Multi-caliber rifle can

[pedal_pusher]

If I state that the worlds fastest production car is the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport and provide the data to back that up. The fact that I have never driven one, been in one or even seen one in person means nothing as it is a fact that I am offering up, not opinion.

sorry i missed this little jewel of wisdom... so by that logic you don't own any suppressors, which of course you want to avoid saying, cause that would discredit your assumptions ...because that's all you have, assumptions. whether or not you have personal experience with the cans you say are "the quietest. period" has a lot to do with the credibility of your word. what you don't understand, you don't get credibility by riding the backs of others, you earn it.

i looked at your link to major malfunctions tests and they don't look accurate. he even said at one point, he wasn't sure how to set it up. also, i don't know who he is, or his credibility to do these tests. show me an independent test by someone who is industry credible and i'll have learned something.

chris i'm not trying to belittle you, i just want to know what kind of personal experience you have, and you avoid answering. thats all.

[chrismartin]

Yes I own several silencers. Yes I have shot many different silencers (dozens of different ones)

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[bryanrheem]

I'm going to take a hard look at a trust... what of the rumors about changes though regarding trusts?

Eitherway, I think I'm going to go with the AAC 762-SDN-6 or the 300-SD. I'm hoping AAC comes out with a quick attachment that is not a brake/FH for my 700 SPS similar to what Gemtech has.

I don't have any rifle suppressor experience... just my Osprey45 which I use on a 45 and a 9mm. I've been extremely happy with the Osprey!

[jdonovan]

I'm going to take a hard look at a trust... what of the rumors about changes though regarding trusts?

I believe it would take a change in federal laws to make them no longer valid. They might put some additional checks in, and that might catch some of the I found this trust form on the internet people... but I'd suspect if you have one drawn up by a lawyer who practices in that area of law, you are probably on solid ground.

I've heard rumors that ATF might eliminate the CLEO signoff, and that would reduce 80+ % of the people who have gone to trusts because of uncooperative local CLEO's.

[ImmortalArms]

Just that, rumors. On the CLEO side, wishful thinking with the current administration. It will require an AG and ATF head that actually believe that the Bill of Rights are the law.

On rifle cans, POI shift should be very high on your checklist if you a putting it on a distance shooter. Precision cans are a whole subculture (Thunderbeast, SAS, Elite Iron, Shark) Are you currently on Silencer Forum? http://www.silencerforum.com/ Great independent testing for sound going on over there.

[Diomed]

Just that, rumors. On the CLEO side, wishful thinking with the current administration. It will require an AG and ATF head that actually believe that the Bill of Rights are the law.

ATF has already sent it to DOJ for approval. ATF wants the CLEO signoff gone, because actually restricting trusts would generate too much pushback. Removing the main reason for them should take the pressure off.

[ImmortalArms]

DOJ is Atty General Eric Holder, an affirmed "gun control" guy. Anything that will make it easier will never be approved in the current administration. They have already started making things harder for FFLs in CA, AZ, NM and TX.

As to it already being sent, I take it you read that on another forum. There has been no confirmation, in fact the NAFTCA guys basically said it was "still a work in progress". Until there is a "public comment period" on such an action, don't believe it is in process anywhere within the NFA branch or BATFE.

[Diomed]

DOJ is Atty General Eric Holder, an affirmed "gun control" guy. Anything that will make it easier will never be approved in the current administration. They have already started making things harder for FFLs in CA, AZ, NM and TX.

Holder doesn't even know NFA exists. It's up to the bureaucrats to evaluate and determine where to go. Kind of a flip a coin situation, where the regulator ATF is saying "do it" and their instincts to control are saying don't.

As to it already being sent, I take it you read that on another forum. There has been no confirmation, in fact the NAFTCA guys basically said it was "still a work in progress". Until there is a "public comment period" on such an action, don't believe it is in process anywhere within the NFA branch or BATFE.

No, I heard that from a former head of NFA Branch last week (you should consider attending the Importer/Exporter/Manufacturer Conference, very informative). And there has already been a public comment period; that's what opened the door. Once DOJ sends it back down to ATF there will be another one - DOJ will either say yes, no, or change this or that, plus whatever OMB says about the proposed change, and in any event it'll have to go up for another comment period. There was some hope it would be done this year but unfortunately it'll probably drag on into next year.

[gunderwood]

On rifle cans, POI shift should be very high on your checklist if you a putting it on a distance shooter.

IMHO, POI changes really only matter that it's consistent. As long as it always moves 2MOA down and 1.4MOA right, it's easy to correct for. I'd rather have a can that has a big POI change, but the same one every time than a can with a relatively small change, but inconsistent as to what that change is.

[ImmortalArms]

On rifle cans, POI shift should be very high on your checklist if you a putting it on a distance shooter.

IMHO, POI changes really only matter that it's consistent. As long as it always moves 2MOA down and 1.4MOA right, it's easy to correct for. I'd rather have a can that has a big POI change, but the same one every time than a can with a relatively small change, but inconsistent as to what that change is.

Yes, consistency is the key. You should be able to screw it on and know what it is going to do every time.

[ImmortalArms]

DOJ is Atty General Eric Holder, an affirmed "gun control" guy. Anything that will make it easier will never be approved in the current administration. They have already started making things harder for FFLs in CA, AZ, NM and TX.

