User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 3:19:26 AM EDT
 Now THAT'S What I Call a Suppressor Mount! TLDW: Hop says that Plan B gives a repeatable zero b/c of the taper mount, and there is much aftermarket support. True, or is there a better route? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 5:43:39 AM EDT
[#1]
Honestly. Got me to lookin tho. Considering swapping out my keymo mounts for a mount to fit this.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 5:48:46 AM EDT
[#2]
There are other mounts that have been around far longer that have larger harder to damage threads behind a taper, and an additional friction lock device on top of that.... They just don't get as much love.
|
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 6:42:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: dmk0210]
[#3]
Personally, I think the big name taper mounts are all about the same (Plan A, Plan B, DA Xeno, YHM SRX). The simple taper is the magic, and they all have that.
The differences are in which thread patterns are available to fit your barrels, the muzzle device designs available and personal preference. You can't go wrong with any of them unless you are backed into a compatibility corner. My personal preference has always been DA Xeno due to aesthetics, reverse thread and price. But I switched to Griffin Plan A due to the combination of wider range of barrel thread patterns supported and a much larger muzzle device selection available. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 6:48:13 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dmk0210: Personally, I think the big name taper mounts are all about the same (Plan A, Plan B, DA Xeno, YHM SRX). The simple taper is the magic, and they all have that. The differences are in which thread patterns are available to fit your barrels, the muzzle device designs available and personal preference. You can't go wrong with any of them unless you are backed into a compatibility corner. All of this. Just a simple, lightweight, secure, and reliable mounting system which is about all you can ask for. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 6:57:08 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dmk0210: Personally, I think the big name taper mounts are all about the same (Plan A, Plan B, DA Xeno, YHM SRX). The simple taper is the magic, and they all have that. The differences are in which thread patterns are available to fit your barrels, the muzzle device designs available and personal preference. You can't go wrong with any of them unless you are backed into a compatibility corner. My personal preference has always been DA Xeno due to aesthetics, reverse thread and price. But I switched to Griffin Plan A due to the combination of wider range of barrel thread patterns supported and a much larger muzzle device selection available. This. I’ve been using Plan A for 6ish years now. It’s just about perfect. Should be the same for about any of the bigger name simple taper systems. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 7:19:00 AM EDT
[#6]
I don’t think Plan B is terrible, but I do think Plan A is better.
|
|
|
|
IN, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 7:25:10 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: I don’t think Plan B is terrible, but I do think Plan A is better. What makes it better? |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 7:58:39 AM EDT
[#8]
I'll go against the grain here. I don't like having any exposed threads. Hop mentioned using some kind of thread protector for the taper mounts.
Rather than deal with that, I just run the old school HALO style mount which Griffin now sells separately. Get cheap $5 FH's from Delton or wherever w/o a crush washer and take 5 min to confirm it is aligned properly. For guns that I run harder, I may get an A2 spec hider like below:  Griffin also makes their A2 spec hammer comp that I can beat on. Another point I don't see anyone mention is that with the old HALO style mount which again Griffin sells here: https://www.griffinarmament.com/a2-adapter-for-1-375x24-suppressors/ is is you can clock the can to it's 'sweet' spot.  Back in the day @PHD told me that sometime I think in the 90's they started to engrave the baffle clip to align with the engraving on the tubes and that I should clock my can to have the engraving on top for minimal POI shift. Sure enough with my old steel HALO and Ti HALO, I got little to no POI shift doing so and it was a lot further off not doing so. So cheaper than a taper mount, plenty of devices to choose from (some that can act as a sacrificial baffle) and you just need to confirm alignment is good and the ability to quickly clock the can and did I say no exposed threads. The one drawback is it may be a tad longer. I use these for 556 and .30 cal applications. For a dedicated super LW setup I will go DT like for the can below which is hard to beat at 5.8oz in weight and 3.7" long. Brevis UltraII.  For SMG's, I standardize on the 3 lug but ONLY with the old school Bixler mount which is rock solid, no wobble, no springs or o-rings to wear out and sold by Shaw Armament...which BTW, they are doing runs now of various thread patterns. The exception is something like an UZI that has a ratcheting barrel nut. I really like that but not as convenient as 3 lug since you have to remember where you put that barrel nut when going unsuppressed. |
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 8:36:00 AM EDT
[#9]
It’s my go to for recommending people because it’s
- affordable - plentiful with lots of options because so many companies are making compatible mounts and muzzle devices now - simple and hard to screw up and easy to understand Is it the best mounting system ever made that all the door kickers and elite operators should be using? Probably not. But for the average joe just wanting to hit the range and swap their cans around without investing as much in the mounting system (or more) than they did their actual suppressor I think it’s perfect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 9:19:19 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By The_Sugar_Weasel: What makes it better? The Q plan B adds about the same length (~.2”) as the Plan A, but lacks tool features for dudes that twist the whole thing off their muzzle threads. The ones that add tool features to Q-pattern mounts add another .2”-.3”. That’s not a big deal, of course. The Griffin Plan A is also available in longer lengths on the adapter side, if desired. Putting the taper on the rear allows it to have much more surface area within the envelope constraints. TBAC has talked about this on the Hide. I’m not sure how much that really matters vs more subtle engineering decisions such as the angle of the taper or the thread pattern. I don’t have a way to experiment with that because I’m not a machinist. When I say “better”, I don’t mean that one will make you lose your house and the other will make you a millionaire. |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 9:22:07 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dmk0210: Personally, I think the big name taper mounts are all about the same (Plan A, Plan B, DA Xeno, YHM SRX). The simple taper is the magic, and they all have that. The differences are in which thread patterns are available to fit your barrels, the muzzle device designs available and personal preference. You can't go wrong with any of them unless you are backed into a compatibility corner. My personal preference has always been DA Xeno due to aesthetics, reverse thread and price. But I switched to Griffin Plan A due to the combination of wider range of barrel thread patterns supported and a much larger muzzle device selection available. Solid take. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 9:46:05 AM EDT
[#12]
Unless your use case calls for secondary retention, taper mounts are light years ahead of simple direct thread for retention & repeatability, give muzzle device options to protect blast baffles, and are much more compact, lightweight and cost effective than QD/SR systems.
