Suppressor optimized gas port?

[usbp379]

Has anyone here played with cutting a 14.5" or 16" barrel down to ten or eleven inches for suppressor use?

If so, did you leave the gas port alone or drill it? What ammo and suppressor are you running?

On a related note, who else other than Sionics is making a dedicated short barrel for use with a can?

[gatordev]

Has anyone here played with cutting a 14.5" or 16" barrel down to ten or eleven inches for suppressor use?

If so, did you leave the gas port alone or drill it? What ammo and suppressor are you running?

On a related note, who else other than Sionics is making a dedicated short barrel for use with a can?

I've had two 16" (Colt) barrels cut down to 10.3 by ADCO and both run like sewing machines with and without suppressors. ADCO has the spec on what to drill the port to. It's public knowledge (it's whatever the MILSPEC is), I just can't remember off the top of my head. I also run a Centurion Arms 12.5" that's been problem free in both configs, as well. BCM seems to be configured correctly, as well.

For a "dedicated short barrel for use with a can," I'll defer to others. Personally I like the ability to run in both modes (without blowing the gun out and/or causing malfunctions), so that's been my focus.

[usbp379]

Sionics currently makes an 11.5" barrel that's got a small-ish gas port. That barrel is supposed to be spec'ed to work best with a can attached.

"Work" is a somewhat relative term here too. If we can come up with a gas port that'll allow the rifle to feed and eject but maybe not lock the bolt back without a suppressor that might be preferable to a gun that runs violently and blows excess gas all over the place like some SBR's do once the can is screwed on.

[Former11B]

Has anyone here played with cutting a 14.5" or 16" barrel down to ten or eleven inches for suppressor use?

If so, did you leave the gas port alone or drill it? What ammo and suppressor are you running?

On a related note, who else other than Sionics is making a dedicated short barrel for use with a can?


I cut a 16" FN barrel down to 10.5" and I run it suppressed with no adjustment to the gas block. I've got the factory fixed front sight post (carbine length gas and I believe the port size is .071" with a .750" gas block seat) and the only gas mitigation I have on that rifle is RTV silicon in the charging handle. The rifle itself could probably use a heavy buffer to reduce carrier speed a little but I don't get gas in the face.

[gatordev]

I believe the Crane spec for a 10.3" barrel is .071" with a H2 buffer. I don't know what the spec is for a 11.5", but I'm guessing it's exactly what BCM uses, since they tend to run without issues.

[mtdawg169]

I believe the Crane spec for a 10.3" barrel is .071" with a H2 buffer. I don't know what the spec is for a 11.5", but I'm guessing it's exactly what BCM uses, since they tend to run without issues.
I beleive that the 11.5 BCM is ported a little bigger than that, maybe 0.076. The Sionics reduced gas port barrel is right at 0.070 of I recall correctly.

[voodoo_man]

Buy a Gemtech 556 SBC and you don't have any problems regardless of length...

[gatordev]

Buy a Gemtech 556 SBC and you don't have any problems regardless of length...

According to my fans, I haven't had any problems with length without the SBC. Maybe it's just you.

[Former11B]

According to my fans, I haven't had any problems with length without the SBC. Maybe it's just you.

I see what you did there

[mtdawg169]

Buy a Gemtech 556 SBC and you don't have any problems regardless of length...
I know a lot of guys are using the gemtech carrier with good results and are happy with it. But I just can't get behind it. Having to remove it to gain access to the switch isn't ideal to me. And at the same time, I've never really been happy with the idea of restricting gas flow at the carrier. Same goes for adjustable gas keys.

I ultimately went a different route, via the Sionics reduced gas port barrel, LMT enhanced carrier and Vltor A5 buffer system.

[Slippers]

I know a lot of guys are using the gemtech carrier with good results and are happy with it. But I just can't get behind it. Having to remove it to gain access to the switch isn't ideal to me. And at the same time, I've never really been happy with the idea of restricting gas flow at the carrier. Same goes for adjustable gas keys.

