Joining two suppresors

2nd Amendment and Freedom

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw

Post Reply
GHEN
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:45 pm

Joining two suppresors

Post by GHEN »

Stupid legal question with no intent of actually doing it.

If I have 2 suppressors and I machine a coupler to create (in effect) one long suppressor:

1) Do I need another stamp?
2) Is the coupler I make a "silencer part"? (I guess if this is the case Question #1 is automatically a "yes"). I suppose that part would have to be numbered and that alone would require a stamp.

Just a silly mental exercise...your thoughts are welcome.

GHEN
User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11897
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:02 pm
Location: Houston-ish

Re: Joining two suppresors

Post by doubloon »

I wanted Brooks & Co. to make a coupler for two Poseidons a while back and IIRC the general consensus was extra stamps but also an issue of extra parts when everything was coupled together. I don't really understand the extra parts logic if there's enough stamps to go around but I never got a Poseidon coupler either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11357
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Joining two suppresors

Post by Bendersquint »

GHEN wrote:Stupid legal question with no intent of actually doing it.

If I have 2 suppressors and I machine a coupler to create (in effect) one long suppressor:

1) Do I need another stamp?
2) Is the coupler I make a "silencer part"? (I guess if this is the case Question #1 is automatically a "yes"). I suppose that part would have to be numbered and that alone would require a stamp.

Just a silly mental exercise...your thoughts are welcome.

GHEN
Yes, its another stamp to combine them as you are making a new unit that operates as one silencer with its own OAL and caliber, engravings and everything.

Yes, the part would be a silencer part as well.
User avatar
Bendersquint
Industry Professional
Posts: 11357
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:19 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Joining two suppresors

Post by Bendersquint »

doubloon wrote:I wanted Brooks & Co. to make a coupler for two Poseidons a while back and IIRC the general consensus was extra stamps but also an issue of extra parts when everything was coupled together. I don't really understand the extra parts logic if there's enough stamps to go around but I never got a Poseidon coupler either.
In order for the coupler to work on the Poseidons one of the cans would not be using the endcap and the other wouldn't be using the mount......leaves 2 extra silencer parts after the assembly.

That's where the extra parts come from.
User avatar
renegade
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 4547
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 9:19 am
Location: Texas

Re: Joining two suppresors

Post by renegade »

GHEN wrote:Stupid legal question with no intent of actually doing it.

If I have 2 suppressors and I machine a coupler to create (in effect) one long suppressor:

1) Do I need another stamp?
2) Is the coupler I make a "silencer part"? (I guess if this is the case Question #1 is automatically a "yes"). I suppose that part would have to be numbered and that alone would require a stamp.

Just a silly mental exercise...your thoughts are welcome.

GHEN
Done this and no extra stamp. No different then adding a thread-on to an integral. Watch out for extra parts though.

No significant reduction in sound.
a_canadian
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1204
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:09 pm

Re: Joining two suppresors

Post by a_canadian »

Yeah, like renegade says, no significant reduction in sound. In my case - as outlined in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=125774 - the experiment was turning a 1" x 8" can with a bunch of delrin K baffles which worked very well on a PCP air pistol into a monster 13.25" long by adding a larger tube with an adapter and using a very effective plastic monocore inside that one. I did have to bore out the monocore slightly (the K baffles are bored to 0.25" for a .22" projectile moving at 610fps) to 0.30" as there was some slight clipping towards the end cap, but that's still only 0.080" total clearance for the second suppressor element. Each can had performed admirably on its own. Combined there was something on the order of a 1dB to 2dB further reduction in noise. Going from reasonably quiet to Hollywood quiet would seem to require a LOT bigger can. Maybe a stack of oil filters.

The weight gain, increased awkwardness in handling, risk of recoil-caused baffle strikes, increased potential for turbulence-induced inaccuracy, all seem to make it an experiment thoroughly not worth it. I've managed to match the noise reduction of that doubled can in building an aluminum K baffle can with the first half 0.55" long K's and the second half 1.125" long K's and cross-venting them efficiently, with good face detailing to scrub off pressure. Of course it could be that some will say air weapon suppression and firearm suppression are entirely different beasts... but from what I've seen in these forums the firearms guys are doing pretty much the same things I'm doing for air, with similar results. Mine's a LOUD air pistol without a suppressor, similar to subsonic .22"LR.
rodpiper
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 11:26 am

Re: Joining two suppresors

Post by rodpiper »

If two silencers were able to screw together, then voila, no extra parts. Hence, leave a threaded section on front of your DIY so it can screw into the back of any other that would fit the barrel ;), if that's what you wanted.
Post Reply