TAC 65 > Silencers

Posted: 6/11/2006 7:50:37 PM EDT

Anyone have any first hand experience with the Tactical Innovations TAC 65 .22 suppressor? I'm looking to jump into the suppressor world with a 10/22. My FFL has these in stock instead of the Outback II. For the price, it's certainly tempting.

I've searched around a bit and don't seem to find anything negative about them. Just curious if anyone here had one.

Posted: 6/11/2006 11:48:13 PM EDT

[#1]

unfortunately, not 1st hand experience, but this is what I've gleaned so far...

TAC-65

Pros:
Good Price
Comes apart for cleaning
Decent sound reduction
Comes apart for cleaning

Cons:
Aluminum threads are a bit vulnerable
Weight?
Comes apart for cleaning

Posted: 6/12/2006 5:37:31 AM EDT

[#2]

Yep, that's about what I have picked up so far as well.

Posted: 6/12/2006 5:49:45 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Anyone have any first hand experience with the Tactical Innovations TAC 65 .22 suppressor? I'm looking to jump into the suppressor world with a 10/22. My FFL has these in stock instead of the Outback II. For the price, it's certainly tempting.

I've searched around a bit and don't seem to find anything negative about them. Just curious if anyone here had one.

Yes I have had one for several years. I think it is a great deal, especially for the price (got mine for $109, but even at 2x that it is a good deal). Light, easy to clean, accurate, and quiet. Not as quiet as an SWR Warlock (I have that too), or an integral (have one of those too) but more than quiet enough. I have used it on a 10/22, 96/22, P22, Mark II, and of late, a Mosquito. Runs great on all platforms. The only significant reason NOT to get it is if your ego requires you to have the absolutely most quiet can on the range for bragging rights.

Posted: 6/12/2006 6:19:58 AM EDT

[#4]

Where at in MD are you? I just got an AAC Pilot, I really like it. I would be willing to let you try it if you want.

Posted: 6/12/2006 4:49:25 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
The only significant reason NOT to get it is if your ego requires you to have the absolutely most quiet can on the range for bragging rights.

Or you could drop a few drops of water into the rear of the can and you will be quieter than the dry cans.

Posted: 6/12/2006 5:02:05 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The only significant reason NOT to get it is if your ego requires you to have the absolutely most quiet can on the range for bragging rights.

Or you could drop a few drops of water into the rear of the can and you will be quieter than the dry cans.

Shooting rifle cans wet is a bad idea.

Posted: 6/12/2006 5:37:45 PM EDT

[#7]

I have a TAC 65... I love it! A cost effective can that WORKS. A buddy of mine has an Outback 2, its just a bit quiter with a different "note", but double the price... With the money I saved, I put it toward my Evo-9...

Good can that will let you see the innards of a suppressor...

Posted: 6/12/2006 7:10:47 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The only significant reason NOT to get it is if your ego requires you to have the absolutely most quiet can on the range for bragging rights.

Or you could drop a few drops of water into the rear of the can and you will be quieter than the dry cans.

Shooting rifle cans wet is a bad idea.

A Tac 65 is hardly a rifle can. You can dip the Tac 65 in water and it will perform. I shot a 223 suppressor wet once and it didn't explode. It was just for one shot, with a tad of water. It was quieter than the first shot without. I don't make it a practice to do this.

Oh, by the way, water is a by product of gunpowder combustion. Its kinda in there after a few shots anyway...the bigger the caliber the more water.

Posted: 6/12/2006 7:14:37 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The only significant reason NOT to get it is if your ego requires you to have the absolutely most quiet can on the range for bragging rights.

Or you could drop a few drops of water into the rear of the can and you will be quieter than the dry cans.

Shooting rifle cans wet is a bad idea.

A Tac 65 is hardly a rifle can. You can dip the Tac 65 in water and it will perform. I shot a 223 suppressor wet once and it didn't explode. It was just for one shot, with a tad of water. It was quieter than the first shot without. I don't make it a practice to do this.

Oh, by the way, water is a by product of gunpowder combustion. Its kinda in there after a few shots anyway...the bigger the caliber the more water.

I'm a retard, I thought this thread was about the Tac-16. My bad for sure.

Posted: 6/13/2006 8:38:55 PM EDT

[#10]

Thanks for the input everyone, it is appreciated. I think I'll head over to the FFL this weekend and order one.

MakoMan: I live near Ellicot City. Thanks for the offer, although I'm a bit hesitant. I would imagine it would make my wait for the paperwork to come through all that more agonizing!

Posted: 6/14/2006 5:39:37 AM EDT

[#11]

my dealer has the last of the tac 67's "the all stainless ones" if you are interested send me a im

Posted: 6/14/2006 3:22:03 PM EDT

[#12]

It sounds good on a P22, and fantastic on a 10/22.

Posted: 6/14/2006 6:48:16 PM EDT

[#13]

I don't see why a wet 5.56 should be a problem (assuming wet means wet and drained, or like a shot of WD40 and drained. )

I think the issue is volume inside the can ammounting to excessive pressure, and for that to happen you should need a substantial quantity like a 1/3 of a blast chamber or 1/3 of the whole can.

Granted with the pressure being developed, that wet charge should be blown clear in 1 to 3 rounds. With big reflex designs that could even be a good way to reduce or eliminate first round pop maybe.

Posted: 6/21/2006 5:57:48 PM EDT

[#14]

I am relatively new to the supressor world, but just picked up an outback II and have shot it with my friends tac65 side by side for comparison. We both have the same host pistol (walther p22s) also. I thought the outback II had a quieter first round pop and was a little quieter overall, but the tac65 was fun to shoot and is not bad by any stretch, especially given the price. I noticed that it seems a little bigger as it relates to the sight picture on the pistol when compared to the outback.

While we were shooting, a guy showed up with an swr warlock on his p22 and I thought that was quieter than both the outback or the tac. I am not a scientist with thousands of dollars in decibel testing equipment, but I thought the warlock is one of the quietest that I have heard with the exception of some of the integral supressors. It was a little longer than the outback and the tac but it had almost no first round pop and was extremely quiet. I think it is a little more expensive though. I may be purchasing a warlock in the not too distant future after shooting one, assuming my wife doesnt throw me out. Once again, just my .02, ymmv.

Posted: 6/21/2006 7:24:24 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
I am relatively new to the supressor world, but just picked up an outback II and have shot it with my friends tac65 side by side for comparison. We both have the same host pistol (walther p22s) also. I thought the outback II had a quieter first round pop and was a little quieter overall, but the tac65 was fun to shoot and is not bad by any stretch, especially given the price. I noticed that it seems a little bigger as it relates to the sight picture on the pistol when compared to the outback.

While we were shooting, a guy showed up with an swr warlock on his p22 and I thought that was quieter than both the outback or the tac. I am not a scientist with thousands of dollars in decibel testing equipment, but I thought the warlock is one of the quietest that I have heard with the exception of some of the integral supressors. It was a little longer than the outback and the tac but it had almost no first round pop and was extremely quiet. I think it is a little more expensive though. I may be purchasing a warlock in the not too distant future after shooting one, assuming my wife doesnt throw me out. Once again, just my .02, ymmv.

Yeah, what he said.

I like my TAC-65, but after hearing the Warlock, I'm half tempted to order one and permanently assign the TAC-65 to my 10/22.

Warning

Confirm Action

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - TAC 65

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - TAC 65