YHM vs. AAC

[Davo5o]

I don't need hearing protection with the 762SD on 223, let alone a M42k.

I can switch my gas off in .5 sec, and then things start getting even quieter, and I don't have to go find my brass.

Nice. Not to poke, but it sounds like the 762SD also does away with the sonic crack of the bullet.

Yeah it opens a black hole that no sound can escape from.

[gunguy]

I know i'm going to get alot of s--t for suggesting this ,but i have a tac-16 can that works really well for my ar-15.If its just going to stay on an ar-15 its worth a look.The tac-16 is a take apart can.I have cleaned it a few times and there was quite a bit in there. did it need it? well maybe not but its a nice feature and this thing(tac-16) is also built like a tank.No its not as good as the aac and yhm but its a hell of alot cheaper.

[Sid Post]

The Tac-16 has it's place but, it really doesn't compare to the YHM or AAC cans the original poster asked about.

[Artful]

The Tac-16 has it's place but, it really doesn't compare to the YHM or AAC cans the original poster asked about.

Compared in sound?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EeWGJ6GSwA

granted the latest info I have on TAC-16 was from 6/2005 from robert's testing but it showed TAC-16 at 137 db vs AAC M4-2000 at 134db - and in shooting with my friends out in the desert we couldn't tell one from the other on sound - now the AAC was lighter but I ddn't have two identical guns to test handling with and for 1/2 the price and being cleanable - I wouldn't count out the Model-T of 223 can's so quickly.

[Davo5o]

I could tell a difference even on the video.

[Artful]

Of course but how much difference - does 3 db sound bad in comparison - I think not - they are in the same ball park - now back to the YHM Vs AAC debate.

[Davo5o]

What you guys are talking about is like saying I should buy a van instead of a car because in the future I might have 4 kids to haul around. Note, I don't have kids and don't want them, plus I am interested in the car. Hell, a bus or jumbo jet is an option, but i am asking about the car.

The OP wanted to know about 5.56 cans at first... I personally don't like using 7.62 cans with 5.56 because of the extra size and weight. if the 7.62 cans were the best option for 5.56 then we wouldn't make 5.56 cans.

They Cyclone is awesome and works well on a 5.56, but if you have the money, go dedicated 5.56 and dedicated 7.62. If you have to go one can, i would do a QD one so switching would be easier.

Your analogy is weak at best.

The M42K'08 is a class leading 223 can, just barely a db more than the SPRM4'O8.

M42K: 17.1 oz 6.625"

SPRM4: 18 oz 8.625"

762SD: 19.1 oz 8.75"

These are not Car vs. Mini Van comparisons considering the 762SD is only 2db louder, 2 oz heavier, and 2" longer than the M42K

The 762SD doesn't have hardly any blow back which will keep your gun cleaner and running longer.

And you can shoot many different calibers smaller than 30cal. And there are a boat ton.

Again, I don't really see why people are so pumped about dedicated 223 cans?

[JasonAAC]

762SD is only 2db louder, 2 oz heavier, and 2" longer than the M42K...

And that makes a difference to some people. If I don't have a 7.62 gun and no plans to get one, the 5.56 makes more sense.

I save those 2", 2+dB, 2oz., and get the ratchet mount.

Both great and get whatever you want, but not everyone wants or needs to get a 30 cal can.

[Davo5o]

I agree with you 100%.

The op did say he intends to buy a 308 can as well, so obviously he has enough money and interest to buy both.

A dedicated 223 can is sweet, and if that's the primary weapon that you use all the time, then go for it.

Not trying to talk anyone out of a purchase, just trying to provide different angles, and things to think about.


Carry on................

[700PSS]

762SD is only 2db louder, 2 oz heavier, and 2" longer than the M42K...

And that makes a difference to some people. If I don't have a 7.62 gun and no plans to get one, the 5.56 makes more sense.

I save those 2", 2+dB, 2oz., and get the ratchet mount.

Both great and get whatever you want, but not everyone wants or needs to get a 30 cal can.

Having the 762-SD, I have also saved the extra $1,000 on having to get a dedicated 5.56 can as well. And alas, the 2010 model 762-SD will now have the 51T ratchet mount.

[JasonAAC]

And alas, the 2010 model 762-SD will now have the 51T ratchet mount.

Allegedly.

[ArevaloSOCOM]

I sure hope so.

[deltabravo]

Again thanks for all the info. My debate is between the M41K and the YHM for the 5.56. If I get the YHM I will also get the YHM 7.62. Third option is just getting the CycloneK from AAC to run on the 7.62, 5.56, and 6.8. I doubt I will run it on my 300 WM because I heard it will burn out the can quickly. The weight and length is not a big issue. I went to silencer research and watched them compare the M41K and the Phantom. Looked like the Phantom performed a little bit better.

