AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/26/2004 10:50:49 AM EDT
|
I had a chance to shoot the new Surefire suppressor, it is a wonderful piece of kit. Weights in at 17oz it is easily manuverable, the front overhang is short since most of the can mount right over the barrel. the attachment system is world class in simplicity and durability. I can't say enough great thing about this new offering from Surefire. As far as the back pressure, it is not at all what some people have said. I did not feel any over pressure from the suppressor. I especailly shot the gun canted side ways to expose the ejection port to my face and the pressure is no more then you will get in the other manufacture's can. I also shot the gun with Gas Buster, this device made some improvements but nothing drastic.  This is one of the original suppressor, it has gone through enough rounds to blow up other manufacture's can. the finish has discloured and you can see burn marks from the porting inside the can.  Two point QD mount on M4 barrel.  I had to disguise the gun since it is a prototype rifle that I can't make any mention of it. |
|
"As far as the back pressure, it is not at all what some people have said. I did not feel any over pressure from the suppressor. " That's do in part to the fact that it isn't an incredibly efficient suppressor. You can design it to have less back pressure, but you will still experience significantly more backpressure as sound suppression increases. The PRI helps most when you have a very efficient design that produces a lot of back pressure. What's the story on the broken bolt? As always SMG LEE is busy being the first guy to try out new gear. Lucky bastard. |
|
Green, That might be the case, but I did not have a competitor's suppressor on hand to compare, and shooting inside of a enclosed indoor range did not help me to gage the sound reduction neither. for what it is indoors, that suppressor from SureFire is very impressive. I shot the gun with and without the GasBuster, without the Buster the can is still pretty well managed with back pressure. The broken bolt was from one of the PD's 11" Colt. something broke on it that I did not ask the rangemaster about. |
|
If it is quiet enough for you to be comfortable without ear protection indoors it is quiet indeed. I can't even say my suppressed 10/22 with supersonic ammo is quiet indoors... It's loud enough to give you a headache which probably means it's doing damage on some level. Indoor ranges with their cement walls make everything sound much louder. |
|
Quoted: Green, That might be the case, but I did not have a competitor's suppressor on hand to compare, and shooting inside of a enclosed indoor range did not help me to gage the sound reduction neither. for what it is indoors, that suppressor from SureFire is very impressive. I shot the gun with and without the GasBuster, without the Buster the can is still pretty well managed with back pressure. The broken bolt was from one of the PD's 11" Colt. something broke on it that I did not ask the rangemaster about. I think surefire does a very good job with the public relations/ tooting their own horn. They have reason for it regarding flashlights, i'm not convinced they have a reason for it suppressor wise. |
|
"I think surefire does a very good job with the public relations/ tooting their own horn. They have reason for it regarding flashlights, i'm not convinced they have a reason for it suppressor wise." Yeah that's my opinion also. Reading Surefire's magazine makes you think all the competitors are building HEL-H4 suppressors and Sionics cans. All the bad arguments and "COOL SCIENCE" BS makes me want to gag. Even their approach to "special metal" is very seedy. In fact there are many suppressors on the market that have better performance and I think the SOPMOD-II contract for the KAC M4 QD SS NT-4 sound suppressor highlights that. |
|
Quoted: Yeah that's my opinion also. Reading Surefire's magazine makes you think all the competitors are building HEL-H4 suppressors and Sionics cans. All the bad arguments and "COOL SCIENCE" BS makes me want to gag. Even their approach to "special metal" is very seedy. In fact there are many suppressors on the market that have better performance and I think the SOPMOD-II contract for the KAC M4 QD SS NT-4 sound suppressor highlights that. [s]plus who really cares? It's not like they are going to move out of CA and/or pursue civilian markets anytime soon, is it??[/s] CLee- i don't want to be a party pooper on your thread. |
|
It deffinitely is cool that SMG LEE was able to go behind the scenes and test one of the "forbidden" sound suppressors produced in California. Don't get me wrong I am not trying to take the wind out of anyone's sails. If the suppressor really can go 1500rds as fast as mags can be changed in 6-9rd burst fire, its achievement is in it's durability and light weight more than its suppression. The fact that these claims simply blow everything on the market out of the water by a factor of approx at least 300% makes this claim for me to be suspect. I have issues with surefire and their marketing techniques and claims not ar15.comers. I like to see SMG LEE's reports of insider experiences like these. What's next? Ops Inc? hell if I was in his shoes (living in CA) I'ld probably go to Surefire to see if the product was what it was made out to be (given the chance). But I'ld probably want to duplicate that 1500 rd test (doubting Thomas that I am) : ) |
