AAC at SHOT

General silencer discussion. If you want to talk about a specific silenced rifle or pistol, it is best to do that in the rifle or pistol section for that brand.

All NFA laws apply.

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw, renegade

jnitti1014
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 149
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 5:49 pm

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by jnitti1014 » Tue Jan 21, 2014 6:00 am

Will the 51t brakeout 2.0 be compatible with the older 51t system?

Kramer
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1082
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:13 pm
Location: nePA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by Kramer » Tue Jan 21, 2014 3:13 pm

aries14482 wrote:Originally, there was talk about putting the serial number pm the Ranger 3's rear-most part and using a sort of sectional design to allow for future repairs without the hassle and wait of a new stamp.

Silencerco originally said that with the Osprey. The serial number was placed on the booster so they could replace the outer tube if damaged.

User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33985
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:31 am
Location: USA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by silencertalk » Wed Jan 22, 2014 3:03 am

The BrakeOut2 has 31% better recoil reduction than the BrakeOut(1) and is equal to an AAC dual-chamber or TiTAN dedicated brake - but with good flash reduction (better than BrakeOut1).

Image

seattlite
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:17 pm
Location: PNW

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by seattlite » Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:57 pm

1_ar_newbie wrote:
dan9591 wrote:Any new adapters debut at SHOT? Perhaps a TiRant MP5 3-lug?...

New Brakeout 2.0 51 tooth mount.

No 3-lug yet... it is coming in 2014 I promise!
Will the 3-Lug fit the Ti-Rant 9s? How about the Ti-Rant 45?

User avatar
mk23
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1744
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: Port Angeles, WA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by mk23 » Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:36 pm

silencertalk wrote:The BrakeOut2 has 31% better recoil reduction than the BrakeOut(1) and is equal to an AAC dual-chamber or TiTAN dedicated brake - but with good flash reduction (better than BrakeOut1).
Does it still ring like a tunning fork? Maybe less because the prongs are shorter?

User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33985
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:31 am
Location: USA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by silencertalk » Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:49 pm

I don't see how. It is braced.

The Blackout flash suppressor is still best if you want the very best flash suppression and the lowest noise. This does not need timing. No shims.

The BrakeOut2 is best if you want the best recoil reduction (equal to the best AAC dedicated brake) as well as flash suppression, and want to reduce erosion of silencer baffles. This does not need timing. No shims.

A normal muzzle brake is best if you want the rifle for states that ban flash suppressors (the BrakeOut2 counts as a flash suppressor as you can see from the photo). Needs shims.

Image

CallMeShooter
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:43 pm

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by CallMeShooter » Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:25 pm

FWIW, I have many Brakeouts and not one ping.

Thanks for posting the pictures and new info on the mounts Robert.
Every knee will bow...

Pman5KMO
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 131
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 6:21 am
Location: central missouri

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by Pman5KMO » Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:17 am

57fairlane wrote:
Emilio wrote:
chrismartin wrote:Lighter means more material removal is needed, which means more machining time. Time is money, more machining is more wear and tear on the machine and tooling. More machining on Inconel even more wear and tear on tooling.
Not buying that one here. Thinking the reason is to compete and gain back people .

They where on the skin of their "teeth". :lol:
I think they had to drop the price . . . we can probably thank the SWR-named/SilencerCo-built cans for that.
Good ol' fashioned capitalism and market competition..... works wonders for consumers
Suppressors cost less than hearing aids..

User avatar
1_ar_newbie
Industry Professional
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by 1_ar_newbie » Thu Jan 23, 2014 6:05 pm

seattlite wrote:
1_ar_newbie wrote:
dan9591 wrote:Any new adapters debut at SHOT? Perhaps a TiRant MP5 3-lug?...

New Brakeout 2.0 51 tooth mount.

No 3-lug yet... it is coming in 2014 I promise!
Will the 3-Lug fit the Ti-Rant 9s? How about the Ti-Rant 45?
Yes :D
Mike Mers
L.E. and Commercial Sales
Advanced Armament Corp.
770-925-9988 x 101 (phone)
770-925-9989 (fax)
[email protected]

Gun Gallery 4 Life!

wacki
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 913
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 8:00 pm

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by wacki » Thu Jan 23, 2014 7:35 pm

mk23 wrote:
silencertalk wrote:The BrakeOut2 has 31% better recoil reduction than the BrakeOut(1) and is equal to an AAC dual-chamber or TiTAN dedicated brake - but with good flash reduction (better than BrakeOut1).
Does it still ring like a tunning fork? Maybe less because the prongs are shorter?

