wacki wrote:About once a week I see a scientific paper of a miraculous discovery found by accident. Many of these revolutions look obvious in retrospect. So yes, I fully expect oversights to be common.Do you not think, for example, HK would have built the MP5SD barrel/can your way if it worked better than the actual design?
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/08/ ... -accident/
I still don't understand why a bullet squeezing heavily ported barrel (50%+ steel removed) won't be more effective than baffles at trapping noise causing expanding air. Especially given Rob Silvers statement. Its tight, slows bullet down a bit allowing more time for the faster moving air to expand and could have just enough steel to guide the bullet between baffles. But ill save that debate for another time.
Fill out a form one and go to town. We welcome your experimenting.
But, having been inside and having worked with a few big can makers, i can tell you that the R&D benches are full of cool experiments and there are good reasons why you see what you do (and why you don't see the ones that aren't made).