As for which one, the Rearden/Cherry Bomb pattern is very popular and does boast more slender muzzle devices, but that comes at the cost of not being able to support some of the larger thread patterns without putting the socket behind the muzzle device, which makes for a goofy aestheitc and adds considerable length. With Griffin (plan A), TBAC CB, our Gyrex system, sizes like 3/4" or M18 fit within the standard pattern muzzle devices. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 9:53:51 AM EDT
[#13]
For most use cases, the Plan B pattern is all that is needed. Standby for compatible Hansohn Brothers muzzle devices coming soon.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:17:17 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HansohnBrothers: For most use cases, the Plan B pattern is all that is needed. Standby for compatible Hansohn Brothers muzzle devices coming soon. |
|
|
|
SC, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:23:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Pyro556]
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: Which brings me to reason #3 that Q compatible mounts and adapters are very popular. They allow other companies to make them; more permissive than even Dead Air about that. All while simultaneously shaming people and denying warranty work if they have a baffle strike on a Q can while using a non Q muzzle device / adapter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:36:21 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Pyro556: [b]Originally Posted By 1168RGR:[b] Which brings me to reason #3 that Q compatible mounts and adapters are very popular. They allow other companies to make them; more permissive than even Dead Air about that. All while simultaneously shaming people and denying warranty work if they have a baffle strike on a Q can while using a non Q muzzle device / adapter. Yeah. It's not that they "allow" it, just that there's no protected IP, no case for cease & desist. KB has made it very clear that he isn't happy about it, but there's nothing that can be done. Rearden, LPM, et al were the natural consequence of Q offering only one muzzle device style with very few thread pattern options whilst refusing to listen to feedback about problems with the design, like not having any external tool features to remove a stuck muzzle device from a suppressor. |
|
|
|
NE, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:38:43 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: They allow other companies to make them; more permissive than even Dead Air about that. To bad they dont make a Xeno mount for the Silencer CO Charlie thread pattern. If you want one system that rules Xeno out. |
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:54:45 AM EDT
[#18]
Plan B is very open source. FPM Gunworks also has some nice light muzzle devices at good prices and these 5 or so companies help with supply logistics during spring white sale suppressor runs.
Plan A mounts can be lighter (the hole is bigger) and Griffin has some lightweight titanium muzzle devices and supports threads other than 1/2-28 and 5/8-24. With Griffin in-family MD and mounts concentricity will run very high. Nitriding and tolerances are excellent. With mix and match Plan B companies you can get some tilt/concentricity issues which can be close at the front cap with ‘for-caliber’ set-ups. Overbore cans are more tolerant of this. Gate lock mounts are handy as hell, they don’t unthread during dismount, but are muzzle device picky, heavy and expensive. Retention is very positive and mounting can be very fast. No mount is QD once the can gets hot. Wrench features are important on both mounts and muzzle devices (Q Cherry Bomb’s biggest deficiency if it comes off with mount). Multiple mount lengths can be important for blast chamber headroom. Muzzle device functionality in stand alone mode is a wild card. Most people buy muzzle jewelry for looks. Like holsters, some of us have a box-graveyard of muzzle devices. Raw heat treated 17-4 might be good to color code a mount and is adequate but nitriding is much harder and generally requires better surface finish to look good after case hardening . I use SiCo ASR, Griffin Plan A about equally and Plan B on some more recent hosts. They all work and have different taper and thread speed, torque, and finesse requirements on the trigger nut. Plan B owing to competition has a price edge and the skinnier muzzle devices are a good look and work fine. Somebody makes thread protectors or blast shields to protect muzzle device threads for all these or one could just put wraps of Teflon tape over MD threads like a bad-ass tourniquet when filming action b-roll on boulder strewn Influencer Peak. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:55:26 AM EDT
[#19]
Eh, I’ll stick with the sRx system.
