Armory Sponsor
Griffin Armament DUAL-LOK 5 AM suppressor test (Page 2 of 4)
|
Originally Posted By IHTFP08: are there plans for a taper mount version of the HRT-5K AM Silencer? or the HRT-5AM? seems like it would be a worthy compliment to the explorr. not wanting to use an adapter with everything on taper mounts MDs already. There is an emphasis not to have just a wild diversity of options, when we already have a lot of models. In just HRT5K we already have 4 skus - 2 colors, and 2 mounting systems. I think the best way to do that is the hub HRT5K and the Plan A, L mount. that renders out about 5.2" OAL, which is pretty short, and a taper mount with gripping surface. We didn't have an immediate plan to offer a direct welded in taper mount. I do like the idea of built in mounts, but I don't know how popular that would be. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Green0: There is an emphasis not to have just a wild diversity of options, when we already have a lot of models. In just HRT5K we already have 4 skus - 2 colors, and 2 mounting systems. I think the best way to do that is the hub HRT5K and the Plan A, L mount. that renders out about 5.2" OAL, which is pretty short, and a taper mount with gripping surface. We didn't have an immediate plan to offer a direct welded in taper mount. I do like the idea of built in mounts, but I don't know how popular that would be. Thanks. 5.2 is still shorter than the explorr. I could swap to a minimalist brake and use the short plan A. |
www.newnanarmscompany.com
|
Originally Posted By IHTFP08: Thanks. 5.2 is still shorter than the explorr. I could swap to a minimalist brake and use the short plan A. Yeah if that fits with the muzzle device attached. I don't know to be 100% sure it fits, I don't have the baffle depth on hand. The suppressor was designed around a thought process that a lot of the hubs are around 1" long, and we wanted it short enough to still be a K can with the hubs on. So dual lok adds 1.05" and makes the can like 5.55" OAL. The .700" Plan A L is 5.2" OAL. Surefire's hub is 2" long and make a can 6.6" long. So you see even trying to build the can for longer hubs, some of the hub mounts are super long and won't allow the can to remain short. 6.6" is like a flagship can- normal full size can. Surefire probably did that because their flash suppressors are very long, and they wanted them to be compatible with whatever can the hub was used on. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By hodgescl: What kind of weight are you expecting for the can? The hub weight is 11.5 without mount. The Dual lok version is 13.8 ounces. Those weights are posted the the additional description tab of the product pages. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
@GreenO, so I did some reading, and this one is more for a right handed person where the HRT AM is for lefties. Am I correct? Any other major differences in the two? Also, there's a note on your website that says that some of these may be smooth? Have those all sold out, as i would rather not have smooth texture. ETA : Upon further reading, I understand the difference of these two cans, no reason to necessarily go back through that as time is valuable. The question on the finish of current models remains. Thanks |
|
Originally Posted By Captain92: @GreenO, so I did some reading, and this one is more for a right handed person where the HRT AM is for lefties. Am I correct? Any other major differences in the two? Also, there's a note on your website that says that some of these may be smooth? Have those all sold out, as i would rather not have smooth texture. ETA : Upon further reading, I understand the difference of these two cans, no reason to necessarily go back through that as time is valuable. The question on the finish of current models remains. Thanks I think the right hand firer will see the DL5AM as a low pressure can. That has played out in the comments from the people who have bought it. The HRT5 AM is better for having that perception as a left hand firer. There are more differences than that between the two cans, but that is the major noticeable interactional difference. the first production DL5AM's were machined on the diameter to be smooth. This was later seen as a waste of production time and resources, as we print more expensive material to cut it off, and we invest print time and machining time and labor to that end, and we lose some surface texture that improves cooling and grip on the suppressor for hands and covers. We ultimately changed the process to not need the machining of the diameter. I don't know where they are in sales, that's more of a CS question. You won't be able to notice a difference in the DL5AM model, other than one is smooth, and the other has a printed texture on the diameter. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
Moderate-Length Barrel Evangelist
Joined:
Jun 2022
Posts:
4931
EE: 100% (11)
USA
|
