Why so few reflex cans?

[wacki]

It seems like ops inc is the only major (?) company that makes reflex suppressors. Just curious why we don't see more of them around.

[continuity]

Thinking that reflex cans are the equivalent of a Lugar pistol. Superbly over engineered works of art, that do what can be done, in a much more simplistic way.

IMHO, suppressing the muzzle blast of a shot to a level that is lower than the projectiles sonic signature is a suppressors job. I'd love to drive a Lambo to Krogers, but my Jeep gets me there and back, in every way just as as well.

[doubloon]

Do the Ops Inc cans still require a special barrel profile?

IIRC ... the was at least one test maybe a long time ago where the Ops Inc can performed well in supersonic but lagged far behind in subsonic.

Maybe like everything else (beta/vhs, MS/unix, etc.) the market picks the "superior" design.

[Grounded]

Do the Ops Inc cans still require a special barrel profile?

IIRC ... the was at least one test maybe a long time ago where the Ops Inc can performed well in supersonic but lagged far behind in subsonic.

Maybe like everything else (beta/vhs, MS/unix, etc.) the market picks the "superior" design.

I believe so... I think its still turned and tapered to seal off on the back end.

[1slow01Z71]

The new muzzle attach cans perform just as good and don't need a special barrel profile, shorter rail on AR platforms or collar installed. Theres really no reason to go with a reflex anymore. Griffin Armament makes one as well.

[Fulmen]

Actually there are good reasons for a telescopic design; build length. By adding volume behind the muzzle you can improve performance for a given length measured from the muzzle. Some might not care for this, but I find any reduction in length beneficial. Not only does it limit gun length with longer hunting barrels but it also provides some extra protection for the muzzle if you apply a bending motion to the can. The downside is added weight and can interfere with flash hiders, rails and gas blocks on shorter barrels. So there is no absolute truths here, it all boils down to personal preferences. Where I live the marked is dominated by cans for hunting, I wouldn't be surprised if 90% are telescopic cans in aluminum.

[David Hineline]

Volume behind the muzzle blast works about as well as having a container of gas in your back pocket.

Back in the day when volume was used to quiet a gun shot, it worked because the design in front of the muzzle blast where the noise is, was such a bad design.

Modern designs with quality machine designs have no need for designs from the past.

[Pman5KMO]

Volume behind the muzzle blast works about as well as having a container of gas in your back pocket.

Back in the day when volume was used to quiet a gun shot, it worked because the design in front of the muzzle blast where the noise is, was such a bad design.

Modern designs with quality machine designs have no need for designs from the past.

The theory of modern reflex cans is to reduce back pressure.

The physics only work well with supersonic loadings and with a short front end with close spaced baffles.

The ops inc 12th model uses a reflex design mostly to enhance service life by reducing force on blast baffle. It is also entirely stainless steel and weighs as much as a brick. It works well sure, but when I have used it overseas it had as much increased back pressure as most other for caliber cans that I have used. I have gotten better back pressure reduction by using 7.62 cans on 5.56 with essentially equatable suppression (and generally a slightly lower tone... lower frequency noise travels slower and less distance).

The reason why the only 3 companies I know of currently making reflex design cans (Ops inc, KAC, Griffin Armament) and nobody else is is largely due to the desire for lighter more affordable cans that don't require custom barrel contours or expensive setups that require as much precision profiling. Even the KAC M110 suppressor requires special contouring and is a PITA to service should problems arise. They also are a major PITA to remove after extended firing schedules and prone to carbon locking in my experience... much more so than a conventional design is. Don't get me wrong I loved the 12th model and the M110 systems... they are great for their role, but by in large they are obsolete. They are the products of the bureaucratic DoD acquisition testing and evaluation systems that finally approved designs that were 5-6 years behind the times. JSOC/SOCOM units used them long before they were officially adopted as they do their own procurement and testing and were using those systems long before conventional units were. They have since moved on to better, lighter, more effective designs.

the main reason why there is demand for reflex cans is those who want to build Mk12 and SR25/M110 clones... and while I have clones of each I use a modern quick attach can on both (same cans actually both 7.62 cans). While the sound is not exactly the same, sound reduction is practically identical. I also dont notice any difference in back pressure from the different cans.