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:57:29 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jbooker82: To bad they dont make a Xeno mount for the Silencer CO Charlie thread pattern. If you want one system that rules Xeno out. Too bad there isn’t a Plan X with the loved / hated LH threads on muzzle jewelry for her pleasure. Call it Plan BX like some nerve agent and morph the logo gas mask theme for an extra poke in the eye… |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 10:58:57 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ECCO_Machine: Yeah. It's not that they "allow" it, just that there's no protected IP, no case for cease & desist. KB has made it very clear that he isn't happy about it, but there's nothing that can be done. Rearden, LPM, et al were the natural consequence of Q offering only one muzzle device style with very few thread pattern options whilst refusing to listen to feedback about problems with the design, like not having any external tool features to remove a stuck muzzle device from a suppressor. I should have put “allow” in quotes, perhaps. Q doesn’t really have a choice but to “allow” it, as you said. But that’s their fault (partially because they wanted yo act like they invented tapers) , and they could capitalize on the ubiquity of it if they pulled their heads from their asses. Dead Air is very comfortable with other companies making their mounts, because they don’t make them anyway, and because it’s good marketing. But they’re only comfortable with that if it meets an aesthetic standard. Other companies might be uncomfortable with “allowing” their systems to be reproduced because they want to keep quality in-house, and there’s not big gaps in their product lineup, so that doesn’t hurt them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:02:52 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KalmanPhilter: Too bad there isn’t a Plan X with the loved / hated LH threads on muzzle jewelry for her pleasure. Call it Plan BX like some nerve agent and morph the logo gas mask theme for an extra poke in the eye… That might be possible with that CAT muzzle device system using 1x16LH threads on a taper mount. They went open source with their muzzle device patterns. Though I don’t know what the consensus on their system is yet. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:10:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1168RGR]
[#23]
Originally Posted By KalmanPhilter: Muzzle device functionality in stand alone mode is a wild card. Most people buy muzzle jewelry for looks. Like holsters, some of us have a box-graveyard of muzzle devices. In case anyone’s wondering…I’m not here to bash Plan B. Reason #1 that it’s popular is that it works, and came about during a time where most of the competition was >5x longer, 3x heavier, 2-3x more expensive, and had more opportunities for mechanical or user-induced failures. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:34:22 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ECCO_Machine: Unless your use case calls for secondary retention, taper mounts are light years ahead of simple direct thread for retention & repeatability, give muzzle device options to protect blast baffles, and are much more compact, lightweight and cost effective than QD/SR systems. As for which one, the Rearden/Cherry Bomb pattern is very popular and does boast more slender muzzle devices, but that comes at the cost of not being able to support some of the larger thread patterns without putting the socket behind the muzzle device, which makes for a goofy aestheitc and adds considerable length. With Griffin (plan A), TBAC CB, our Gyrex system, sizes like 3/4" or M18 fit within the standard pattern muzzle devices. So what I'm hearing is that Plan B is open source, not protected, does a good enough job for most applications, has decent can industry support, and has good aftermarket muzzle device support - but you shouldn't use Q cans on it unless you buy only their Plan B devices? For someone w/ 2x Obama panic stamp Form 1 cans, all these different mounts are amazingly confusing, use industry specific language that is not intuitive, and historically it's been a 9 month wait and a $200 sales tax to find out that you've ordered the wrong thing & now have to spend several hundred more to make the thing you've waited 9 months for to work. |
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:37:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Millennial]
[#25]
Don't worry about Hop and guntubers hyping products.
It's a good mount scheme. Light, minimalist, and good muzzle device selection on the market. I run a plan B on a machinegun. I put the gun between my knees and give the can a good'n'tight two-hand install. Never had an issue. Just DO NOT retighten a taper-lock can while still warm/hot. When it cools you're going to need multiple people or tools/machines to separate it. The fact that the taper is in front of the threads keeps them sparkling clean. One thing I potentially don't like is the fine UN 24TPI threads aren't well protected so if you shoot unsuppressed around a lot of brick/concrete barricades you're going to ding them up without a protector ring. They're not like beefy Acme threads on other schemes. Then again I don't shoot unsuppressed ever so that's not a big problem for me. |
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:40:28 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: That’s reason #2 for Q pattern’s popularity. It is very hype-friendly. All that I have seen look great, but that’s not what I mean. I’m talking about the original Cherry Bomb. Loud, flashy, shiny, and marketed hard. Yeah, its an acceptable sacrificial stainless baffle for a Ti can, but its pretty mediocre otherwise, in performance. But it’s got that FG42 aesthetic, which if I’m being honest, looks great. In case anyone’s wondering…I’m not here to bash Plan B. Reason #1 that it’s popular is that it works, and came about during a time where most of the competition was >5x longer, 3x heavier, 2-3x more expensive, and had more opportunities for mechanical or user-induced failures. Well, the Cherry Bomb was marketed as ‘no timing, no shim’ sophistication but yeah, radial port brakes often are louder than they are effective with recoil. For 300 blackout subs it isn’t too bad. But who shoots subs without a can? As long as rockset holds, the front socket wrench feature is slick. With thread-in hub mounts it can be easily removed from an accessible mount. The welded, integral mount Q cans are actually where it’s most annoying it it comes off with the can. As a blast diffuser it’s weird Q opened up the 1/2-28 for 9mm, reducing its choking effect. Maybe that reduces jet intensity as well. I’m thinking of milling FH slots into a now unused Cherry Bomb and seeing how it functions as a 3-slot, AR-180 style FH but with a Liberty style front orifice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:41:45 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: So what I'm hearing is that Plan B is open source, not protected, does a good enough job for most applications, has decent can industry support, and has good aftermarket muzzle device support - but you shouldn't use Q cans on it unless you buy only their Plan B devices? For someone w/ 2x Obama panic stamp Form 1 cans, all these different mounts are amazingly confusing, use industry specific language that is not intuitive, and historically it's been a 9 month wait and a $200 sales tax to find out that you've ordered the wrong thing & now have to spend several hundred more to make the thing you've waited 9 months for to work. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: Originally Posted By ECCO_Machine: Unless your use case calls for secondary retention, taper mounts are light years ahead of simple direct thread for retention & repeatability, give muzzle device options to protect blast baffles, and are much more compact, lightweight and cost effective than QD/SR systems. As for which one, the Rearden/Cherry Bomb pattern is very popular and does boast more slender muzzle devices, but that comes at the cost of not being able to support some of the larger thread patterns without putting the socket behind the muzzle device, which makes for a goofy aestheitc and adds considerable length. With Griffin (plan A), TBAC CB, our Gyrex system, sizes like 3/4" or M18 fit within the standard pattern muzzle devices. So what I'm hearing is that Plan B is open source, not protected, does a good enough job for most applications, has decent can industry support, and has good aftermarket muzzle device support - but you shouldn't use Q cans on it unless you buy only their Plan B devices? For someone w/ 2x Obama panic stamp Form 1 cans, all these different mounts are amazingly confusing, use industry specific language that is not intuitive, and historically it's been a 9 month wait and a $200 sales tax to find out that you've ordered the wrong thing & now have to spend several hundred more to make the thing you've waited 9 months for to work. Many cans are “HUB” compatible now, meaning 1.375x24 threads on the ass end of the can. You buy a “HUB” QD module for whichever system you want to use (Plan A, Plan B, Xeno, etc) and rock on. I will say, while “Plan A” is Griffin specific and isn’t open source, I think they offer an even wider variety of muzzle devices that’ll fit just about any thread pattern/caliber you could ever want. Plan B/Rearden does seem to have an edge in 25* taper muzzle devices though, so if you’re wanting that for an Sig/Q gun, Plan B is likely a better option. As for your F1 cans, just depends on how they’re constructed thread pattern wise if you’ll be able to pick up a cheap COTS solution to easily get into one of these QD systems. I know the F1 world has a lot of oddball thread patterns for main tubes. Someone like ECCO might be a better look for a QD module if you’re not HUB. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:48:38 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By WUPHF: Many cans are “HUB” compatible now, meaning 1.375x24 threads on the ass end of the can. You buy a “HUB” QD module for whichever system you want to use (Plan A, Plan B, Xeno, etc) and rock on. I will say, while “Plan A” is Griffin specific and isn’t open source, I think they offer an even wider variety of muzzle devices that’ll fit just about any thread pattern/caliber you could ever want. Plan B/Rearden does seem to have an edge in 25* taper muzzle devices though, so if you’re wanting that for an Sig/Q gun, Plan B is likely a better option. As for your F1 cans, just depends on how they’re constructed thread pattern wise if you’ll be able to pick up a cheap COTS solution to easily get into one of these QD systems. I know the F1 world has a lot of oddball thread patterns for main tubes. Someone like ECCO might be a better look for a QD module if you’re not HUB. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By WUPHF: Originally Posted By backbencher: Originally Posted By ECCO_Machine: Unless your use case calls for secondary retention, taper mounts are light years ahead of simple direct thread for retention & repeatability, give muzzle device options to protect blast baffles, and are much more compact, lightweight and cost effective than QD/SR systems. As for which one, the Rearden/Cherry Bomb pattern is very popular and does boast more slender muzzle devices, but that comes at the cost of not being able to support some of the larger thread patterns without putting the socket behind the muzzle device, which makes for a goofy aestheitc and adds considerable length. With Griffin (plan A), TBAC CB, our Gyrex system, sizes like 3/4" or M18 fit within the standard pattern muzzle devices. So what I'm hearing is that Plan B is open source, not protected, does a good enough job for most applications, has decent can industry support, and has good aftermarket muzzle device support - but you shouldn't use Q cans on it unless you buy only their Plan B devices? For someone w/ 2x Obama panic stamp Form 1 cans, all these different mounts are amazingly confusing, use industry specific language that is not intuitive, and historically it's been a 9 month wait and a $200 sales tax to find out that you've ordered the wrong thing & now have to spend several hundred more to make the thing you've waited 9 months for to work. Many cans are “HUB” compatible now, meaning 1.375x24 threads on the ass end of the can. You buy a “HUB” QD module for whichever system you want to use (Plan A, Plan B, Xeno, etc) and rock on. I will say, while “Plan A” is Griffin specific and isn’t open source, I think they offer an even wider variety of muzzle devices that’ll fit just about any thread pattern/caliber you could ever want. Plan B/Rearden does seem to have an edge in 25* taper muzzle devices though, so if you’re wanting that for an Sig/Q gun, Plan B is likely a better option. As for your F1 cans, just depends on how they’re constructed thread pattern wise if you’ll be able to pick up a cheap COTS solution to easily get into one of these QD systems. I know the F1 world has a lot of oddball thread patterns for main tubes. Someone like ECCO might be a better look for a QD module if you’re not HUB. Not really looking to change the Form 1 cans, they're large & quiet direct threads. Looking towards the future, maybe chopping a 16" Fold AR barrel to a P/W, would mostly run a blast baffle over that, but would then have flexibility for Form 4 cans. |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:51:58 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: So what I'm hearing is that Plan B is open source, not protected, does a good enough job for most applications, has decent can industry support, and has good aftermarket muzzle device support - but you shouldn't use Q cans on it unless you buy only their Plan B devices? . This might be true from a warranty-coverage perspective. Anecdotally though Q seems to be decent with supporting their customers in practice. Truthfully, with suppressors you are your own muffler System Integration Engineer. A lot of stuff plugs & plays but then you get the rare guy who threads a 1/2-28 rimfire can onto a 9mm PCC and expects it to work ‘because otherwise why would it fit?’ experience from other error-proofed worlds (electrical, plumbing, etc.). Growing up working on bicycles with English, French, and Italian threads was good training. Red dot sights on pistol slides have similar issues. 
