View Full Version : 90 something tooth AAC mount?
Anyone know for sure if the new 90 tooth mounts will be backwards compatible like 18 and 51 toothers?
As Scott said, no they are not compatible.
They use an entirely different setup of threads and bearing surfaces:
http://www.tenpoundmonkey.com/web/mounts.jpg
AAC should produce identical bodies in a couple of sizes and offer them all with 51 and 90t attachments. Instead of having three mounts in inventory simultaneously and a mash up of cans that do and don't fit.
AAC should produce identical bodies in a couple of sizes and offer them all with 51 and 90t attachments. Instead of having three mounts in inventory simultaneously and a mash up of cans that do and don't fit.
Or the ability to retro fit older model cans. I have 4 mounts and a can that the government won't even let me use yet that is already outdated....
Add me to the list of folks waiting to be able use their outdated shit...
Add me to the list of folks waiting to be able use their outdated shit...
Classic AAC retardation.
You couldn't run a ****ing operation any worse. How do you piss off your OWN customers?
I'm glad I'm still on the 18t mount.
Add me to the list of folks waiting to be able use their outdated shit...
Count me in as well.......:confused:
Classic AAC retardation.
You couldn't run a ****ing operation any worse. How do you piss off your OWN customers?
I'm glad I'm still on the 18t mount.
I feel your pain, as you can add me to the list of people waiting now for an outdated product as well. I'm still waiting to be able to pick up my M4 2000 (51t mount)
But I blame the NFA laws and the back logged BATF for that.
Although how would you propose to run the operation? Stop making and developing new products or not put them out because it will make someone else's stuff obsolete?
AAC isnt really doing anything different than what car companies, Microsoft, or Apple or anyone else is doing with their respective products.
I am fairly new to the world of NFA, so if you know something I don't about AAC being underhanded with their marketing tactics or sales practices please do tell.
At least AAC still keeps stocks of parts for their older designs instead of totally cutting you off from servicing their older products (*coughcough HK)
The difference between AAC and cars, electronics and the like is that you don't have to wait 6 months before you can drive your car or use your new cell phone or computer. Yes, there will be upgrades and new products being released but you can either wait for the new product or purchase a product that you know will be replaced shortly. With NFA, you can't do this because you are at the mercy of the examiners. For example. I learned about the Mini4, researched it, asked questions and even started a thread on here and received a lot of input from guys on here that are affiliated with AAC. The serial number on my Mini4 is 36. Yup, 36. I still haven't received my From 4 back and since SHOT, my Mini4 is out dated.
I think the best thing AAC can do about this situation is to put into their design a way to change the suppressor to accept any new adapter that they design. Like a product enhancement program. This would keep a lot of customers happy-er.
The difference between AAC and cars, electronics and the like is that you don't have to wait 6 months before you can drive your car or use your new cell phone or computer. Yes, there will be upgrades and new products being released but you can either wait for the new product or purchase a product that you know will be replaced shortly. With NFA, you can't do this because you are at the mercy of the examiners. For example. I learned about the Mini4, researched it, asked questions and even started a thread on here and received a lot of input from guys on here that are affiliated with AAC. The serial number on my Mini4 is 36. Yup, 36. I still haven't received my From 4 back and since SHOT, my Mini4 is out dated.
I think the best thing AAC can do about this situation is to put into
their design a way to change the suppressor to accept any new adapter that they design. Like a product enhancement program. This would keep a lot of customers happy-er.
Yes, this is what AAC could. Offer to retro fit cans , and make money doing so.
I just sent my Nightforce in and changed it to mil mil with their NEW HIGH SPEED , ZERO STOP TURRETS. Their newest latest greatest stuff Cost me a fortune, but at least they let me do it.
That's what where talking about. Nightforce has a fan club:D:D
Classic AAC retardation.
You couldn't run a ****ing operation any worse. How do you piss off your OWN customers?
I'm glad I'm still on the 18t mount.
They got tired of suing forum users and disagreeing with Surefire about the series of Inconel used in their own blast baffles (AAC claims SF uses 600 series, Surefire claims they use 700 series). This was inevitable, lol
I literally found out about the SR5 and new mount the night before I was going to order an M4-2000...
I literally found out about the SR5 and new mount the night before I was going to order an M4-2000...