[Fulmen]

If volume doesn't matter, why aren't all silencers the size of coin rolls? Volume isn't everything, I completely agree there, but claiming that volume doesn't play a part is simply wrong.

And they don't necessarily require any special setups or custom barrel profiles, my cans are sealed and slip over any barrel with a diameter smaller than the back bore of the can. This might not be optimal for a semi with short barrel, flash hider and gas block, but on a hunting rifle it's usually not a big issue.

And don't forget that US cans are usually built for long life with heavy use, this usually means steel and lots of it. I'm talking of cans made entirely from aluminum that can cost less than your $200 tax stamp.

[bani]

reflex suppressors are common everywhere except the US. so the question isn't why so few reflex cans, but rather why so few in the US. we have extremely regulated suppressors, other countries do not. related? possibly.

[Fulmen]

Exactly my sentiment. The argument presented here seems to be that since US silencers are the best and few mfgs make telescopic cans the design must be inferior. I find that argument flawed and narrow-minded, not only are cans much more regulated in the US compared to many European countries, the marked seems to focus more on "tactical" cans for "tactical" guns. Since they are usually made from steel to withstand heavy use the weight penalty (I have no problem admitting there is one) might not be as acceptable. Or perhaps it's just that people in the US don't like the look of telescopic cans, and you can't survive by making quality products if you can't sell them.

And while we're on the topic of telescopic cans: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=121945

[bani]

another possible explanation is that because semiauto are outright banned or heavily regulated in many countries, the focus is on outright maximum suppression rather than tactical applications. in those countries tactical applications are non existent.

[Fulmen]

the focus is on outright maximum suppression rather than tactical applications

Quite probable. Around here the main use is hunting, so you don't need a can capable of handling full auto fire. And since they aren't taxed or registered you don't have to worry as much about wear and tear. Few hunting rifles see 1000rds per year, so an all-aluminum silencer can last for many years with careful use. And when you add the possibility to replace baffles or modules it becomes even less of an issue.

[silencertalk]

They are heavy for their sound reduction because volume behind the muzzle is much less efficient than volume in front of the muzzle.

[Grounded]

They are heavy for their sound reduction because volume behind the muzzle is much less efficient than volume in front of the muzzle.

That same volume ahead of the muzzle also means a longer can and different barrel harmonics. During my testing I did see an improvement with volume behind the muzzle.

[bani]

so the conclusion is that US companies target lowest common denominator, the designs are constrained that way. maximum suppression for lightest weight. because operator.

countries without mall ninjas focus more on maximum overall suppresion, so every extra bit counts -- even if it is less efficient. when adding length would become too unwieldy, they go reflex. weight and durability are non issues as suppressors are cheap there, not artificially high priced like in the US.

US companies don't have that luxury. prices are high so cans are expected to be high performance in every way. every can is a lamborghini or ferrari.

[Grounded]

so the conclusion is that US companies target lowest common denominator, the designs are constrained that way. maximum suppression for lightest weight. because operator.

countries without mall ninjas focus more on maximum overall suppresion, so every extra bit counts -- even if it is less efficient. when adding length would become too unwieldy, they go reflex. weight and durability are non issues as suppressors are cheap there, not artificially high priced like in the US.

US companies don't have that luxury. prices are high so cans are expected to be high performance in every way. every can is a lamborghini or ferrari.

I liken mine to a delorean

[Fulmen]

They are heavy for their sound reduction because volume behind the muzzle is much less efficient than volume in front of the muzzle.

This is true, a front mounted can will be more efficient. But it will also make the gun longer and more front heavy, so it's a trade-off. My 222 has a 22" heavy barrel, so keeping the total length down to a minimum was worth a small weight gain for me.

[ranb]

I have two form 1 308 cans, one is 12" long with 8" of that in front of the muzzle. the other is an 8" muzzle mounted can. Both suppress well, the reflex can is just heavier. In my opinion the reflex can is not worth the additional weight.