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 11:59:55 AM EDT
[#30]
I don't have direct knowledge, but I'd be surprised if many of the various taper mount muzzle devices have IP protection beyond TM. Some of the secondary retention mechanisms or adaptors, maybe, but just for different thread patterns and tapers combined in various different arrangements, I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 12:12:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: ECCO_Machine]
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By peachy: I don't have direct knowledge, but I'd be surprised if many of the various taper mount muzzle devices have IP protection beyond TM. Some of the secondary retention mechanisms or adaptors, maybe, but just for different thread patterns and tapers combined in various different arrangements, I doubt it. There are some patents, mostly design patents, for particular muzzle devices with novel features, but you can't patent an idea or concept, and the prior art for taper mounts would be an unnavigable minefield anyway, so yeah, there's really nothing one can do to prevent copying of the general geometry of a taper mount muzzle device/adapter. We looked into patenting a couple of my designs, but decided not to pursue it because one, it's really expensive and unless you can afford to go after another company patents don't really accomplish anything and two, despite them having likely been patentable designs, we ran into problems with our own prior art; if you do not file at least a provisional patent within 12 months of public disclosure (which includes any photographs shared publicly in any way), it doesn't matter that you were the progenitor, it's still prior art. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 12:17:17 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KalmanPhilter: This might be true from a warranty-coverage perspective. Anecdotally though Q seems to be decent with supporting their customers in practice. Truthfully, with suppressors you are your own muffler System Integration Engineer. A lot of stuff plugs & plays but then you get the rare guy who threads a 1/2-28 rimfire can onto a 9mm PCC and expects it to work ‘because otherwise why would it fit?’ experience from other error-proofed worlds (electrical, plumbing, etc.). Growing up working on bicycles with English, French, and Italian threads was good training. Red dot sights on pistol slides have similar issues. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By KalmanPhilter: Originally Posted By backbencher: So what I'm hearing is that Plan B is open source, not protected, does a good enough job for most applications, has decent can industry support, and has good aftermarket muzzle device support - but you shouldn't use Q cans on it unless you buy only their Plan B devices? This might be true from a warranty-coverage perspective. Anecdotally though Q seems to be decent with supporting their customers in practice. Truthfully, with suppressors you are your own muffler System Integration Engineer. A lot of stuff plugs & plays but then you get the rare guy who threads a 1/2-28 rimfire can onto a 9mm PCC and expects it to work ‘because otherwise why would it fit?’ experience from other error-proofed worlds (electrical, plumbing, etc.). Growing up working on bicycles with English, French, and Italian threads was good training. Red dot sights on pistol slides have similar issues. Absolutely. With red dots though, there hasn't been a $200 tax on top of the price AND a 9 month wait, so the information is more widespread b/c the feedback is instant. And rimfire cans DO work on 9mm PCCs - at least once.  With cans & muzzle devices - and other parts of the gun industry, looking @ you CMMG - the industry does itself a disservice with weird names & proprietary & incompatible attachments. I get that we've not arrived at the perfect muzzle device yet - but as a consumer, I don't need perfect, I need non-proprietary, compatible, and UNDERSTANDABLE. This is my second thread on muzzle devices in as many months b/c the various attachment methods are so confusing. You can spend a fortune on marketing, but if you throw Q out there, I don't know if that's a company name, a can name, or a mounting standard. I get that people like to have cute names for things, but if it's not descriptive, it's going to take a LONG time for consumers to understand what you're talking about. And the can industry is awash in cutsie names that aren't descriptive at all. What's a cherry bomb? You're selling me a firecracker? I want a suppressor and a mount. |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 12:35:07 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ECCO_Machine: There are some patents, mostly design patents, for particular muzzle devices with novel features, but you can't patent an idea or concept, and the prior art for taper mounts would be an unnavigable minefield anyway, so yeah, there's really nothing one can do to prevent copying of the general geometry of a taper mount muzzle device/adapter. We looked into patenting our helix port brake design, but decided not to pursue it because one, it's really expensive and unless you can afford to go after another company patents don't really accomplish anything and two, despite it having likely been a patentable design, we ran into problems with our own prior art; if you do not file at least a provisional patent within 12 months of public disclosure (which includes any photographs shared publicly in any way), it doesn't matter that you were the progenitor, it's still prior art. I could see some design patents since those are directed to the ornamental features of the invention, but it would be interesting to see which features were covered by the claims. Wouldn’t surprise me if the tapers, threads, tool features, etc. were excluded from coverage. On a design patent, the claimed features are shown in solid lines whereas the disclaimed features are shown in broken lines. Otherwise, you more or less said what I was thinking. That makes me wonder, who made the first taper mount? I believe the YHM Phantom/legacy setup has been around nearly 20yrs, which is the oldest I can think of off the top of my head. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 12:40:28 PM EDT
[#34]
I have plan b on everything 5.56-300, no issues at all. Its light weight, lots of MD from various companies.
