Will/Does Anyone Make a 308 Win Suppressor?

[Macintosh]

So why not the OG30 Gen 2 for a 308? I’m guessing it’ll be 8 ish ounces, and only 4” muzzle forward

Its really the smallest footprint weight and length Id be after. I responded agreeing that a .308 version of the 6-s would be what it would take for me to look at one of these. Some folks dont mind a little heavier and longer—but Ive already got that covered.

I figure moderate length 308 suppressors that weigh 9 ounces are a dime a dozen, unknown doesn’t really stand to gain much market share by offering another one beyond what they’ve already got. But if you’re gonna make a really ultra light and small suppressor for hunting, you cut out a massive share of the market by not offering in 308 caliber. I would think even though the overall market volume in that class would be much smaller, that there’s an argument they could have a larger share of it with a more unique product like that.

 

[Bluefish]

I agree that we aren't at the.point of really specific cans, say one for 6.5creed vs a different one for 6.5prc, but I do think it's coming. Maybe not to the same sales levels or prevalence as universal 30 cal cans, but I think it will become part of the market.

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

I think you are getting too specific for most people and even for a manufacturer. People are not educated and if it says xx cal, it will be used on all of them. So if you make a 6.5 cm can, it better be able to handle a 6.5 prc. Just look at the failures on the scythe. You can’t have a can failing or its reputation is hurt.

Even the specialization of cans between 223, 6, 6.5 is starting to split hairs. When I was looking at airlock, the difference between a nano and zg 6.5 wasn’t enough to not get the zg 6.5 for me. It can cover more rifles and it’s quieter for the small ones. The 2 oz and size difference isn’t worth it to me.

What I really want is a sub 10 oz 45 cal can that works. I would take a sub 8 oz 35 cal can too. I along with the 100,000+ hunters in Iowa all have to use 35 cal or larger, yet there are few good cans out there.

 

[dårlig jeger]

What I really want is a sub 10 oz 45 cal can that works. I would take a sub 8 oz 35 cal can too. I along with the 100,000+ hunters in Iowa all have to use 35 cal or larger, yet there are few good cans out there.

45 cal cans are a good example. Most of them are for 45-70, 458 socom, etc, and not 416 cheytac. If they had to be designed and built to cover every cartridge under 45 cal, it sure wouldn't be sub 10oz.

I'd also love a light, short 45 cal or 35 cal can for short/mini actions like 450bm/458 socom, 35legend, 338 arc.

 

[Bluefish]

45 cal cans are a good example. Most of them are for 45-70, 458 socom, etc, and not 416 cheytac. If they had to be designed and built to cover every cartridge under 45 cal, it sure wouldn't be sub 10oz.

I'd also love a light, short 45 cal or 35 cal can for short/mini actions like 450bm/458 socom, 35legend, 338 arc.

Pretty sure no one with a 416 cheytac is looking for a sub 10 oz hunting can. Far different to me than someone with an 300/7wm, prc, that would want a lw hunting can. I can see that a typical fudd would say, oh it’s 30 cal, I can use it. As a manufacturer I would not make a can that only works on a 308, but not on the common magnums.

Getting a light can that can handle 45-70/458 socom seems to be a challenge. It’s a big bore with decent powder volume. Not an easy task. My one big can, 10”, 22oz does a good job on the 45-70, but it’s too big and heavy for anything but a sbr. Works great in that application.

 

[dårlig jeger]

Pretty sure no one with a 416 cheytac is looking for a sub 10 oz hunting can. Far different to me than someone with an 300/7wm, prc, that would want a lw hunting can. I can see that a typical fudd would say, oh it’s 30 cal, I can use it. As a manufacturer I would not make a can that only works on a 308, but not on the common magnums.

I think you're speculating here. I don't see why a fudd can know better than to put a 6.5 can on his 7mm but not be able to differentiate between a 300 magnum and a 308, or even be able to understand barrel restrictions.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I don’t see any indications that a “.308 Winchester only” suppressor rated for typical .308 barrel lengths needs to be appreciably lighter, shorter, etc., than one that can also be safe on .308 caliber magnums (with appropriate barrel length restrictions). To me, this whole thread rests on a false assumption.

The gen1 OG 30 seems to be overbuilt. No denying that. It’s probably heavier than it “needs” to be.

But, absent an improved material, I will be shocked if anyone comes out with a .308 caliber suppressor that works measurably better and measures meaningfully better than a ZG 30 or OG 30 gen2. Suppression is largely a function of volume.

 

[JF_Idaho]

What about something like the jk armament rpx 30 that is fully modular down to 3.6 inches at -4oz and is still rated for larger cartridges and bored up to .36 for the 350 legend, 9mm, etc?

 

[JF_Idaho]

@Q_Sertorius

Yeah supression/db rating needs to not even be considered for this to even be a premise.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

What about something like the jk armament rpx 30 that is fully modular down to 3.6 inches at -4oz and is still rated for larger cartridges and bored up to .36 for the 350 legend, 9mm, etc?

Got any stats on noise suppression on a 20” .308 in the smallest, lightest configuration?

 

[dårlig jeger]

I don’t see any indications that a “.308 Winchester only” suppressor rated for typical .308 barrel lengths needs to be appreciably lighter, shorter, etc., than one that can also be safe on .308 caliber magnums (with appropriate barrel length restrictions). To me, this whole thread rests on a false assumption.

The gen1 OG 30 seems to be overbuilt. No denying that. It’s probably heavier than it “needs” to be.

But, absent an improved material, I will be shocked if anyone comes out with a .308 caliber suppressor that works measurably better and measures meaningfully better than a ZG 30 or OG 30 gen2. Suppression is largely a function of volume.

@Q_Sertorius

Yeah supression/db rating needs to not even be considered for this to even be a premise.

The premise/assumption for this thread is, if you designed the best 30 cal suppressor, (factoring size, weight, length, hearing safe, etc) for a 300 blackout and a 300RUM, would they be the same?

If you think yes because fudds can barely buy the right ammo for their rifle, let alone abide by suppressor ratings, or, all that matters is bore volume, then I disagree.

If you think no, they should have different suppressor designs for an optimal experience, then I agree. 308 win falls somewhere in the middle, leaving room for a smaller, lighter suppressor (that is still durable and effective) than every 30 cal can out there that is rated for magnum cartridges.

If you think the gains would be minimal and not worthy of so much as a bit of R&D, that's an opinion. But to be dismissive of the entire thread seems harsh and close-minded.

 

[Formidilosus]

The premise/assumption for this thread is, if you designed the best 30 cal suppressor, (factoring size, weight, length, hearing safe, etc) for a 300 blackout and a 300RUM, would they be the same?

If you think yes because fudds can barely buy the right ammo for their rifle, let alone abide by suppressor ratings, or, all that matters is bore volume, then I disagree.

If you think no, they should have different suppressor designs for an optimal experience, then I agree. 308 win falls somewhere in the middle, leaving room for a smaller, lighter suppressor (that is still durable and effective) than every 30 cal can out there that is rated for magnum cartridges.

If you think the gains would be minimal and not worthy of so much as a bit of R&D, that's an opinion. But to be dismissive of the entire thread seems harsh and close-minded.

The issue, and your mistake- is believing almost any can is optimized for a 300 Rum. They are not. Almost all 30cal cans are really built around 308 win.

 

[dårlig jeger]

The issue, and your mistake- is believing almost any can is optimized for a 300 Rum. They are not. Almost all 30cal cans are really built around 308 win.

I did not state, and do not believe, any can is optimized for 300 RUM.

I must not be stating my idea very clearly.

What I believe is that most 30 cal cans are heavier or larger than necessary for 308 win because they must be built to withstand abuse from magnums.

Furthermore, I believe that the suppressor industry is heading towards more niche suppressors for a one-for-each gun market. They would sell more cans that way, and rate of development is extremely high.

I look at the ZG nano, a can designed for 223, which is also effective on 22 creed, and I think there must be an equivalent 30 cal can out there.

 

[JF_Idaho]

Got any stats on noise suppression on a 20” .308 in the smallest, lightest configuration?

If loud as ***** is a stat.......

 

[Formidilosus]

I did not state, and do not believe, any can is optimized for 300 RUM.

I must not be stating my idea very clearly.

What I believe is that most 30 cal cans are heavier or larger than necessary for 308 win because they must be built to withstand abuse from magnums.

They are not. Well, they’re not being built and tested for that use. If a can was ancrually made for magnums- they would be far larger and heavier than most 30cal hunting cans currently are. And, Ti printed cans remove almost all the weight and durability differences when done correctly. 30cal bore requires a larger volume to trap gas and make it perform- regardless of cartridge.