Are you going to hold off an extra 6 months to a year and get it?
While I was FILING my paperwork, 2 months got added to the wait time people are experiencing.
You are going to have to wait until the can is manufactured and pre-orders, etc. are filled and then jump on one.
I predict that at soonest, you will have one in your hands in 1 year.
Add me to the list of folks waiting to be able use their outdated shit...
Me too! :(
Which is why after seeing the Saker from Silencerco I think they're onto something. They can swap out the rear mount with a thread on, their own current proprietary system, or a 51T AAC mount. And I'm sure down the road when some new whiz-bang contraption comes out they'll find a way to mount onto it too. It's a smart idea and I'd like to see more companies go to it.
I'd love a .30 cal can that I could thread onto one gun, fast attach to another, and throw on my friends gun who has a different mount. I'm hoping Silencerco comes out with a big brother to the Saker.
I can tell you right now the saker is going to suck ass.
It has way too many interfaces and joints to mount this can that have the possibility of becoming loose or getting ****ed up.
It also has those retarded prongs on the end of it.
Eurodriver
02-02-12, 06:50
I have absolutely no issues with aac upgrading their mounting system. I don't see why anyone does. Your m42000s are not obsolete. They're the same as they were before shot. There is just a newer model available.
Aac is definitely full of retards (surefire, Ian). But you can't blame them for designing new products. They will take a worn out/damaged can and give you a replacement at 50%. As they said "try towing your Volvo with 500,000 miles to the dealership and getting a new one for $15,000."
The only thing I have a problem with are the dudes complaining that the cans they don't even have yet are obsolete. You could always wait till May when the new ones start shipping, July until the form 3 comes back and January 2013 and have the latest and greatest - OR you could suck it the hell up and enjoy your absolutely ok M42000
I have absolutely no issues with aac upgrading their mounting system. I don't see why anyone does. Your m42000s are not obsolete. They're the same as they were before shot. There is just a newer model available.
Aac is definitely full of retards (surefire, Ian). But you can't blame them for designing new products. They will take a worn out/damaged can and give you a replacement at 50%. As they said "try towing your Volvo with 500,000 miles to the dealership and getting a new one for $15,000."
The only thing I have a problem with are the dudes complaining that the cans they don't even have yet are obsolete. You could always wait till May when the new ones start shipping, July until the form 3 comes back and January 2013 and have the latest and greatest - OR you could suck it the hell up and enjoy your absolutely ok M42000
I agree with what Euro says, but I would like the opportunity, even at a ridiculous price to upgrade the mounts so you wouldn't have to have several different mounts. I didn't intend for this to turn into a AAC bashfest. People just get pissed because BATFE (AKA Life Suckage) takes 5/6 months now and worse still in some cases.
Smart business is to keep your current customers happy. If I have to change mounting systems and I'm looking for a 300WM rated can. Now I look at Surefire. Which I am. Just let the almighty greenback direct company policy and R&D.
All in all, AAC has done a good job with my 5.56 cans. The Lifesuculation (defined as sucking life out of ones body) with the 7.62 mounts causing cans to wobble and AAC sticking their head in the sand and saying, "oh its OK" is the only real completely stupid thing they have done. They should fix 7.62SDN-6 to the 90 tooth design, and all would be forgiven. And its not too late for them to offer such a service.
At this point, I have my mini4 stamp coming and it will fit all my 51toofus set-ups. Thats all good.
Although how would you propose to run the operation? Stop making and developing new products or not put them out because it will make someone else's stuff obsolete?
It's not that... it's this...
WHY is there a 90 toofus mount??? Because they ****ed up with the 51t. It doesn't work consisently.
And AAC's constant BS about... "It doesn't hurt to run the can backed of one toof"....
HORSE SHIT!! Sure, it won't hurt the can, but show me one rifle guru who advocates a heavy rattling weight on the end of a barrel as acceptable for achieving accuracy..
I'm already invested in the 51T cans. It works well for me. I plan on ordering another M4-2000 this year. Ordered a SD-N-6 a couple months ago in hopes to be used for the 300blk. Nonetheless, if anything from shot show, I was hoping the 51T cans will go down in price.
I can tell you right now the saker is going to suck ass.
It has way too many interfaces and joints to mount this can that have the possibility of becoming loose or getting ****ed up.