Yes. But only dogs and bats can hear it.

Shorter = higher frequency
Longer = lower frequency

Partially being cute, but the scientific rules are relevant.

Still, this is really cool tech and bravo to aac.

CallMeShooter
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:43 pm

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by CallMeShooter » Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:25 pm

Any idea on a release timeframe of the BrakeOut 2's?
Every knee will bow...

User avatar
mk23
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1744
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: Port Angeles, WA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by mk23 » Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:27 pm

CallMeShooter wrote:Any idea on a release timeframe of the BrakeOut 2's?
Yes, please, when can we buy the BrakeOut 2?

User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33985
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:31 am
Location: USA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by silencertalk » Mon Feb 03, 2014 1:32 pm

It is best to ask AAC sales directly.

User avatar
1_ar_newbie
Industry Professional
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by 1_ar_newbie » Mon Feb 03, 2014 1:58 pm

mk23 wrote:
CallMeShooter wrote:Any idea on a release timeframe of the BrakeOut 2's?
Yes, please, when can we buy the BrakeOut 2?
Shipping in 2nd quarter

Mike
Mike Mers
L.E. and Commercial Sales
Advanced Armament Corp.
770-925-9988 x 101 (phone)
770-925-9989 (fax)
[email protected]

Gun Gallery 4 Life!

User avatar
Fireman1291
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3142
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 5:43 pm
Location: Land O' lakes, FL
Contact:

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by Fireman1291 » Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:53 pm

Breakout 2.0 on must own list.
Industry T&E
https://www.youtube.com/nfareviewchannelusa
Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/NFAreviewchannel
Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/nfareview

CallMeShooter
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:43 pm

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by CallMeShooter » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:37 pm

Thanks for the info on the new mounts.
Every knee will bow...

User avatar
elcapitan1
Silent Operator
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:15 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by elcapitan1 » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:07 pm

Does the new 762SD rate the same as the old one? Or how does it rate compared to the N6?

Hater
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 12:04 pm

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by Hater » Fri Feb 07, 2014 10:58 am

elcapitan1 wrote:Does the new 762SD rate the same as the old one? Or how does it rate compared to the N6?
These are my questions also.

Old SD was longer than N6, had secondary stainless baffles, but weighed basically the same and was metered to be slightly quieter - at least on full-length 308/7.62.

AAC video from '14 Shot - "1_ar_newbie" says new SD is longer than N6 (like before, this we knew) but has "fewer baffles" and will be slightly louder. I think the quote was "a couple of dB's."

Did the old SD have fewer baffles than the N6? Or is reducing the number of baffles one of the measures that will allow the new SD to come in at a price point of $400 less MSRP ($650 vs $1050)? If the old SD and the new SD have the same number of baffles, then the only differences are the mounting system and the all Inconel baffle stack on the new SD, correct? Seems like it would be just as quiet as before...

In the same video mentioned above, 1_ar_newbie also discusses the new 556SD. He says one of the cost cutting measures over the M4-2000 is that the "geometry" on the baffles is different and therefore easier to machine. Is this the case also with the new 762SD's baffles vs the 762SDN-6?

User avatar
JasonM
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1483
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:51 pm
Location: NoVA
Contact:

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by JasonM » Fri Feb 07, 2014 11:19 am

Hater wrote:
elcapitan1 wrote:Does the new 762SD rate the same as the old one? Or how does it rate compared to the N6?
These are my questions also.

Old SD was longer than N6, had secondary stainless baffles, but weighed basically the same and was metered to be slightly quieter - at least on full-length 308/7.62.

AAC video from '14 Shot - "1_ar_newbie" says new SD is longer than N6 (like before, this we knew) but has "fewer baffles" and will be slightly louder. I think the quote was "a couple of dB's."

Did the old SD have fewer baffles than the N6? Or is reducing the number of baffles one of the measures that will allow the new SD to come in at a price point of $400 less MSRP ($650 vs $1050)? If the old SD and the new SD have the same number of baffles, then the only differences are the mounting system and the all Inconel baffle stack on the new SD, correct? Seems like it would be just as quiet as before...