Ranb

[Fulmen]

That's your choice to make. As for performance it's hard to predict accurately, and even small differences between two cans of the same size can make a difference.

[hunter2]

Have 2 reflex and 3 front mounted suppressors. So far have only used the reflex ( OPS INC and Liberty ) on bolt and single shot. ( my upper might arrive one of these days ) Heavier - yes, more secure in their mount - I think so, inferior - I smell barnyard. The Liberty is a special build for a 375 CHEYTAC that can be used without plugs. Weight was not an issue on this build. But it did exceed my expectations by a long shot ( ). I got the the OPS 12 for length and the DeGroat 12 for pistol build. I can't tell any difference on subs. Each has their own application. Personally I like the reflex better and wish more were made.

[bani]

vote with your wallet. ultimately, thats the most effective message to manufacturers.

[Pman5KMO]

When you have to plug the exit aperture of a 12th model on a mk 12, and pour an entire can of kroil down the barrel to get it to come off, you will learn to hate reflex cans in quick fashion. Granted the Mk12 I had that happen to also had more rounds put through it during that operation than I had in the first 6 months in Baghdad. At some points having the can red freaking hot (reflex cans also seem to gain heat faster than non reflex cans in my experience, since heated barrel gets blasted with hot gas).

Sure the ops 12th model is by far the most accurate, and accuracy enhancing can I have ever used, and it's heavy weight feels comparable to a muzzle can that weighs 2/3-3/4 as much, but the carbon locking was a HUGE turn off. That said the only reflex can I would personally eye ever buying would be a 12th model. In part because my SPR build does have a Mk12 CLE contoured barrel making any profile work unnecessary. The Griffin Armament RSTA and SPR cans doesn't require such profiling, however it does have a maximum diameter, and the one piece mount does add a bit of weight. I also will say the rear taper does seem to seal up better on a reflex can compared to a muzzle can.

[Fulmen]

Pman: Not all reflex cans expose the barrel to the inside of the can, in fact few cans are designed like that (outside the US at least). And for good reasons, as you've explained. It's not a bad choice when it comes to saving weight, but it does foul up the barrel like you experienced. It can also causes problems with accuracy and POI as uneven heating can place the barrel under uneven tension. Threading the rear mount and using a cylindrical slip fit for the muzzle would probably be a better solution.

[k31user]

[quote="Pman5KMO"]When you have to plug the exit aperture of a 12th model on a mk 12, and pour an entire can of kroil down the barrel to get it to come off, you will learn to hate reflex cans in quick fashion. Granted the Mk12 I had that happen to also had more rounds put through it during that operation than I had in the first 6 months in Baghdad. At some points having the can red freaking hot (reflex cans also seem to gain heat faster than non reflex cans in my experience, since heated barrel gets blasted with hot gas).

Sure the ops 12th model is by far the most accurate, and accuracy enhancing can I have ever used, and it's heavy weight feels comparable to a muzzle can that weighs 2/3-3/4 as much, but the carbon locking was a HUGE turn off. That said the only reflex can I would personally eye ever buying would be a 12th model. In part because my SPR build does have a Mk12 CLE contoured barrel making any profile work unnecessary. The Griffin Armament RSTA and SPR cans doesn't require such profiling, however it does have a maximum diameter, and the one piece mount does add a bit of weight. I also will say the rear taper does seem to seal up better on a reflex can compared to a muzzle can.[/quote]

Odd that you had a hard time removing a 12th model. Sounds like the collar didn't fit the barrel properly. About the only thing that makes them stick on is if the collar is sitting too far back causing the suppressor to screw on too far exposing the brake threads into the first chamber of the suppressor. 6-8 turns is what I like to see, although some of the ones I've seen are only 4 and seem to work fine. Over 10 turns starts getting too close for comfort. Unfortunately there are a lot of Mk 12 barrels made to "sort of look right" specs.
RonA
One last note: In the beginning we made the brake threads about .625 long so they could be timed with shim washers. We were asked to change them so they could be timed using crush washers, so we shortened the threaded end down to .475 to allow for the .150 added thickness of the crush washers. If someone installed the long threaded brake with the crush washer, that could cause the sticking you experienced.