Had a chance to shoot this today...only about 100 rounds. Build quality is top notch. The Dual Lock is extremely intuitive and secure. Mostly groups of 5 to sight in a new optic and irons. I did one 20 round magazine rapid fire. Good tone, very low gas to the face as a left hand shooter. I think it was on par, or maybe even slightly less than my Ventum, which I found surprising. Noticed a slight POA shift, but not bad at all. I was only shooting with an Aimpoint Pro, but it needed a couple clicks of both windage and elevation from unsurpassed. I plan to leave this can on this rifle so it will not be a factor. I did not like the minimalist brake that came with it though...but that is the case with all brakes...too loud without the suppressor on. I might swap the brake to my 11.5 just for the sacrificial blast baffle and put a flash hider on this rifle. Which will mean buying another HRTAM for the 11.5  Also did not like the delay in shipping even though my 4473 was submitted and accepted by the Chief LEO 2 full weeks prior to approval...overall not a big deal...just over 5 weeks from purchase to delivery...much better than the 8 months my last one took. Great job so far. This is my first, but won't be my last Griffin can. |
|
I've been suggesting all the left handed firers get a HRT-5AM or HRT5K as those are both lower backpressure. I believe our Optimus 6 in the not released nickel 625X version is also very low backpressure and Left handed firer friendly but I'm not as familiar with it as I've only done preliminary testing of it. The Optimus 6 AM in the nickel 625X is the lowest flash signature option in the lineup but the price is a little higher due to the diameter putting a lot less cans on a build plate, and using more material and being a pretty tall build etc. Glad you had a good experience. I think the short brakes help the sound and flash a little, but I don't know if that is the same as helping reduce backpressure. So you might reduce backpressure going to the flash hider also (I'm not sure on that one). I do think you will pick up ~3DB up front and that won't effect ear noise. But coming from 129DBA that's not a lot of sound to pick up muzzle either. I think the short brake is a good way to run it, especially if the suppressor is staying there. I find just about always the POI shift is down because of weight on the barrel. In your case you have a little windage, and some elevation, but the elevation part you can't really get around as weight changes the muzzle attitude of the barrel. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
The DL5 AM promo video finally came out.  Griffin Armament - DUAL-LOK 5 AM Suppressor |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Super interesting reading through all this. I've been shopping around for a can for a 14.5" DD M4A1. With the longer barrel and generous gassing (already running an A5H3 unsuppressed), I think it would be best suited by a short suppressor with low back pressure. I haven't seen much out there on these, but it seems like the HRT-5K AM would fit the bill pretty well... Besides a sound difference of a few dB, and the weight/length difference, are there any other concessions that the 5K makes compared to the full-size HRT-556 AM? |
|
Originally Posted By Waaerja: Super interesting reading through all this. I've been shopping around for a can for a 14.5" DD M4A1. With the longer barrel and generous gassing (already running an A5H3 unsuppressed), I think it would be best suited by a short suppressor with low back pressure. I haven't seen much out there on these, but it seems like the HRT-5K AM would fit the bill pretty well... Besides a sound difference of a few dB, and the weight/length difference, are there any other concessions that the 5K makes compared to the full-size HRT-556 AM? The concessions are really small to the point of almost being un-noticeable in terms of flash signature for example. The muzzle sound is the largest difference, but that's not totally the predominant sound the shooter is hearing at the small difference of ~6DB between the two models with that 6 being in the 130 range rather than 140 where it hits harder. Ear sound is ~2-3DB higher I believe. Shooting the HRT5K the size is really small, and the performance really solid for the size, and that kind of package of attributes has a sort of odd likeability factor. I felt the same way about the Flow 556K on a 12.5" gun, just to a lesser extent. I understood it was kind of loud, but at the same time it was kind of a nice form factor- so I could see how people could like the can despite it being loud. With the HRT5K (kind of ballpark comparing to the flow 556K as an example)- we drop the DB ~7 muzzle (from ~145 where it really matters) and 4-5 ear on the included EZ brake, and at that point the gun sounds suppressed, and that short can like-ability factor just increases at that point. The flow gets kind of stuck on the mount creating a struggle, the Dual Lok does not. So whatever the more expensive 17-4 stainless flow 556K did good, this is just the Cadillac pimp version of that- it does it all better (exception one ounce of weight), in Nickel 625X, with a better mount, in a shorter form factor, for less money. You can see in the tests below we also drop 2-3DB muzzle and ear vs our Recce 5K in a shorter HRT5K that has low bolt speed and low backpressure,vs a conventional Recce 5K. It's a win win. The Recce 5K IMO was already more desirable than a Flow556K, but this just hammers that home harder. We didn't pull out a Flow 556K for the comparison, because it wasn't even remotely close. We needed to find newer more performing cans to compare against.  