clipped cone baffle orientation?

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.

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw

Post Reply
sspbass
Silent Operator
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 10:43 pm

clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by sspbass » Wed Oct 01, 2014 11:00 am

I've read that clipped cone baffles should have the clipped part all oriented the same way for 300 blk. Given that they're all on the same side does it matter where that side is... I.e top, bottom, 30° from the top...

User avatar
Dr.K
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 632
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 9:32 pm
Location: Webster Parish

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by Dr.K » Wed Oct 01, 2014 2:52 pm

In my experience, it doesn't matter.
Kyle O.

User avatar
curtistactical
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:22 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by curtistactical » Wed Oct 01, 2014 3:35 pm

It will be quieter by small margin if you line them up but will have more POI shift, if you index them 180 degrees apart it will have less POI shift and be a touch louder, these are the only two that I use, I have found that 90 degree orientation can do some funny things with the bullet. Others may have different experiences this just my .02 and what I do in my production cans.
Joseph Jones
Curtis Tactical
07/02

Fulmen
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:36 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by Fulmen » Wed Oct 01, 2014 5:11 pm

I must admit I haven't tested this as fully as I'd like to (on my list), but I think Curtistacticals experiences are very sound from a theoretical/logical point. Until I have conclusive proof I try not to push the envelope when it comes to bore size on asymmetrical baffles as well as keeping the baffles staggered.
The 90° could be a bit of a wild-card, if the rotation and distance should match with bullet rotation it could theoretically create a wobble rather than simply deflect. Would be fun to study that one closer, but that would take a lot of work...

User avatar
Dr.K
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 632
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 9:32 pm
Location: Webster Parish

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by Dr.K » Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:42 pm

The orientation matters with respect to each baffle (all clips on same side), but it doesn't matter in relation to the firearm.
Kyle O.

User avatar
curtistactical
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:22 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by curtistactical » Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:51 pm

Fulmen wrote:I must admit I haven't tested this as fully as I'd like to (on my list), but I think Curtistacticals experiences are very sound from a theoretical/logical point. Until I have conclusive proof I try not to push the envelope when it comes to bore size on asymmetrical baffles as well as keeping the baffles staggered.
The 90° could be a bit of a wild-card, if the rotation and distance should match with bullet rotation it could theoretically create a wobble rather than simply deflect. Would be fun to study that one closer, but that would take a lot of work...
You actually hit it right on, when I started going in 90 degree rotations the bullets were actually starting to tumble. The cool part about it is that on an integral you can shift the POI to match the sights so you don't have to get to extreme with the sights. I spent close to a month studying this with trial and error, I came away with about 5 pages in a notebook of things I learned. Some of my theories were right but I proved myself wrong just as much, I was just lucky to get the time to do this kind of r&d work. There were a lot of sleepless nights that month and I didn't take a day off till I was satisfied with what I learned. The result was an awesome rimfire can to start off, we done a demo at silencer shop in August, the rimfire can we build is .99 dia. x 5" long and weighs 5.1oz, it is all stainless. We metered it on a walther p22 using CCI standard velocity ammo, first round was 121db and the next 9 shots ran between 112 and 114 db. needless to say I was more than happy when everything was said and done. Two weeks after the demo our shop burnt all the way to the ground and I am just now starting to get somewhere with the insurance, we are planning on being back up and running some time in January.
Joseph Jones
Curtis Tactical
07/02

Fulmen
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1045
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:36 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by Fulmen » Thu Oct 02, 2014 9:08 am

Sorry to hear about your shop, hope the insurance plays fair and covers the damage.

Historian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3232
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by Historian » Thu Oct 02, 2014 7:04 pm

Curtistactical, add my condolences. The 'kick-in-the-gut' loss
can only be understood by those who have experienced similar
circumstances once in their life. You were smart not
to be cheap and bypass insurance.

But, as the Bible says "And this too shall pass".
You shall rise like the Phoenix even stronger.

Here is a funny story Boston Comedy Club performer once told in the 1970's
to lighten things up:

"Two old guys were rocking on the veranda on a Miami Beach Luxury Hotel
while their wives were chatting near by.

First old guy - "So, what did you do before you retired?"

Second old guy - "I had the largest clothing factory in New York, supplied suits and dresses to the top designers
in New York.
Unfortunately last year we had a major fire that destroyed the 15,000 square foot
building, equipment, stock. All burned to the ground. Nothing but ash."