It also has those retarded prongs on the end of it.
From what I was told by one person who went to SHOT, the guy demo-ing it even dicked it up. Twisted it the wrong way first, then got it stuck on the host.
I wasn't there, so I cannot vouch for the accuracy of it, but this is what I was told. Grain of salt and all that.
I have absolutely no issues with aac upgrading their mounting system. I don't see why anyone does. Your m42000s are not obsolete. They're the same as they were before shot. There is just a newer model available.
Aac is definitely full of retards (surefire, Ian). But you can't blame them for designing new products. They will take a worn out/damaged can and give you a replacement at 50%. As they said "try towing your Volvo with 500,000 miles to the dealership and getting a new one for $15,000."
The only thing I have a problem with are the dudes complaining that the cans they don't even have yet are obsolete. You could always wait till May when the new ones start shipping, July until the form 3 comes back and January 2013 and have the latest and greatest - OR you could suck it the hell up and enjoy your absolutely ok M42000
The problem is that AAC leaves you out in the cold. When Surefire (for example) re-did their mounting systems, they made sure the new cans would fit the old mounts. That's nice. AAC makes it to where if you want a new can, you need a new mount. Pinned? Sucks for you.
It's not that... it's this...
WHY is there a 90 toofus mount??? Because they ****ed up with the 51t. It doesn't work consisently.
And AAC's constant BS about... "It doesn't hurt to run the can backed of one toof"....
HORSE SHIT!! Sure, it won't hurt the can, but show me one rifle guru who advocates a heavy rattling weight on the end of a barrel as acceptable for achieving accuracy..
To be fair, Surefire performed tests with a tension type mount vs. one that allowed slight axial rotation and found no difference in accuracy, from what I was told.
Eurodriver
02-02-12, 09:30
I agree with what Euro says, but I would like the opportunity, even at a ridiculous price to upgrade the mounts so you wouldn't have to have several different mounts. I didn't intend for this to turn into a AAC bashfest. People just get pissed because BATFE (AKA Life Suckage) takes 5/6 months now and worse still in some cases..
Yep. I would love to be able to make the M4-2000 tight without having to dremel it :cray: but such is life.
People do need to realize its the BATFE that makes them wait 6 months, not AAC/Surefire/Etc.
They can't blame AAC for releasing a new mount/can combo four months after they initially purchased the older model :rolleyes:
Are you going to hold off an extra 6 months to a year and get it?
While I was FILING my paperwork, 2 months got added to the wait time people are experiencing.
You are going to have to wait until the can is manufactured and pre-orders, etc. are filled and then jump on one.
I predict that at soonest, you will have one in your hands in 1 year.
I would rather wait than be mad like everyone else.
Eurodriver
02-02-12, 17:31
I would rather wait than be mad like everyone else.
You don't get it.
A year ago, no one was mad with their M4-2000s.
A year from now, everyone will be mad with the SR5/SR7 and people will be saying "Get the XXX that AAC just released at SHOT"
...this happens every year yet people refuse to learn.
To be fair, Surefire performed tests with a tension type mount vs. one that allowed slight axial rotation and found no difference in accuracy, from what I was told.
The wobble on AAC cans is not axial rotation.
LonghunterCO
02-02-12, 20:20
I can tell you right now the saker is going to suck ass.
It has way too many interfaces and joints to mount this can that have the possibility of becoming loose or getting ****ed up.
It also has those retarded prongs on the end of it.
Saker has a replacable end cap. So unless you what to pay extra, you do not have to have those retarded prongs.
I've seen a lot of complaints about 51t mounts lately.
I've seen a lot of complaints about 51t mounts lately.
Can you expand on that?
I agree with what Euro says, but I would like the opportunity, even at a ridiculous price to upgrade the mounts so you wouldn't have to have several different mounts.
You already can- just blow up your current can, shoot a 30 cal through your M4-2000, etc and you can get a brand new latest can for 50% retail.
Of course, you have to pay the tax and wait, so even your new whizbang can will be "outdated" by the time you get it.
;)
The wobble on AAC cans is not axial rotation.
on 99% of them it is.
At most, the distance (rotationally) between two teeth.
(not to detract from the people that do have actual issues).
Mount compatibility issues suck. The ATF wait sucks. Couldn't agree more overall.
