New SIG 762 can

Wicked · Post by **Wicked** » Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:27 am

I'll just leave this right here. Discuss.

Wicked · Post by **Wicked** » Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:47 am

este · Post by **este** » Mon Jan 19, 2015 12:18 pm

Liking it!

Instantly kicks the crap out last gen cans. I'm not unhappy with my Socom 762-RC, but I like the weight on this one. Will wait to form an opinion when I see the weight of that mount to add to it.

Grounded · Post by **Grounded** » Mon Jan 19, 2015 12:59 pm

The design reminds me of this AAC configuration minus the holes and with a slightly different taper.

Bendersquint · Post by **Bendersquint** » Mon Jan 19, 2015 6:05 pm

Grounded wrote:The design reminds me of this AAC configuration minus the holes and with a slightly different taper.

Well, the designer is the same......

Wicked · Post by **Wicked** » Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:48 pm

Anyone else remember back in the day, there was a utube vid of Robert firing a FA mag dump (or 2 or 3) on a 5.56 suppressor core minus the outer tube to demonstrate the durability of the welded core? Looks like it may be gone now. Anyway, I remember it mostly because he was wearing this sweet Vanson leather jacket. But I did think to myself at the time, if the 'train whistle' holes in the blast chamber were omitted, the core itself would work just fine as is - and be much lighter weight without the extra tube. "Trust the Weld, Luke."

Yea, I'm pretty much a visionary.

T-Rex · Post by **T-Rex** » Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:37 am

That thing is so ugly and unrefined that it's beautiful.

I wanted to try gearing my lathe slow enough to make a suppressor like this.

whiterussian1974 · Post by **whiterussian1974** » Tue Jan 20, 2015 2:57 pm

The original purpose of the tapered shape and holes was to create a coaxial space to bleed the blast chamber into. Remove the faux reflex volume, and the shape doesn't make much sense.
I DO agree about the lighter weight of using a sealed core, vs an overtube.
I always thought that plug welds were for easy of Manufacture rather than making the best possible can.

BearTHIS · Post by **BearTHIS** » Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:40 pm

Didn't Kevin state his disdain for QD systems in the recent past? Now this? I'm confused, does he head the silencer operations at Sig? Maybe the firearms guys twisted his arm a bit?

Bendersquint · Post by **Bendersquint** » Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:43 pm

BearTHIS wrote:Didn't Kevin state his disdain for QD systems in the recent past? Now this? I'm confused, does he head the silencer operations at Sig? Maybe the firearms guys twisted his arm a bit?

Yes he did make that statement.

quiettime · Post by **quiettime** » Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:54 pm

whiterussian1974 wrote:The original purpose of the tapered shape and holes was to create a coaxial space to bleed the blast chamber into. Remove the faux reflex volume, and the shape doesn't make much sense.
...

Approximates the shape of the blast coming out of the muzzle. Reduce the [unnecessary] volume of the first chamber to cut down on FRP?

Bendersquint · Post by **Bendersquint** » Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:19 pm

quiettime wrote:
whiterussian1974 wrote:The original purpose of the tapered shape and holes was to create a coaxial space to bleed the blast chamber into. Remove the faux reflex volume, and the shape doesn't make much sense.
...
Approximates the shape of the blast coming out of the muzzle. Reduce the [unnecessary] volume of the first chamber to cut down on FRP?

Creative but no, shape of the blast isn't quite like that.

whiterussian1974 · Post by **whiterussian1974** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 1:01 am

Bendersquint wrote:
quiettime wrote:
whiterussian1974 wrote:The original purpose of the tapered shape and holes was to create a coaxial space to bleed the blast chamber into. Remove the faux reflex volume, and the shape doesn't make much sense....
Approximates the shape of the blast coming out of the muzzle. Reduce the [unnecessary] volume of the first chamber to cut down on FRP?
Creative but no, shape of the blast isn't quite like that.

The muzzlebrake slit would redirect the exhaust anyway.
Now that I revisit the OP pic, it seems that there are probably 2 cones inside the initial section. The muzzlebrake spits into the coaxial space, and the blastbaffle indexes on or near the end of the blastbaffle. this escentially gives 2 blast chambers. Still doesn't explain why they would remove the added volume.
I'm just spitballing, though. Feel free to tear my theory to shreds.