First old guy - "Oh my gosh, devastating. You must have suffered terribly.
It must have bankrupted you."


Second old guy - " Yes, it was heart wrenching. Over 50 years of work gone in a flash.
But I was very lucky. A year before my wife insisted that I upgrade the insurance that
had not been done in 30 years. I was so lucky. We got a major settlement which, along with selling
the valuable New York land the building had been on, was like hitting the lottery,
allowing us to retire and live like kings here."

There was a pause and the second old guy asked his companion about his work prior to retirement.

" I had the largest machine shop in St. Louis, with over 100 machinists.
We did specialized work for NASA, McDonnell Douglas, and all the major aerospace companies.

My father had started the business in the 1930s.
But last year the Mississippi flooded its banks during the worst flooding we had had in recent memory in the midwest.

The river rushed through our buildings near the river, over 15' high, pushing mud and slime over all our equipment,
ruining our lathes, milling machines, computers, projects. etc. All destroyed. I was devastated.
Took me months to recover from my depression."

Second old guy - "Terrible. So sad. It must have bankrupted you.".

First old guy - "It would have had I not the previous year like you upgraded my insurance on the business.
I was so lucky, the settlement was a fortune and allowed me and my wife to retire in opulence."

There was a long pause. Then after a few minutes the second old guy stopped rocking, leaned over
and whispered into his companions ear:

" How did you arrange the flood?"

User avatar
curtistactical
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:22 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by curtistactical » Thu Oct 02, 2014 9:14 pm

Historian wrote:Curtistactical, add my condolences. The 'kick-in-the-gut' loss
can only be understood by those who have experienced similar
circumstances once in their life. You were smart not
to be cheap and bypass insurance.

But, as the Bible says "And this too shall pass".
You shall rise like the Phoenix even stronger.

Here is a funny story Boston Comedy Club performer once told in the 1970's
to lighten things up:

"Two old guys were rocking on the veranda on a Miami Beach Luxury Hotel
while their wives were chatting near by.

First old guy - "So, what did you do before you retired?"

Second old guy - "I had the largest clothing factory in New York, supplied suits and dresses to the top designers
in New York.
Unfortunately last year we had a major fire that destroyed the 15,000 square foot
building, equipment, stock. All burned to the ground. Nothing but ash."

First old guy - "Oh my gosh, devastating. You must have suffered terribly.
It must have bankrupted you."


Second old guy - " Yes, it was heart wrenching. Over 50 years of work gone in a flash.
But I was very lucky. A year before my wife insisted that I upgrade the insurance that
had not been done in 30 years. I was so lucky. We got a major settlement which, along with selling
the valuable New York land the building had been on, was like hitting the lottery,
allowing us to retire and live like kings here."

There was a pause and the second old guy asked his companion about his work prior to retirement.

" I had the largest machine shop in St. Louis, with over 100 machinists.
We did specialized work for NASA, McDonnell Douglas, and all the major aerospace companies.

My father had started the business in the 1930s.
But last year the Mississippi flooded its banks during the worst flooding we had had in recent memory in the midwest.

The river rushed through our buildings near the river, over 15' high, pushing mud and slime over all our equipment,
ruining our lathes, milling machines, computers, projects. etc. All destroyed. I was devastated.
Took me months to recover from my depression."

Second old guy - "Terrible. So sad. It must have bankrupted you.".

First old guy - "It would have had I not the previous year like you upgraded my insurance on the business.
I was so lucky, the settlement was a fortune and allowed me and my wife to retire in opulence."

There was a long pause. Then after a few minutes the second old guy stopped rocking, leaned over
and whispered into his companions ear:

" How did you arrange the flood?"
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I might think about retiring but I am 37yrs. old so new machine shop here we go, I like playing with guns and suppressors too much to retire though I would lose my mind. This did make me laugh pretty good though, a friend of mine owns a shop a few miles down the road, he had a guy tell him my shop was supposed to burn down 2 months earlier ???? Then he said it was the same guy that told him when I closed to the public and went to dealer sales only that I closed because I owed $1,000,000 on my shop and couldn't pay for it which was really funny because I only owed $3500 on my cnc lathe and that was it. I actually got a good laugh out of this guy because I don't even know him but he knew so much about me. Thank you for the laugh I need some of those right now.
Joseph Jones
Curtis Tactical
07/02

Historian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3232
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by Historian » Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:04 am

.

Glad I could give you a laugh.