HuxWrx Flow 556k vs Recce 5k | Sound Testing Overview  HRT 5K AM vs SureFire® SOCOM556-MINI4 vs SilencerCo® Velos LBP 556K® | Sound Test Comparison |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Waaerja: Super interesting reading through all this. I've been shopping around for a can for a 14.5" DD M4A1. With the longer barrel and generous gassing (already running an A5H3 unsuppressed), I think it would be best suited by a short suppressor with low back pressure. I haven't seen much out there on these, but it seems like the HRT-5K AM would fit the bill pretty well... Besides a sound difference of a few dB, and the weight/length difference, are there any other concessions that the 5K makes compared to the full-size HRT-556 AM? Can't speak to the HRT-5K AM, but the HRT 556AM ROCKS...I have about 500 rounds through it right now sound, back pressure and gas to the face are great. I shoot left handed and this is better than the 30 cal Ventum that I have been using. I ordered the 5K and changed it to the full size and glad that I did. Using it right now on a 14.5 Mid, but plan to get another muzzle device and use it on a 11.5 too...or order another one for the 11.5... |
| Nice! It's great to hear from both the designers/manufacturers and also from consumers with hands-on experience. The 5K seems like it might be a great option for what I'm looking for. Now just gotta wait for them to come back in-stock... |
|
Something else I'd love to hear your thoughts on... what do you think about recessed HUB adapters, like the Comstock RPA, that push the muzzle device 1/2" further into the blast chamber? This is getting into the weeds a little bit, but it seems that these setups have become a fairly popular option recently. I'd think it's certainly preferable to keep the blast chamber as large as possible, but if it comes down to full blast chamber + K suppressor, vs reduced blast chamber + full-length suppressor, is it pretty much a wash at that point? You're essentially trading blast chamber for more baffles. Option 1: HUB HRT-5K AM, standard adapter w/ micro brake, 0.770" blast baffle clearance. Option 2: HUB HRT-556 AM, recessed adapter w/ micro brake, 0.438" blast baffle clearance. With option 2, you're getting a 1" longer suppressor while gaining only 0.5" total system length. So, as long as you have the brake to eat up some of the gas/particulate exiting the muzzle, would you expect to see a net benefit still by running the full-size can? |
|
How is the brake made? Some of these manufacturers make universal parts so a 1/2-28 brake has a .394” aperture for 9mm bullets, even though most are using it on .224 5.56. A 9mm brake is going to push a lot of gas laminar down the bore axis and create noise and flash problems. We have a bayonet micro brake that accomplishes shortening the system .780” on std Dual lok. The brake aperture is .252” so the brake cuts gas out of the bore line and i think the shortened full size can would outperform the k, but you would be dealing with a little extra weight. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
The exact bore diameter isn't explicitly stated, but they make several caliber-specific versions with one of them having a maximum projectile diameter of .223/5.56. So likely just slightly larger than that. I'd imagine it does a pretty good job of deflecting most of it. Yeah, net gain would be the additional weight of the full-size can, plus a touch more for the adapter made with more material. 0.5" and 3.0oz total, doing the math. Plus, you get to have those cool-looking cooling fins towards the back of the can haha
|
|