I got some hands-on with the Saker at SHOT... It is definitely intriguing and i look forward to real world tests. There are a lot of parts and the idea that the customer will need to monitor the mount and body for any loosening is scary, but it brings a lot of great ideas to the table.
That said, they said they are hoping to ship in 6 months, so I'm sure there will be refinements and changes. i wish the industry could move to one or 2 standardized mounts, like ski bindings...
Saker has a replacable end cap. So unless you what to pay extra, you do not have to have those retarded prongs.
This is true. Silencerco would have done themselves a favor by showing the can initially with the "regular" endcap:
http://www.tenpoundmonkey.com/web/saker1.jpg
Jason, are you the Jason that was the "AAC guy" on the forum? You know a great deal about AAC, and I remember a "Jason" was the goto guy for AAC. Is dat you ?
And, no I'm not blowing up my m4-2000's. I likes em. Hell, I even like my 7.62SDN6 now that I have it mounted solid.
Shit , I just started this thread with, Is the 90 toofus compatible. And it blowed up? I was just going to buy a 90 toofer for my LMT.
Jason, are you the Jason that was the "AAC guy" on the forum? You know a great deal about AAC, and I remember a "Jason" was the goto guy for AAC. Is dat you ?
And, no I'm not blowing up my m4-2000's. I likes em. Hell, I even like my 7.62SDN6 now that I have it mounted solid.
Shit , I just started this thread with, Is the 90 toofus compatible. And it blowed up? I was just going to buy a 90 toofer for my LMT.
Yes, I was "JasonAAC". AAC was my company's largest client through mid 2011. I've since picked up a lot more and AAC has faded.
I'm all JasonM now though, didn't want to be tied to that one horse if you know what i mean. I'm happy to offer advice from my experience with surefire, knights, ops, YHM, Silencerco, GemTech, etc, etc...
on 99% of them it is.
At most, the distance (rotationally) between two teeth.
(not to detract from the people that do have actual issues).
No it isn't and have 4 of them.
The muzzle end can slightly pivot side to side about the mount. I can push the muzzle end up and down, left and right.
Quit ****ing denying there is a problem. You are affiliated with AAC.
No it isn't and have 4 of them.
The muzzle end can slightly pivot side to side about the mount. I can push the muzzle end up and down, left and right.
Quit ****ing denying there is a problem. You are affiliated with AAC.
Scott, pump your brakes tough guy. I am not affiliated with AAC.
To be clear, they were a client of mine for 4 years, no longer. Yes, I am familiar with the people there and the product.
And I am simply explaining my experience, sorry if that doesn't match yours.
I have decided I'm finally going to buy a ****ing LATHE to fix my $1000 suppressor / mount combo... So for that I applaud AAC for finding a way for me to trick the wife into yet another tool purchase for me.
My 'obsolete' mini-4 hasn't even made it in state yet. I'll be lucky to have that thing in a year and half at the rate things are going. Hell, I have four items in the pipeline and one I'm most likely to get next is coming up on 11 months wait.
Yea, but the 5.56 cans are good to go. I have a mini 4 that I should get a stamp for within the next 30-60 days. I'm looking forward to hanging that guy off some 16 inch guns. I had a 14.5 that I bought it for, which got horse traded for a Scope.
I wouldn't worry about any 5.56 cans. I would buy those all day long with a 51 toofer.
I think all the anger in this thread can be summed up with this picture.
http://www.tenpoundmonkey.com/web/mounts.jpg
This is the amazing engineering breakthrough???? Finer teeth so there is more tolerance for poorly indexed threading on the can and mount? Hard to defend this as “progress”. It could be more accurately described as bullshit.
At least Silencer Co is trying.
For the record I'm waiting on a SDN-6 and TiRant.
Look in front of the teeth. That is a tapered bearing surface. That is what promotes better lock up. Its not just finer teeth.
Quiet Riot
02-04-12, 15:06
I think all the anger in this thread can be summed up with this picture.
http://www.tenpoundmonkey.com/web/mounts.jpg
This is the amazing engineering breakthrough???? Finer teeth so there is more tolerance for poorly indexed threading on the can and mount? Hard to defend this as “progress”. It could be more accurately described as bullshit.
At least Silencer Co is trying.