I ultimately went a different route, via the Sionics reduced gas port barrel, LMT enhanced carrier and Vltor A5 buffer system.

The Gemtech SBC isn't like an adjustable gas key because it vents excess gas directly out the side of the carrier. This is somewhat similar to what the LMT enhanced carrier does, but on a greater scale when set to suppressed.

Voodoo has recommended the SBC since the beginning of the year, and I finally switched over to one a couple months ago when I got my LMT MRP 10.5. Having to remove the carrier to change the setting has yet to bother me because it's basically tool-less (just use the rim of a casing), and I shoot 99% suppressed. It makes for a very pleasant suppressed shooting experience, so I now have an LMT enhanced carrier sitting lonely in the parts box.

Also, you can access the toggle without completely removing the carrier from the upper. It's not too involved to shotgun the receivers apart, pull the bolt back without touching the charging handle so the carrier can't fall out, and change the setting.

If I had the ability to use an adjustable gas block, I probably would, but it's not an option with the LMT monolithic receiver platform.

[mtdawg169]

The Gemtech SBC isn't like an adjustable gas key because it vents excess gas directly out the side of the carrier. This is somewhat similar to what the LMT enhanced carrier does, but on a greater scale when set to suppressed.

Voodoo has recommended the SBC since the beginning of the year, and I finally switched over to one a couple months ago when I got my LMT MRP 10.5. Having to remove the carrier to change the setting has yet to bother me because it's basically tool-less (just use the rim of a casing), and I shoot 99% suppressed. It makes for a very pleasant suppressed shooting experience, so I now have an LMT enhanced carrier sitting lonely in the parts box.

Also, you can access the toggle without completely removing the carrier from the upper. It's not too involved to shotgun the receivers apart, pull the bolt back without touching the charging handle so the carrier can't fall out, and change the setting.

If I had the ability to use an adjustable gas block, I probably would, but it's not an option with the LMT monolithic receiver platform.
10-4. Part of my goal with that build was a tooless gun that was set up to run well suppressed, but require no changes when the suppressor comes off. Granted, that's not often though. I've pretty much set all my guns up the same way now, with the enhanced carrier and A5. I could obviously get even more gas reduction with an AGB or the gemtech carrier. But I just can't get past my hang up with needing to have tools available or fooling with the switch. But that's just me being anal.

[usbp379]

That's kind of my idea. Build a gun that's supposed to be suppressed most of the time. The only time the can comes off is when the gun needs cleaned or just to break the carbon loose.

With regard to the SBC; does the "selector switch" get fouled or jammed with extended use? That's one of the complaints I've seen with most everything that restricts gas flow.

[alamo5000]

The Gemtech SBC isn't like an adjustable gas key because it vents excess gas directly out the side of the carrier. This is somewhat similar to what the LMT enhanced carrier does, but on a greater scale when set to suppressed.

Voodoo has recommended the SBC since the beginning of the year, and I finally switched over to one a couple months ago when I got my LMT MRP 10.5. Having to remove the carrier to change the setting has yet to bother me because it's basically tool-less (just use the rim of a casing), and I shoot 99% suppressed. It makes for a very pleasant suppressed shooting experience, so I now have an LMT enhanced carrier sitting lonely in the parts box.

Also, you can access the toggle without completely removing the carrier from the upper. It's not too involved to shotgun the receivers apart, pull the bolt back without touching the charging handle so the carrier can't fall out, and change the setting.

If I had the ability to use an adjustable gas block, I probably would, but it's not an option with the LMT monolithic receiver platform.

I've always wondered about over doing it or if it would be worth it... I am running an adjustable block, a heavy buffer, a extra power spring, and a griffin snach as is... the buffer and the spring did miracles to make my SBR run smooth as ice.

If I toss in a Gemtec bolt I'm almost scared that it will screw up what I've accomplished so far! LOL

[Slippers]

If you have an adjustable gas block there's no real need for the SBC.

Fouling: hasn't happened yet. Voodoo might be able to tell you. I believe he ran a multi day course and got to 800 rounds with a suppressor and SBC before it started to slow down from fouling. I'm curious about the selector after that, as well.