I was amused with your " ... a friend of mine owns a shop a few miles down the road,
he had a guy tell him my shop was supposed to burn down 2 months earlier ????
"

By the way, your shop was not near Red Jacket testing ground, was it? :) :)
[ Could not resist the joke. ]

Best.

Kanook
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 12:39 pm

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by Kanook » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:44 pm

Reguarding the fire, start wiping down/off all the metal that you plan on keeping with 50/50 mix of Ballistol. Had a house fire and learned a bunch of tricks.

We were under-insured.

quietoldfart
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 4:28 pm
Location: France

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by quietoldfart » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:45 pm

curtistactical wrote:It will be quieter by small margin if you line them up but will have more POI shift, if you index them 180 degrees apart it will have less POI shift and be a touch louder... Others may have different experiences this...
Do you have numbers demonstrating the different decibel values for lined up and 180 degree alternating orientations? I'm not trying to be contrarian, but my rather more limited experience has shown zero difference to my ear or to my rather humble meter. By comparison, improvements made to cross-bore venting in K baffles, for instance, has made measurable and very audible improvements in damping volume - I started off being too timid with the ball end milling but then went deeper, improving suppression rather dramatically on a .22"LR pistol. Just this afternoon I've tested again and found identical results with 7 short K baffles aligned and alternating, both metering at 103.1dB on my cheap, but seemingly sensitive meter. I know the actual volume must be higher than 103dB, but the meter has proven reliable in a relative sense, giving identical results from shot to shot with the same setup and ammunition but showing a predictable increases in volume if I put in some earlier, rather less efficient K baffles. The relative volume measurements are easily confirmed by ear, with a 3dB increase in volume coming considerably closer to the discomfort threshold. I'm just not hearing nor measuring any difference at all with my setup on the firearm. Nor with the same K baffle type installed on a PCP airgun which meters about 2dB quieter than the firearm with a non-integral 12 K baffle suppressor.

User avatar
curtistactical
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:22 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by curtistactical » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:52 pm

I like the fact that I am quite a few states away from Red Jacket, I always got a good laugh out of that show. Years ago I worked at a very large retail gun shop and range here in Ohio as their gunsmith and R.O. We probably had a dozen people come in with paperwork to have a gun transferred from Red Jacket that they had ordered, NONE of the orders were ever filled to my knowledge. That was the point I realized what they were all about, and this is in no way a dig at Joe, I noticed he has come on here. All of this happened before him, 2008-2009. Maybe now that they are out of the spot light Joe can make something of that place, but seriously I would change the name as it will now be associated with incest and molestation.
Joseph Jones
Curtis Tactical
07/02

User avatar
curtistactical
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 10:22 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by curtistactical » Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:59 pm

quietoldfart wrote:
curtistactical wrote:It will be quieter by small margin if you line them up but will have more POI shift, if you index them 180 degrees apart it will have less POI shift and be a touch louder... Others may have different experiences this...
Do you have numbers demonstrating the different decibel values for lined up and 180 degree alternating orientations? I'm not trying to be contrarian, but my rather more limited experience has shown zero difference to my ear or to my rather humble meter. By comparison, improvements made to cross-bore venting in K baffles, for instance, has made measurable and very audible improvements in damping volume - I started off being too timid with the ball end milling but then went deeper, improving suppression rather dramatically on a .22"LR pistol. Just this afternoon I've tested again and found identical results with 7 short K baffles aligned and alternating, both metering at 103.1dB on my cheap, but seemingly sensitive meter. I know the actual volume must be higher than 103dB, but the meter has proven reliable in a relative sense, giving identical results from shot to shot with the same setup and ammunition but showing a predictable increases in volume if I put in some earlier, rather less efficient K baffles. The relative volume measurements are easily confirmed by ear, with a 3dB increase in volume coming considerably closer to the discomfort threshold. I'm just not hearing nor measuring any difference at all with my setup on the firearm. Nor with the same K baffle type installed on a PCP airgun which meters about 2dB quieter than the firearm with a non-integral 12 K baffle suppressor.
The tests I ran all of this on for the cone baffles was the integral 10/22 that I build, the cones are 30degree cone but my clipping isn't a standard clip, I actually port them through the opposite wall so it works somewhat like a port on a K baffle just instead of venting to a separate chamber it vents right back into the initial chamber. On the 10/22 with this style ported cone baffle the difference between alternating 180 and having them in line was an average of about 4 db. This style cone is not something I have ever seen anyone use it was something I tried and worked excellent. This design works well on rimfires, handguns, and subsonic rifle rounds, on high velocity rifle rounds there was no measurable difference between my style of porting and a normal clipped cone. As for the size of ports on the K baffles go from all my testing as you go larger and deeper on the port the frequency drops lower the bigger and deeper you go, I build my rimfires to run at a low frequency instead of the high frequency some other manufacturers prefer, there is also a magic angle on the port, I noticed once I found it going either way more than a couple degrees the db started climbing. So in all a lot of things play into the db level vs what you hear, its getting all of the features to work together in harmony that's a pain but once you do you are rewarded for it. Everyone that shoots my rimfire suppressors give me a funny look followed by a big smile, so until one of the big guys surpass my design the rimfire r&d is done for now. I use the Larson Davis 800b. The reason you are getting such a low db reading is the rise time is not fast enough on most meters to catch the peak level of sound, if you are just playing around with it for your own experiments there is no problem using the meter its just not data you can reference to what other people are metering. Mil-spec testing requires a rise time of 20 m/s or faster, the LD 800b and B&K 2209 are the only two listed that will do this in a reasonable price range. I have been talking to Larson Davis this week about some of there new electronic meters with rise times less than 20 m/s but for now those are out of my price range, we are talking 20 to 50 grand.
Joseph Jones
Curtis Tactical
07/02