For the record I'm waiting on a SDN-6 and TiRant.
Wow, you've got it way wrong. The teeth are only there to keep the can from backing off. The tapered mating surface in front of the teeth is what is new and is what now locks the can in place. The 90T mount appears to have about 5x the mating surface of the 51T mount, and the more gradual taper will allow it to wedge itself into the can much better.
The photo is perfect for showing the BIG difference between the two locking systems. This is why they can't just give existing can users a new 90T latch or something and make them work with the new mounts.
Do you see it now?
I think all the anger in this thread can be summed up with this picture.
http://www.tenpoundmonkey.com/web/mounts.jpg
This is the amazing engineering breakthrough????
It reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpOvzGiheOM
If it didn't work, then WHY release it? Why not simply make up their minds on what really does work, make something that does, and be done with it?
What AAC could do is allow 51T cans to have a second latch installed on them 1/2 a tooth opposite of the existing latch.
That way, one latch is guaranteed to lock up on the very last tooth.
What AAC could do is allow 51T cans to have a second latch installed on them 1/2 a tooth opposite of the existing latch.
That way, one latch is guaranteed to lock up on the very last tooth.
Or come up with a way to cut the mount off (leaving the serialized part along) and weld a 90T mount section on for customers that want to change.
Or come up with a way to cut the mount off (leaving the serialized part along) and weld a 90T mount section on for customers that want to change.
This!!!
What AAC could do is allow 51T cans to have a second latch installed on them 1/2 a tooth opposite of the existing latch.
That way, one latch is guaranteed to lock up on the very last tooth.
Or come up with a way to cut the mount off (leaving the serialized part along) and weld a 90T mount section on for customers that want to change.
Both would probably work to satisfy most AAC owners with the 51T mounting solution, but with the current owners of the company, I doubt that would ever happen.
My SDN6 just arrived at my SOT, I will bring my upper to check the fit while I pick up the paperwork.
Raven Armament
02-05-12, 00:10
YHM cans are heavy and OK in performance, but I've never had one come remotely loose with one of their QD mounts. Since I've been an SOT in 2007 they haven't changed their mounts. You'd think a company like AAC would have their ducks in a row.
. You'd think a company like AAC would have their ducks in a row.
Heaven forbid they progress with something new. Stop r&d. The status quo must be maintained!
:rolleyes:
Raven Armament
02-05-12, 01:20
Heaven forbid they progress with something new. Stop r&d. The status quo must be maintained!
:rolleyes:
AAC cares too much about the profit and not enough about the customer. Problem is they are too concerned with the future that they leave the present in the dust.
But you entirely missed my point.
infidelprodigy
02-05-12, 12:09
YHM cans are heavy and OK in performance, but I've never had one come remotely loose with one of their QD mounts. Since I've been an SOT in 2007 they haven't changed their mounts. You'd think a company like AAC would have their ducks in a row.
Funny, I've seen over a dozen YHM cans work loose from their QD mounts. The most recent one was on a friends 700 when we were testing supersonic and subsonic loads. He has since sold it for a (gasp) AAC QD can.
I have a 762SD 51T on my 700 and was able to hit a 6" plate as 1000yds. with 168gr ammo in front of a 20 person class. 3 times in a row. My 51T has no issues affecting accuracy.
But hey, vote with your wallet guys.
I have a 762SD 51T on my 700 and was able to hit a 6" plate as 1000yds. with 168gr ammo in front of a 20 person class. 3 times in a row. My 51T has no issues affecting accuracy.
That is truly incredible accuracy!
lfromsalem
02-05-12, 13:17
I'm seeing the word obsolete thrown around a lot in regards to the 51t mounts, and suppressors.
I have heard nothing about AAC dropping them or the cans that go with them.
It's just another option.
I'm seeing the word obsolete thrown around a lot in regards to the 51t mounts, and suppressors.
I have heard nothing about AAC dropping them or the cans that go with them.
It's just another option.
If it weren't for the delay caused by BATFE, right now we'd be discussing if AAC was pushing for the Apple style of very early planned obsolescence - it might be working right now, but that's not really a business model I'm a fan of when the majority of your Form1 buyers are viewing your product as an investment piece, instead of a technological trinket.