I have 3 prong FHs on short barrel 5.56 guns for when they dont have a can on the front. I single port brake on 300's and a 2 port break on my 6.5 cm and longer barreled ars. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 12:41:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1168RGR]
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: Absolutely. With red dots though, there hasn't been a $200 tax on top of the price AND a 9 month wait, so the information is more widespread b/c the feedback is instant. And rimfire cans DO work on 9mm PCCs - at least once. With cans & muzzle devices - and other parts of the gun industry, looking @ you CMMG - the industry does itself a disservice with weird names & proprietary & incompatible attachments. I get that we've not arrived at the perfect muzzle device yet - but as a consumer, I don't need perfect, I need non-proprietary, compatible, and UNDERSTANDABLE. This is my second thread on muzzle devices in as many months b/c the various attachment methods are so confusing. You can spend a fortune on marketing, but if you throw Q out there, I don't know if that's a company name, a can name, or a mounting standard. I get that people like to have cute names for things, but if it's not descriptive, it's going to take a LONG time for consumers to understand what you're talking about. And the can industry is awash in cutsie names that aren't descriptive at all. What's a cherry bomb? You're selling me a firecracker? I want a suppressor and a mount. With Q stuff, “Q” is the brand name; the mounting pattern is called Quickie. The silencers that are native to it are the Q Trash Panda, Q Thunder Chicken, Q Jumbo Shrimp, and so on. “Plan B” refers to the adapter that can fit on Bravo/Hub/Omega/1.375”x24 threaded cans. There is a version for Silencerco Charlie/Saker patttern cans, also, I think. The “Cherry Bomb” is one of the original Q brand muzzle device mounts compatible with their proprietary silencers, or the Plan B. Other brands that support the “Quickie” mount/adapter pattern are Ecco Machine, Wolfpack Armory, Liberty Precision Machine, and Rearden. Probably others, too. “Adapter”, short for mounting adapter, is the part that threads into the silencer to make it usable with “qd” systems. “Mount” refers to the muzzle device that screws on to the muzzle threads on the barrel. A proprietary mount silencer, such as the Trash Panda, has the adapter built in already, and the end user (or armorer/gunsmith) only has to eff with mounts for the barrels. For the terminology, pros, and cons of other systems, just ask. Like Kalman Philter said, some of us have a holster drawer, but for mounts and adapters. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 12:43:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1168RGR]
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By peachy:That makes me wonder, who made the first taper mount? I believe the YHM Phantom/legacy setup has been around nearly 20yrs, which is the oldest I can think of off the top of my head. I think AAC 18t might have been around that time, too. Don’t remember which was first. Obviously lugnuts and spark plugs have been doing this a long time. |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 12:43:48 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: You can spend a fortune on marketing, but if you throw Q out there, I don't know if that's a company name, a can name, or a mounting standard. I get that people like to have cute names for things, but if it's not descriptive, it's going to take a LONG time for consumers to understand what you're talking about. And the can industry is awash in cutsie names that aren't descriptive at all. What's a cherry bomb? You're selling me a firecracker? I want a suppressor and a mount. Not trying to turn this into IP day, but there is a reason for that. You can't register generic trademarks, and you can only register a descriptive mark if it has acquired secondary meaning, which takes times and is hard to prove. The strongest marks are fanciful (made up names) or arbitrary (e.g. "apple" to describe a computer company). Both of these tell you nothing about the product. Suggestive is the middle ground, where it hints at or alludes to the product or one of its traits without describing what it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 1:16:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2JokersWild]
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: I don't think Plan B is terrible, but I do think Plan A is better. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 1:46:15 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: So what I'm hearing is that Plan B is open source, not protected, does a good enough job for most applications, has decent can industry support, and has good aftermarket muzzle device support - but you shouldn't use Q cans on it unless you buy only their Plan B devices? For someone w/ 2x Obama panic stamp Form 1 cans, all these different mounts are amazingly confusing, use industry specific language that is not intuitive, and historically it's been a 9 month wait and a $200 sales tax to find out that you've ordered the wrong thing & now have to spend several hundred more to make the thing you've waited 9 months for to work. Pretty much all my attempts to understand this stuff, has just led to more confusion. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 2:30:59 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: With Q stuff, “Q” is the brand name; the mounting pattern is called Quickie. The silencers that are native to it are the Q Trash Panda, Q Thunder Chicken, Q Jumbo Shrimp, and so on. “Plan B” refers to the adapter that can fit on Bravo/Hub/Omega/1.375”x24 threaded cans. There is a version for Silencerco Charlie/Saker patttern cans, also, I think. The “Cherry Bomb” is one of the original Q brand muzzle device mounts compatible with their proprietary silencers, or the Plan B. Other brands that support the “Quickie” mount/adapter pattern are Ecco Machine, Wolfpack Armory, Liberty Precision Machine, and Rearden. Probably others, too. “Adapter”, short for mounting adapter, is the part that threads into the silencer to make it usable with “qd” systems. “Mount” refers to the muzzle device that screws on to the muzzle threads on the barrel. A proprietary mount silencer, such as the Trash Panda, has the adapter built in already, and the end user (or armorer/gunsmith) only has to eff with mounts for the barrels. For the terminology, pros, and cons of other systems, just ask. Like Kalman Philter said, some of us have a holster drawer, but for mounts and adapters. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: Originally Posted By backbencher: Absolutely. With red dots though, there hasn't been a $200 tax on top of the price AND a 9 month wait, so the information is more widespread b/c the feedback is instant. And rimfire cans DO work on 9mm PCCs - at least once. With cans & muzzle devices - and other parts of the gun industry, looking @ you CMMG - the industry does itself a disservice with weird names & proprietary & incompatible attachments. I get that we've not arrived at the perfect muzzle device yet - but as a consumer, I don't need perfect, I need non-proprietary, compatible, and UNDERSTANDABLE. This is my second thread on muzzle devices in as many months b/c the various attachment methods are so confusing. You can spend a fortune on marketing, but if you throw Q out there, I don't know if that's a company name, a can name, or a mounting standard. I get that people like to have cute names for things, but if it's not descriptive, it's going to take a LONG time for consumers to understand what you're talking about. And the can industry is awash in cutsie names that aren't descriptive at all. What's a cherry bomb? You're selling me a firecracker? I want a suppressor and a mount. With Q stuff, “Q” is the brand name; the mounting pattern is called Quickie. The silencers that are native to it are the Q Trash Panda, Q Thunder Chicken, Q Jumbo Shrimp, and so on. “Plan B” refers to the adapter that can fit