[JGifford]

Why not just run the correct gas-port size? This is a friend shooting his rifle with one of my suppressors in place. It functions just fine unsuppressed, too. No adjustable anything and no swapping of anything. It's just correctly gassed/buffered is all.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLrYPaiydFE

[JGifford]

According to my fans, I haven't had any problems with length without the SBC. Maybe it's just you.

SBC?

[Former11B]

SBC?

Suppressed Bolt Carrier


That's kind of my idea. Build a gun that's supposed to be suppressed most of the time. The only time the can comes off is when the gun needs cleaned or just to break the carbon loose.

With regard to the SBC; does the "selector switch" get fouled or jammed with extended use? That's one of the complaints I've seen with most everything that restricts gas flow.

That's what I like about my WAR upper; no matter what you shoot through it, the selector switch never gets jammed up. Although replacing an upper isn't always possible, especially for those running a monolithic upper, or matching upper/lower sets, etc. But if you're building a rifle from the ground up you know you'll run a can on, it's worth a look

[mtdawg169]

Why not just run the correct gas-port size? This is a friend shooting his rifle with one of my suppressors in place. It functions just fine unsuppressed, too. No adjustable anything and no swapping of anything. It's just correctly gassed/buffered is all.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLrYPaiydFE
Most quality barrels are correctly ported for unsuppressed use only. As I'm sure you're aware, suppressors increase pressure, gas blowback, etc. The Sionics reduced gas port barrel has a slightly smaller port and was designed to be run suppressed the majority of the time. So it addresses those issues at the source, as opposed to the gas block or carrier. Essentially performing the task of an AGB, without the moving parts. The port is still large enough to function unsuppressed with most ammunition. You could take additional measures to reduce gas even further with an AGB. I'm not sure that barrel would do well with a gemtech carrier though. Other companies have made RGP barrels in the past, but not as a regular production item.

[gatordev]

Why not just run the correct gas-port size?

This x10. I see so many people adding all kinds of gear to multiple rifles just to make it run correctly when starting with a spec barrel and buffer would eliminate all of the fiddling. I CAN see the SBC being a nice addition to help with some gas face, but I wouldn't call that a necessity.


Most quality barrels are correctly ported for unsuppressed use only. As I'm sure you're aware, suppressors increase pressure, gas blowback, etc.

I have one (1) AR (.308) that doesn't run right and it's because I mistakenly thought it was going to be different than "all of the other" barrels. Sadly it's not. So hopefully the SBC will be the answer. Otherwise, all of my "quality barrels" (KAC, Colt, Noveske, Douglas) run absolutely fine both unsuppressed and suppressed without ripping out casings or causing malfunctions.

To me, it seems like the Scionics barrel has a bunch of marketing behind it, and its "undergassed port" that lets it run in both modes just means it's gassed correctly. That doesn't make it a bad product. On the contrary, actually, as that seems like just what you want.

[mtdawg169]

This x10. I see so many people adding all kinds of gear to multiple rifles just to make it run correctly when starting with a spec barrel and buffer would eliminate all of the fiddling. I CAN see the SBC being a nice addition to help with some gas face, but I wouldn't call that a necessity.



I have one (1) AR (.308) that doesn't run right and it's because I mistakenly thought it was going to be different than "all of the other" barrels. Sadly it's not. So hopefully the SBC will be the answer. Otherwise, all of my "quality barrels" (KAC, Colt, Noveske, Douglas) run absolutely fine both unsuppressed and suppressed without ripping out casings or causing malfunctions.

To me, it seems like the Scionics barrel has a bunch of marketing behind it, and its "undergassed port" that lets it run in both modes just means it's gassed correctly. That doesn't make it a bad product. On the contrary, actually, as that seems like just what you want.
I'll be honest, Sionics hasn't marketed that barrel AT ALL, with the exception of the intro thread on M4C. It's all been word of mouth. And I've been very satisfied with mine. It's is 0.006 under the "correct" size for an 11.5" barrel. And I wouldn't recommend it for someone who wasn't shooting suppressed the majority of the time. It might be more accurate to say that it is "correct" for a dedicated suppressed upper. And right now, no one else offers a comparable product. Side by side with a BCM 11.5, the Sionics has less blowback and is a shade softer shooting, with all other components being the same. With the suppressor removed, it's also more ammo sensitive. So, there's the trade off.