[Steve178]

I have an M41000 and my buddy has a stainless phantom, we got them at the same time. I got mine from Renegade and it came with a phantom mount. It was a great deal and he is awesome to deal with.......anyhow, to our un-calibrated ears, there is not too much difference in suppression level, the tone was different. We both have 16" guns. My buddy and I agree that the AAC mounts are better than the YHM, it seems to me, that its easy to miss a tooth on the YHM mount, causing alot of gas leakage and loose can. Just my 2 cents.

[delta9mda]

I don't need hearing protection with the 762SD on 223, let alone a M42k.

I can switch my gas off in .5 sec, and then things start getting even quieter, and I don't have to go find my brass.

Nice. Not to poke, but it sounds like the 762SD also does away with the sonic crack of the bullet.

it is impossible to silence the sonic crack of a bullet unless you go subsonic.

[continuity]

I don't need hearing protection with the 762SD on 223, let alone a M42k.

I can switch my gas off in .5 sec, and then things start getting even quieter, and I don't have to go find my brass.

Nice. Not to poke, but it sounds like the 762SD also does away with the sonic crack of the bullet.

it is impossible to silence the sonic crack of a bullet unless you go subsonic.

You can silence it if you wear flightdeck hearing protection.........

[gunguy]

I have both a yhm phantom qd and a cyclone and on my ar-10 type rifle the aac cyclone blows the yhm out of the water as far as suppression goes.

[Selectedmarksman]

I have a pre-SS Phantom. If the cyclone or 7.62-SD had existed when I was purchasing, I'd have gone with either over the Phantom. I like the QD mount for lots of reasons, so my personal choice would be the 7.62-SD

[liquid]

if i was gonna shoot it a lot i would go with an aac. i am more of a pistol fan, i have a few ars and aks and sadly i never shot one. there really isnt a place down here to shoot them unless u have a certain type of ammo or go outdoors. for pistols i went with an element and a Spectre for .223 i went with a yhm.

[sinsir]

i"m having the same debate - the 5.56 yhm phantom, or the AAC 7.62-sd and call it good for most of what i would want a can on. at 2 oz and 2 inches over the yhm 5.56 it's not that big of a deal breaker... with that said, what i need is a .30 ss can, that i can take apart for cleaning so i can mount it to the 7.62x25 tok AR upper, and not worry about corrosive ammo.

[Diomed]

with that said, what i need is a .30 ss can, that i can take apart for cleaning so i can mount it to the 7.62x25 tok AR upper, and not worry about corrosive ammo.

Stainless =/= rustproof.

[sinsir]

with that said, what i need is a .30 ss can, that i can take apart for cleaning so i can mount it to the 7.62x25 tok AR upper, and not worry about corrosive ammo.

Stainless =/= rustproof.

stainless steel is not the super metal lots of folks would like to believe, although it may not "rust" like your typical carbon steel, and one of the main reasons why stainless steels are used is corrosion resistance, they do in fact suffer from certain types of corrosion in some environments.

it's my understanding that what makes most corrosive ammo corrosive, is a chloride salt. under certain conditions, particularly involving high concentrations of chlorides, tempture, and stress ( high pressure ), much like what you would find in a rifle barrel, one of the biggest issues with SS, mostly the 300 series, but other austenitic types, is SCC (stress corrosion cracking) or more specificaly chloride stress corrosion. CSC is thought to start with chlorides reacting with chromium deposits along grain boundaries of the metal,leading to localized pitting, ( or a reduction of the cross section thickness ) micro fracturing of the base material, and premature material failure.

i've been to many job sites, where i was asked to do either an inspection or failure analysis of SS equipment. once i see the part i usualy turn to look at the engineer and say something like - this XXXXX is in contact with a chloride or soultion containing chlorine/chlorides - the look on thier face is often one of - how the hell did you know that? - 2 things, the color, and the surface, in serious cases it can look sandblasted or etched, and at times you don't even need magnfication or dye penatrate to ID it.

the best way to aid in preventing SCC/CSC is to keep it clean and reduce the contact time of the chlorides ... so if your asking why i might want a can which can be taken apart for cleaning .... well maybe i'm just being anal

[JasonAAC]

stainLESS steel.

better than stainmore steel.

[Kevin/AAC]

[sinsir]

well i said the hell with it, called the major, and put an order in for the 762sd ... now the wait