Originally Posted By Waaerja: The exact bore diameter isn't explicitly stated, but they make several caliber-specific versions with one of them having a maximum projectile diameter of .223/5.56. So likely just slightly larger than that. I'd imagine it does a pretty good job of deflecting most of it. Yeah, net gain would be the additional weight of the full-size can, plus a touch more for the adapter made with more material. 0.5" and 3.0oz total, doing the math. Plus, you get to have those cool-looking cooling fins towards the back of the can haha That made designing the can a complete bitch, but the blast baffle is double wall, and the fins increase it's cooling surface area a factor of around 12 times. So the blast baffle runs cooler and erosion is really limited because not only is the material stupidly amazing but the temperature is being managed during operation. Getting enough flow to still have low backpressure with that design was the largest challenge. The can just starts to glow around the end of a SOCOM table and that's indoor where light is closer to dark than daylight. It really helps a can in a harsh fire schedule. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Yeah, seems like a cool feature for sure. I'm looking more into the DUAL-LOK Bayonet Micro Brake that you mentioned. Didn't know you guys made something like that, looks like a neat solution. If I'm doing the math correctly... the HRT-556 has an OAL of 6.44", and the Bayo Brake sits 0.780" behind the barrel thread shoulder. So when mounted, that setup would extend 5.66" beyond the barrel thread shoulder, or around ~5" total added length. The DUAL-LOK HRT-5K is 1.2" shorter than the full-size, so that would be only like 3.8" of total added length... wow. Just to confirm, the DUAL-LOK HRT-556 AM has a blast chamber deep enough to accept that muzzle device? Is it also compatible with the HRT-5K AM? I do not see a blast baffle depth listed for those on the site. |
|
Originally Posted By Waaerja: Yeah, seems like a cool feature for sure. I'm looking more into the DUAL-LOK Bayonet Micro Brake that you mentioned. Didn't know you guys made something like that, looks like a neat solution. If I'm doing the math correctly... the HRT-556 has an OAL of 6.44", and the Bayo Brake sits 0.780" behind the barrel thread shoulder. So when mounted, that setup would extend 5.66" beyond the barrel thread shoulder, or around ~5" total added length. The DUAL-LOK HRT-5K is 1.2" shorter than the full-size, so that would be only like 3.8" of total added length... wow. Just to confirm, the DUAL-LOK HRT-556 AM has a blast chamber deep enough to accept that muzzle device? Is it also compatible with the HRT-5K AM? I do not see a blast baffle depth listed for those on the site. That mount will fit the full size can. It may not fit the HRT5K unless the hub model is used with dual lok. At that point you add .3” to 5.25 (built in dual lok length) to subtract .780 from 5.55” for 4.77” or 4.145” length past the muzzle crown. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Brahmzy: Have both HRT-556 AM and HRT-5K AM cans inbound and am probably going to order a DL7 AM shortly. LOVE Griffin cans and mounts. Great tests - can't wait to get my hands on it. You will be one of the first people in the country with an HRT5K. I have only seen one youtube short out with someone, although we have sold a hundred or so. Rob Orgel at Silencer Syndicate has both models inbound, as those are lefty friendly models. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Thanks for all the info! Sounds like the DL HRT556AM is a solid choice. Seems like the lower back pressure of that one along with the improved cooling make it worth the sound trade-off compared to the DL5AM. Just gotta wait for the FDE to-your-door to come back in stock. Maybe I'll just send it and get a 5K at the same time, can't ever have too many right? Haha. Thanks again. ETA: Just sent it on the DL HRT5K AM, since that's what's in stock now. Very excited to get my hands on it! |
|
Originally Posted By Green0: You will be one of the first people in the country with an HRT5K. I have only seen one youtube short out with someone, although we have sold a hundred or so. Rob Orgel at Silencer Syndicate has both models inbound, as those are lefty friendly models. How does the lack of cooling fins on the 5K effect cooling performance compared to the 556, if at all? |
|
Originally Posted By Master_Blaster: How does the lack of cooling fins on the 5K effect cooling performance compared to the 556, if at all? The DL5AM has been run 200rounds full auto in a single trigger pull on a 11.5" belt fed lima 6. The cans like the 5K are still going to be durable. That might be the difference between something like 300rounds being an abuse threshold and 200 full auto like that. There are cans from a lot of popular brands that will explode at around 100 rounds in materials like titanium. So these are really durable cans. There was a poster on Reddit who blew out the tube on his Surefire RC2 running 6 30 round mags of full auto. When a can is more durable than a can that is standard issue with SOCOM, it' s a pretty durable can. The HRT5K is a tiny can. We can't afford to waste volume on a cooling feature in something that size that we want to perform for sound and flash. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: it comes in a hub model dude. So, I called Griffin yesterday because while yes I had heard of hub, I really didn't understand it. I thought hub was just a fancy name for an attachment system such as asr. I leaned that hub is the system that is the attachment of the attachment system. Griffin was very helpful and yes I am a slow learner on this. |
