Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post your experiences here.

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw

kbinmt
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:13 pm

Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by kbinmt » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:38 pm

Not really a review, but since I read information to the contrary on another forum I thought I would post here. Contacted Griffin and was told that their 3-lug for the revolution 9 was compatible with an Octane 9. Got one, put it on, yes..........works great. Seems to have less tolerance than the the SWR/SilCo one so the fit is very snug. No wobble issues. The spring is very strong, and the mount "snaps" into place. It is about 1.25"-1.375" shorter overall than an Octane with a SWR/SilCo 3-lug mount.
Image

User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11359
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Bendersquint » Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:44 pm

You know there is a reason on WHY the Octane mount is designed externally right? Not just to look pretty.

kbinmt
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:13 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by kbinmt » Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:25 am

My guess would be to provide an "expansion" chamber, but please correct me or expand on the subject. Why?

User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11359
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Bendersquint » Thu Jan 08, 2015 12:32 am

kbinmt wrote:My guess would be to provide an "expansion" chamber, but please correct me or expand on the subject. Why?
Expansion chamber.
Distance from the muzzle.
First Round Pop.
Internal pressures.
Sound suppression.

All those are reasons why the can is designed the way it is. Altering those features will alter the cans performance and lifespan.

kbinmt
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:13 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by kbinmt » Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:14 pm

Any input on if/how a Griffin Revolution 9 addresses those concerns, either full size or K config? I understand it is its own design, but the two could be considered similar. Both spec 17-4PH Stainless Steel Baffles and 6061 Aluminum tube. Does the coating on the baffles of the griffin address any of this? Is the tube thicker? The Griffin is stated to be .4 oz heavier. I am genuinely interested in your perspective....or anyone in the know.

User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11359
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Bendersquint » Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:25 pm

kbinmt wrote:Any input on if/how a Griffin Revolution 9 addresses those concerns, either full size or K config? I understand it is its own design, but the two could be considered similar. Both spec 17-4PH Stainless Steel Baffles and 6061 Aluminum tube. Does the coating on the baffles of the griffin address any of this? Is the tube thicker? The Griffin is stated to be .4 oz heavier. I am genuinely interested in your perspective....or anyone in the know.
They are similar in design as a Ferrari F50 is to a Ford Mustang.

Both have 4 wheels, souped up engines and have steering wheels, but thats about all the similarities there are.

Each design bears different requirements for each of those concerns.

kbinmt
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:13 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by kbinmt » Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:50 pm

Fair enough

karlglen101
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 9:47 am

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by karlglen101 » Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:03 am

Can we get some pictures of your Octane mounted with the Griffin 3-lug? :D

User avatar
mpallett
Elite Industry Professional
Posts: 2876
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:28 am
Location: MA
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by mpallett » Fri Feb 13, 2015 5:13 pm

karlglen101 wrote:Can we get some pictures of your Octane mounted with the Griffin 3-lug? :D

Did you see the 1st post?
Over weight Telco guy with a FFL/07 for hire :)

User avatar
Crash_pro
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Crash_pro » Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:08 pm

I disagree that the space is required. While yes it may improve suppression by providing an expansion chamber, at the same time it may increase FRP due to a larger air pocket. The reason I don't feel it's necessary for durability purposes is imagine when the octane is used on a pistol with booster, it puts the muzzle just as close to the first baffle. I have the octane 9 and 3 lug, my revolution 9 is pending form 4, when I order my 3 lug mount for it I can test for myself if there is a noticeable sound difference but I find it highly unlikely you'll be able to tell by the naked ear.

Beside, I've talked to SilencerCo and if you ever wear out a baffle they will replace it free so I say go for it. The are marketed as the toughest pistol suppressors on the market (but I think liberty and Thompson have them beat, the mystic can handle rifles and I've seen the Isis 2 torture test video...)
Last edited by Crash_pro on Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kbinmt
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:13 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by kbinmt » Fri Feb 13, 2015 9:33 pm

I just bought a silencerco 3-lug just to see if I felt there was a difference. Have not done a side by side yet. I am enjoying the griffin mount very much. I am shooting 147 gr polymer coated bluebullets hand loads, and not concerned that the cans longevity is being compromised.