If they can find an economical retrofit solution, or make it a gradual phasing out (where any warranty work for older units on other aspects of the can automatically updates them), then this should have been something amicable, and we'd be excited about how the 92t might address the small issues presented by the 51t line.
Heaven forbid they progress with something new. Stop r&d. The status quo must be maintained!
:rolleyes:
All of surefire's mounts are compatible regardless of when they were made.
The 51T should have never been developed in the first place. They should have went straight from 18T to 90T.
The other part of the problem is AAC fails to acknowledge there is a problem.
This has nothing to do with progress.
Buy a surefire can then, Scott.
There are steps to design and not every step is technological perfection. They have evolved their product as they could and are working to make better mounts. I'm not trying to say there isn't a flaw in their 51 tooth mount, it just looks like now they are offering a solution to those that want a tighter lockup on their new suppressors.
Evolution does not always breed winners. Sometimes ideas flop and sometimes they work great. From what I've seen, a small percentage of 51t users actually have a problem with the mount wobbling. From that noise it seems as if AAC has redesigned their mount to fix the issue.
Buy a surefire can then, Scott.
There are steps to design and not every step is technological perfection. They have evolved their product as they could and are working to make better mounts. I'm not trying to say there isn't a flaw in their 51 tooth mount, it just looks like now they are offering a solution to those that want a tighter lockup on their new suppressors.
Evolution does not always breed winners. Sometimes ideas flop and sometimes they work great. From what I've seen, a small percentage of 51t users actually have a problem with the mount wobbling. From that noise it seems as if AAC has redesigned their mount to fix the issue.
Mine did not have an issue until I bought the new Breakout Mount with my Noveske. The old style 51T mount worked fine. I think I need to probably go back and pull off this mount I paid $90 for. Kind of burns me to be honest.
51T are in fleetwide use by institutional customers, and will be in the foreseeable future. Not exactly the definition of obsolete.
The 51T improved the 18T, the 90T is a further evolution to address knuckle heads that over-tighten a 51T.
What are people bitching about? Marketplace evolution? A company that moves forward and improves? Progression to a better product?
Appears to be the infantile whining similar to the buyers remorse that buy the last model yr of a vehicle & resent the next gen of buyers.
What exactly are the the operational deficits?
Scottyran, good to see your usual bloviating rant machine is good working order. I would suggest you sort them out at the next AAC meeting or strike out on your own & bring the next best thing to market
The 51T improved the 18T, the 90T is a further evolution to address knuckle heads that over-tighten a 51T.
What is over tighten? If it means that my M4-2000 can stops wiggling around on the end of my barrel with the Breakout mount I spent $90 on then I guess there are a bunch of us AAC knuckleheads!
:sarcastic:
Raven Armament
02-05-12, 22:20
Funny, I've seen over a dozen YHM cans work loose from their QD mounts. The most recent one was on a friends 700 when we were testing supersonic and subsonic loads. He has since sold it for a (gasp) AAC QD can.
I have a 762SD 51T on my 700 and was able to hit a 6" plate as 1000yds. with 168gr ammo in front of a 20 person class. 3 times in a row. My 51T has no issues affecting accuracy.
But hey, vote with your wallet guys.
I have a SS Phantom 5.56 QD on an M16 that has 30,000 rounds through it, mostly full auto and burst, that has never loosened. It's a demo beater can.
Evolution does not always breed winners. Sometimes ideas flop and sometimes they work great. From what I've seen, a small percentage of 51t users actually have a problem with the mount wobbling. From that noise it seems as if AAC has redesigned their mount to fix the issue.
I don't get your logic. The redesigned (91 tooth) is an entirely different can. As far as I know they are still manufacturing 51 toothers on all the cans that have been using that configuration.
Increased group size and an increased chance of a baffle strike.
Again, what exactly are the deficits?
How much are group sizes increased when can is on vs off?
"chance" of a baffle strike? really? lets talk reality not some abstract chance.. tolerances are not tight enough with a properly mounted AAC muzzle device to permit strikes.
My commentary isn't abstract rants, I have worn AAC baffles into large triangular holes (lots of auto w/ 10" pouring water on em to keep gun cool enough to train ) & used them to 600m (14.5" w/ mk262) without noticeable degradation in accuracy or performance
I have a SS Phantom 5.56 QD on an M16 that has 30,000 rounds through it, mostly full auto and burst, that has never loosened. It's a demo beater can.