quietoldfart
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 4:28 pm
Location: France

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by quietoldfart » Fri Oct 03, 2014 4:41 pm

Thanks, I've had the cheap meter lecture a couple of times now. Hence my disclaimer stating that I'm aware it's not giving an absolute reading, only a useful relative reading for comparison among sounds I test locally. Since the sound intensity with my rather successful integral K baffle suppressor and normal velocity ammunition (barrel porting keeps Federal bulk to just under supersonic) is comfortable indoors, I'm guessing it's somewhere well under 130dB. Since I don't know anyone around me with a suppressor from a major manufacturer with published proper meter results I have no way of comparing directly. Only relative testing, learning from experimentation and gradual improvements. My initial efforts were decidedly poor using long K baffles with inefficient (as I learned later) Dremel-carved cross-bore venting. Even with twice as long a baffled volume, normal velocity ammunition was bordering on the painfully loud. And that initial effort metered about 15dB higher with this cheap meter than my current best, short can. So for me, it's a useful point of reference, confirming what my ears are hearing.

GTS01
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:37 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by GTS01 » Wed Dec 28, 2016 2:18 am

Newbie here just reading and thinking out loud so if I'm WAY off base by all means slap me down.

So reading this thread and thinking about what I'm reading when you clip the baffles and run them all in a line you get more of a POI shift but quieter. If you stagger them 180° you get less POI shift but a little louder. Has anyone tried clipping the baffles on both sides 180° apart to help stabilize the round as well as reduce volume? Or does it just throw everything into a tail spin?

a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by a_canadian » Wed Dec 28, 2016 2:25 am

Clipping both sides, or even clipping in three spots at equal angles around the entry point of the baffle, is something used by precision shooters looking for minimal POI shift, and willing to sacrifice some suppression efficiency towards that end. If you look at the completed builds thread you will eventually find examples of each of these types of clipping.

GTS01
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:37 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by GTS01 » Wed Dec 28, 2016 3:29 am

OK so it sounds like my thought process is on point. So if the case is that it helps make them more accurate but less suppressive, and leaving them unnotched is the most accurate but slightly less suppressive what's the point of notching at all if it's the same end result? I guess if a single notch makes it quieter with a bit more move to POI then I get that trade off. But it seems going with two or three symmetrical notches nets you back to the starting point of no notches but with more effort.

a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by a_canadian » Wed Dec 28, 2016 3:33 am

Perhaps re-read my post. Symmetrical clipping is LESS efficient for suppression, but better for maintaining POI. Asymmetrical clipping is MORE efficient for suppression but can sometimes change POI.

GTS01
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 12:37 am

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by GTS01 » Wed Dec 28, 2016 2:09 pm

My original post I had it backwards. I edited it when I realized I did that. I'm assuming your reply was prior to editing?

a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: clipped cone baffle orientation?

Post by a_canadian » Wed Dec 28, 2016 2:43 pm

Yes, it seems your edit came after I replied and put down my phone for the evening. Your changed version is about right, except that with symmetrical clipping there should be at least a small increase in suppression efficiency as compared to the same conical baffles un-clipped. So more work, sure, but with a point.

Post Reply