Quoted:
I've been looking at the Recce 5 and 7 but don't like the idea of stainless baffles when other manufacturers offer iconel and stellite.  Is it anything to worry about?  I have one SOCOM RC2 waiting but have been thinking about a Recce for a second can.

Quoted:
Something else I've noticed on the griffin it has a nice looking crown on the end cap that helps a lot with accuracy it seems. The same type of crown that is on the RECCE is on my RSTA also.

Quoted:
Recce 7's are currently in stock again.

Quoted:
What about the Griffin Alpha

Quoted:
From Griffin Armament

Our current heat treated 17-4 baffles are approximately twice as strong as stellite, and are lighter per unit of volume, so stellite is exponentially heavier for equal system strength. There are some really horrible options in the stainless alloy family, but 17-4 is a super alloy compared to 300 series stainless steels. Manufacturers almost universally use 17-4 for muzzle devices including brakes. Muzzle devices are the most abused part of the suppressor system. This should tell you something about 17-4 and it's worthiness as a material.

Not my attempt to say stellite is a bad material to use, both of these materials are good materials when compared to the formerly market leading 300 series stainless alloys. Just hoping to help people to understand that the upper echelon materials in the suppressor industry are comparably good with each possessing unique merits. We feel we are using the superior material. We chose 17-4 because we believe it to be the best material option on the market.

This is to some extent a philosophical engineering argument. I feel people have to have a very good understanding of what it is the suppressor needs in order to be equipped to answer that. The questions will be, "what is more important- safety or wear resistance, weight, or performance." We chose safety, lightweight, and high performance. We want our products to have the highest safety factor possible within their product category.

"Years of internal testing has found 17-4 stainless steel to provide longer service life than 718 Inconel, the prior market leading alloy. 17-4 stainless is also twice as strong as cast Stelite 6."

That's their direct quote. I understand there's different alloys for all these material  Is Stellite 6 even the common alloy used in cans?


But if your bullets are allergic to 17-4 stainless steel Inconel is hypoallergenic and will keep your bullets from breaking out.

Quoted:
If 17-4 stainless was so much better than Inconel or Stellite, how come other big manufactures aren't using it more?  AAC and SiCo as two examples have very limited stainless offerings in centerfire cans but, certainly have the knowledge and manufacturing capacity to use it if it was better.

Are we all being sold a bunch of hype to buy suppressor with Stellite and/or Inconel?  Or is this just a cop out to avoid the higher costs of using Stellite and Inconel by a manufacturer who doesn't want to invest in those materials?  And yes, stainless steel is lighter weight but, so is Titanium which is used to a limited degree as well.

Quoted:


It is important to frame the argument here.  In the late 90's everybody was emulating KAC- KAC had the most historically significant military suppressor in the M4QD / NT4 and they were using 625 inconel cast baffles in it.  So around 2000, you weren't cool in suppressors if you didn't specify inconel on your sheet, your product was taking a hit (we were using Inconel in our early years).  AAC correctly realized that 625 is very soft and soft is not a desirable characteristic for resistance to peening which is a major component of erosive wear.  They began to use 718 which from foggy memory (it's been a while since I thought or cared about inconel) is maybe 5RC points higher in hardness than 625- I believe annealed (the condition most people use it in, it is ~25RC).  That's huge.  ~5 theoretical points higher (as 625 is below the C scale) than 625 makes 718 a lot more durable than 625.   When Silencer Co came on the scene in 2008 and they felt the need to have some strong marketing speak,  they proclaimed Stellite to be superior to inconel.  That's probably true.  Stellite has a little more yield strength, a slightly lower melting point (not positive), but has massive hardness (~45RC).  It has greater mass, that's obviously negative - a suppressor made with inconel or stellite will be heavier than one of equal or greater ultimate strength made of 17-4.  

17-4 has ~42RC hardness, has more than double the strength of inconel, 30% greater strength than Stellite, one of if not the highest melting point, and has really positive and strong erosion resistance.  17-4 is a good material for general use in silencers- be it baffles or anything else.  

I believe you can make a good silencer using any of the 3 materials.  Obviously I believe the silencer with inconel 718 will ultimately not be competitive with Stellite or 17-4, and ultimately I don't see stellite as a material that can really compete with 17-4 in silencers.  Weight is becoming more and more important to consumers which is pushing design in that direction.  Titanium is not the answer, because it amounts to throwing money at the weight problem (which is only permissible for a segment of the consumer population).  Silencers will be more affordable in the future, not less.

I think my thoughts above can obviously be supported by the fact that Rugged was founded by people who splintered off of Silencer Co, and they are using 17-4 pretty extensively, and also Dead air founders had roots in Silencer CO and they extensively use 17-4.   We were to my knowledge one of the first companies to do 17-4 suppressor housings, maybe the first US company to be doing that, and the market either noticed or became enlightened because now that list includes SIG, Dead Air, Rugged, Q, and others.  

Some of these companies cling to the Stellite Marketing speak.  But I really see that as an artifact of the past.  Stellite will be leaving suppressors eventually.  Also in the last 5 years of manufacturing thousands upon thousands of 17-4 cans, we've only re-cored 2 to my knowledge to date.  This speaks volumes to the durability and service life of the products in our line.  Discussion was great, back to manufacturing great cans!

I believe Socrates said, "The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new."

Quoted:


I'm going to play dummy here but what makes the hammer comps so desirable as compared to any of the others? the breaks/comps i buy are going to live inside the can while they are being fired

Quoted:
So I'm stuck now between the M4SD series and Recce 5...is there a reason the Recce was built without a retention system (not sure what to call it) for the taper mount to ensure it doesn't walk off the threads?

Also, how "quick" is it to throw on and off a rifle?  I mean to the SD series for the true QD but am wondering if that's an ignorant decision considering all the good I hear about the Recce 5???

Quoted:


The recce won't come off once tightened, it's rock solid and not once has it even began to loosen.

I wasn't a fan of the m4sd mount, personal nothing against it. The taper is just simplified.

I'm a big fan of the recce 5, its lighter than my saker's and has a better tone. Not sure if it's the rifle or the recce, but the sbr it's on shoots smoother than my other suppressed rifles wearing sakers

Quoted:


How "quick" does it go on and off?  Is it a relatively short thread in?  I think the Saker is like a 1/4 turn to be set.

Quoted:
So I'm stuck now between the M4SD series and Recce 5...is there a reason the Recce was built without a retention system (not sure what to call it) for the taper mount to ensure it doesn't walk off the threads?

Also, how "quick" is it to throw on and off a rifle?  I mean to the SD series for the true QD but am wondering if that's an ignorant decision considering all the good I hear about the Recce 5???

Quoted:


The taper is the retention system.

Quoted:
You do noy need it. It is a compression fit. Even then once you fire it and it get warm it will not come loose. I can't speak for everyone but I have to let it cool down to get it off. It will absolutely not come off. The muzzle attachments/break will come loose first. Do not know what else to tell you bud.  Once you screw it on it will not come loose

Quoted:


I definitely trust what you guys are saying!  I just get confused why the "other guys" would need to add weight and money to achieve the extra tightening down for their taper mounts if just threading it on was solid enough.  Wondered if maybe I was missing something!

Quoted:
My brother just picked his up.  Impressive can.  Very quiet on a 14.5 and took all of the nastiness out of his obnoxiously loud 7.5.  Also compact and lightweight.  Its equal or slightly better than a SiCo specwar k, which we both have for comparison.  The only thing that made me nervous was no retention latch but it never came loose, even during rapid fire on his 7.5.

Would buy.