|
Originally Posted By takdriver: So, I called Griffin yesterday because while yes I had heard of hub, I really didn't understand it. I thought hub was just a fancy name for an attachment system such as asr. I leaned that hub is the system that is the attachment of the attachment system. Griffin was very helpful and yes I am a slow learner on this. I think Dave Merrill of Recoil magazine coined the term "HUB"- that was what he told me at Shot or NRA (one or the other maybe 4 years ago). He wanted it to take off and I think it did. We began using the term after he mentioned it to us in a way that left us feeling it meant something to him. The system 1.375x24 is Silencer Co's Omega mount system. It is called "Bravo" at Silencer Co where it was designed, which is odd, because I believe they designed Charlie mounts chronologically before bravo. So the system can be called 1.375x24, Bravo, or "Hub". It relates to a square shoulder suppressor socket with a 1.375x24 threaded ID for reception of a male or OD threaded 1.375x24 suppressor mounting system like our Dual-Lok Hub mount, or our Plan A or Plan A long 1.375x24 "hub" taper mounts. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By takdriver: So, I called Griffin yesterday because while yes I had heard of hub, I really didn't understand it. I thought hub was just a fancy name for an attachment system such as asr. I leaned that hub is the system that is the attachment of the attachment system. Griffin was very helpful and yes I am a slow learner on this. Originally Posted By takdriver: Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: it comes in a hub model dude. So, I called Griffin yesterday because while yes I had heard of hub, I really didn't understand it. I thought hub was just a fancy name for an attachment system such as asr. I leaned that hub is the system that is the attachment of the attachment system. Griffin was very helpful and yes I am a slow learner on this. right on didn't mean to be rude |
|
Originally Posted By hoody2shoez: right on didn't mean to be rude I don't think you were, I just learned that maybe some people don't know we have 1.375x24 cans. I had seen posts reflecting that previously but this is the first time the term "Hub" was the reason it wasn't understood. Maybe that was the reason in more of these situations than less. There are only a couple use cases where I like Hub cans- the Bushwhacker/Sportsman cans made sense (any application where there is a desire to also use a pistol booster housing on an otherwise rifle suppressor). That's the original reason Bravo exists- the Omega was a pistol/rifle convertible can. They make some sense I think on the PRC cans where the precision shooters may have an affinity for a number of different mounting systems and lose relatively little to use Hub as they don't have a particularly thermal or vibration intensive application. Also this allows the PRC (forward brake attached) cans to have a shorter overall length if the end user wants to use something nearly flush mounted. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Green0: I think Dave Merrill of Recoil magazine coined the term "HUB"- that was what he told me at Shot or NRA (one or the other maybe 4 years ago). He wanted it to take off and I think it did. We began using the term after he mentioned it to us in a way that left us feeling it meant something to him. The system 1.375x24 is Silencer Co's Omega mount system. It is called "Bravo" at Silencer Co where it was designed, which is odd, because I believe they designed Charlie mounts chronologically before bravo. So the system can be called 1.375x24, Bravo, or "Hub". It relates to a square shoulder suppressor socket with a 1.375x24 threaded ID for reception of a male or OD threaded 1.375x24 suppressor mounting system like our Dual-Lok Hub mount, or our Plan A or Plan A long 1.375x24 "hub" taper mounts. As far as its origin - the hub name and dimensions are straight out of the bicycle world, ISO standard 1.375x24 bottom brackets and freewheel hubs have been around forever and are virtually ubiquitous. |
|
