dual purpose ???

[wdeitsch]

Hey everyone. First time post. I've got a "design" question that I'm having trouble finding an answer for. I've seen many Youtube videos about home-made cans using either Maglite housings or 4003 filter housing. I thought the videos were good, and I figured I make one someday, but I just seen one for real (Maglite design) this past weekend. I'm was at a local outdoor range shooting my 10/22 with my son, and I seriously thought this guy was shooting an air rifle. I couldn't believe my ears. The videos don't do it justice. Now I really really want one ASAP.

I am looking at the possibility of building a "dual purpose" can that is threaded at 1/2 x 28 on one end and 5/8 x 24 on the other. I'm pretty sure that it will work when I put it on my 10/22 that is threaded 1/2 x 28. The 5/8 x 24 hole at the other end should be plenty of clearance. What I need to know is if it will work if I turn it around and and put it on my .308 that is threaded 5/8 x 24. Would the 1/2 x 28 hole be enough for bullet clearance? I want to do it legally, so when I fill out the paperwork, is there anything about having both ends threaded that would disqualify it?

It's a simple idea, and I'm sure others have thought about it, and even built it, but I can't seem to find any info about why it would or would not work? Any info that you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

William

[a_canadian]

A 0.5" exit hole is much larger than necessary for a 0.308" projectile, so yes, the physical part should be fine so long as your barrel threads and endcap threads and barrel shoulders result in a can which aligns perfectly with the bores of both rifles. As for legality, I can't imagine this would be a problem.

Now for the negatives. That's a huge exit hole for .22lr, and will not help in keeping your rimfire rifle sounding like an air rifle at all. And baffles bored out to say 0.40" to give adequate clearance for .308" are not going to suppress .22lr well at all, the hole is just too big. 0.35" is considered very large for .22lr. 0.28" is more or less standard. So it'll be a loud rimfire can. And unless you're using flat washers for baffles, which are the least efficient for suppression, reversing the can means one or the other caliber is going to be shooting into the wrong end of your shaped baffles. Seems you could benefit from studying a few completed build threads.

[fishman]

unless you're using flat washers for baffles, which are the least efficient for suppression, reversing the can means one or the other caliber is going to be shooting into the wrong end of your shaped baffles

Canadian, there's this great new technology called "putting the baffles in backwards." Truly groundbreaking stuff.

Also 1/2x28 will not be a .50" hole, it'll be closer to .450" (not that that's a problem for this application.)

If I were making this can, i'd have a thread protector for each set of threads for when they're not in use. That would prevent the threads from getting caked with carbon and make the exit hole smaller.

Id honestly just make a 308 can and make a 1/2x28 to 5/8x24 adapter for the 22.

[a_canadian]

Canadian, there's this great new technology called "putting the baffles in backwards." Truly groundbreaking stuff.

Yeah, gee, thanks for pointing out the obvious fishman... I actually considering including baffle flipping in my reply, but after a moment considering the fellow's obvious noob status (he's seen/heard 1 suppressor with unknown internal construction) figured it's unlikely he'd be wanting to dismantle and reassemble his suppressor every time he switched from one rifle to the other. But go ahead, be a smartass if it makes you feel good, I don't mind much.

If I were making this can, i'd have a thread protector for each set of threads for when they're not in use. That would prevent the threads from getting caked with carbon and make the exit hole smaller.

Wouldn't the thread protectors qualify in this instance as 'spare parts' under NFA rules? I mean inserting one would reduce the endcap hole size, obviously reducing noise level, even if by only 1 or 2dB, and all it takes is ANY noise reduction to qualify as a suppressor under their rules. A spare part which can reduce blast noise might get you into trouble should you be so unlucky as to get noticed using it by someone in a bad mood at the range.

Id honestly just make a 308 can and make a 1/2x28 to 5/8x24 adapter for the 22.

On this I agree, an adapter gets rid of some of the other problems, lets you keep your baffles pointed in one direction full time (though of course after a bunch of .22lr you'll have to dismantle for cleaning). But there remains the issue of bore size being rather excessive for the smaller bullets. It'll definitely be quieter, even with simple washers or pressed freeze plug 'M' baffles, but not nearly as quiet as with a dedicated .22lr can properly proportioned for that use.