User avatar
Crash_pro
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Crash_pro » Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:49 pm

I wish I would've realized the Griffin worked on the Octane before I bought my SilencerCo mount although I'm not sure they were available then. The Griffin model is much more slick since it doesn't add the extra inch and a half like the SilencerCo model. Oh well, guess it doesn't hurt to have options. I'm really curious to see if my Octane fixed barrel mounts work on my Revolution also.
Last edited by Crash_pro on Mon Feb 16, 2015 10:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kbinmt
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 5:13 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by kbinmt » Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:07 pm

I would think they will work just fine as the thread pitch is correct. I see griffin has more piston choices now, but since I have 1/2x28 and 5/8x24 fixed mounts for the octane I plan on using those with the revolution as well.

User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11359
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Bendersquint » Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:24 pm

Everyone seems to forget that even though the mount fits it WILL ALTER the performance.

The mounts are made to a spec for a reason, changing the blast chamber size WILL affect the overall performance of the can.

User avatar
Crash_pro
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Crash_pro » Mon Feb 16, 2015 10:38 pm

Like I mentioned before, the Octane is primarily sold as a pistol silencers made to be used with a booster, in this design it also looses most of this expansion chamber via piston and spring. While there is some extra volume lost by completely filling this area i would say the loss is insignificant.

Just a theory, but while you say it was designed this way for a reason, and this could be true since it was intended for MP5's and such or other sub guns, possibly being full auto, this extra chamber may provide extra volume which aids in suppression or longevity. I do not have a full auto nor do I believe this was the intent. Most likely at the time of creating the 3 lug mount, being as small as possible and the idea of a "K" can wasn't their priority. Most mounts like the Multimount and etc. all used external devices. Gemtech, Liberty and Thompson all still use such devices. It was probably designed as an add on feature that just happened to be external. Griffin on the other hand took a different approach especially since their Revolution silencers are configurable for full size or compact "K" form. I believe it is probably most likely that they just thought of a different way to create the mount to keep it as small as possible and therefore made the mount internal instead of the typical route of making an external device.

I'm not denying there maybe some loss of suppression due to lost volume and expansion chamber, but at the same time I would be very surprised if the human ear could tell a difference. Hopefully kbinmt will be able to test this for us to see if he can tell a difference.

User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11359
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Bendersquint » Mon Feb 16, 2015 10:45 pm

Crash_pro wrote:Like I mentioned before, the Octane is primarily sold as a pistol silencers made to be used with a booster, in this design it also looses most of this expansion chamber via piston and spring. While there is some extra volume lost by completely filling this area i would say the loss is insignificant.

Just a theory, but while you say it was designed this way for a reason, and this could be true since it was intended for MP5's and such or other sub guns, possibly being full auto, this extra chamber may provide extra volume which aids in suppression or longevity. I do not have a full auto nor do I believe this was the intent. Most likely at the time of creating the 3 lug mount, being as small as possible and the idea of a "K" can wasn't their priority. Most mounts like the Multimount and etc. all used external devices. Gemtech, Liberty and Thompson all still use such devices. It was probably designed as an add on feature that just happened to be external. Griffin on the other hand took a different approach especially since their Revolution silencers are configurable for full size or compact "K" form. I believe it is probably most likely that they just thought of a different way to create the mount to keep it as small as possible and therefore made the mount internal instead of the typical route of making an external device.

I'm not denying there maybe some loss of suppression due to lost volume and expansion chamber, but at the same time I would be very surprised if the human ear could tell a difference. Hopefully kbinmt will be able to test this for us to see if he can tell a difference.
Interesting analysis.

User avatar
mpallett
Elite Industry Professional
Posts: 2876
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:28 am
Location: MA
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by mpallett » Tue Feb 17, 2015 8:23 pm

Crash_pro wrote:Like I mentioned before, the Octane is primarily sold as a pistol silencers made to be used with a booster, in this design it also looses most of this expansion chamber via piston and spring. While there is some extra volume lost by completely filling this area i would say the loss is insignificant.