Originally Posted By Green0: I don't think you were, I just learned that maybe some people don't know we have 1.375x24 cans. I had seen posts reflecting that previously but this is the first time the term "Hub" was the reason it wasn't understood. Maybe that was the reason in more of these situations than less. There are only a couple use cases where I like Hub cans- the Bushwhacker/Sportsman cans made sense (any application where there is a desire to also use a pistol booster housing on an otherwise rifle suppressor). That's the original reason Bravo exists- the Omega was a pistol/rifle convertible can. They make some sense I think on the PRC cans where the precision shooters may have an affinity for a number of different mounting systems and lose relatively little to use Hub as they don't have a particularly thermal or vibration intensive application. Also this allows the PRC (forward brake attached) cans to have a shorter overall length if the end user wants to use something nearly flush mounted. Hub / Bravo / 1.375-24 actually got a big boost during the Form 1 era. As did your taper mounts. Lots of aftermarket titanium &stainless mounts were available when the primary sources weren’t keeping up with demand or weight, length & material desires. The sales volume success of the Omega-300 which was mount & front cap modular made for host versatility as compared to being locked into shitty 18 or 51 tooth muzzle devices or poorly functioning brakes like the Cherry Bomb. Offering competing mounts for the ASR equipped Omega-300 introduced otherwise brand loyal buyers to mount families (& eventually cans) outside of proprietary heavy, long, and intermittently available mounting solutions. I suspect it helped level out cash flow & machine utilization as non-stamped parts could flow freely in unregulated commerce. This supply competition & abundance then drove can marketing to provide mount modularity & some standardized rear threaded cans. Even though it’s another interface to be engineered & managed. It’s largely a result of regulatory market distortion from the earlier proprietary-only era. Surprisingly front cap modularity hasn’t settled into a standardized thread pattern. But front caps are fairly cheap until you get into front-cap brakes. |
| So how does the DL7am compare to the DL5am asides from the larger bore? Was kinda thinking about pickup up another explorr 300 but wanted to try an AM model and have hub compatibility but doesn’t seem to be an option. Sorry if this has been covered but how does the DL7/5am compare to the 17-4 explorr 300? |
|
My 2c… I wish the “HUB” system had finer threads. I honestly think the Charlie thread pattern was better. Not the full Charlie setup/design(heavier, more parts), but I have far fewer issues with my SiCo -> TM mounts than I do HUB. hUB loves walking off if you don’t use some sort of thread locker. Even blue thread locker, as long as it’s torqued very tight works fine, but on my Charlie cans, I only need them tightened properly. Not a fan of having to Rockset cans. Wish HUB threads werern’t so course. |
|
Originally Posted By Remington1992: So how does the DL7am compare to the DL5am asides from the larger bore? Was kinda thinking about pickup up another explorr 300 but wanted to try an AM model and have hub compatibility but doesn’t seem to be an option. Sorry if this has been covered but how does the DL7/5am compare to the 17-4 explorr 300? I think the explorr 300 AM will be available if it isn’t already. It is not uncommon for web filters not to be set up properly. Or it wasn’t made yet or listed yet. The DL7 AM is a more advanced flow path design where sound is better but weight is higher due to redundant walls. The 300 is planned to be offered. I’ll inquire with the team as to status. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Remington1992: So how does the DL7am compare to the DL5am asides from the larger bore? Was kinda thinking about pickup up another explorr 300 but wanted to try an AM model and have hub compatibility but doesn’t seem to be an option. Sorry if this has been covered but how does the DL7/5am compare to the 17-4 explorr 300? I had the same dilemma as I have an EXPLORR 300. Great can, but I wanted a tougher, lower backpressure can. I do occasional mag dumps / rapid-fire with my 300BLK rifles. The DL7AM IS the can for that. I mean look at the specs between the two. DL7AM is quieter, much tougher, lower backpressure, better flash suppression etc. heavier? Yes, that’s the trade-off. Soon my DL7AM will arrive and I’ll be able to do in-depth back to back A/B testing between the two. |
|
Originally Posted By Brahmzy: My 2c… I wish the “HUB” system had finer threads. I honestly think the Charlie thread pattern was better. Not the full Charlie setup/design(heavier, more parts), but I have far fewer issues with my SiCo -> TM mounts than I do HUB. hUB loves walking off if you don’t use some sort of thread locker. Even blue thread locker, as long as it’s torqued very tight works fine, but on my Charlie cans, I only need them tightened properly. Not a fan of having to Rockset cans. Wish HUB threads werern’t so course. Your talking about whichever mounting adapter that threads into a hub can, right? I am curious what round count etc do you notice the adapter walking out of the can and has it happened more than once? I ask because I have always wondered if this would eventually be an issue but I have not experienced it yet. I put anitseize on my hub threads and just crank the adapter into the can using a vice and a wrench. My rifle I use just for training, the suppressor has around 7,000 rounds and its a hub, it has not backed out. So I am interested if others have had the issue you have had or if its possible that it could be certain companies adapter. Not sure really. I am using griffin plan A taper adpaters for all my hub cans. nothing has walked out yet. |