[John A.]

If I were making this can, i'd have a thread protector for each set of threads for when they're not in use. That would prevent the threads from getting caked with carbon and make the exit hole smaller.

Really good idea.

I will say though, that 308 is not going to sound nearly as good as the rimfire can did. But it should be a little more quiet.

I would ask though, why not just make it strong enough for 308 and exchange the rear endcap depending on which thread the barrel is of the gun you're shooting?

This is very commonly done and will allow your front endcap bore to be smaller, which may even in turn help it be more effective.

[garredondojr]

I agree with fishman on doing essentially a 30 cal can then using a thread adapter for the 22 host. however i'd add a wipe into the design for the endcap or make the "endcap" threaded to accept sliencerco's or rugged's "front caps" then buy 22 cal and 30 cal caps.

[alordnapa]

A compromised design, but if you ran it dry as a .308, and wet as a .22, it would help the .22 side quiet down, and if cleaned promptly, a little easier to clean up. I can't imagine that any amount of water added to a .308 suppressor would ever be too much for a .22LR round. Personally, I would thread it for the .308 and buy or build a thread adapter, rather than threading both caps. Even if the adapter was not very concentric, you are going to have a lot of tolerance in the can when shooting .22's. As mentioned above, a wipe would help a lot too.

[fishman]

Yeah, gee, thanks for pointing out the obvious fishman...

relax. I'm just giving you a hard time.

Wouldn't the thread protectors qualify in this instance as 'spare parts' under NFA rules?

nah. If there's a configuration that uses every part then none of the parts are spares. With both thread protectors installed, it would be in its full configuration. Neither part is a spare of the other.

I would ask though, why not just make it strong enough for 308 and exchange the rear endcap depending on which thread the barrel is of the gun you're shooting?

depending on the design, this can qualify as spare parts. It can be done legally.

[T-Rex]

If you have something that weighs 1lb, or more, strap it to the barrel of your 22lr and see if it fits you.
While my 16oz, 5.56mm suppressor works great on a 22 rifle, it's extremely unrealistic to see it as a viable option. Especially on a pencil thin 22lr barrel.

A proper 22lr suppressor should be around 3-6oz. This is a drastic difference than the proposed design. If you can't swing the extra $200 tax stamp, just wait a bit until you can. I'd rather have 2 purpose built suppressors than a compromise.

[cdhknives]

To the OP: 308 cans work fine for 22's. Not optimum, but well. Mine is a YHM phantom. It is waaaay too heavy to use regularly on a 22lr, but when I tried it it suppressed very well and handles 223/5.56 as well. Again, not as well as a dedicated 223 can, but definitely hearing safe. Build your can to 308 norms and use the thread adapter to get it mounted to your 22. The dual end threaded design is going to have issues with the threads getting gunked up and/or damaged when at the muzzle end, and the oversize exit hole will reduce suppression effectiveness.

[wdeitsch]

Hey everyone, thanks for your replies. Unfortunately, you're telling me things I don't want to hear. LOL... Seriously, I kinda knew that if it were as easy as I thought, then everyone would be doing it. All of your replies just confirmed that it's just not to be.

I've seen many Youtube videos, and so-called "experts" saying a suppressor would reduce the sound by "maybe" 30 or 40 dB, but that's not what I saw at the range the other day. What I saw, and heard, was the sound of the .22 bullet hitting the dirt at 50 yards being louder than the sound of it exiting the can. I could not believe my ears. And he was using a Maglite body on his home-made can. If I have to build a one specific to the caliber that I will be using it on, then so be it. I just don't like giving the government $200. Giving them $400 really grinds my gears.

Maybe I'm nitpicking, but I don't care for the PVC insert to cover the flashlight button hole in the Maglite designs that I've seen. That's the main reason I prefer the 4003 filter design.