on Bravo/Hub/Omega/1.375”x24 threaded cans. There is a version for Silencerco Charlie/Saker patttern cans, also, I think. The “Cherry Bomb” is one of the original Q brand muzzle device mounts compatible with their proprietary silencers, or the Plan B. Other brands that support the “Quickie” mount/adapter pattern are Ecco Machine, Wolfpack Armory, Liberty Precision Machine, and Rearden. Probably others, too. “Adapter”, short for mounting adapter, is the part that threads into the silencer to make it usable with “qd” systems. “Mount” refers to the muzzle device that screws on to the muzzle threads on the barrel. A proprietary mount silencer, such as the Trash Panda, has the adapter built in already, and the end user (or armorer/gunsmith) only has to eff with mounts for the barrels. For the terminology, pros, and cons of other systems, just ask. Like Kalman Philter said, some of us have a holster drawer, but for mounts and adapters. Thanks. I've figured out most of the above, but it's just ridiculous. Q tells me nothing - any more than CMMG's "Banshee" does. Car manufacturers can get away w/ unique names b/c they spend millions on marketing - and I see their products every day and they have names on the back of em. I see suppressors occasionally. The first suppressor company that comes out with cans like: Suppressor Company's new "5.56 Can that uses Plan B mounts" is going to make a mint b/c folks will actually understand what they're buying and the company pitching the P "TrannyKilo" which is a far better can is gonna get steamrolled. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 2:32:43 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By peachy: Not trying to turn this into IP day, but there is a reason for that. You can't register generic trademarks, and you can only register a descriptive mark if it has acquired secondary meaning, which takes times and is hard to prove. The strongest marks are fanciful (made up names) or arbitrary (e.g. "apple" to describe a computer company). Both of these tell you nothing about the product. Suggestive is the middle ground, where it hints at or alludes to the product or one of its traits without describing what it is. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By peachy: Originally Posted By backbencher: You can spend a fortune on marketing, but if you throw Q out there, I don't know if that's a company name, a can name, or a mounting standard. I get that people like to have cute names for things, but if it's not descriptive, it's going to take a LONG time for consumers to understand what you're talking about. And the can industry is awash in cutsie names that aren't descriptive at all. What's a cherry bomb? You're selling me a firecracker? I want a suppressor and a mount. Not trying to turn this into IP day, but there is a reason for that. You can't register generic trademarks, and you can only register a descriptive mark if it has acquired secondary meaning, which takes times and is hard to prove. The strongest marks are fanciful (made up names) or arbitrary (e.g. "apple" to describe a computer company). Both of these tell you nothing about the product. Suggestive is the middle ground, where it hints at or alludes to the product or one of its traits without describing what it is. Car companies, as I've pointed out, can get away with that. Buick has been around for a century, and I know an Enclave is an SUV b/c they spent millions promoting it & every time I see one it says Enclave on the back. That doesn't work for suppressors. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 2:38:35 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: With red dots though, there hasn't been a $200 tax on top of the price AND a 9 month wait, so the information is more widespread b/c the feedback is instant. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 2:41:33 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: You can spend a fortune on marketing, but if you throw Q out there, I don't know if that's a company name, a can name, or a mounting standard. I get that people like to have cute names for things, but if it's not descriptive, it's going to take a LONG time for consumers to understand what you're talking about. And the can industry is awash in cutsie names that aren't descriptive at all. What's a cherry bomb? You're selling me a firecracker? I want a suppressor and a mount. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 2:46:13 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tortilla-flats: So much this. I foresee industry players are going to see a lot of backlash in this space with quick approvals removing one of the major barriers to entry and allowing a lot of new consumers. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tortilla-flats: Originally Posted By backbencher: You can spend a fortune on marketing, but if you throw Q out there, I don't know if that's a company name, a can name, or a mounting standard. I get that people like to have cute names for things, but if it's not descriptive, it's going to take a LONG time for consumers to understand what you're talking about. And the can industry is awash in cutsie names that aren't descriptive at all. What's a cherry bomb? You're selling me a firecracker? I want a suppressor and a mount. So much this. I foresee industry players are going to see a lot of backlash in this space with quick approvals removing one of the major barriers to entry and allowing a lot of new consumers. Well, someone's going to either spend a ton of money promoting their relatively simple line up & reap the rewards, or someone really smart is going to rename or introduce a line up with simple, descriptive names and clean house. All the can manufacturers are going to make money w/ these fast approvals. It's all a pretext so the Biden admin can declare all semi-autos "readily convertible" and try to force us to register em. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 2:53:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: tortilla-flats]
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1168RGR: With Q stuff, "Q" is the brand name; the mounting pattern is called Quickie. The silencers that are native to it are the Q Trash Panda, Q Thunder Chicken, Q Jumbo Shrimp, and so on. "Plan B" refers to the adapter that can fit on Bravo/Hub/Omega/1.375"x24 threaded cans. There is a version for Silencerco Charlie/Saker patttern cans, also, I think. The "Cherry Bomb" is one of the original Q brand muzzle device mounts compatible with their proprietary silencers, or the Plan B. Other brands that support the "Quickie" mount/adapter pattern are Ecco Machine, Wolfpack Armory, Liberty Precision Machine, and Rearden. Probably others, too. "Adapter", short for mounting adapter, is the part that threads into the silencer to make it usable with "qd" systems. "Mount" refers to the muzzle device that screws on to the muzzle threads on the barrel. A proprietary mount silencer, such as the Trash Panda, has the adapter built in already, and the end user (or armorer/gunsmith) only has to eff with mounts for the barrels. For the terminology, pros, and cons of other systems, just ask. Like Kalman Philter said, some of us have a holster drawer, but for mounts and adapters. So you posted this response as an expert*, and by your own verbiage you're not sure. This is the point. Also, how many times are you going to repeat this for every newbie before you get tired of responding? backbencher is 100% correct on this. Personally, I've stuck to DT and Surefire. That's as far as I've comfortably figured out this goat screw. Does that limit my options? Sure. But I'm not wasting hours and $$$ sorting through the muck & mire trying to figure out all the nuances here. And the ones that should be concerned are the manufacturers as I'm not buying their products. *Not suggesting you're not an expert nor am I casting aspersions. Just making a point with your post. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 3:05:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: tortilla-flats]
[#46]
I did find Hop's video helpful.