I've never seen anywhere near those rd counts possible on SS cans, which show erosion much faster, nor an AR that can do that kind of rd count with a can... gas port eroded beyond belief & smoothbore at this point?
Of course this is the internet & physics don't apply.. One gets MUCH faster degradation of barrel life, gas port and baffles with Auto and high rd count.
Raven Armament
02-06-12, 10:56
I've never seen anywhere near those rd counts possible on SS cans, which show erosion much faster, nor an AR that can do that kind of rd count with a can... gas port eroded beyond belief & smoothbore at this point?
The can has an Inconel blast baffle which helps, but the can is definitely worn and eroded. The weapon has had several barrels, tubes, and BCGs replaced.
Of course this is the internet & physics don't apply.. One gets MUCH faster degradation of barrel life, gas port and baffles with Auto and high rd count.
Physics certainly apply which is why there have been several barrels on the weapon. This is a post 86 M16 that I use for demonstrations and basically beat the piss out of it. I didn't mean to portray that was a single barrel on for the entire round count, if that's how you took my post. Hell, I haven't had half that round count through a semi-auto with slowfire before.
The tube and barrel get replaced after every demonstration, because they are worn. Other parts as needed, but those two are new every demo.
No one is calling anyone stupid. Was that word posted?
Specificity in metrics was asked for. Imprecise language leads to unclear thoughts ( ala "hope & change" ) and is meaningless.
However, your frantic accusatory responses may lead one, at best, to believe you have communication difficulties.
A group "opens" 30% what does that mean, exactly? POI shifts in a direction? Shift isn't repeatable? .30 group now .39? 1.5 now xxx? Etc.
IMO a muzzle device optimized for QD (and not all QD mounts are) is not a good choice in a bolt gun, where one may notice .25-.50moa difference. Certainly changing suppressors, and maring mating surfaces, will not lend itself to repeatability. QD is a compromise, realistically measure your requirements.
One could hardly call www.snipershide.., and their pathological nay-saying and resistance to Horus methodology (Now widely adopted and broadly used by "A" game players and US Army, USMC guys that actually have experience in the realworld) a bastion of savvyness or relevancy.
Precise language = clarity of thought. Have the best day ever!
backpedal.. funny. keyboard commando barbs from afar :rolleyes:
Delightful display of reading comprehension issues, lack of understanding of common industry terms & practices, topped with a frosting of insular angry ranting.
I'm gonna have to categorically address your misunderstandings.
1) "open up" means nothing. Does not speak to linear, circular, or other displacement of mean rds from tgt center or group center.
2) Not previously "implying" on postings. I have dialogue with AAC engineers, was told some user groups were, of course, over-tightening their cans.. effectively torquing to 1/2 notch. It would then of course slip back at some point changing POI. However, for the record, now that I've been permitted a longer look at dismal postings, I surmise your not the shiniest apple in the m4carbine bunch.
3) I wrote specifically of not using a QD mount on a bolt gun and you respond with a m110 semi?
4)Because on chooses to write in bold black and use the term "fact" does not make it so unless your a talking head on tv, trying to sway ignorant masses, it makes no sense whatsoever. "A fact I cannot deny" Uh.. what are you trying to say. that whatever some guys unqualified post on the www must be true. That some random guys www postings should displace the data-sets derived from millions of dollars worth of institutional testing hundreds of weapon/suppressor/ammunition combos? Following that train o though.. SOF to adopt a dpms m4 cause bubba gumps on badasscommandowannabe.com says it's so
5) My experience is probably relevant... I don't have the unrealistic expectations of equipment you do and breadth of experience permits knowing the proper tool for the job. And, professionals certainly view their gear with a more critical lenses than hobbiest. The consequences of blood & tears sting a little more than a light wallet from disposable income.
Gotta go and leave you with the last rant. Muddying my www boots is a waste o time. Have the best day ever!
Caveat Emptor!
Man there is alot of hate for AAC on this forum. Most other sites love them
There is so much drama in the silencer industry
Raven Armament
02-07-12, 12:20
No, there is drama and hate when a company starts shitting on their customers. I don't hate AAC by any means. Their problems can be solved pretty quickly if they actually had people on payroll that gave a shit. Now they are Remington's problem.