Just a theory, but while you say it was designed this way for a reason, and this could be true since it was intended for MP5's and such or other sub guns, possibly being full auto, this extra chamber may provide extra volume which aids in suppression or longevity. I do not have a full auto nor do I believe this was the intent. Most likely at the time of creating the 3 lug mount, being as small as possible and the idea of a "K" can wasn't their priority. Most mounts like the Multimount and etc. all used external devices. Gemtech, Liberty and Thompson all still use such devices. It was probably designed as an add on feature that just happened to be external. Griffin on the other hand took a different approach especially since their Revolution silencers are configurable for full size or compact "K" form. I believe it is probably most likely that they just thought of a different way to create the mount to keep it as small as possible and therefore made the mount internal instead of the typical route of making an external device.

I'm not denying there maybe some loss of suppression due to lost volume and expansion chamber, but at the same time I would be very surprised if the human ear could tell a difference. Hopefully kbinmt will be able to test this for us to see if he can tell a difference.
As I was part of the development of the Trident and the Octane before SiCo bought SWR I think you are way off base, but that is my $0.02.
Over weight Telco guy with a FFL/07 for hire :)

User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11359
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Bendersquint » Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:34 pm

mpallett wrote: As I was part of the development of the Trident and the Octane before SiCo bought SWR I think you are way off base, but that is my $0.02.
Agreed.

User avatar
Crash_pro
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Crash_pro » Wed Feb 18, 2015 10:30 am

mpallett wrote:
Crash_pro wrote:Like I mentioned before, the Octane is primarily sold as a pistol silencers made to be used with a booster, in this design it also looses most of this expansion chamber via piston and spring. While there is some extra volume lost by completely filling this area i would say the loss is insignificant.

Just a theory, but while you say it was designed this way for a reason, and this could be true since it was intended for MP5's and such or other sub guns, possibly being full auto, this extra chamber may provide extra volume which aids in suppression or longevity. I do not have a full auto nor do I believe this was the intent. Most likely at the time of creating the 3 lug mount, being as small as possible and the idea of a "K" can wasn't their priority. Most mounts like the Multimount and etc. all used external devices. Gemtech, Liberty and Thompson all still use such devices. It was probably designed as an add on feature that just happened to be external. Griffin on the other hand took a different approach especially since their Revolution silencers are configurable for full size or compact "K" form. I believe it is probably most likely that they just thought of a different way to create the mount to keep it as small as possible and therefore made the mount internal instead of the typical route of making an external device.

I'm not denying there maybe some loss of suppression due to lost volume and expansion chamber, but at the same time I would be very surprised if the human ear could tell a difference. Hopefully kbinmt will be able to test this for us to see if he can tell a difference.
As I was part of the development of the Trident and the Octane before SiCo bought SWR I think you are way off base, but that is my $0.02.
I took no part in the development of either, just a theory. However could you provide more information such as your actual involvement in the development of the products or insight in the conversation in a productive manner? I.e reason they were designed in the manner they were, the significance and/or effects of using the Griffin mount on the Octane series.

User avatar
jdasilva
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:02 am

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by jdasilva » Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:52 pm

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

It's about to get real in here

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

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Fireman1291 » Thu Feb 19, 2015 5:11 pm

Crash_pro wrote:
mpallett wrote:
Crash_pro wrote:Like I mentioned before, the Octane is primarily sold as a pistol silencers made to be used with a booster, in this design it also looses most of this expansion chamber via piston and spring. While there is some extra volume lost by completely filling this area i would say the loss is insignificant.

Just a theory, but while you say it was designed this way for a reason, and this could be true since it was intended for MP5's and such or other sub guns, possibly being full auto, this extra chamber may provide extra volume which aids in suppression or longevity. I do not have a full auto nor do I believe this was the intent. Most likely at the time of creating the 3 lug mount, being as small as possible and the idea of a "K" can wasn't their priority. Most mounts like the Multimount and etc. all used external devices. Gemtech, Liberty and Thompson all still use such devices. It was probably designed as an add on feature that just happened to be external. Griffin on the other hand took a different approach especially since their Revolution silencers are configurable for full size or compact "K" form. I believe it is probably most likely that they just thought of a different way to create the mount to keep it as small as possible and therefore made the mount internal instead of the typical route of making an external device.