It's a great option, but obviously not the only solution. For someone like me that doesn't really trust adjustable gas blocks and doesn't want to fool with switches on the carrier or receiver, it's a better mousetrap. Mainly because it's "correct" for suppressed shooting.

[usbp379]

We're using .070" as correct 11.5" gas port?

[gatordev]

I'll be honest, Sionics hasn't marketed that barrel AT ALL, with the exception of the intro thread on M4C. It's all been word of mouth. And I've been very satisfied with mine. It's is 0.006 under the "correct" size for an 11.5" barrel. And I wouldn't recommend it for someone who wasn't shooting suppressed the majority of the time. It might be more accurate to say that it is "correct" for a dedicated suppressed upper. And right now, no one else offers a comparable product. Side by side with a BCM 11.5, the Sionics has less blowback and is a shade softer shooting, with all other components being the same. With the suppressor removed, it's also more ammo sensitive. So, there's the trade off.


Gotcha. That makes a little more sense. And no surprise that's there's a trade off. Nothing's free, right?

[Default.mp3]

Another option for an adjustable carrier, if you can't find the Gemtech or are leery of the components used (I've heard complaints about the staking and the screws used for the gas key being subpar): http://bootleginc.com/product/bootleg-adjustable-carrier/

You could also get something like the MicroMOA Baby Govnah or Black River CustomTune Port, which are gas-restricted gas blocks, so you can tame down an overgassed barrel, but still keep the simplicity of a non-adjustable gas block.

[mtdawg169]

We're using .070" as correct 11.5" gas port?

Correct is a relative term in this case. There is no true "correct" in this case because there is no spec for it. "Optimal" may be a more accurate description. That is the port size they chose after months of testing. The RGP barrel was the result of a LE Department request for dedicated suppressed uppers. Sionics could have gone a tad smaller, but the gun would have been truly a dedicated suppressed upper ONLY. So they built in a margin of error by opening it back up to 0.070. They do not guarantee function without a suppressor. However, in my own experience the gun runs well without a suppressor, even with weak .223 ammo, an A5H3, springco Green and LMT enhanced carrier. So it seems they did indeed find the sweet spot for suppressed 11.5" port sizing.

[mtdawg169]

Another option for an adjustable carrier, if you can't find the Gemtech or are leery of the components used (I've heard complaints about the staking and the screws used for the gas key being subpar): http://bootleginc.com/product/bootleg-adjustable-carrier/

You could also get something like the MicroMOA Baby Govnah or Black River CustomTune Port, which are gas-restricted gas blocks, so you can tame down an overgassed barrel, but still keep the simplicity of a non-adjustable gas block.

I really like the BRT custom tune port concept. It allows you to reduce the port size and use any barrel you want.

[usbp379]

I believe (but could be wrong) that Colt uses .070" on their 10.3 and 11.5" barrels.

[mtdawg169]

I believe (but could be wrong) that Colt uses .070" on their 10.3 and 11.5" barrels.

0.070-0.071 is ideal for 10.5, so it wouldn't surprise me if they are using it. But I have no idea what they use on the 11.5. I'd love to see some confirmation of that though. The better manufacturers are usually around 0.076, so it would be interesting to know if Colt is doing something different.

[Slippers]

Another option for an adjustable carrier, if you can't find the Gemtech or are leery of the components used (I've heard complaints about the staking and the screws used for the gas key being subpar): http://bootleginc.com/product/bootleg-adjustable-carrier/

You could also get something like the MicroMOA Baby Govnah or Black River CustomTune Port, which are gas-restricted gas blocks, so you can tame down an overgassed barrel, but still keep the simplicity of a non-adjustable gas block.

