Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 33
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    13,844
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I'm tempted to try this out on a suppressed short barrel.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    389
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by UWone77 View Post
    I'm tempted to try this out on a suppressed short barrel.
    Me, too.

    I have a VLTOR upper that's put together with a Sionics 11.5" barrel. I'll try a few rounds through it with my AAC 7.62 suppressor.

    Also curious to try with a select fire lower to see how the cyclic rate changes.

    Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,938
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    This is getting more interesting as I read.

    In this video below at about 1:30 he states that it will keep the bolt in lock up in battery for longer than a standard BCG. I wonder how much longer, and if that may or may not help alleviate some port pop on semi auto suppressed applications?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUJa...ature=youtu.be

    If it's decreasing chamber pressure by about 15% that could in theory have a pretty significant impact on at the ear numbers for suppression, especially out of an SBR.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    389
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    The info on the back of the packaging.

    Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,938
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by usbp379 View Post
    The info on the back of the packaging.

    Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
    Maybe I am wrong here but I am thinking through this. ( Dangerous I know right? )

    If there is extended lock up time, and particularly on SBRs that gives the bullet substantially more time to travel down the bore and exit the muzzle (or at least enter the suppressor), thus dropping the pressure and forcing the gas forward more such as in a bolt action rifle.

    If everything works the way that I think it would work it would have the equivalent effect (sound wise) of shooting out of a longer barrel rifle and decreasing the back pressure for gassy face and possibly a sound reduction. If my thinking is correct the sound reduction part would come from opening the system up while physically being under less pressure and hence less pop.

    How that would translate into real world sound reduction (at the ear) I don't know. I emailed them and asked if they tested this. Even a 4-5 DB reduction at the ear would be pretty cool.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,938
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    In the video below the suppressed at the ear numbers for a 10.5" SBR are over 149 almost 150 DB. Out of a 16" those same cans at the ear were reduced by around 6 DB.

    If that's true then with this BCG a 16" AR would meter in at the ear around 136-137 DB range. If it works like that. Big if. I would like to see testing.

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

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    389
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Weights for comparison.

    The Surefire with counterweight:

    A standard GI style from BCM:




    Both weights taken with carriers completely assembled.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    389
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Weight of the buffer included with the carrier:

    Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    389
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Packaging says H weight buffer.

    I assume the weight(s) inside are standard stuff. I'm going to guess it would be possible to add a tungsten weight if desired.

    Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,938
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    In the video below the suppressed at the ear numbers for a 10.5" SBR are over 149 almost 150 DB. Out of a 16" those same cans at the ear were reduced by around 6 DB.

    If that's true then with this BCG a 16" AR would meter in at the ear around 136-137 DB range. If it works like that. Big if. I would like to see testing.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_LuHzfzYtc
    Based on this using a 15% reduction in pressure it would make a 10.5" SBR reduce at the port door to something akin to a 12.5" to 14.5".

    However on a 16" gun still using the same formula it would reduce port noise down to about an 18" barrel length.

    If it's linear.

    Basically like having an extra 2-3" on the barrel for noise purposes. It probably would reduce the noise at the ear but realistically probably not by much. Maybe 2 or 3 DB.

    Attachment 6292

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    3,919
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by UWone77 View Post
    I'm tempted to try this out on a suppressed short barrel.
    Torture test gun ...

    Haha remember that

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    13,844
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Just ordered one... I guess their new video convinced me I needed to try one.

    Any update on your usbp?



  13. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    2,396
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    “It will double the reliability of your AR”

    Snake oil sales pitch is unnecessary and offputting. What’s double the reliability of 100%? Zero failures thus far except for one broken spring but that’s unrelated to a BCG

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Mn.
    Posts
    1,328
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Im all for checking out and trying new stuff that comes down the pipe but that statement from SF is a little far fetched. If I do my part and maintain my rifles even though I beat the shit out of them, they are running at 100% as is. The first thing I usually ask myself is "what can go wrong with it" Adding internal moving parts: spring loaded weight: where am I if that stops functioning? Screwed comes to mind, if Im in a bad situation. Also a proprietary buffer and spring length: Now I have to buy extra special length springs? Seems like we are adding variables instead of reducing variables... Their first video should have been a 50K round torture test with a few spring swaps allowed, then I would have been interested. Seems like they have left the long term testing and reviews up to the end users... So far to date, with using high quality parts, all of my DI builds are running at 100% with zero issues. But its like this with anything, I am sure there are things I buy that people would have a question with. Its our hard earned money and we can spend it how we like. Now we just need to talk UW into that 5K round torture test...
    The best way to survive a violent encounter is to be the one inflicting the most violence.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    13,844
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I'm just in it to see if there's any gas reduction while shooting suppressed.

    I don't buy into the double the reliability stuff either.

    This is going on a new CMT SBR, that will be shot 100% suppressed. It's that cerakoted one I've posted a couple of times. Just working on getting the parts I want for it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •