All about Titanium

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, mr fixit, bakerjw, renegade

User avatar
#93
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 859
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Post by #93 »

rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote:
OK you and Dater agree the risk of baffle strikes increase as a barrel overheats. So I don’t see the problem.
Shooting a can also increases the risk of a baffle strike. While that applies to all silencers, there are still design features you can implement to make the can more suitable for full auto.
Gem-Tech’s reasoning fro their limited F/A use has nothing to do with the limitations of their can but with the limitations of the bullet. I don not see how your response addresses this and I thought that is what you were referring to when you asked if I was kidding.
rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote: I have not seen or heard of a problem with the Gem-Tech spring in the mount. Have you? What material is it made of or are you assuming it is inferior? I have seen an external spring fail on a M249SAW at the silencer shoot and read about similar occurrences on this site.
I brought the inside of my can up to above 1550 degrees. Springs are not rated for that. That outside rear area of the M4-2000 does not get as hot as inside the can so it is safer to put a spring there than inside the blast area.
I would like to know more about what you found out when you got your can that hot and what happened but have you heard of one of the Gem-Tech springs failing?


rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote:]What grade Titanium do they use? Do you know the specs on the can or are you again assuming that it is inferior?
No Titanium or Ti alloy is a good choice for full auto cans. I am not sure what grade they use. Please ask them and post what they say.


You know way more about metallurgy than I do (suppressors too) so I will accept that Ti is not the best choice for a heavily abused can but it has its place in the market.

rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote: I believe their end caps are laser welded on. They used to do a short weld and now weld the entire circumference. They may use locktite on 22 cans but a 22 can don’t need to be welded.
They do not do full penetration welds. The laser weld is a surface weld to keep the threads from unscrewing which is obvious from the width of the weld. Welds are typically not much deeper than they are wide so just look at it.
I don’t see why any more than a surface weld would be necessary on an end cap anyway.
rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote:They fully weld the core on their cans and told me they are getting 20 thousandths penetration with their laser welder you are so skeptical of. Do you have any reason to not believe them?
20 thousands is only 1/5 the thickness of an M4-2000 tube (which AAC welds to 100% depth). It is a very possible depth, depending on how much time they want the weld to take and spot-size.
AAC uses a different technique for welding their cans where the weld must penetrate the tube you know this. Gem-Tech uses a welded core that is welded all the way around not “spot” welded.

I was speaking with them about an HVT can I purchased so I can not say with any certainty that what I was told also applies to the G5 but I suspect it does.

BTW I am very grateful you allow differing opinions on this site. It allows for us all to lean so much more.
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

#93 wrote:
rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote:
OK you and Dater agree the risk of baffle strikes increase as a barrel overheats. So I don’t see the problem.
Shooting a can also increases the risk of a baffle strike. While that applies to all silencers, there are still design features you can implement to make the can more suitable for full auto.
Gem-Tech’s reasoning fro their limited F/A use has nothing to do with the limitations of their can but with the limitations of the bullet. I don not see how your response addresses this and I thought that is what you were referring to when you asked if I was kidding.

It has a lot to do with the limitations of the can, but they are instead naming a reason that does not require more expensive engineering.
rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote: I have not seen or heard of a problem with the Gem-Tech spring in the mount. Have you? What material is it made of or are you assuming it is inferior? I have seen an external spring fail on a M249SAW at the silencer shoot and read about similar occurrences on this site.
I brought the inside of my can up to above 1550 degrees. Springs are not rated for that. That outside rear area of the M4-2000 does not get as hot as inside the can so it is safer to put a spring there than inside the blast area.
I would like to know more about what you found out when you got your can that hot and what happened but have you heard of one of the Gem-Tech springs failing?

I have not heard of a Gemtech-spring failing from heat (except for the usual sticking, however, I have also not seen anyone do a long burst through one.
rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote:]What grade Titanium do they use? Do you know the specs on the can or are you again assuming that it is inferior?
No Titanium or Ti alloy is a good choice for full auto cans. I am not sure what grade they use. Please ask them and post what they say.


You know way more about metallurgy than I do (suppressors too) so I will accept that Ti is not the best choice for a heavily abused can but it has its place in the market.

Metallurgists told me that Ti absorbs hydrogen at high temps and becomes brittle. I have tested a Grade-2 can until destruction, and it failed much earlier than an AAC stainless can.

rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote: I believe their end caps are laser welded on. They used to do a short weld and now weld the entire circumference. They may use locktite on 22 cans but a 22 can don’t need to be welded.
They do not do full penetration welds. The laser weld is a surface weld to keep the threads from unscrewing which is obvious from the width of the weld. Welds are typically not much deeper than they are wide so just look at it.
I don’t see why any more than a surface weld would be necessary on an end cap anyway.