I'm not denying there maybe some loss of suppression due to lost volume and expansion chamber, but at the same time I would be very surprised if the human ear could tell a difference. Hopefully kbinmt will be able to test this for us to see if he can tell a difference.
As I was part of the development of the Trident and the Octane before SiCo bought SWR I think you are way off base, but that is my $0.02.
I took no part in the development of either, just a theory. However could you provide more information such as your actual involvement in the development of the products or insight in the conversation in a productive manner? I.e reason they were designed in the manner they were, the significance and/or effects of using the Griffin mount on the Octane series.
He designed the entire can and it's predecessors. Google Matt Pallet and Henry Graham. After you figure out the history of SWR and then the merge and buyout with Sco, you can come back here, read what he said and take it for fact. :wink:
Industry T&E
https://www.youtube.com/nfareviewchannelusa
Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/NFAreviewchannel
Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/nfareview

User avatar
Crash_pro
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Crash_pro » Thu Feb 19, 2015 7:52 pm

Fireman1291 wrote:
Crash_pro wrote:
mpallett wrote:
As I was part of the development of the Trident and the Octane before SiCo bought SWR I think you are way off base, but that is my $0.02.
I took no part in the development of either, just a theory. However could you provide more information such as your actual involvement in the development of the products or insight in the conversation in a productive manner? I.e reason they were designed in the manner they were, the significance and/or effects of using the Griffin mount on the Octane series.
He designed the entire can and it's predecessors. Google Matt Pallet and Henry Graham. After you figure out the history of SWR and then the merge and buyout with Sco, you can come back here, read what he said and take it for fact. :wink:
Trust me, I am aware of SWR and the SilencerCo history. Even though I may not work for a silencer company I am truly fascinated (my wife would use the word obsessed) with all things silencer, design, performance, research, history, etc. Actually just a couple days ago I gave “Thumbs Up” rating on comments you made during a little dispute you had with a gentleman regarding the Dead Air Mask-22 series. I also own (some pending) (2) Octane 9’s, an Octane 45, Octane 45 K and a Spectre II plus the Griffin Revolution 9 which is a straight copy of the Octane Series. So therefore I am also very familiar with the SWR lineup and products.

While I know silencers, that doesn’t mean I know the people who designed them, it isn’t exactly like their name is written on them anywhere. There are a few stand out characters who are very well known in the silencer industry, Henry Graham being one of them especially with discussions of Dead Air Silencers recently. To the best of my knowledge I have not seen the name Matt Pallet so please forgive my ignorance and not automatically knowing his previous experience.

Regardless, it doesn’t change the fact that in his comment, he simply stated that in his opinion he disagreed with my post. Now knowing his involvement with SWR (and that he wasn’t the guy designing the packing materials) his comment does carry more weight however he still didn’t provide and constructive input into the discussion on WHY it was designed to be external and the purpose of the chamber and how it’s different from when a booster is filling the same space. Clearly he read the post so I would assume he would’ve gave some more insightful information considering he would be the most knowledge person on the subject and design of the Octane Series.

In the one post someone had theorized that it was needed for durability and suppression purposes, and if this is true then why is there not a space when using a Nielsen device?
Why was it designed in the manner that is was as an external device and not internally?

What can be the expected results by using the Griffin mount on the Octane series?

Any other insightful information?

Just out of curiosity, how does it make you feel that Griffin made an almost exact replica of the Octane?


Thanks,
Mike

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

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by Fireman1291 » Fri Feb 20, 2015 8:55 am

Well, you jumped in with both feet. I like that. I was the same way.

As for the distinct similarities of the oct and rev, I have not had a Griffin Armament can in hand yet. The baffles do seem like CTA baffles coated in TiNi, however, most companies baffles share similarities with others. I won't point any fingers.

