damage, like the scythe for example. And to think, I almost bought 2 of them when there was a free stamp deal. Baffle erosion is more of a wear issue I think. So it looks like US has been able to avoid catastrophic failures and mitigate wear even under extreme circumstances.

No US suppresor has had a catastrophic failure, even through use that absolutely turns nearly all “hunting” cans to pipe bombs.

Anyway, I’m glad to see someone actually testing and providing the data on outcomes. I’ve talked to other companies about barrel/caliber restrictions before and I’m left wondering how they come up with their answers.

You and me both. I believe you will be happy with US’s standard that they are going to do and show for caliber/cartridge/barrel length testing from now on.

 

[Gstew1930]

Ripped off my CB brake and screwed on my OG 6.5 from the group buy today.

Shorter and lighter than the ultra 7, sounds about the same to me. Simple, no frills. Seems like a winner.

Thanks again for the group buy
View attachment 973248

i did the exact same thing. took off my CB for the OG 65. Very happy with it