Bootleg is making the gemtech SBC as far as I can tell. The carrier has identical sand cuts and styling. The only difference is the bootleg allows adjustment without removing the carrier and has 5 settings, although preliminary reports suggest that it isn't as well tuned as the two settings of the SBC.

[Default.mp3]

Bootleg is making the gemtech SBC as far as I can tell. The carrier has identical sand cuts and styling. The only difference is the bootleg allows adjustment without removing the carrier and has 5 settings, although preliminary reports suggest that it isn't as well tuned as the two settings of the SBC.You're probably right; looking at the pictures, it appears that the Bootleg also uses YFS screws for the gas keys, which was the complaint on the Gemtech carrier that I saw. I've also heard similar things about the Bootleg being somewhat overgassed even on the lowest setting (an issue I've certainly had with my PWS MK110's adjustable gas block).

[mtdawg169]

You're probably right; looking at the pictures, it appears that the Bootleg also uses YFS screws for the gas keys, which was the complaint on the Gemtech carrier that I saw. I've also heard similar things about the Bootleg being somewhat overgassed even on the lowest setting (an issue I've certainly had with my PWS MK110's adjustable gas block).
Isn't Bootleg a division of PWS?

[Default.mp3]

Isn't Bootleg a division of PWS?Yep, which is why I brought up the fact that my MK110 was overgassed, despite it being a piston weapon; it would lock back just fine at the smallest gas port, while running a Vltor A5 RE with a Sprinco Green Spring and one of Clint's heavy buffers with all tungsten weights (which Clint states to be ~10.0 oz. on his webpage). I've also heard people running XM193 just fine on the 3rd setting for a MK1 Mod 1 rifle, which is nominally for suppressed use (the Mod 1s had 4 settings). I guess PWS/Bootleg tends toward being overgassed in general?

[usbp379]

Yep, which is why I brought up the fact that my MK110 was overgassed, despite it being a piston weapon; it would lock back just fine at the smallest gas port, while running a Vltor A5 RE with a Sprinco Green Spring and one of Clint's heavy buffers with all tungsten weights (which Clint states to be ~10.0 oz. on his webpage). I've also heard people running XM193 just fine on the 3rd setting for a MK1 Mod 1 rifle, which is nominally for suppressed use (the Mod 1s had 4 settings). I guess PWS/Bootleg tends toward being overgassed in general?
I'd guess the PWS and many other guns are built with the idea that people will tend to run them with cheap (ie Tula/Wolf) ammo and set gas ports accordingly.

I had an older non-adjustable PWS MK116. It cycled fast without my AAC can. When suppressed the action was so fast the gun would routinely stove pipe. This was with stuff like Federal Fusion and M193-ish reloads.

My solution there was to use a VLTOR RE and the heaviest A5 buffer along with a Springco spring. Even then the gun had what I thought was an excessive bolt velocity.

[Default.mp3]

I'd guess the PWS and many other guns are built with the idea that people will tend to run them with cheap (ie Tula/Wolf) ammo and set gas ports accordingly.While I can subscribe to that notion (Daniel Defense's civilian MK18 being a notorious offender on this, while KAC has also bowed to demand, apparently), I find it dumb to make an adjustable system still be way overgassed, given that there are clearly an option to allow for people to run shitty ammo without any modifications.

[mtdawg169]

While I can subscribe to that notion (Daniel Defense's civilian MK18 being a notorious offender on this, while KAC has also bowed to demand, apparently), I find it dumb to make an adjustable system still be way overgassed, given that there are clearly an option to allow for people to run shitty ammo without any modifications.
Yep. Larger ports = less warranty returns.

KAC did bow to this to a degree, but their port still seems very reasonable and I wouldn't call it overgassed by any stretch. I owned one of the first Legacy SR15s sold, with the original gas port sizing. I loved how that gun shot. But it was definitely more temperamental about ammo selection.

[usbp379]

Yep. Larger ports = less warranty returns.

Certainly makes sense. Who's going to get the call when a gun won't run? The ammo company or the rifle company?