Matt may or may not chime in with the design characteristics of the Octane. I will say this. I doubt you will damage the can by using the Griffin 3-lug. Will you void the warranty? I don't know what Sco would do in that case. They would have no responsibility to warranty a can using another companies parts but they probably would anyway. The octane is one tough SOB so I doubt moving the blast closer to the first baffle would do much other than hurt decibel reduction performance. I am interested in the 3-lug capability. I have a Oct45K on the way and the reduced length with the GA 3-lug will make it an even better option for my under rail suppressed DDLES.
Industry T&E
https://www.youtube.com/nfareviewchannelusa
Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/NFAreviewchannel
Instagram
https://www.instagram.com/nfareview

User avatar
mpallett
Elite Industry Professional
Posts: 2876
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 10:28 am
Location: MA
Contact:

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by mpallett » Fri Feb 20, 2015 6:42 pm

Crash_pro wrote: Trust me, I am aware of SWR and the SilencerCo history.
Maybe not.

SWR was initially founded by Joe Gaddini.

Henry Graham, William Ellison, and I (Matt Pallett) took it over and improved, redesigned, grew the business until SiCo bought us out. Henry continued on with SiCo. I suppose I could have as well, but I did not want to move to UT.

Henry and I worked on the Octane and they were starting to ship just as SWR became SiCo. Henry took the can to the next level (CTA baffles in place of the Omegas as well as booster changes).

This site was initially called Silencertests. ALL of the testing was done under my personal license. I employed the founder of this site so the testing could happen.

I do mostly know what I'm talking about. Just because I don't want to go into why / how things are done publicly in the industry doesn't mean I don't know what is going on / what I'm doing. Silencer folks really are an odd bunch and we don't like to share unless you are part of the group. There are reasons WHY it was done the way it was done and the interactions between space / booster / 3 lug / fixed mounts / internal / external all play a part in it. It is a large puzzle and takes effort to get the best overall performance over multiple hosts.
Crash_pro wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how does it make you feel that Griffin made an almost exact replica of the Octane?
Love it. I laughed when I saw it at SHOT this year. He missed several subtle things though (no I won't say what they are). The 3-lug is almost an exact copy of the YHM internal 3-lug.

What will happen if you use it? Performance might be the same, it might suck on a 9mm AR it depends. Will anything happen to the can? Maybe nothing, Or maybe something like this if the tolerances are slightly off:

Image
Over weight Telco guy with a FFL/07 for hire :)

User avatar
bayonet14
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 226
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 8:51 pm
Location: Pinelands, NC

Re: Griffin 3-lug on an Octane...Yes

Post by bayonet14 » Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:16 am

mpallett wrote:
Crash_pro wrote: Trust me, I am aware of SWR and the SilencerCo history.
Maybe not.

SWR was initially founded by Joe Gaddini.

Henry Graham, William Ellison, and I (Matt Pallett) took it over and improved, redesigned, grew the business until SiCo bought us out. Henry continued on with SiCo. I suppose I could have as well, but I did not want to move to UT.

Henry and I worked on the Octane and they were starting to ship just as SWR became SiCo. Henry took the can to the next level (CTA baffles in place of the Omegas as well as booster changes).

This site was initially called Silencertests. ALL of the testing was done under my personal license. I employed the founder of this site so the testing could happen.

I do mostly know what I'm talking about. Just because I don't want to go into why / how things are done publicly in the industry doesn't mean I don't know what is going on / what I'm doing. Silencer folks really are an odd bunch and we don't like to share unless you are part of the group. There are reasons WHY it was done the way it was done and the interactions between space / booster / 3 lug / fixed mounts / internal / external all play a part in it. It is a large puzzle and takes effort to get the best overall performance over multiple hosts.
Crash_pro wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how does it make you feel that Griffin made an almost exact replica of the Octane?
Love it. I laughed when I saw it at SHOT this year. He missed several subtle things though (no I won't say what they are). The 3-lug is almost an exact copy of the YHM internal 3-lug.

What will happen if you use it? Performance might be the same, it might suck on a 9mm AR it depends. Will anything happen to the can? Maybe nothing, Or maybe something like this if the tolerances are slightly off:

Image
Picture worth a "thousand" words.

Post Reply