SilencerTalk

How would using a pendulum to demonstrate decreased recoil distinguish between the effects of the mass of the suppressor and the delayed gas pulse? I don't doubt your word on this, I just can't think of a definitive way to measure it. Recoil ( like noise suppression) is so very subjective.

I don't suppose you could get away with putting ports in the suppressor tube? Is there a weight limitation in your service rifle rules? Without any ports, I don't see how you are going to get any recoil reduction other than from the additional mass of the muzzle device. Am I missing something?

I think it is pretty evident that even an untrained monkey can make a serviceable, but perhaps not great, suppressor from a Solvent Trap ( They are not suppressor "kits" because that might demonstrate the intent to manufacture a suppressor, or worse, constructive possession, and that...would be naug...

I tried using a Boring bar adapter on my mini-lathe for this purpose, and it works. Kind of. If you actually want to hang a drill, a reasonably long shaft and chuck, a longer and more robust would probably be better. The poor little QC mount is not made to carry a large off-axis weight like a power ...

I thought this post might be lesson number one in the French language...

Well, I can hardly dispute the findings of secret government labs....

I would venture to say that for any given suppressor volume, a wet, wiped , copper/bronze/silver screened device will be significantly quieter than a "conventional" can. Admittedly, these need frequent repacking, but the OSS probably did not have to shoot a heck of a lot of people. For a given volu...

I would venture to say that for any given suppressor volume, a wet, wiped , copper/bronze/silver screened device will be significantly quieter than a "conventional" can. Admittedly, these need frequent repacking, but the OSS probably did not have to shoot a heck of a lot of people.

No views of the internals?

The volume of the helical portion of this design is pretty low; I have a hunch that it would not help much, but that's just a WAG. Maybe our computer modeling guru on the board can do the math?

Well, now you have done it! ATF will be kicking down Grainger's door by the end of the day!

I don't see any posts by CMV about how this design worked out for him. It is a pretty high weight-to-volume design, so I really wonder how it worked out in either of these builds.

Are you using cast slugs? The additional back-pressure caused by the can may be causing your barrel to overheat, and this could cause erratic performance. Even without cast slugs, an over-heated barrel will cause accuracy problems.

Nice!

So this will be a two-stamp gun?

Increased back-pressure is an inescapable side effect of adding a suppressor ( There are some manufacturers that say otherwise, but I think they are Commies...) Effectively, your action is opening too soon, and the gas pressure is causing that mess flying back into your face and dirtying up your gun...

Giving the gentleman the benefit of the doubt, I would think that he he could build suppressor from one of the "Filter kits" with little more than a hand drill and one bit. I can't believe that anyone in America does not have at least a cordless drill, and if they don't, I suggest this kind of a pro...

I suppose with no tools at all, you could build an "Irish" silencer, sometimes called a "Russet" silencer, but its really hard to engrave the serial number...

Somewhere along the lines silencer builders got away from Maxims original baffles designs which although they werent terribly efficient they worked and started doing all kinds of goofy stuff like chore boy packing, expanded metal screen etc. Some work pretty good. I did a 22 silencer decades ago th...

"I would think a suppressor if anything would add gas pressure" It will indeed add gas pressure, but the added mass hanging on the end of the barrel in other than a fixed-barrel weapon can prevent the slide from unlocking. A "Booster" also known as a LID, for Linear Inertial device may be needed to ...

Roger that. Sort of like the spring ball detent mod that people used to use on 10-22's to stop bolt bounce in full auto ( Does adding a roller lock make any gun into an H7K? :) ) I have a Ciener conversion kit, and it puts just about as much gas out of the ejection port as from the muzzle; Deadly in...

T-Rex wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 27, 2020 10:56 pm

Which upper conversion, for the 22lr, are you running?
Have you done any of the mods, to quiet them down? There are a couple.

Do you have suggestions for modifications to the upper assembly itself?

Okay, taking all these considerations into account, let me pose the following statements and questions: A Suppressor built for .22LR may have a "bore diameter" of .251 or even larger, and therefore physically permit the launching of projectiles .223, .251, .250, etc, irrespective of the cartridge na...

With all due respect, to what "misinformed suggestion" do you refer? I think any misinformation came from someone making the assumption that the original post was not referring to a Form 1 can built specifically for a .25 pistol, but rather whether a .25 caliber cartridge could be used in a designat...

Capt, I believe that the original post concerned building a Form 1 purpose built, specially for a .25, just using the "normal" ( i.e., "Fuel filter) components ordinarily used to build .22 cans. I was not aware that it was illegal to fire a .25 caliber projectile through a can registered and built a...