I'd rather be wrong and learn, than be right and learn nothing new.

Tuukka · Post by **Tuukka** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 1:58 am

Nice to see other manufactures adopt the welded, tubeless technology into use.

Many ways of manufacturing suppressors, but at least in our experience there are quite a few benefits from this type of construction.

Most of our centrefire calibre suppressors have featured a fully welded tubeless construction since 2006.

We have also utilized a taper alignment on our BoreLock series flash hiders and muzzle brakes for a number of years now. Taper before the attachment surfaces for very minimal fouling.

Regards!

Tuukka Jokinen
Ase Utra sound suppressors

66427vette · Post by **66427vette** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 8:19 am

The cut away of the mount is pretty slick. Played with and shot it yesterday.

jreinke · Post by **jreinke** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 8:26 am

Wicked wrote:

I'll just leave this right here. Discuss.

I still say it looks like a 60mm mortar round!

ncorry · Post by **ncorry** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 3:00 pm

What does "SOUND 137 dB (300BLK 125dB)" mean? Supersonic sound level and subsonic sound level on a 300BLK?

RJT · Post by **RJT** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 3:22 pm

Most likely .308 supers at 137, and the 125 will be the lowest it gets with 300BO subs.

Wicked · Post by **Wicked** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:41 am

Tuukka wrote:Nice to see other manufactures adopt the welded, tubeless technology into use.

Many ways of manufacturing suppressors, but at least in our experience there are quite a few benefits from this type of construction.

Most of our centrefire calibre suppressors have featured a fully welded tubeless construction since 2006.

We have also utilized a taper alignment on our BoreLock series flash hiders and muzzle brakes for a number of years now. Taper before the attachment surfaces for very minimal fouling.

Regards!

Tuukka Jokinen
Ase Utra sound suppressors

The Euro guys often have a different (more innovative) prospective on suppressors. And the Eastern Euro dudes are completely on a different planet than us on suppressor design. Sadly, there is still little in the way of true innovation in many 'new' suppressor designs here. Mostly its a re-hashing of previously done bits and pieces made up in different combinations. Change an angle here or try a different grade of Ti, big deal. Guess there are only so many ways to skin a cat.

Yea, I've always liked the taper before the threads on mounts. Unsure why so few do it this way? Makes complete sense to me but many here in the US still do it backwards. Thunderbeast Arms just re-designed their mounts and they're still backwards!

Post by **silencertalk** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:57 am

Wicked wrote:[Yea, I've always liked the taper before the threads on mounts. Unsure why so few do it this way? Makes complete sense to me but many here in the US still do it backwards. Thunderbeast Arms just re-designed their mounts and they're still backwards!

Patents? Those pesky things that keep people from doing anything they want.

Bendersquint · Post by **Bendersquint** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:28 pm

silencertalk wrote:
Wicked wrote:[Yea, I've always liked the taper before the threads on mounts. Unsure why so few do it this way? Makes complete sense to me but many here in the US still do it backwards. Thunderbeast Arms just re-designed their mounts and they're still backwards!
Patents? Those pesky things that keep people from doing anything they want.

+100

Wicked · Post by **Wicked** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:00 pm

Is it really protected? I'd never considered it. It's such a simple/basic concept that I find it hard to believe that the time, money and effort to patent such an idea would be worthwhile. I work in manufacturing, not design or engineering so my brain isn't wired to think that way.

All right, are you guys going to make me do a search, or does anyone have a reference to whatever patent(s) would apply to this mount.

Post by **silencertalk** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 10:58 pm

See if there is anything here:

https://www.google.com/patents/US201002 ... CCUQ6AEwAQ

JeffWard · Post by **JeffWard** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:24 am

Wicked wrote:

Already obsolete vs the Omega...

DangerMouse · Post by **DangerMouse** » Tue Feb 03, 2015 1:39 pm

JeffWard wrote: Already obsolete vs the Omega...

Good afternoon. My first post here. I've been doing some research and thinking about getting my first 30-cal can for both .308 and .300blk (different firearms obviously).

Is the Omega really that much better?

The .300Blk may be an MCX when they become available, which will have a barrel taper for the direct thread version.

New SIG 762 can

New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can

Re: New SIG 762 can