Page 1 of 1

Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:29 am
by Jeanpierre
Hello to everybody

I would like to thank in advance for this forum full of great ideas and constructions!

I designed my own freeze plugs suppressor for the 32 ACP pistol according to this preliminary design, but it does not work well. Noise is reduced by at least about 1/3 down.
This design was originally intended for a 7.62 caliber mid-size rifle but I have not tried it yet

The suppressor is all stainless and 2 holes (ports) 2mm are drilled in all center baffles. Input and end baffles are full. All have a cone angle of about 40 degrees...

Everything is properly made in a lathe and centered

Are there any reasons why it does not work well for a weak 32 ACP?

Can it work well at 7.62x39?

Thank you very much for the comments



Image

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:35 am
by fishman
If your 32acp host gun operates via direct blowback then it won't suppress well.

If your 7.62x39 host is an AK, then you're going to be disappointed with how it sounds suppressed.

Also, symetrical baffles do a poor job of suppressing anything. Clipping the baffles might help.

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:48 am
by Historian
Back in 2006 on this board there was a good thread started by GHEN on the .32.

Please give dimensions of your design.

Inadequate volume is a variable to consider aside from
'washer' stacking.

Having once collected Browning .32s I am curious what
barrel you have found to replace original for threading.

At least you did achieve some reduction.

.22 or .45 suppression gives most satisfaction.

Bon Chance.

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 12:26 pm
by mpallett
Historian wrote:Back in 2006 on this board there was a good thread started by GHEN on the .32.

.22 or .45 suppression gives most satisfaction.

Bon Chance.
I 2nd the port noise. Stronger spring to delay the blow back.

Also, 45? I would vote .22 and 9mm myself.

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 12:40 pm
by Jeanpierre
Dimensions are 30mm inner diameter of can. Wall thickness 1.5mm
The length is 220mm, the length of the expansion chamber is 40mm. The meshes between the individual baffles are 9mm (aligned freeze plug). Thread M12x1

Unfortunately, the can is welded, no additional baffles can be done

The suppressor is considerably oversized, so I do not understand why it does not work properly on such a weak lap....


Is there a problem with a too large expansion chamber?

Or was it unnecessary to drill ports into plugs?

Too small cone angle?

Should I put the distance between the individual counters?

does not you think what a problem could be ???

For the .25 auto it works relatively well

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 2:17 pm
by mpallett
Jeanpierre wrote:Dimensions are 30mm inner diameter of can. Wall thickness 1.5mm
The length is 220mm, the length of the expansion chamber is 40mm. The meshes between the individual baffles are 9mm (aligned freeze plug). Thread M12x1

Unfortunately, the can is welded, no additional baffles can be done

The suppressor is considerably oversized, so I do not understand why it does not work properly on such a weak lap....


Is there a problem with a too large expansion chamber?

Or was it unnecessary to drill ports into plugs?

Too small cone angle?

Should I put the distance between the individual counters?

does not you think what a problem could be ???

For the .25 auto it works relatively well

We told you.

32 ACP doesn't suppress well as it is blow back.

Put in a heavier spring.

Turn small slots in the chamber. to delay the action opening.

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2018 5:33 pm
by Jeanpierre
Is it possible to cut freeze baffles dremel? What trimming style can be most effective in this case?

Or would it be better to produce new K-baffles from aluminum? Does it make any sense at 32ACP?

Is it better for a smaller caliber to compose partitions with cropped holes in one line or does it have to be some other system?

When the blowback can not be easily suppressed, why do people on various videos suppress their 32ACP suppressors on a whole range of weapons quite well?

thx

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:16 am
by Enfield577
I use K baffles on a 32 ACP Skorpion (blowback) and it suppresses very well, the projectile hitting is louder than the discharge noise

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:09 pm
by Jeanpierre
My pistol is just CZ skorpion and 7.62 vz58 semi auto rifle
Can you tell us how do you have the K-partitions modified? Did you have to replace the springs because of the blowback function for the harder? It seems to me that the scorpion is not a blowback effect so much prone.....so prone as another small blowback gun
thx

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:09 pm
by Enfield577
Jeanpierre wrote:My pistol is just CZ skorpion and 7.62 vz58 semi auto rifle
Can you tell us how do you have the K-partitions modified? Did you have to replace the springs because of the blowback function for the harder? It seems to me that the scorpion is not a blowback effect so much prone.....so prone as another small blowback gun
thx
Hi, I make the Ks complete from bar stock, then get anodised, not found any need to change the gun at all, it functions fine.

Image
Image

Cheers

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:48 pm
by Capt. Link.
Jeanpierre wrote:Hello to everybody

I would like to thank in advance for this forum full of great ideas and constructions!

I designed my own freeze plugs suppressor for the 32 ACP pistol according to this preliminary design, but it does not work well. Noise is reduced by at least about 1/3 down.
This design was originally intended for a 7.62 caliber mid-size rifle but I have not tried it yet

The suppressor is all stainless and 2 holes (ports) 2mm are drilled in all center baffles. Input and end baffles are full. All have a cone angle of about 40 degrees...

