New Ranger II- Cone baffle holes misshaped or normal?

[aries14482]

I just looked down the bore of my brand new Ranger II and have found the holes in the two cone-shaped baffles to be irregularly shaped. The blast baffle hole is round, end cap hole is round, the other two baffles have holes that are irregular, and seem slightly enlarged and misshapen, from 12 o' clock to 6 o' clock, as viewed through the end cap with a light.

I just wanted to verify that this is normal, and their openings aren't supposed to look round like the blast baffle and end cap before I panic.

The can was sold to me at full retail cost, and nothing was mentioned about the can being repaired or used, just for clarification.

The can looked clean upon initial inspection and the "misshapen holes" were first noticed in the car shortly after leaving the dealer's location. I initially assumed they were simply supposed to be that way, that this was simply the baffle's design since the can appeared clean and new, but have had second thoughts since.

The following images were taken as viewed through the endcap. Only the baffle before the endcap is in focus, though the baffle behind it looks identical. (the two cone baffles, as previously stated)

Note: some carbon fouling is present, as I have fired about 80 rounds with the can attached.





I just want to make sure that all is as it should be.

Any owners of Ranger 2s, please feel free to chime in.

[SRM]

Looks funky to me. KInda makes one question the integrity of the rest of the baffle.

[rockman96]

Looks hacked to me. Anything intentional should have smooth transitions and edges.....that looks like a rotary file gone wild.

[ronin111]

Looks normal to me.

viewtopic.php?t=49110

[JasonM]

Completely normal-
the inside baffles have step cuts on them that interface slightly with the flutes pressed into the baffles- giving it the irregular/wavy look.

Same with M4-2000, 762-SDN-6, etc.

Carry on.

[aries14482]

Thanks Jason. That's what I was looking for! It was just what looked like an enlargement that concerned me. I was slightly afraid that the dealer I went through might have been less than honest with me- I suppose I'm disinclined to trust as easily as I once did. It was the first can I'd bought with this particular dealer.

Thanks for putting my fears to rest!

Hopefully this will help anyone else who wonders the same thing.

EDIT: I believe the 'roughness' can be accounted for by the waviness, that Jason explained is a part of the baffle, in addition to the rough texture from the carbon. The 80 rounds fired was steel cased ammo.

[markm]

My M4-1000's baffles that have had a bullet strike don't look that gnarly.

I've never looked down an AAC rifle can that was that chunked out. Shouldn't hurt the performance though.

[aries14482]

Chunked out? Are you sure you actually got a good look at the baffles? I had to play around with angles until I found the light angle that highlighted the inside edge of the baffle aperture.

I don't like to think there may be something wrong with this Ranger II that I waited 6 months to get, AFTER previously waiting six months to get a previous can that turned out to not fit my needs.

[JasonM]

Chunked out? Are you sure you actually got a good look at the baffles? I had to play around with angles until I found the light angle that highlighted the inside edge of the baffle aperture.

I don't like to think there may be something wrong with this Ranger II that I waited 6 months to get, AFTER previously waiting six months to get a previous can that turned out to not fit my needs.

Like I said above, it is completely normal, and looks like every AAC 5.56 can I have seen in the past 4 years (whether or not that is shitty is another conversation, but it will work very well). Shoot it and enjoy.

[Kramer]

If it was a Gemtech can that looked like that, this thread would be an eight page bash fest.

[markm]

I've got 2 AAC 5.56 rifle cans... my buddy has like 5 and a mini on the way, and another buddy had the old M4-2000. I have a baffle watching obsession... ESPECIALLY after my baffle strike.

Not one AAC can I've snooped in has had that much out of round in any of the baffles.... including the three that are missing chips in mine where the bullet hit the baffles. The baffles are indeed cut asymetrically, but not THAT out of round.

[JasonM]

I've got 2 AAC 5.56 rifle cans... my buddy has like 5 and a mini on the way, and another buddy had the old M4-2000. I have a baffle watching obsession... ESPECIALLY after my baffle strike.

Not one AAC can I've snooped in has had that much out of round in any of the baffles.... including the three that are missing chips in mine where the bullet hit the baffles. The baffles are indeed cut asymetrically, but not THAT out of round.

Here's pre-EDM... maybe they've got the EDM turned up a little fast?

[twodollarbill]

Jason......Great Pic, that explains a lot.

[aries14482]

So, would you suggest contacting AAC then?

[chrismartin]

So, would you suggest contacting AAC then?

No, I wouldn't anyway.
The only way to fix that (Without another $200 stamp) would be to EDM the hole larger, thereby decreasing the performance.
Well, that's not true, I guess AAC might be able to cover the $200 under "defect" but the rules on that are difficult to make come out in favor of the customer.

All for what amounts to an esthetic issue that's on the inside of the silencer.
Also, keep in mind that baffles erode, so eventually, even the perfect holes will end up looking jagged.

[aries14482]

I don't care about anything being jagged, I'm only worried about the size of the holes- that this would effectively be the equivalent of several thousand rounds of wear to those baffles.

I seem to be gathering that owners of other cans are stating that the baffle aperture pictured looks too big.

[JasonM]

I don't care about anything being jagged, I'm only worried about the size of the holes- that this would effectively be the equivalent of several thousand rounds of wear to those baffles.

I seem to be gathering that owners of other cans are stating that the baffle aperture pictured looks too big.

If your concern is the size of the aperture, that looks fine- no one can tell from your pics how big the cuts are.

If you're worried about roughness- email the pic to aac and see what they say.

[aries14482]

Yeah, I'm really only concerned about function and longevity. I don't think a little roughness will have any measurable negative effect.

You can't see how the size of the 'step' cut half of the aperture (where the roughness is observed) compares the other half in the photo?

[Shamrock-MP]

I don't think it will hurt to contact them and send them a pic. If they say nothing is abnormal and some issue arrises later, you will have documentation.

[aries14482]

I went ahead and contacted AAC via email and received a very helpful response that included an explanation and a picture of the baffles from another of their suppressors.

I'll include that here:

"Thanks for the email and support.

Your Ranger 2 looks completely normal and there is nothing to worry about. The baffles on some of our silencers have these asymmetrical baffles to help disrupt gas flow and improve suppression. I have attached a picture of a brand new silencer ready to ship out to a customer. As long as your blast baffle and end cap are symmetrical, you are good to go!"



Thanks for your help guys.

[markm]

That's ugly.

[jaredr]

who cares what it looks like inside as long as it performs?

[markm]

who cares what it looks like inside as long as it performs?

I do, evidently.

I'm thinking of complaining about this to the NAACP!