|
Install techniques probably have a lot of bearing on it. Also how hard is the use case. Juicey media did the test of the dead air lazarus - a simulated 6 socom tables with a semi auto gun and it walked off once during the test. Completely unscrewed and I think flew off. But thats extraordinary abuse so a little unorthodox. I prefer built in mounts where you can really reef on the can if needed- no worries, but they obviously must work relatively well as they are very popular. All of my issues were probably because I didn’t tighten mounts tight enough and happened while removing cans from guns. I use hub cans in testing like sound and flash. I don’t have hard use time on hub cans. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Green0: I think the explorr 300 AM will be available if it isn’t already. It is not uncommon for web filters not to be set up properly. Or it wasn’t made yet or listed yet. The DL7 AM is a more advanced flow path design where sound is better but weight is higher due to redundant walls. The 300 is planned to be offered. I’ll inquire with the team as to status. So the DL7am is quieter than the 17-4 explorr 300 and explorr 300am? I see there’s a taper mount explorr 300am but not a hub version. |
|
Originally Posted By Brahmzy: I had the same dilemma as I have an EXPLORR 300. Great can, but I wanted a tougher, lower backpressure can. I do occasional mag dumps / rapid-fire with my 300BLK rifles. The DL7AM IS the can for that. I mean look at the specs between the two. DL7AM is quieter, much tougher, lower backpressure, better flash suppression etc. heavier? Yes, that’s the trade-off. Soon my DL7AM will arrive and I’ll be able to do in-depth back to back A/B testing between the two. I’ll be curious to see what you think of the 2 side by side. I like my explorr but quieter and less back pressure sounds like a plus even if it’s a few extra ounces. |
|
Originally Posted By Remington1992: So the DL7am is quieter than the 17-4 explorr 300 and explorr 300am? I see there’s a taper mount explorr 300am but not a hub version. Yes the DL7AM is the more quiet suppressor, followed by the 300 AM and then the 17-4 Explorr .300 in that order. |
Austin, Managing Partner - www.GriffinArmament.com
|
Originally Posted By Kgknight1037: Your talking about whichever mounting adapter that threads into a hub can, right? I am curious what round count etc do you notice the adapter walking out of the can and has it happened more than once? I ask because I have always wondered if this would eventually be an issue but I have not experienced it yet. I put anitseize on my hub threads and just crank the adapter into the can using a vice and a wrench. My rifle I use just for training, the suppressor has around 7,000 rounds and its a hub, it has not backed out. So I am interested if others have had the issue you have had or if its possible that it could be certain companies adapter. Not sure really. I am using griffin plan A taper adpaters for all my hub cans. nothing has walked out yet. My *first DA Sierra 5 HUB started coming loose a couple of times at low round counts. I might have put 120 rounds through it when I noticed that it was on only finger tight. I cranked it down as hard as I can with the tool they supplied, but I still noticed that after shooting it would only be finger tight again. Technically it never completely walked loose, but I'm sure if I kept going without checking it would have walked off. This was with Dead Air's own Xeno HUB, so I wasn't mixing brands. *I mention it was my first Sierra 5 because I had to RMA it for the crumbling baffle issue. The Sierra 5 I got back looked like it was completely new and the HUB on that one has been tight since the day I got it. I definitely haven't put 7,000 rounds through that one, but there's no signs of it coming loose. My second HUB can was a B&T Print XH with B&T's Surefire HUB mount. I want to say that at about the 1,000 round mark I noticed the HUB mount came loose as I was removing the suppressor from my rifle. Thankfully it didn't walk off during shooting but it was annoying. |
|
Thanks for sharing. I am going to keep an eye on the other hub cans I have. If I get any loosening on the hub cans I am going to rocksett the threads. I just don’t want to have to worry about the hub adapter coming out of the can. I use griffins plan A almost exclusively now and the tapers have never let me down. I have had xeno and cat loosen up between muzzle device and adapter. If I could start over I’d just use dual lock. I have dual lock 7 and that system is pretty cool. |
Griffin Armament DUAL-LOK 5 AM suppressor test (Page 2 of 4)
Armory Sponsor