Everything is properly made in a lathe and centered

Are there any reasons why it does not work well for a weak 32 ACP?

Can it work well at 7.62x39?

Thank you very much for the comments

There are various reasons for your problems.First you need to check the ammo used as some .32 acp is very close to being super sonic.The other has to do with flow of gases or in this case the lack of flow within the suppressor. A two mm port is very small with a low pressure cartridge.Part of the idea of porting is to get the gases to split between the bore and a alternate path.The small port in this design is wrong for the cartridge used.Reducing the baffle count and doubling the space between baffles would help w/ no other changes to the basic design. I would just use this on a .22 rifle and call it a day.
-CL

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 4:18 pm
by Jeanpierre
Gentlemen
Thank you for your comments directly to the matter and photos, I appreciate it

Capt. : Indeed, reducing baffles and defining space by spacers of appropriate size was the first thing that occurred to me and where I probably made a mistake

What length of distance would you choose?

Do you think I'm going to baffles drilling larger ports than 2mm or better not to rub any?

I will try to open the can and make some meaningful adjustment. If it does not help, I will go by K-baffles

I usually use ammunition declared by the manufacturer around 1000FPS

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:01 pm
by Capt. Link.
Jeanpierre wrote:Gentlemen
Thank you for your comments directly to the matter and photos, I appreciate it

Capt. : Indeed, reducing baffles and defining space by spacers of appropriate size was the first thing that occurred to me and where I probably made a mistake

What length of distance would you choose?

Do you think I'm going to baffles drilling larger ports than 2mm or better not to rub any?

I will try to open the can and make some meaningful adjustment. If it does not help, I will go by K-baffles

I usually use ammunition declared by the manufacturer around 1000FPS
Fill the whole can with K baffles.Keep your expansion chamber to under 12mm and add a Dater hole to the blast baffle.

Porting can be very complex and is little understood.You will love the K baffle.
-CL

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:58 am
by Jeanpierre
I managed to open a welded can and pull out all the baffles.

All the baffles outside the first and the last had 2 ventilation openings with a diameter of 2mm, which were rotated by 180 degrees each time

My latheman is now busy for a long time. I will have to adjust my current proposal now.....for now

What adjustments would you recommend to me?

I thought I'd cook one vent on each counter, reduce the number of bulkheads, and place 10mm spacing rings between them.
At the entrance leave just such an expansion chamber that allows the inlet plug, that is, as short as possible without a spacer ring

My main question is how should properly look the first input explosive baffle ??
Should there be any holes in it or should it be full?
Should it be conical or straight?

What do you think??

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 2:29 pm
by Capt. Link.
Sir please answer these questions.

1) how long is the suppressor.
2) how wide is the suppressor.
3) how many ports are in each baffle. The bore hole is not a port.
4) how long is the spacing between baffles.
5) where are the ports in the baffle. A simple drawing will do.
6) How many baffles are there total including flat baffles.

Please send this information and I will try to improve the design. You may need some hand tools and a few hardware items.

-CL

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 5:37 pm
by Jeanpierre
1) the can is now 190mm-stainless steel, the wall thickness is 1.10mm
2) The inner diameter of the can is 30mm
3) Two holes 2 mm were drilled in each baffle, now the second holes are already welded
4) the distance between the partitions is 7.60mm.......the original design was missing spacer rings, the new spacer rings have a length of 5mm
5) photo
6) The entire original contents of the can is on the photo

In the original configuration, the suppression was roughly at the level of unsuppressed short rimfire pistol

Hand tools are not a problem

Thank you so much for your help


Image

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:07 am
by ninoslavt
Well, it's too late now, but next time, try to shoot suppressed pistol but in a such manner that slide (OK, in this case the bolt) is blocked. For Scorpion, all you need is a few turns of duct tape over and behind those two charging "buttons". If you are happy with a result, than try it without duct tape. If it sucks, well, now you know that you need stronger springs. Also, 40 mm is way too much for expansion chamber for 32 Auto.

Re: Poor suppressor function

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 5:10 pm
by gunny50
Jeanpierre wrote:1) the can is now 190mm-stainless steel, the wall thickness is 1.10mm
2) The inner diameter of the can is 30mm
3) Two holes 2 mm were drilled in each baffle, now the second holes are already welded
4) the distance between the partitions is 7.60mm.......the original design was missing spacer rings, the new spacer rings have a length of 5mm
5) photo
6) The entire original contents of the can is on the photo
Iff you are not able to manufacture More baffles, you could cut the 40 mm spacer in 3 and put one as blast chamber, 2nd after 5 3rd 4 later and fill with remaining baffles. That will be better than 40 mm blastchamber. My original 765 German QD pistol silencer is a lot shorter and works great on the cz27 pistol