In the same video mentioned above, 1_ar_newbie also discusses the new 556SD. He says one of the cost cutting measures over the M4-2000 is that the "geometry" on the baffles is different and therefore easier to machine. Is this the case also with the new 762SD's baffles vs the 762SDN-6?
The 'N-6 has more (tighter-spaced) baffles than the old and new 762-SD's do.

Good questions on the cost-cutting/design:
The new and old 762-SDs should sound about the same- size and number of baffles etc.
(Not 100% on what/if AAC changed on the baffles, but they are at least very close to the traditional AAC press-formed Inconel cones. the baffles are minimally machined to begin with- turned edges and final EDM bore).
Kick Ass Design
ten:pm media
www.facebook.com/VisualGravy

User avatar
MCKNBRD
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 9:19 pm

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by MCKNBRD » Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:46 am

Talking w/ John at the GAO show in Harrisburg last week, the -N6 has reduced backpressure, based on the baffle design, compared to the -SD. Bolt guns won't see the difference, but if you're running it on an autoloader, you might have to tweak your gas system.

The -S line of TiRants are pretty sweet, too. Sacrifice a little in dry sound reduction for a lot shorter OAL.

Personally, if they could do a Ti can in the -N6 dimensions, I'd be on it like a fat kid on a ham sandwich.

Great seeing John again and meeting Mike. Looking forward to the future!

Byrdman

User avatar
1_ar_newbie
Industry Professional
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by 1_ar_newbie » Thu Feb 13, 2014 11:21 pm

elcapitan1 wrote:Does the new 762SD rate the same as the old one? Or how does it rate compared to the N6?
The new 762-SD is the same design as last time we made it. However, the new design is more durable since it is made with all Inconel baffles.

Mike
Mike Mers
L.E. and Commercial Sales
Advanced Armament Corp.
770-925-9988 x 101 (phone)
770-925-9989 (fax)
[email protected]

Gun Gallery 4 Life!

User avatar
whiterussian1974
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2727
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:37 am
Location: On 8th line of eye chart.

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by whiterussian1974 » Fri Feb 14, 2014 2:22 am

wacki wrote:
mk23 wrote:Does it still ring like a tunning fork? Maybe less because the prongs are shorter?
Yes. But only dogs and bats can hear it.

Shorter = higher frequency
Longer = lower frequency

Partially being cute, but the scientific rules are relevant.
Still, this is really cool tech and bravo to aac.
Why not add a flat baffle on the end?
Would help redirect more discharge gas through the prongs and all connected at tips to prevent harmonic resonance.
The Darkest Corners of Hell are reserved for those who remain Neutral!-Dante
The Death of One is a Tragedy, a million only a statistic.-Stalin
Well I AM 1/16 Demon on my Father's Side!-Dresden Files

aries14482
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 248
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:36 am

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by aries14482 » Sat Feb 15, 2014 3:10 am

The old Ranger 3 model displayed for 2013 SHOT looked like a shorter M42000 with thread adapter and IIRC was said to have the same or similar baffle stack. The new Ranger 3 looks different, more like the new economy quick attach suppressor line you guys are offering.

Can you comment on the makeup of baffles, comparative DB rating, and weight/length specs for the latest iteration of the Ranger 3 with your other offerings and the originally advertized Ranger 3 specs?

User avatar
delta9mda
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2304
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 4:32 pm
Location: miami, florida

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by delta9mda » Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:26 pm

762sd = 8 baffles
sdn6 = 9 baffles (spaced much closer).

theres plenty of numbers from both cans on majors site.
NP

User avatar
Conqueror
Elite Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: RTP, NC

Re: AAC at SHOT

Post by Conqueror » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:39 am

whiterussian1974 wrote:
wacki wrote:
mk23 wrote:Does it still ring like a tunning fork? Maybe less because the prongs are shorter?
Yes. But only dogs and bats can hear it.

Shorter = higher frequency
Longer = lower frequency

Partially being cute, but the scientific rules are relevant.
Still, this is really cool tech and bravo to aac.
Why not add a flat baffle on the end?
Would help redirect more discharge gas through the prongs and all connected at tips to prevent harmonic resonance.
Because that would actually reduce the flash suppression and is substantially more prone to erosion (see: Phantom-style silencer mounts).
[b]Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?[/b]

Post Reply