Holder doesn't even know NFA exists. It's up to the bureaucrats to evaluate and determine where to go. Kind of a flip a coin situation, where the regulator ATF is saying "do it" and their instincts to control are saying don't.

We could only wish he didn't know....his minions will be sure to "inform" him.

As to it already being sent, I take it you read that on another forum. There has been no confirmation, in fact the NAFTCA guys basically said it was "still a work in progress". Until there is a "public comment period" on such an action, don't believe it is in process anywhere within the NFA branch or BATFE.

No, I heard that from a former head of NFA Branch last week (you should consider attending the Importer/Exporter/Manufacturer Conference, very informative). And there has already been a public comment period; that's what opened the door. Once DOJ sends it back down to ATF there will be another one - DOJ will either say yes, no, or change this or that, plus whatever OMB says about the proposed change, and in any event it'll have to go up for another comment period. There was some hope it would be done this year but unfortunately it'll probably drag on into next year.

I would have loved to attend this year..wasn't doable. It is dragging and in government, that means death. I would be ecstatic if they actually do it, but I won't hold my breath.

[ArsenalAttorneys]

I wanted to comment on earlier replies in this thread regarding trusts. I'm a Fairfax-based attorney offering gun trusts at http://www.arsenalattorneys.com

ImmortalArms offered valuable comments about the benefits of a trust over an LLC or a corporation. I would say, though, the price range in Virginia for trusts is probably $300-1,000. I offer some tips on my website in this regard. For now, I would just say confirm your attorney offers a trust specially designed for the gun owner--not an off the shelf, one size fits all trust. Additionally, use Google to confirm the reputation of your attorney.

[sdlrodeo]

I just ran into a great deal on a set of 3, NIB cans. I'm thinking it would be a good idea for me to get a trust set up so I won't have to 'worry' about anything. One is the Gucci AAC 762 SD, another is a Slim-Lite, and the third is a warlock. I'm planning on using the 762 for both .308 and 5.56. I probably won't use it in 'operator' conditions. At least I hope not anytime soon.

Can anyone tell me how the pressure differential would affect the 762 SD if used on a .300 Win Mag?

Thoughts?

Thanks and wow, what informative reading this thread has been!!!! I want to party with you guys!

Steve

[jdonovan]

Can anyone tell me how the pressure differential would affect the 762 SD if used on a .300 Win Mag?

according to Jason@aac, that combination is a no-go

http://www.silencertalk.com/forum3/view ... 45#p606445

[sdlrodeo]

Reading further in the thread you sent it mentions the Remington Ultra Mag being acceptable out of a 24" barrel. I'm not worried about it very much because I don't plan on using it on 300 WM. I have a just right AR10 that I plan on using it with. Now how do I get it on my AK......

Steve

[jdonovan]

It seems that longer barrels on the high pressure 30 cal's make it more acceptable... but officially its a .308 and under can from what I can determine.

Now how do I get it on my AK

Its a QD can, so get the right mount, and it should thread right on.

[sdlrodeo]

Ok, I understand the QD mount for the AK. Solution there.

Next question:

How much would it hurt the performance of the can if I were to have it bored out so that I could pass .38/9mm ammo through it? In my mind, it is only 40/1000 difference give or take.

What about any legal issues?

I ask because I have an AR chambered in .357 sig. I know .357 sig is NOT subsonic, but I wouldn't mind being able to use the can on it. Definitely should handle the pressure. Also, Although a bit unweildy given its size, I could put it on a pistol as well.

Just trying to get the most use out of this can as I can.

Either way, I'm just happy to get one. I'm pretty excited. tick tock tick tock....

Steve

[Diomed]

How much would it hurt the performance of the can if I were to have it bored out so that I could pass .38/9mm ammo through it? In my mind, it is only 40/1000 difference give or take.

Bigger aperture will mean more noise. Just the way it is. How much depends on how big and the specific can.

What about any legal issues?

ATF takes the position that changing the caliber of a registered silencer is illegal. How they could prove that a silencer marked as .30 cal with an aperture size of (for example) 0.425" isn't just the result of baffle strike paranoia or incompetent design in the absence of an admission that the size is intended to change the caliber, I don't know.

[sdlrodeo]

Thanks for the heads up.
I'll just have to get another for .38/9mm.

Steve

[ImmortalArms]

It seems that longer barrels on the high pressure 30 cal's make it more acceptable... but officially its a .308 and under can from what I can determine.

Now how do I get it on my AK

Its a QD can, so get the right mount, and it should thread right on.

For an AK you have to very careful. The 14x1LH seems to be pretty solid among many manufacturers offerings, but the 24x1.5mm thread is all over the place on concentricity. Any mount for a 24 pitch needs to be "smithed" to make sure it is lines up correctly. I don't understand how they seem to get it so wrong, but I have seen several examples to date of threading that would guarantee baffle strikes.

Huntertown has released the Kestrel 7.62AK with swappable adapaters. It ships with the 14x1LH. They will be releasing a 24 soon, but it will be "in the white" so you can have your favorite smith fit it to your gun. I have a video of this can running http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EJlx5aP84Q It is pretty remarkable on pulling the low end out of the 47.