Page 4 of 35 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 349

Thread: New Surefire SOCOM RC Suppressors

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by skatz11 View Post
    I like the 212 attachment, but if SF can get the same results without the locating pin I'm sold on the RC. I'm picturing the SOCOM 215 style flash hider on my carbine and the break on my in-process SBR...
    The 212 is a great mount and good to go. It was the 215 that had issues, and SOCOM wanted THAT hider, so that is part of why I think they re-did the mounting system.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    205
    Feedback Score
    20 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by WS6 View Post
    The 212 is a great mount and good to go. It was the 215 that had issues, and SOCOM wanted THAT hider, so that is part of why I think they re-did the mounting system.
    Yes, I know what you mean. I didn't like the idea of the pin slot on the prongs of the flash hider for the 215.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by skatz11 View Post
    Yes, I know what you mean. I didn't like the idea of the pin slot on the prongs of the flash hider for the 215.
    The post could get between the tines, especially if attached in the dark. There were 4 possible orientations for it...so if there WAS any zero-shift...well paint a dot, lol. The un-used tines filled the slot with carbon during use...so again, paint a dot or scratch it or something or it won't seat fully if removed/re-attached. Further, carbon could build up behind the post in the slot.

    With the 212 mount, it only goes on in 1 orientation. That V-cut won't likely foul meaningfully in any situation. It doesn't have ANY "ring" to it. You can mount the suppressor by feel, even in the dark, and be 100% sure it is ON.

    However, SOCOM liked the other mount, so Surefire made it work.


    ---Just my .02 from reading about and looking at the stuff. Not official info in any way. I am very happy with my 556-212 and 212 mount combo. The only thing the SOCOM offers is more durability (I could shoot out 2 barrels instead of just 1?), reduced back-pressure (I don't know how meaningful it is, I remember AAC claiming the same about the M4/SPR, and I never really saw evidence of it based on full-auto analysis/round-count, so that remains to be seen. Also, no FRP or muzzle-flash. This is huge for the military and maybe police, but not really a factor for me.

    Also, my concern with the SOCOM was this...The Noveske Switchblock is awesome. I use them. They work perfect with my 556-212. What if the SOCOM cut back-pressure to the point that the weapon was unreliable in the suppressed setting when dirty, yet was over-gassed in the normal setting? So I just bought another 556-212 and when I wear one out, I will use the other. Easily as good as a beefier blast-chamber.
    Last edited by WS6; 09-09-12 at 12:04.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    178
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    I talked with Garin at Surefire a while back. It is my understanding there WILL be a FH mount for the 212 series cans. They may just not have listed them yet.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,917
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by David Pennington View Post
    The 212 was the selected suppressor. Post award SF proposed some improvements via an ECP (Engineering Change Proposal). This happens with many different products and can happen right after the award or 4 years down the road. Basically, it means that the originally selected product was great and met all of the requirements to receive the initial award but the manufacturer has found a way to make it even better. An ECP gets proposed and, if found to improve the product, can be instituted. The "improvement" could be technical, logistical, QA/QC, or economic. From what I understand, the original 212 won the award and then SF found a way to make it even better. An ECP was proposed and the contracting office/PM agreed with the ECP.

    The improvements were, as I understand it:

    -improved mounting system for the selected open pronged suppressor adapter
    -additional durability
    -less back pressure
    -less first round flash

    The other thing to remember is that these Program level down selects can take months or even years and technology can change a lot in that timeframe. Once a bidding period is closed, the participants can't offer improvements for reasons of fairness in contracting. Once an award is released and the competition is over and done with the winner can now sit down with the PM shop and show them all of the improvements that have come about since the initial bid period ended.
    Makes perfect sense - thanks!

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,681
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    A couple of questions;

    Are they only going to be sold in tan?

    Are the older models being phased out? The only 5.56 MB on the website is the new style.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    I watched this video, and while back-pressure I am sure is reduced, I saw several things in it that make me feel like this is evolutionary vs. revolutionary.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75gjY...ayer_embedded#!

    Observe at 3:20, you will see the shells ejecting well forward of where they normally do in most un-suppressed M4 style weapons, and then a few kick out to 3-4 o'clock.

    Okay, I know that the "wheel" and all that gets a fair amount of ragging on and is "unscientific". What matters is that the weapon cycles properly, forget where the casings land.


    With that in mind, watch very closely at 3:40. Note that the casing appears to eject at 4 o'clock. Now watch it several times, closer. You will see that it ejects so violently that it is first extracted, then slams into the shell-deflector, and is knocked forward into the front of the ejection port, and is then kicked back out of the chamber by the bolt-carrier to the 4 o'clock position. This could well have turned into a stove-pipe looking jam.

    The back-pressure just doesn't seem much less with this suppressor, to me, as the firearms in this video are obviously over-gassed. I am sure that Surefire has conducted full-auto testing and a rate reduction is shown, but I am guessing it is more academic, based on Surefire's promotional video.
    Last edited by WS6; 09-11-12 at 06:19.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    516
    Feedback Score
    0
    Now on the Website they dont show any other cans besides the 212 SOCOM for 5.56 and the 7.62 SOCOM for 7.62 cans.

    I hope they continue to make FH and Brake mounts for the "old" suppressors.
    I just sent in my Form 4 and feel like I have to rush to get extra mounts.
    I also wanted to get a mini, but unless there available for about another year then I guess im out of luck.

    I love to know if there are plans to do runs of the "old" suppressors and mounts for a few years.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by saddlerocker View Post
    Now on the Website they dont show any other cans besides the 212 SOCOM for 5.56 and the 7.62 SOCOM for 7.62 cans.

    I hope they continue to make FH and Brake mounts for the "old" suppressors.
    I just sent in my Form 4 and feel like I have to rush to get extra mounts.
    I also wanted to get a mini, but unless there available for about another year then I guess im out of luck.

    I love to know if there are plans to do runs of the "old" suppressors and mounts for a few years.
    According to Garin Lee, they have current contracts for the -212 cans and mounts, and will still support them/produce them for a time, as I understand it.

    Surefire has done a really hardcore "about-face" when it comes to civilian support. I bet that they will be more than glad to assist in putting a -212 compatible mount in your hands if you cannot find one elsewhere. They are friendly and helpful.
    Last edited by WS6; 09-13-12 at 19:17.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    34
    Feedback Score
    0
    I've got a MINI just waiting for paperwork to clear. I had no idea about the new models, but I would have liked to compare before laying down that much cash.

Page 4 of 35 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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