I have been researching the effectiveness of 5.56mm AR15 full barrel suppressors or Integrated suppressors. A conventional suppressor attaches it's rear end at a flash hider, but a full barrel suppressor attaches its internal front end at a flash hider, which allow a good portion of AR barrel to be "submerged" inside the suppressor. This has a benefit of introducing suppressing capabilities without extending an AR barrel significantly.
Back to my questions:
1. Has anyone had any experience with this type of silencers?
2. How effective of its suppressing capability comparing to any conventional silencers?
3. Would this type of silencers affect ballistics?
4. How much do they cost? Any available 5.56mm models for sale?
5. Would anyone direct me to any sites that sell this kind of suppressors?
Integrated suppressors or full barrel suppressors??
Moderators: mpallett, mr fixit, bakerjw, renegade
Re: Integrated suppressors or full barrel suppressors??
My memory sucks, so bear with me. Isn't that a 'reflex silencer'? I'd think one of the biggest benefits to this type of suppressor is a huge blast chamber, hopefully drastically lower blow-back. There is some advantage to it because of the increased volume without horrendous extra length.
Here is why it may not matter on an AR - the ordinary peep sights are so high, that it wouldn't be out of the question to simply make the same length of can fatter. This, I think, is exactly what Tornado Tech's "stubby" is (although that may be for 30 caliber rifles). Here is also why it may not matter on an AR - simply because 7.62 silencers can and are used on 5.56 ARs, and in addition to being multi-caliber, they also tend to enjoy reduced blow-back.
Here is why this may be a bad idea. First, with regard to rimfire .22 cans, extra baffles tend to be more effective than more volume - all other things being equal - and this makes a case for increased length as opposed to necessarily increased volume. Does that translate to the significantly higher pressure 5.56? I don't know. Yet another reason to avoid this is because of front sight posts - if its too near to the end then the AR isn't a viable candidate for that type of suppressor. True, these aren't incredibly common, but they're common enough that limiting available hosts isn't a good business practice. Another reason why this isn't a good idea is because of gas leakage. The suppress wraps back over a portion of the barrel, right? But if the suppressor isn't indescribably tight, then the high pressure cartridge will force gas out of that back portion. Different barrel widths prevent this type of machined connection, so instead, the silencer will have to fold back on itself so that it screws on, and you could put, maybe, a rolled up dollar bill between the silencer and the barrel - even the portion that has been 'covered'. This makes for an expensive silencer design. I believe it is done, but the problem is that these silencers see very, very minimal improvements on suppression, yet huge increases in price-to-manufacture and to the seller. I'm paraphrasing from memory on this one, but I believe rsilvers (connected with AAC) said something to the effect that it wasn't worth it - the gains to cost, I mean.
You're looking for extra volume without prohibitive increases in length, but the answer seems to lie with improved baffle design, and tighter tolerances.
Here is why it may not matter on an AR - the ordinary peep sights are so high, that it wouldn't be out of the question to simply make the same length of can fatter. This, I think, is exactly what Tornado Tech's "stubby" is (although that may be for 30 caliber rifles). Here is also why it may not matter on an AR - simply because 7.62 silencers can and are used on 5.56 ARs, and in addition to being multi-caliber, they also tend to enjoy reduced blow-back.
Here is why this may be a bad idea. First, with regard to rimfire .22 cans, extra baffles tend to be more effective than more volume - all other things being equal - and this makes a case for increased length as opposed to necessarily increased volume. Does that translate to the significantly higher pressure 5.56? I don't know. Yet another reason to avoid this is because of front sight posts - if its too near to the end then the AR isn't a viable candidate for that type of suppressor. True, these aren't incredibly common, but they're common enough that limiting available hosts isn't a good business practice. Another reason why this isn't a good idea is because of gas leakage. The suppress wraps back over a portion of the barrel, right? But if the suppressor isn't indescribably tight, then the high pressure cartridge will force gas out of that back portion. Different barrel widths prevent this type of machined connection, so instead, the silencer will have to fold back on itself so that it screws on, and you could put, maybe, a rolled up dollar bill between the silencer and the barrel - even the portion that has been 'covered'. This makes for an expensive silencer design. I believe it is done, but the problem is that these silencers see very, very minimal improvements on suppression, yet huge increases in price-to-manufacture and to the seller. I'm paraphrasing from memory on this one, but I believe rsilvers (connected with AAC) said something to the effect that it wasn't worth it - the gains to cost, I mean.
You're looking for extra volume without prohibitive increases in length, but the answer seems to lie with improved baffle design, and tighter tolerances.
Re: Integrated suppressors or full barrel suppressors??
Have a look at the Liberty 30RR can. I think it may be what you are looking for.
"Those gun control activists advocating exchanging a liberty for safety should recall that the safest place on earth is solitary confinement at Leavenworth."
- Rand T. Lennox
- Rand T. Lennox
Re: Integrated suppressors or full barrel suppressors??
One thing thats tipicle with the ar family is the front sight. Sure wish someone would make one to grab the sight or a baonet lug. No threads( Colt makes them), just a slip on and your there. People are also worried about missalignment. With an overbore can there will be no worries.I`ve never seen a barrel out far enough to cause a problem.
Re: Integrated suppressors or full barrel suppressors??
SRM wrote:One thing thats tipicle with the ar family is the front sight. Sure wish someone would make one to grab the sight or a baonet lug. No threads( Colt makes them), just a slip on and your there. People are also worried about missalignment. With an overbore can there will be no worries.I`ve never seen a barrel out far enough to cause a problem.
Good point! I guess I over-look this little detail. Let me look into it.
Re: Integrated suppressors or full barrel suppressors??
The Liberty 30RR can add another 7" to the barrel length. However many conventional suppressors like M4-1000 (adding 5.7"), M4-2000 (adding 5.1"). I was hoping for something a bit shorter... (like adding another 2-3")Alangaq wrote:Have a look at the Liberty 30RR can. I think it may be what you are looking for.
Re: Integrated suppressors or full barrel suppressors??
You want a short can, that means you don't get many baffles, That means you get a very loud can. Truth be told, top-notch AR cans aren't quiet as it is.zollen wrote:The Liberty 30RR can add another 7" to the barrel length. However many conventional suppressors like M4-1000 (adding 5.7"), M4-2000 (adding 5.1"). I was hoping for something a bit shorter... (like adding another 2-3")Alangaq wrote:Have a look at the Liberty 30RR can. I think it may be what you are looking for.
Maybe buy a mini-marauder. Its short.
Anything in the 2-3 inch, even as a reflex, its going to be so loud that it won't be worth it. ESPECIALLY in light of its increased costs.