As T-Rex said, "A proper 22lr suppressor should be around 3-6oz. This is a drastic difference than the proposed design." I need to do more research on this. Perhaps I am going WAY to big by using the 4003 filter design on my little ole 10/22. Perhaps I need to go back and look at using a "C" cell maglite body.

I've been around guns and hunting when I was a kid, but when Dad passed away, I just lost interest. Now, 30 years later, I'm getting back into hunting, but this is my first venture into the world of suppressors. And the way society is today, I feel the need more and more every day to prepare for SHTF. I don't know if I will need a suppressor when the SHTF, but I'd rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it. And I really like the idea of being able to hunt small game without giving my position away.

Anyways, thank you all for the information that you provided.

William

[fishman]

I've seen many Youtube videos, and so-called "experts" saying a suppressor would reduce the sound by "maybe" 30 or 40 dB, but that's not what I saw at the range the other day.

you are aware that the dB scale is not linear, correct? Every 10 decibels quieter is 1/10 the peak sound pressure. A 40 dB reduction is 0.0001 times the original pressure. To the human ear, this sounds like roughly 5% as loud as the original.

[a_canadian]

Fair enough on all points, and well said. Agency interference with individuals' essentially harmless activities is extremely difficult to justify, and watching broadcasts of the truncated discussion of the HUSH Act some time ago was torturous as one witnessed the manipulations and propaganda of elected non-expert individuals desperately trying to demonize legitimate uses of suppressors, namely hearing protection, improved hunting success (not scaring away game, especially for pesting use such as coyote and hog hunting where significant numbers are involved in a single outing), and neighbourliness (not bugging the heck out of people with gunfire). But we're to live with the laws on the books....

As for quiet and a 10/22, you're going to get significant noise from the cycling of the action, so going too big becomes a bit futile beyond a certain length and volume. Still, there's the legendary K can video... which was up for a couple of years but has never re-surfaced after it was pulled from Youtube mysteriously. That thing was, I think, 1" diameter, but 14" long, with some enormous number of K baffles, threaded onto a 4" barrel. Bloody ridiculously quiet. The action cycling was seriously the loudest thing about it, when shooting at dirt about 100 yards away with SV ammunition. There's something attractive about such a quiet gun... but I'd tend to favour a bolt gun to get a lot of that quiet as high rate of fire with a .22lr rifle doesn't interest me. The inherently quieter function of a bolt action rifle coupled with a mid-sized suppressor results in something very comfortably hearing safe, even with just washers and spacers or pressed freeze plugs for baffles.

Without having witnessed the quiet rifle you heard, and frankly without being you, with whatever level of hearing loss you've acquired so far in life, it's impossible to guess at how truly quiet that rifle was. Such things are highly subjective and there are numerous variables of environment and ammunition choice and weather and local acoustics etc. Was the guy shooting Aguila 60gr subsonics, or CCI Quiet? Perhaps even something weaker? Or was it standard subsonics? These are crucial in understanding at least a little of what you were hearing. If you use CCI Quiet for example and adjust your spring so as to allow cycling with such weak loads, your 10/22 is indeed going to be absurdly, giggle-inducingly quiet, while still providing sufficient power (about triple a normal hardware store type airgun's average power) to be fun for plinking and small game such as squirrels out to 40 yards.

And of course what fishman said; decibel scales need to be understood better generally, as most seem to misinterpret such numbers. And then there's the fact that a very short impulse noise especially at the lower volumes of suppressed .22lr are much, much easier on the ears as compared to sustained noises (jackhammers, even loud trucks) or the unsuppressed firing of centerfire rifles.

[John A.]

There are still some solvent trap companies in business if you are needing a lighter weight threaded tube and don't have a lathe to do it yourself with.

[a_canadian]

Putting these terms into an eBay search yielded a number of nice tube with end caps for sale:
Threaded tube 1" end caps
And this titanium kit seems especially attractive - as long as you're investing $200 for the ATF anyway you may as well get something nice.
https://ebay.com/itm/Maglite-D-Cell-7-8 ... nav=SEARCH

[T-Rex]

When it's listed, the DM Ti 22lr kit is supposedly a good deal.