[Slippers]

You're probably right; looking at the pictures, it appears that the Bootleg also uses YFS screws for the gas keys, which was the complaint on the Gemtech carrier that I saw. I've also heard similar things about the Bootleg being somewhat overgassed even on the lowest setting (an issue I've certainly had with my PWS MK110's adjustable gas block).

I have two Gemtech SBCs and both have YFS screws. The staking definitely wasn't done by a MOACKs tool, but I'd say it's adequate.

[usbp379]

I have two Gemtech SBCs and both have YFS screws. The staking definitely wasn't done by a MOACKs tool, but I'd say it's adequate.
Isn't staking something that should be better given the price?

[mtdawg169]

Isn't staking something that should be better given the price?
One would think so, but that's often not the case. I mean, they saved, like $0.03 per carrier by using those YFS screws instead of the correct grade 8 screws.

I have two Gemtech SBCs and both have YFS screws. The staking definitely wasn't done by a MOACKs tool, but I'd say it's adequate.
Here's something else to consider. The YFS screws have a rounded shoulder and little to no knurling. So that stake has less material to push into vs the correct screw with a straight wall, aggressive knurling and flat head. It may not be as secure as we might think. Thankfully, it's an easy fix. Remove, replace, re-stake, done.

[UWone77]

Yep. Larger ports = less warranty returns.

KAC did bow to this to a degree, but their port still seems very reasonable and I wouldn't call it overgassed by any stretch. I owned one of the first Legacy SR15s sold, with the original gas port sizing. I loved how that gun shot. But it was definitely more temperamental about ammo selection.

You nailed it with the Legacy's. They don't like underpowered cheap ammo, which is not a bad thing.

I almost wish manufacturers had a hobby and pro line. If you want to shoot any and all ammo, use this overgassed hobby gun. Obviously we know that's not realistic.

[Slippers]

One would think so, but that's often not the case. I mean, they saved, like $0.03 per carrier by using those YFS screws instead of the correct grade 8 screws.

Here's something else to consider. The YFS screws have a rounded shoulder and little to no knurling. So that stake has less material to push into vs the correct screw with a straight wall, aggressive knurling and flat head. It may not be as secure as we might think. Thankfully, it's an easy fix. Remove, replace, re-stake, done.

The way they stake it, both the screw heads and gas key get smushed together. I guess Gemtech didn't see any issue with the staking and screws to slap their name on it.


You nailed it with the Legacy's. They don't like underpowered cheap ammo, which is not a bad thing.

I almost wish manufacturers had a hobby and pro line. If you want to shoot any and all ammo, use this overgassed hobby gun. Obviously we know that's not realistic.

Except all the hobby users would still buy the pro line, because they want to be "operators." And then they'd complain. :)

[usbp379]

The Ruger AR-556 seems to be selling well. I imagine most AR "snobs" would consider it a hobbyist gun.

[alamo5000]

Certainly makes sense. Who's going to get the call when a gun won't run? The ammo company or the rifle company?

It depends on the problem I guess. That though is where being a member of a forum like this one (or having experience) matters a lot. Research things out and make wise decisions and a lot of the firearm side of that equation is diminished to some degree.

As for ammo the cost isn't the only reason why I reload. But for the people buying ammo here is what I don't get...why there aren't more ammo manufacturers out there. I am sure there is enough paperwork that you need a mule and a cart in order to haul it to the right people to apply for all the licenses....

But considering what the mark up is on ammo it seems like more people could get into it. If I can load a single round of ammo and sell it for triple what it costs to make you would think that's a good business opportunity provided the scale and so forth to get into it.

It makes me question the entire chain... primers...powder... whatever....

[Former11B]

You nailed it with the Legacy's. They don't like underpowered cheap ammo, which is not a bad thing.

I almost wish manufacturers had a hobby and pro line. If you want to shoot any and all ammo, use this overgassed hobby gun. Obviously we know that's not realistic.

People buying $2k rifles and shooting the cheapest ammo they can find through them. I don't get it.

