Armory Sponsor
Posted: 2/13/2017 12:50:46 AM EDT
|
I've searched around and finding a mix of ideas on this. One suggestion was a smaller hole in the blast chamber and then larger on the exit. For example, .250 in the blast chamber and then .300 at the exit. What is the benefit of this?
.250 seems a bit tight though so I was thinking more like .280 (basically a 9/32 drill bit) for all baffles and end cap. Is there a sweet spot? Not too narrow and not too open? This is for a 22lr. |
never heard of that one 
|
Quoted:
0.260" - 0.275" if you're using a lathe. A 17/62" drill bit is 0.2656". A 9/32" bit is 0.2813". Either will work well. Clip the baffles for best performance. How might the two different sizes affect performance of either the bullet or the suppressor? If it's a cheap can with potentially looser tolerances is the slightly larger bore a better choice? I don't have a lathe and it's AL so hoping a drill press is good enough. Do I need to lube or anything? To clip, is turning it on the size and drilling a semicircle good enough? Thanks. |
|
Quoted:
0.260" - 0.275" if you're using a lathe. A 17/62" drill bit is 0.2656". A 9/32" bit is 0.2813". Either will work well. Clip the baffles for best performance. Do you think that if you drilled center marked baffles on a drill press you would get a baffle strike with a 17/64 diameter hole? |
|
Quoted:
Do you think that if you drilled center marked baffles on a drill press you would get a baffle strike with a 17/64 diameter hole? If the threads, bore, and exit were all aligned, I would have no problem using a 17/64". With center marked baffles, an accurate drill press, and a sharp new bit, I say go for it. If there's any doubt, as another poster suggested, you could go to a 9/32" and see very little (if any) difference in noise reduction. In fact, a 9/32" might even be better for gas flow on the baffles, which could give you better suppression and less blowback. |
|
Quoted:
If the threads, bore, and exit were all aligned, I would have no problem using a 17/64". With center marked baffles, an accurate drill press, and a sharp new bit, I say go for it. If there's any doubt, as another poster suggested, you could go to a 9/32" and see very little (if any) difference in noise reduction. In fact, a 9/32" might even be better for gas flow on the baffles, which could give you better suppression and less blowback. Thanks. Since this is my first form 1 I think I'm inclined to go with the slight margin of safety and do 9/32. If it's a bit better for gas flow then all the better. |
|
This question has multiple answers.
The real question is what is your worst case - how many different barrels are you going to try and use this suppressor on. Which has the sloppyist threads, worst concentricity, shortest length of engagement, OAL of suppressor tube? I once built a dedicated can for a customer that had a .236" blast baffle, M baffle stack was .242" and endcap was .249" and even using crap ammo this unit has never had an issue with any signs of a baffle strike. But again - its a dedicated unit and doesn't get used on any other firearm other than its intended host. Regan said; Trust but verify. Well everyone should check the OEM barrel threads before any device gets mounted. Don't try this at home, unless your home has $50,000 minimum in quality machine tools and you have 10+ years exp with those tools. |
|
So what kind of bits are you using? Was thinking cobalt.
Also, sizes like 9/32 aren't common in small sets I've found and large sets are a waste and have very few usable bits - most of the bits are too small or too large to be useful. Has anyone found a good set for these types of projects? |
|
Quoted:
So what kind of bits are you using? Was thinking cobalt. Also, sizes like 9/32 aren't common in small sets I've found and large sets are a waste and have very few usable bits - most of the bits are too small or too large to be useful. Has anyone found a good set for these types of projects? What material?. I buy singles or packs off eBay pretty cheap |
Armory Sponsor