Blast baffle errosion- really an issue?

[Kudu22]

If you do plan to run suppressed most of the time a brake will take the brunt of the beating off the blast baffle. However if you want to run a flash hider even on a 10" rig you are not going to hurt the SOCOM556-RC. You will see the gasses creating a very shallow channel where the gasses run between the tines. They are flowing on the path of least resistance and it stops. The blast baffle on the SOCOM line is much thicker than the preceding series of SF suppressors. We have 10's of thousands of rounds on Mk18's with test samples we use to record accuracy, sound and performance over the life of the samples and the wear on the blast baffle is a non-issue.

[vereceleritas]

Muzzle brakes work by redirecting propellant gasses. I can see how they would reduce blast baffle erosion but wouldn't they just shift that erosion to another part of the suppressor, like the tube or the locking mechanism? Seems like you would just be shifting the wear from one part to another unless the brake also has the benefit of reducing the velocity of the gasses. I'm certainly no expert on this stuff though.

[domestique]

If you do plan to run suppressed most of the time a brake will take the brunt of the beating off the blast baffle. However if you want to run a flash hider even on a 10" rig you are not going to hurt the SOCOM556-RC. You will see the gasses creating a very shallow channel where the gasses run between the tines. They are flowing on the path of least resistance and it stops. The blast baffle on the SOCOM line is much thicker than the preceding series of SF suppressors. We have 10's of thousands of rounds on Mk18's with test samples we use to record accuracy, sound and performance over the life of the samples and the wear on the blast baffle is a non-issue.

Garin, have you seen any extra wear on the sides of the blast chamber with regards to using a brake vs. flash hider?

It's been brought up before on other forums that some people would rather use a flash hider because they feel that an inner core can be replaced where as a damaged blast chamber/side wall of suppressor cannot.

[Kudu22]

No it wouldn't expel the gasses sideways as you would expect when the suppressor is on. The mating of the suppressor to the adapter takes all the attributes of a brake or a flash hider and does away with them. The brake/flash hider just become a adapter for the suppressor attachment. You will see small amounts of carbon deposits on the back section in the pattern from the ports but the brake can not act as a brake since the gasses can not use the ports to expel their energy. What you do get is the port partitions taking the muzzle blast as they are forced into the suppressor where they can expand into the chambers.

[Kudu22]

I have never see any erosion what so ever in a back section no matter what choice of muzzle device the user has used. I have people that shoot a ave of 100K rounds a year on a suppressor and we have done re-cores for them years later as the bore has opened up so much it no longer meets their performance demands.

[domestique]

As always, thank you for your replies Garin!

[kaltesherz]

Lots of great info in this thread, thanks everyone.

[markm]

Garin, have you seen any extra wear on the sides of the blast chamber with regards to using a brake vs. flash hider?

To echo what was posted... no. The one thing I've noticed is that the carbon build up in the blast chamber can accumulate based on the shape of the mount. In other words, a three prong FH will allow carbon to build up most in the slots between the prongs.

[TehLlama]

If you do plan to run suppressed most of the time a brake will take the brunt of the beating off the blast baffle. However if you want to run a flash hider even on a 10" rig you are not going to hurt the SOCOM556-RC. You will see the gasses creating a very shallow channel where the gasses run between the tines. They are flowing on the path of least resistance and it stops. The blast baffle on the SOCOM line is much thicker than the preceding series of SF suppressors. We have 10's of thousands of rounds on Mk18's with test samples we use to record accuracy, sound and performance over the life of the samples and the wear on the blast baffle is a non-issue.

Gavin nailed it - if you're knackering multiple barrels through throat and gas port erosion all while using the same can, I'd say the suppressor is holding up fine. Basically anything linked to the bore of the weapon is going to get blasted with actively exploding rifle gunpowder, and the throat of the barrel will lose out first.

I have noticed that the brakes do get covered in a bit more powder burn debris as they reroute a touch more of the unburned powder before that first baffle, but all that's doing is deflecting a little bit of already contained energy. By the time the modified jets coming from ports on a brake inside the can become a wear issue, you've already turned even inconel/stellite/unobtanium blast baffles into ablated overbore partitions of the can, and rebuilding the can core makes more sense anyway.

I sure as poop don't shoot enough to wear out my cans, but just looking at some basic math on ammunition cost, even doing reloading with the cheapest components I'd want to feed through a suppressed rifle one is still looking at 10x the cost of the can in ammunition, and at least a barrel/gas tube/BCG/buffer spring swap in addition to a can refresh. In realistic terms, it's about 20-30 fold the cost of the can in ammunition before the can is starting to fall out of desired performance range, and based on ammunition and range time budgets of anybody who isn't shooting for a living, that's probably at least one full development cycle of suppressors before the 'old' one would even be due for a refresh as a result of wear.

To me it's like worrying about wear on pistons and cranks in a passenger car - sure they'll be beat to crap if you take it to a quarter million miles... but very few actually get anywhere close to that, and by that point you've spent $25k-$75k in gasoline (30+ mpg down to 10mpg), oil changes, tires, and regular maintenance so what difference does wearing out $500 of parts really make in the grand scheme of things - if you're in the minority who gets to that point, figure out the answer that makes sense and drive on; the other 98% of the population would be better served learning how to be better at finances so that they could actually bankroll the ammunition and training to become a good enough shooter for this to matter in the first place.

[cbx]

Besides the surefire, sure there any other suppressors that are considered long? I'm going to get in the nfa game this next year. I'd like one that could last a lifetime. Dealer said that selling a used suppressor is worse than getting divorced....lol