[mtdawg169]

People buying $2k rifles and shooting the cheapest ammo they can find through them. I don't get it.
That was my argument when they decided to change the port size. But I can't blame KAC. That gun was their first foray into the commercial market in a long time. For them, it became a question of protecting the Brand. Because no matter the reasons, people are going to complain. And when enough people complain, the internet takes over. Folks like us that would reply, "stop shooting crap ammo" are the minority.

[Former11B]

That was my argument when they decided to change the port size. But I can't blame KAC. That gun was their first foray into the commercial market in a long time. For them, it became a question of protecting the Brand. Because no matter the reasons, people are going to complain. And when enough people complain, the internet takes over. Folks like us that would reply, "stop shooting crap ammo" are the minority.

What I don't understand is if they want inexpensive ammo, then why not handload? If they're already significantly invested in top shelf rifles and probably optics and other gear as well, why not control the quality of what you put in it? I doubt they'd buy a Ferrari and put 87 octane in it. I'm beating a dead horse, but it just makes no sense.

[Slippers]

What I don't understand is if they want inexpensive ammo, then why not handload? If they're already significantly invested in top shelf rifles and probably optics and other gear as well, why not control the quality of what you put in it? I doubt they'd buy a Ferrari and put 87 octane in it. I'm beating a dead horse, but it just makes no sense.

Time, effort, inconvenience. Reloading isn't for everyone. I used to enjoy it and reap the cost benefits. Now between family and Arisaka I simply don't have the time.

My Dillon 650 sits lonely on the bench.

[Former11B]

Time, effort, inconvenience. Reloading isn't for everyone. I used to enjoy it and reap the cost benefits. Now between family and Arisaka I simply don't have the time.

My Dillon 650 sits lonely on the bench.

But you also don't sound like the type of person to complain when a top shelf rifle doesn't work well with bottom shelf ammo.

I personally don't see reloading as an inconvenience; I'm saving a ton of money especially with the type of ammo I'm shooting. Beats paying 3x the cost per round plus shipping, since quantities like this are hard to find locally. My wife and kid consume nearly every waking moment I have when I'm not at work, but I still manage to get on the bench when I need to. I have to make time because I can't afford to shoot what I do AND pay factory ammo prices.

[Slippers]

But you also don't sound like the type of person to complain when a top shelf rifle doesn't work well with bottom shelf ammo.

I personally don't see reloading as an inconvenience; I'm saving a ton of money especially with the type of ammo I'm shooting. Beats paying 3x the cost per round plus shipping, since quantities like this are hard to find locally. My wife and kid consume nearly every waking moment I have when I'm not at work, but I still manage to get on the bench when I need to. I have to make time because I can't afford to shoot what I do AND pay factory ammo prices.

Yeah, I don't shoot bottom shelf ammo.

For reloading, it's great that you find the time and have the patience and know-how to do it.

In my experience with friends and other people I meet at the range, if they're not willing to purchase half-decent ammo, they aren't going to be willing to spend the money and time learning how to reload, despite the potential savings. It's the enthusiasts that appreciate high quality match ammunition that end up getting into reloading, not people searching for the cheapest blasting fodder.

[DeviantLogic]

What I don't understand is if they want inexpensive ammo, then why not handload? If they're already significantly invested in top shelf rifles and probably optics and other gear as well, why not control the quality of what you put in it? I doubt they'd buy a Ferrari and put 87 octane in it. I'm beating a dead horse, but it just makes no sense.

What's a bigger shame is that the quality of commodity ammunition hasn't improved that much over that last several decades. Manufacturing processes and technology have definitely improved, but in order to get marginally consistent ammo you've gotta pay a premium or roll your own. Even half ass handloads perform better than run of the mill Federal, Remington, and Winchester.

[usbp379]

In poking around on the webz I see that Specialized Armament Warehouse makes a suppressor dedicated upper in a 692x and 694x format. The info on his site says these various uppers are spec'ed to run only with a can in place.

[gatordev]

In poking around on the webz I see that Specialized Armament Warehouse makes a suppressor dedicated upper in a 692x and 694x format. The info on his site says these various uppers are spec'ed to run only with a can in place.