It is not 'necessary.' It is just a question of if you want to have everything be just 'good enough' or designed for the most extreme worst case.

rsilvers wrote:
#93 wrote:They fully weld the core on their cans and told me they are getting 20 thousandths penetration with their laser welder you are so skeptical of. Do you have any reason to not believe them?
20 thousands is only 1/5 the thickness of an M4-2000 tube (which AAC welds to 100% depth). It is a very possible depth, depending on how much time they want the weld to take and spot-size.
AAC uses a different technique for welding their cans where the weld must penetrate the tube you know this. Gem-Tech uses a welded core that is welded all the way around not “spot” welded.

AAC cans do not require full penetration welds. AAC chooses to incur the expense of welding to 100% depth because it is better. Just for background info, plug welding and spot welding are not same. AAC plug welds on the tube. The means a hole is drilled first. See this link (although AAC uses TIG, not MIG)

http://www.mig-welding.co.uk/plug-weld.htm


I was speaking with them about an HVT can I purchased so I can not say with any certainty that what I was told also applies to the G5 but I suspect it does.

BTW I am very grateful you allow differing opinions on this site. It allows for us all to lean so much more.
PhD told me they do various degrees of TIG and/or laser welding. They may or may not be structural quality welds. For example, would you ride a motorcycle where the frame was laser-welded together on Gemtech's laser? Look at the weld while thinking about that.
zak2427
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 5:45 pm

Post by zak2427 »

When I first saw the thread title about titanium, I wondered what the point of the thread would be. I should have known somehwere in there silvers would try to point out something negative about someones product, and somewhere say that AAC was the best......lol :lol:
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

Yeah. I learned that Grade-2 Ti is not that useful, and so I am sharing that. You can make a case that it is great stuff if you want.
zak2427
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 5:45 pm

Post by zak2427 »

I think you need a hug... :P
User avatar
#93
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 859
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:54 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Post by #93 »

rsilvers wrote: It has a lot to do with the limitations of the can, but they are instead naming a reason that does not require more expensive engineering.
Well this part of the conversation has come full circle I knew someone would call it a Gem-Tech ploy. I, however, believe it has merit.
rsilvers wrote: I have not heard of a Gemtech-spring failing from heat (except for the usual sticking, however, I have also not seen anyone do a long burst through one.
Neither of us has heard of a spring failing then. I have not seen anyone do a long burst out of one either but I’ll bet people have.
rsilvers wrote: It is not 'necessary.' It is just a question of if you want to have everything be just 'good enough' or designed for the most extreme worst case.
Once again we agree, a stronger weld is not necessary for the end caps. When I was talking to Gem-Tech about my HVT they told me they can turn the end caps off should the silencer need repair. In other words it is repairable, a benefit the laser welded can has that more traditional welds do not. One could argue that companies who essentially weld their silencer into a solid piece of metal are designing disposable silencers as they are obviously designed in a manor that does not allow for repair. I think we both agree that is not the case though.
rsilvers wrote: PhD told me they do various degrees of TIG and/or laser welding. They may or may not be structural quality welds. For example, would you ride a motorcycle where the frame was laser-welded together on Gemtech's laser? Look at the weld while thinking about that.
You are starting to sound like a trial lawyer trying to give the jury that little bit of doubt so his client beats the case. What reason, if any, do you have to believe the welds would not be of “structural” quality? Or are you just trying to raise some doubt?

So far as the motorcycle goes, I would not ride a motorcycle made of M4-2K silencer tubes either regardless of how they were welded. What does that have to do with silencers? Oh-Yeah the doubt thing.
User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33978
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:31 am
Location: USA

Post by silencertalk »

There is more than reasonable doubt the laser welds are not of structural quality! They are micro-welds. Neither wide nor deep and they do not penetrate to the depth of the metal.

Correct, Gemtech designed their silencer so that they can repair it at minimal cost. In warranty claim Gemtech will repair and send back your silencer. AAC will give you a new one with the same serial number. AAC will never charge you more than 50% of retail to replace or upgrade a silencer whereas Gemtech will charge about 80% of retail price or more to repair and won't even upgrade an M4-96D to an G5 according to what a reader was just told. So you would have to buy a new G5 and pay a new tax to change to one.
zak2427
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 5:45 pm

Post by zak2427 »

I thought the thread was about titanium?
Post Reply