Armory Sponsor
Joined:
Apr 2025
Posts:
9
EE: 0% (0)
VA, USA
Posted: 2/23/2026 11:43:50 AM EDT
|
Hello, When questioning the KAC sales rep about the SR-16 upper receiver package, it seems this is how the SR-16 is currently being delivered to USSS. With CRS-2 suppressor and 3-prong flash hider. Just wondering if USSS ever used the 5.56 MAMS? Was thinking of swapping muzzle devices and mounting a MAMS I have, but have also considered keeping it as clone correct as possible. I don't have extensive knowledge of the USSS SR-16 so I'd appreciate any feedback or knowledge. Also, from accuracy and overall use, what is the better muzzle device in your opinion, MAMS or FH? Accuracy and Control. |
|
Originally Posted By Grey_Company: Hello, When questioning the KAC sales rep about the SR-16 upper receiver package, it seems this is how the SR-16 is currently being delivered to USSS. With CRS-2 suppressor and 3-prong flash hider. Just wondering if USSS ever used the 5.56 MAMS? Was thinking of swapping muzzle devices and mounting a MAMS I have, but have also considered keeping it as clone correct as possible. I don't have extensive knowledge of the USSS SR-16 so I'd appreciate any feedback or knowledge. Also, from accuracy and overall use, what is the better muzzle device in your opinion, MAMS or FH? Accuracy and Control. If we did business with that entity, I would not be able to disclose that due to contract requirements. That said, I have not run any 5.56 program that involved anything other than the 3-prong flash hider, with some limited use of the QDC Open Brake for suppressor longevity under aggressive firing schedules with short barreled rifles and frangible ammunition. The 5.56 CRS-2 works fine with a Mini-MAMS, with some minor performance shifts due to the altered pressure flow through the muzzle device and into the primary blast chamber of the suppressor, but nothing drastic. As far as dispersion and felt recoil, there is virtually no difference once the can is on, though the MAMS will show slightly more residual bore pressure. |
Joined:
Apr 2025
Posts:
10
EE: 0% (0)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By Jack_L: If we did business with that entity, I would not be able to disclose that due to contract requirements. That said, I have not run any 5.56 program that involved anything other than the 3-prong flash hider, with some limited use of the QDC Open Brake for suppressor longevity under aggressive firing schedules with short barreled rifles and frangible ammunition. The 5.56 CRS-2 works fine with a Mini-MAMS, with some minor performance shifts due to the altered pressure flow through the muzzle device and into the primary blast chamber of the suppressor, but nothing drastic. As far as dispersion and felt recoil, there is virtually no difference once the can is on, though the MAMS will show slightly more residual bore pressure. Thanks. Does the sr16 upper package co.e with the same barrel that the ks3 uses? |
Joined:
Apr 2023
Posts:
280
EE: 100% (4)
FL, USA
|
3 Prong QDC/CQB previously MCQ-1 currently Also HUXWRX 556K w/Mod Tac shield USSS CAT |
|
Originally Posted By Jack_L: If we did business with that entity, I would not be able to disclose that due to contract requirements. That said, I have not run any 5.56 program that involved anything other than the 3-prong flash hider, with some limited use of the QDC Open Brake for suppressor longevity under aggressive firing schedules with short barreled rifles and frangible ammunition. The 5.56 CRS-2 works fine with a Mini-MAMS, with some minor performance shifts due to the altered pressure flow through the muzzle device and into the primary blast chamber of the suppressor, but nothing drastic. As far as dispersion and felt recoil, there is virtually no difference once the can is on, though the MAMS will show slightly more residual bore pressure. Originally Posted By Jack_L: Originally Posted By Grey_Company: Hello, When questioning the KAC sales rep about the SR-16 upper receiver package, it seems this is how the SR-16 is currently being delivered to USSS. With CRS-2 suppressor and 3-prong flash hider. Just wondering if USSS ever used the 5.56 MAMS? Was thinking of swapping muzzle devices and mounting a MAMS I have, but have also considered keeping it as clone correct as possible. I don't have extensive knowledge of the USSS SR-16 so I'd appreciate any feedback or knowledge. Also, from accuracy and overall use, what is the better muzzle device in your opinion, MAMS or FH? Accuracy and Control. If we did business with that entity, I would not be able to disclose that due to contract requirements. That said, I have not run any 5.56 program that involved anything other than the 3-prong flash hider, with some limited use of the QDC Open Brake for suppressor longevity under aggressive firing schedules with short barreled rifles and frangible ammunition. The 5.56 CRS-2 works fine with a Mini-MAMS, with some minor performance shifts due to the altered pressure flow through the muzzle device and into the primary blast chamber of the suppressor, but nothing drastic. As far as dispersion and felt recoil, there is virtually no difference once the can is on, though the MAMS will show slightly more residual bore pressure. Highly doubt their rifle contracts are classified, I'm sure they'd turn up on a search of SAM.gov |
I sell people a means to defend themselves.
Joined:
Mar 2009
Posts:
10385
EE: 100% (253)
UT, USA
|
Originally Posted By cone256: Highly doubt their rifle contracts are classified, I'm sure they'd turn up on a search of SAM.gov If it involves the Secret Service, dollars to donuts they probably classify a lot of things. |
Originally Posted By bradpierson26:
So I know you're a SF whore . . . . .
So I know you're a SF whore . . . . .
|
Originally Posted By TheTacticalCoyote: If it involves the Secret Service, dollars to donuts they probably classify a lot of things. Also, you don't have to classify a thing in order to make it a contractual requirement that the vendor not discuss any aspect of the contract. |
|
Originally Posted By cone256: Highly doubt their rifle contracts are classified, I'm sure they'd turn up on a search of SAM.gov Originally Posted By cone256: Highly doubt their rifle contracts are classified, I'm sure they'd turn up on a search of SAM.gov It would be written into the contract language. One of the reasons you don't see companies that very clearly supply products to that entity identify them as a customer. Originally Posted By PacificNic: Also, you don't have to classify a thing in order to make it a contractual requirement that the vendor not discuss any aspect of the contract. Correct. |
Armory Sponsor