I'm sure any SA gun runs great, as they have a great reputation, but he's also SUPER-proud of his product. As an alternative, if you're looking at Colt, just buy a 16" SOCOM barrel (they're everywhere for sale online) and send it off to ADCO. Tell them to chop it to whatever length you want, and adjust the gas port, and you'll have a great barrel that functions great for significantly less expense. I'm 2 for 2 with sending my Colt barrels to them and I know there's plenty of others with the same experience.

[usbp379]

I'm sure any SA gun runs great, as they have a great reputation, but he's also SUPER-proud of his product. As an alternative, if you're looking at Colt, just buy a 16" SOCOM barrel (they're everywhere for sale online) and send it off to ADCO. Tell them to chop it to whatever length you want, and adjust the gas port, and you'll have a great barrel that functions great for significantly less expense. I'm 2 for 2 with sending my Colt barrels to them and I know there's plenty of others with the same experience.

So you've had two barrels cut and drilled just for suppressed use? What length and what gas port?

[gatordev]

I've had two barrels cut and drilled to "the spec," so they can run both unsuppressed and suppressed with M193. Both have been 10.3" barrels, and I'm guessing ADCO is using the Crane spec (which I mentioned earlier). I run my lowers with "the spec" of H2 buffers.

ADCO will build to order, so if you want a permanently-suppressed gun, you can email him and tell him that and they'll most likely build it that way.

[alamo5000]

In my experience with friends and other people I meet at the range, if they're not willing to purchase half-decent ammo, they aren't going to be willing to spend the money and time learning how to reload, despite the potential savings. It's the enthusiasts that appreciate high quality match ammunition that end up getting into reloading, not people searching for the cheapest blasting fodder.

Agreed. As well as to know the difference.

I don't normally shoot with a lot of other people but every once in a while I run across people who think they need match ammo to do mag dumps out of their 650 dollar AR's. A lot of them just go out and make noise with 200 rounds shooting pumpkins or whatever and call it good for six months until the next time they go shooting.

[usbp379]

I reload for quantity not quality. I've found a tremendous savings in training ammo especially in 300BLK. I know of no factory ammo available in this cartridge for cheap and repeated range use.

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk

[usbp379]

I'm going to play with this idea a bit more and actually experiment with cutting a barrel and using it with an undrilled gas port.

What I'm thinking currently is cutting a carbine gas system barrel off at about 9.5" or so. This should leave enough room to mount a lopro gas block and thread the barrel.

I seriously doubt the gun will cycle at all without a suppressor but I'm hoping the addition of a suppressor will give the system enough dwell time to work. Or, at the least, the port will only need to be opened a tiny bit to get the gun to cycle.
I'm sure alot of this will be depending on ammo and suppressor combo. Anyway I'll update later.

[usbp379]

Here's a quick update:

We cut a Colt 14.5" barrel with a .064" gas port off at 10.5" and made no mods other than the cut and thread. Now the gun will almost run (cycles most of the time in semi- but won't lock the bolt open) unsuppressed but seems to be fine suppressed. If anything the gun might be a tad overgassed even with no mods to the existing gas port. Cyclic rate on full-auto isn't crazy but the ejection pattern is to the 2:30 position or so. We're using an AAC SD can with 18T adapter and an old Gemtech direct thread.

[Former11B]

Since it's on the same topic and without starting a new one, after reading Griffin's specs for their new suppressor-ready match barrels, I emailed Rainier about the gas ports on their barrels, and gave them the corresponding SKU numbers for accuracy. My 16" Match w/ 5.56 chamber, heavy contour, 1:8 twist, has a .076" gas port and the 18" Match/SPR contour with .223 Wylde chamber & 1:8 twist has a .078" port. I run them both with WAR upper receivers which recommend .084-.093" gas ports without any issues. I've seen people shy away from the WARs for this reason but I have empirical data that shows it can work and gas port size, at least at .076" and up (until tested otherwise), shouldn't be a reason not to get one.