|
guys, you know what, I went to shoot and had tons of fun, took some pictures to share it with you guys. I am very impressed with the can and I have shot Gem-Tech, SWR, KAC, Tac-Ord AAC and AWC. Out of all those cans, i like the Gem-Tech, KAC and SWR the best. After I shot the Surefire, i am really impressed with the can, it is lightweight, quiet and short off the muzzle since it bury itself into the barrel. it repeat zero after each dismount and remount like there is no tomorrow. I have not witness the durability of the can but from some very well respected friends that have seen the can in action, it can take a beating as well. Surefire can't sell to civilians nor ind. LEO, their market is military and LE agencies. |
|
Quoted: It deffinitely is cool that SMG LEE was able to go behind the scenes and test one of the "forbidden" sound suppressors produced in California. Don't get me wrong I am not trying to take the wind out of anyone's sails. If the suppressor really can go 1500rds as fast as mags can be changed in 6-9rd burst fire, its achievement is in it's durability and light weight more than its suppression. The fact that these claims simply blow everything on the market out of the water by a factor of approx at least 300% makes this claim for me to be suspect. I have issues with surefire and their marketing techniques and claims not ar15.comers. I like to see SMG LEE's reports of insider experiences like these. What's next? Ops Inc? hell if I was in his shoes (living in CA) I'ld probably go to Surefire to see if the product was what it was made out to be (given the chance). But I'ld probably want to duplicate that 1500 rd test (doubting Thomas that I am) : ) 1500 rounds? Bull-fucking-shit. The GUN wouldn't last that long, even unsuppressed. |
|
They published in their magazine a article about a 1500rd test in which they fired 6-9rd burst and changed mags as fast as the guy could change them out, in this time they claim to have went through 2 m4 uppers and ended the test with a third. The only problems with that is that every time a upper goes down did they change the suppressor immediately or wait for it to cool? How "fast" could their guy change mags (if he took a minute to gingerly change them out he could deffinitely prolong the duration of this test.) Being a lightweight thin walled suppressor with high surface area it would probably cool very quickly. If they changed mags in 4seconds or less and changed out the suppressors in less than 30seconds when uppers went down it says a lot about the durability of the suppressor (and a lot about the claims that KAC is getting contracts based on politics) I also thought that the way SF bashed their competition (even without naming names) was pretty unprofessional. But I guess if their suppressor was capable of that, met the POI change suppression and weight requirements (which it probably did) and didn't get the contract maybe that is good reason to use these tactics. [b]They should have a video of the test, it would clear everything up.[/b] |
|
Quoted: ...the surefire suppressor did not get the contract is because they did not submit it in time. There were only two entries. KAC and OPS. ***Chen, there were a few more entries than that. Most were ruled out in the early stages of the testing (didn't make weight, other non-compliant specs, etc.) As you've stated already, my understanding concurs in that Surefire did not get their can there in time, as there were logistical screwups in shipping, twice. (This even after being granted that strange last-minute emergency extention of the deadline - I remember getting that 'new deadline notice' email from Crane and wondering why the heck they bothered to extend the deadline a matter of a couple hours... :) While I'm not going to name the companies that *DID* submit, because I don't know if they want that info public or not (as they didn't make the cut), for what it's worth as a datapoint, Neither SWR nor Gemtech submitted entries. A small part of these decisions were that no matter who was downselected, the solicitation was bound to be protested (and it indeed was, with an added bonus of an Inspector General audit and Congressional inquiry into inappropriately awarded KAC sole-source contracts). Politics can be a nasty thing. There were also other valid reasons for companies not submitting this time around. Kel |
|
People try to act like KAC gets contracts soley on politics but I think that is a stretch. The KAC suppressor can take abuse on the order of double that of the competition (except for the possibility of Surefire), and still provides world-class suppression in a small 6.38in OAL. People who argue that it is not about the best product are dreaming. The military needs a product that can take the abuse of an emergency high volume fire situation without failure. 35+DB suppression is great but not when the suppressor is ruptured and bullets are impacting the baffles. [b]Why not just inform the soldier of his ROF limitations? There will always be people who don't pay attention or who simply don't care and for that reason the military attempts to buy "soldier proof" gear. I think the KAC M4 QD represents that in the suppressor world.[/b] |
AR Sponsor