Yes, it can be legal to make a silencer. For everything Form-1, from silencer designs that are easily made, to filing forms with the BATF, to 3D modeling. Remember, you must have an approved BATF Form-1 to make a silencer. All NFA laws apply.
Why port the barrel? If you are loading the telescoping ammo why not make subsonic loads?
Nice design for the round
NPE
Porting the barrel is not mainly for making it slower, its mainly to fill the rear part on the silencer faster and have the screen fill faster, the over the barrel room is otherwise not used to its optimum.
Less pressure at the front of the barrel will help when using K's for small caliber. Loads will be HV and Sub.
Maybe even design a (rotating) sleeve fixed inside the silencer that can close the holes for HV AP ammo.
Makes sense, I was thinking a Monocore with a reflex design but with a subsonic load. My concern is the friction of the o-ring on the barrel face. I am not sure if the cylinder will rotate once the cartridge is fired.
I tried the telescoping insert loaded into a 44 remington magnum case. 308 projectile with 308 barrel fitted to the Ruger Super Red Hawk.
I used 1mm x 8mm o-rings for the seal between the ally insert and the barrel face.
As the inserts impacted the barrel the o-rings sealed the gap but the ally inserts compressed and deformed. They flared out and made it impossible to rotate the cylinder and remove the insert from the cylinder by hand.
I will have to go back and look at using a larger o-ring that will not compress as much. This should stop the ally from deforming when the round is fired.
Cool to try and it looks like it will work when I find the right o-rings.
NPE wrote:I tried the telescoping insert loaded into a 44 remington magnum case. 308 projectile with 308 barrel fitted to the Ruger Super Red Hawk.
I used 1mm x 8mm o-rings for the seal between the ally insert and the barrel face.
As the inserts impacted the barrel the o-rings sealed the gap but the ally inserts compressed and deformed. They flared out and made it impossible to rotate the cylinder and remove the insert from the cylinder by hand.
I will have to go back and look at using a larger o-ring that will not compress as much. This should stop the ally from deforming when the round is fired.
Cool to try and it looks like it will work when I find the right o-rings.
NPE
NPE, what hardness was the O-Ring?
7075 aluminum?
Did you take pictures?
Subsonic loads and the right alloy should help to. Maybe use a brass insert?
70 durometer o-orings
I had 6061 on on hand so I used that for the first test.
I took pics of the rounds but I am not sure about uploading them to the site
I could try brass but there is so little surface area on the end of the insert I think the o-ring is just thin. If I use 5.56mm projectiles I can increase the thickness and diameter of the o-ring. The o-ring will compress but the added thickness may stop the insert from contacting the barrel and deforming. R&D fun!
Have you ever seen the real knights rounds?
I am going to design the round so that the piston has o-rings that seal it within the 44 case.
The telescoping piston will be make of 6061 but this time the end will be slightly beveled with the barrel face. I have not decided what type of material to use on the beveled front face of the piston yet.
Round two of testing hopefully will stop the deformation of the piston on the barrel chamber face and allow the rounds to properly eject from the cylinder and also allow the cylinder to rotate freely
NPE wrote:I am going to design the round so that the piston has o-rings that seal it within the 44 case.
The telescoping piston will be make of 6061 but this time the end will be slightly beveled with the barrel face. I have not decided what type of material to use on the beveled front face of the piston yet.
Round two of testing hopefully will stop the deformation of the piston on the barrel chamber face and allow the rounds to properly eject from the cylinder and also allow the cylinder to rotate freely
NPE
Nice work
here a detailed image of the barrel.
Still searching for detailed image of ammunition
also an interesting host might be Mateba revolver or the Rhino 200DS.
Gunny
The only reason after 243 years the government now wants to disarm you is they intend to do something you would shoot them for!
http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
I know, HUGE necro-post here, and I'm sorry, but...
Dan Wesson .357 with 1/2x28 thread barrel nut adapter from EWK Arms. Have not fired it yet, waiting for CNC Warrior to get their 9mm alignment rods back in stock.
IslandTimes wrote:I know, HUGE necro-post here, and I'm sorry, but...
Dan Wesson .357 with 1/2x28 thread barrel nut adapter from EWK Arms. Have not fired it yet, waiting for CNC Warrior to get their 9mm alignment rods back in stock.
If that's still the "Mystic" and not the "X" update, shoot it. If you get a baffle strike, send it in for the update.
Received a 9mm alignment rod from CNC Warrior. Unfortunately between the barrel, adapter nut, and suppressor the setup is not true. Looks like there would be a baffle strike on the last couple baffles and/or the end cap.
So yeah, majorly bummed. Would maybe be able to get away with a short can, but my setup is far too long.
IslandTimes wrote:Unfortunately between the barrel, adapter nut, and suppressor the setup is not true.
As the barrel-nut is locked against the barrel shroud, you should check if it is machined square.
Not all barrel Shrouds are machined well on both sides and on the contact face of the barrel nut.
Put the shroud in a spider, align, machine and be happy.
In a low power firearm, like a sub-sonic .22, is port-pop chamber noise as high in an auto-loader as flash-gap noise would be in a revolver? In other words I suppose, what would be the problem in using say, a thin brass "consumable" gasket between a cylinder and a forcing cone ( And I can't see any reason you could not make a larger outside diameter forcing cone) to create effectively, an interference fit, in the flash gap? You would want a very uniform gasket that positively indexed on the cylinder, and it would add a lot of drag to the trigger pull, but would it be as bad as the Nagant revolver? ( Which I surmise was designed as a trigger finger exercise device, rather than as a practical weapon) Obviously, this would only be practical with very low pressure rounds to avoid gasket shrapnel blinding the guy next to you at the range. The basic Nagant concept is very interesting, although I don't see that it could ever be emulated in a more modern design if it had to rely on weapon-specific ammo to achieve a good mating of the gap.
