Db reduction of SF FA556-212?

[tcba_joe]

I've seen the published db levels of the SF can, but they don't advertise a reduction level like most suppressor companies. For reference I'm trying to find the db reduction numbers for straight comparison.

[Bendersquint]

I've seen the published db levels of the SF can, but they don't advertise a reduction level like most suppressor companies. For reference I'm trying to find the db reduction numbers for straight comparison.

You can try on major malfunctions site, he may have some numbers you are seeking.

[tcba_joe]

I tried there, no dice.

Someone on ARF answered 28-30 dB.

[66427vette]

If your looking for the quietest keep looking . Great can just a little louder than others that cost hundreds less.

[tcba_joe]

If your looking for the quietest keep looking . Great can just a little louder than others that cost hundreds less.

I'm not. The -212 is the type of can I've been wanting to buy. A good compromise of signature suppression and weight/size. I've played with various AAC and Gemtech cans, along with a couple of others, and I'm willing to give up a couple decibles for weight and length. I just don't have the cash to buy SF cans.

I'm already settled on the Griffin M4SDK, which Austin told me about long before it ever came out. As it was developed to be similar in niche to the -212 (and frankly I'm not spending $12-1400 on a FA556-212, -K, or SOCOM556), I'd like to know how it stacks up in value. On paper, the M4SDK already has slight advantages in OAL, weight, length added, and price. The only missing piece was dB reduction readings. With the reported 28-30 db it seems that the noise reduction is the only thing the M4SD beats the -212. The M4SDK reportedly has a 27 dB reduction, and according to Austin if using the Tactical Compensator or Flash comp meeters even better. This could make it a great value with a $350-735 difference.

Also, if anyone in NH has a -212, I'd like to do a direct side by side review of the 2 cans once I get mine in, and I have all the tech experience and equipment to compare the 2 in all aspects, (Sound, POI shift, accuracy, temp, backpressure/ROF, and visual signature) sans durability (I don't have the cash to replace both when I kill em). I know how passionate Griffin is with regards to the design of their cans and it'd be cool to see how well the $750-800 M4SDK performs compared to the $12-1400 Surfire "K" sized cans it was designed to compete with.

Granted that only happens if somone in NH has a -212 and would be willing to come out and play with me.

[Pman5KMO]

If your looking for the quietest keep looking . Great can just a little louder than others that cost hundreds less.

I'm not. The -212 is the type of can I've been wanting to buy. A good compromise of signature suppression and weight/size. I've played with various AAC and Gemtech cans, along with a couple of others, and I'm willing to give up a couple decibles for weight and length. I just don't have the cash to buy SF cans.

I'm already settled on the Griffin M4SDK, which Austin told me about long before it ever came out. As it was developed to be similar in niche to the -212 (and frankly I'm not spending $12-1400 on a FA556-212, -K, or SOCOM556), I'd like to know how it stacks up in value. On paper, the M4SDK already has slight advantages in OAL, weight, length added, and price. The only missing piece was dB reduction readings. With the reported 28-30 db it seems that the noise reduction is the only thing the M4SD beats the -212. The M4SDK reportedly has a 27 dB reduction, and according to Austin if using the Tactical Compensator or Flash comp meeters even better. This could make it a great value with a $350-735 difference.

Also, if anyone in NH has a -212, I'd like to do a direct side by side review of the 2 cans once I get mine in, and I have all the tech experience and equipment to compare the 2 in all aspects, (Sound, POI shift, accuracy, temp, backpressure/ROF, and visual signature) sans durability (I don't have the cash to replace both when I kill em). I know how passionate Griffin is with regards to the design of their cans and it'd be cool to see how well the $750-800 M4SDK performs compared to the $12-1400 Surfire "K" sized cans it was designed to compete with.

Granted that only happens if somone in NH has a -212 and would be willing to come out and play with me.

I think the ammo cost and time to test some cans to destruction would be the largest limiting factor... especially your higher end cans. Now if you did the full auto till it melts you would save on rounds, but destroy the weapons barrel most likely (or at least dead line it), now a more realistic test involving lots of rapid fire, let it cool, rapid fire, let it cool would go through more ammo, be much more realistic, and take for freaking ever.

[tcba_joe]

If your looking for the quietest keep looking . Great can just a little louder than others that cost hundreds less.

I'm not. The -212 is the type of can I've been wanting to buy. A good compromise of signature suppression and weight/size. I've played with various AAC and Gemtech cans, along with a couple of others, and I'm willing to give up a couple decibles for weight and length. I just don't have the cash to buy SF cans.

I'm already settled on the Griffin M4SDK, which Austin told me about long before it ever came out. As it was developed to be similar in niche to the -212 (and frankly I'm not spending $12-1400 on a FA556-212, -K, or SOCOM556), I'd like to know how it stacks up in value. On paper, the M4SDK already has slight advantages in OAL, weight, length added, and price. The only missing piece was dB reduction readings. With the reported 28-30 db it seems that the noise reduction is the only thing the M4SD beats the -212. The M4SDK reportedly has a 27 dB reduction, and according to Austin if using the Tactical Compensator or Flash comp meeters even better. This could make it a great value with a $350-735 difference.

Also, if anyone in NH has a -212, I'd like to do a direct side by side review of the 2 cans once I get mine in, and I have all the tech experience and equipment to compare the 2 in all aspects, (Sound, POI shift, accuracy, temp, backpressure/ROF, and visual signature) sans durability (I don't have the cash to replace both when I kill em). I know how passionate Griffin is with regards to the design of their cans and it'd be cool to see how well the $750-800 M4SDK performs compared to the $12-1400 Surfire "K" sized cans it was designed to compete with.

Granted that only happens if somone in NH has a -212 and would be willing to come out and play with me.

I think the ammo cost and time to test some cans to destruction would be the largest limiting factor... especially your higher end cans. Now if you did the full auto till it melts you would save on rounds, but destroy the weapons barrel most likely (or at least dead line it), now a more realistic test involving lots of rapid fire, let it cool, rapid fire, let it cool would go through more ammo, be much more realistic, and take for freaking ever.

I've done (and am doing tests) of that nature for my job.

I would not be doing any sort of durability or destructive tests for the test I outlined above. Sound reduction, POI shift, heat level/retention, back pressure/ROF, as well as measurements (length/weight/bore size) are all easy to do with only a couple hundred rounds at the most.