Well if the government ever lets me have my m4-2000 ill let you know if it wobles
Finger print cards got kicked back 3 weeks ago and I'm still waiting for them toaccept the new ones I've sent them
Been pending since 8/18. This wait is stupid
One thing is for certain, I know Dano has used the AAC cans every bit as much as he says. I can't imagine anyone else has put them to the amount of use/abuse his guys do.
It's one thing to disagree, without going full retard. Its one thing to have a lot of guns at home, it's another to have spent a long career employing those systems in combat conditions. I'd say calling the guy a liar because he views the issue differently is way out of line.
A year from now, everyone will be mad with the SR5/SR7 and people will be saying "Get the XXX that AAC just released at SHOT"
...this happens every year yet people refuse to learn.
You do know the current M4-2000 was released in like 2008 right? They used to call it a Mod '08. I'd be so extremely skeptical of an SR5.2 or SR7.2 for next shot.
There is some serious BS going in this thread. If you don't like AAC, buy a Surefire and pay a lot more for it. Or buy a YHM and pay less, but get less.
Imo, if you have a lot of 51T mounts and cans, stay with that! The newest silencerco products will mate up, you might be able to get cheaper 51T cans now, and it does look like AAC is still supporting it seeing as the new Mini7 is not 90T it's 51T.
If you don't own anything AAC, might as well start with the 90T. This seems pretty logical and I'm not sure where all the drama is coming from.
Look in front of the teeth. That is a tapered bearing surface. That is what promotes better lock up. Its not just finer teeth.
YHM mounts use a similar tapered surface and are the worst mounts made for getting stuck to the can after lots of shooting.
I've never seen anywhere near those rd counts possible on SS cans, which show erosion much faster, nor an AR that can do that kind of rd count with a can... gas port eroded beyond belief & smoothbore at this point?
Of course this is the internet & physics don't apply.. One gets MUCH faster degradation of barrel life, gas port and baffles with Auto and high rd count.
I've seen two other posts claiming 15,000 rounds or more through a phantom 556 that is still in good shape.
I've seen two other posts claiming 15,000 rounds or more through a phantom 556 that is still in good shape.
15K rounds = $5K in ammo. I think even after that a new suppressor is not that expensive considering.
Raven Armament
02-13-12, 12:35
15K rounds = $5K in ammo. I think even after that a new suppressor is not that expensive considering.
Except I'm buying components at OEM pricing and loading my own ammunition, so it's only $123 per thousand. :D
My m4-2000 wobbled rotationally at first
Couple hundred rounds later its tight. I dont know if it finally clicked over or if carbon has just built up.
Im happy with it
http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn63/cclement45/IMG_5760.jpg
I too am waiting on my 762sdn6 and have two 51t mounts for a black and a 5.56. I will be very "disappointed" if my 1400 dollars worth or can, mounts, and stamp don't combine to make awesomeness.
Kidding aside, if the sloppy fit is a known issue and it is linked to damaged parts, maybe a class action lawsuit could be a remedy?
Except I'm buying components at OEM pricing and loading my own ammunition, so it's only $123 per thousand. :D
Nobody likes a bragger Raven. :D
I too am waiting on my 762sdn6 and have two 51t mounts for a black and a 5.56. I will be very "disappointed" if my 1400 dollars worth or can, mounts, and stamp don't combine to make awesomeness.
Kidding aside, if the sloppy fit is a known issue and it is linked to damaged parts, maybe a class action lawsuit could be a remedy?
Maybe just call it a tactical wobble / like a feature rather than a defect :blink:
I too am waiting on my 762sdn6 and have two 51t mounts for a black and a 5.56. I will be very "disappointed" if my 1400 dollars worth or can, mounts, and stamp don't combine to make awesomeness.
Kidding aside, if the sloppy fit is a known issue and it is linked to damaged parts, maybe a class action lawsuit could be a remedy?
Oh Lord
"Tactical wobble" nice... :eek: this is the only warranty I could find.. ]http://www.advanced-armament.com/pdf/manuals/aac_manual_ammo.pdf[/URL]http://www.advanced-armament.com/pdf/manuals/aac_manual_ammo.pdf
Is there another AAC warranty somewhere? After reading this thread, I am more than a little concerned that I may be faced with "tactical wobble".
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.