Furthermore, I believe that the suppressor industry is heading towards more niche suppressors for a one-for-each gun market. They would sell more cans that way, and rate of development is extremely high.

Sure- but almost all 30cal cans are actually built around 308win performance.

I look at the ZG nano, a can designed for 223, which is also effective on 22 creed, and I think there must be an equivalent 30 cal can out there.

That works because of a .224 bore; not only that, it’s a perfect example. It’s a “relatively” loud can on 22creeds. People whined about that level of suppression on a 30cal can.

 

[Macintosh]

But, absent an improved material, I will be shocked if anyone comes out with a .308 caliber suppressor that works measurably better and measures meaningfully better than a ZG 30 or OG 30 gen2. Suppression is largely a function of volume.

Probably true. BUT two thoughts on it.

1) I dont need it to be better or even as good. as more people own multiple cans, there is a lot more room for specialization. I already have a “shooting” can that is hearing safe for the range and what now passes for a lightweight. What I really want is a super short, super light can for hunting even if its not hearing safe but close to it. Some folks dont mind a 9.5lb rifle and a longer barrel—but lots of folks want the shortest/lightest rifle they can get at least some of the time. And lots of those folks shoot 7mm and .308bore guns. Im willing to sacrifice the decibels for the size. Ive listened to multiple podcasts recently from well-connected people in the hunting industry who own multiple cans and choose to hunt with an ultra-5 for instance, or choose to hunt unsuppressed due to the size/weight even though they own a suppressor . For me it would take a .308 6s-ish product (3” muzzle fwd, sub 6ish oz) to get me to buy another can.

2) That can may not exist yet. It was only a couple months ago that people were apparently floored that the airlock suppressors are as quiet as they are. I imagine there’s still tweaking to do. I dont NEED another can, I can wait.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Probably true. BUT two thoughts on it.

1) I dont need it to be better or even as good. as more people own multiple cans, there is a lot more room for specialization. I already have a “shooting” can that is hearing safe for the range and what now passes for a lightweight. What I really want is a super short, super light can for hunting even if its not hearing safe but close to it. Some folks dont mind a 9.5lb rifle and a longer barrel—but lots of folks want the shortest/lightest rifle they can get at least some of the time. And lots of those folks shoot 7mm and .308bore guns. Im willing to sacrifice the decibels for the size. Ive listened to multiple podcasts recently from well-connected people in the hunting industry who own multiple cans and choose to hunt with an ultra-5 for instance, or choose to hunt unsuppressed due to the size/weight even though they own a suppressor . For me it would take a .308 6s-ish product (3” muzzle fwd, sub 6ish oz) to get me to buy another can.

2) That can may not exist yet. It was only a couple months ago that people were apparently floored that the airlock suppressors are as quiet as they are. I imagine there’s still tweaking to do. I dont NEED another can, I can wait.

People gushing about something is all well and good, but the Airlock isn’t magic. It’s relatively thin-walled (enabled by 3d printing and by virtue of an additive design process) and fat in diameter. That gives it volume.

 

[Macintosh]

Sure. The point stands though—there are still incremental improvements being made, so Im waiting till the increments add up to a substantial improvement not in suppression, but in weight and size. There is a crowd that (in addition to their quieter cans) wants smaller and lighter even if it doesnt suppress as well. Im agreeing with the poster who was looking for that 6S can with a .308 bore is all.

 

[nm.otter]

30cal bore requires a larger volume to trap gas and make it perform- regardless of cartridge.

I expected some correlation of powder charge and can volume, but a pure caliber correlation is new to me.

 

[Bluefish]

What about something like the jk armament rpx 30 that is fully modular down to 3.6 inches at -4oz and is still rated for larger cartridges and bored up to .36 for the 350 legend, 9mm, etc?

If it’s anything like the Versax 155’s they are loud af. Even in the full long configuration it’s loud. Not enough volume. While light, they are too small to work well on rifles. Even with subs the 45 cal works poorly on a 45-70.

 

[Formidilosus]

I expected some correlation of powder charge and can volume, but a pure caliber correlation is new to me.

Everything else being equal- a bigger hole makes it harder to trap the gas.

It’s not “massive”, but it means things have to change to keep dB’s at the same level.