There's also a TFBtv video that compares the Keymo & Xeno mounts. That was helpful, too.  Best AR-15 Silencer Bargain? Dead Air Sierra 5 Review |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 3:24:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 2JokersWild: I don't think Plan A is terrible, but I do know Plan B is better In what way(s) is Plan B “better”? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 4:17:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1168RGR]
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tortilla-flats: So you posted this response as an expert*, and by your own verbiage you're not sure. This is the point. Also, how many times are you going to repeat this for every newbie before you get tired of responding? backbencher is 100% correct on this. Personally, I've stuck to DT and Surefire. That's as far as I've comfortably figured out this goat screw. Does that limit my options? Sure. But I'm not wasting hours and $$$ sorting through the muck & mire trying to figure out all the nuances here. And the ones that should be concerned are the manufacturers as I'm not buying their products. *Not suggesting you're not an expert nor am I casting aspersions. Just making a point with your post. I don’t mind discussing this topic with newcomers for the most part. I like gunmufflers, and more people having them benefits me indirectly. Also, I realize that its a lot to wade through, which is one of the reasons there’s always someone that thinks they need to buy Brand P silencers because their rifle came with a Brand P mount, even though Brand P, X, and L make adapters for Hub silencers. (Brand name letters chosen to avoid picking on brands, so if they relate to real brands, that’s a coincidence.) |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 4:25:46 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tortilla-flats: So you posted this response as an expert*, and by your own verbiage you're not sure. This is the point. Also, how many times are you going to repeat this for every newbie before you get tired of responding? backbencher is 100% correct on this. Personally, I've stuck to DT and Surefire. That's as far as I've comfortably figured out this goat screw. Does that limit my options? Sure. But I'm not wasting hours and $$$ sorting through the muck & mire trying to figure out all the nuances here. And the ones that should be concerned are the manufacturers as I'm not buying their products. *Not suggesting you're not an expert nor am I casting aspersions. Just making a point with your post. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tortilla-flats: Originally Posted By 1168RGR: With Q stuff, "Q" is the brand name; the mounting pattern is called Quickie. The silencers that are native to it are the Q Trash Panda, Q Thunder Chicken, Q Jumbo Shrimp, and so on. "Plan B" refers to the adapter that can fit on Bravo/Hub/Omega/1.375"x24 threaded cans. There is a version for Silencerco Charlie/Saker patttern cans, also, I think. The "Cherry Bomb" is one of the original Q brand muzzle device mounts compatible with their proprietary silencers, or the Plan B. Other brands that support the "Quickie" mount/adapter pattern are Ecco Machine, Wolfpack Armory, Liberty Precision Machine, and Rearden. Probably others, too. "Adapter", short for mounting adapter, is the part that threads into the silencer to make it usable with "qd" systems. "Mount" refers to the muzzle device that screws on to the muzzle threads on the barrel. A proprietary mount silencer, such as the Trash Panda, has the adapter built in already, and the end user (or armorer/gunsmith) only has to eff with mounts for the barrels. For the terminology, pros, and cons of other systems, just ask. Like Kalman Philter said, some of us have a holster drawer, but for mounts and adapters. So you posted this response as an expert*, and by your own verbiage you're not sure. This is the point. Also, how many times are you going to repeat this for every newbie before you get tired of responding? backbencher is 100% correct on this. Personally, I've stuck to DT and Surefire. That's as far as I've comfortably figured out this goat screw. Does that limit my options? Sure. But I'm not wasting hours and $$$ sorting through the muck & mire trying to figure out all the nuances here. And the ones that should be concerned are the manufacturers as I'm not buying their products. *Not suggesting you're not an expert nor am I casting aspersions. Just making a point with your post. The nomenclature is confusing. End caps (which end?), muzzle devices or mounts, calling mounts adapters, etc. To me, if the item stays on the barrel with a stand alone function, it’s a muzzle device. Something with just a taper and no brake or flash hiding is an adapter that can live as a muzzle device. A direct thread mount with built in brake that is left on the barrel is both a muzzle device and a mount too. An adapter that can live on the can as it’s swapped around is to me a mount. Front caps is preferred over the ambiguous ‘end cap’. Mounts welded to the can are integral mounts. Back when all cans were that way, muzzle devices were called mounts. Beyond that, thread pitches are specific and can be known & specified, but with taper mounts the included taper angle & location is also defining. Manufacturers bundle all this into family names. That’s a convenience until somebody tries to blend families. Does this help?  |
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 4/9/2024 4:42:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: peachy]
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By backbencher: Car companies, as I've pointed out, can get away with that. Buick has been around for a century, and I know an Enclave is an SUV b/c they spent millions promoting it & every time I see one it says Enclave on the back. That doesn't work for suppressors. CAT has really taken your point to the next level. Their suppressor page is just a bunch of cartoon people, and you have to click through each one to figure out what it is: https://specterscat.com/product-category/cat-suppressors/ |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
