Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Silencershop Recce 5 Sound test

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    980
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    dB is simply the measure of a sounds peak intensity, not it's frequency or it's duration. Sonic boom's occur at a very low frequency, between .1 - 100 Hz. Also, the duration of that noise is less since the bullet is moving away from you (sonic booms are continuous and degrade over distance). Expanding gasses from the muzzle are far more damaging since they are higher in frequency, and longer in duration. So saying that 150 db from the negates makes suppression at the muzzle somewhat pointless is false IMO. Most of the sound to bystanders and damage to your ear will be from expanding gasses. I think it's better to only be bombarded by port noise plus the sonic crack, rather than muzzle, port noise and crack.
    Last edited by foxtrotx1; 05-09-15 at 18:44.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by foxtrotx1 View Post
    dB is simply the measure of a sounds peak intensity, not it's frequency or it's duration. Sonic boom's occur at a very low frequency, between .1 - 100 Hz. Also, the duration of that noise is less since the bullet is moving away from you (sonic booms are continuous and degrade over distance). Expanding gasses from the muzzle are far more damaging since they are higher in frequency, and longer in duration. So saying that 150 db from the negates makes suppression at the muzzle somewhat pointless is false IMO. Most of the sound to bystanders and damage to your ear will be from expanding gasses. I think it's better to only be bombarded by port noise plus the sonic crack, rather than muzzle, port noise and crack.
    The loudest insult to the shooters ear is port signature on the m4 platform.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    980
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by WS6 View Post
    The loudest insult to the shooters ear is port signature on the m4 platform.
    For sure, by peak noise. But the hearing damage isn't caused by one source, so I think pressure waves from both the muzzle and port need to be considered for actual damage to the shooters ear, as well as sound signature to observers.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by foxtrotx1 View Post
    For sure, by peak noise. But the hearing damage isn't caused by one source, so I think pressure waves from both the muzzle and port need to be considered for actual damage to the shooters ear, as well as sound signature to observers.
    I agree, but this is a very complex medical scenario. The correct answer is to always wear earpro. The subjective answer is that my ears ring the same whether I use a fullsize or mini can. Both are far better than no can. By a mile. I prefer to shed weight and reduce backpressure and go with the mini as they sound identical to me. Downrange fullsize is quieter. But again...I care about me. Not the bg or deer.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    3,036
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    So looking at the description of the Recce 5 it appears neither inconel or Stallete is used, just stainless steal? I'm guessing this is mean't to be a low volume use can perhaps an ideal hunting can but not really tactical?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrioticDisorder View Post
    So looking at the description of the Recce 5 it appears neither inconel or Stallete is used, just stainless steal? I'm guessing this is mean't to be a low volume use can perhaps an ideal hunting can but not really tactical?
    SS can handle some abuse.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Northern UT
    Posts
    4,023
    Feedback Score
    66 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrioticDisorder View Post
    So looking at the description of the Recce 5 it appears neither inconel or Stallete is used, just stainless steal? I'm guessing this is mean't to be a low volume use can perhaps an ideal hunting can but not really tactical?
    It's not just a standard SS. It's 17-4PH. It has qualities very similar to inconel but is easier to machine so cost is less, however it does weight more. At 600 degrees 17-4 is actually stronger than at room temp.

    17-4ph melting point 1400deg c, Inconel 625 melting point 1290deg c, tensile strength 17-4ph 930mpa, tensile strength 625 Inconel 920mpa.

    Inconel 718 and Stellite are improved over both.
    Last edited by VIP3R 237; 05-10-15 at 13:20.
    I paint spaceship parts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Failure2Stop View Post
    Stippled Glocks are like used underwear; previous owner makes all the difference in value.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,887
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    I've got one in the NFA pipeline. Looking forward to getting my hands on it. It will be my dedicated 556 can. I have a SOCOM 762 and an AE AEM5 already. Damn Class 3 toys are addicting.
    Love you Pop. F*ck Cancer.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    3,036
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by VIP3R 237 View Post
    It's not just a standard SS. It's 17-4PH. It has qualities very similar to inconel but is easier to machine so cost is less, however it does weight more. At 600 degrees 17-4 is actually stronger than at room temp.

    17-4ph melting point 1400deg c, Inconel 625 melting point 1290deg c, tensile strength 17-4ph 930mpa, tensile strength 625 Inconel 920mpa.
    From the comparison you just made,it would sound as though the 17-4 SS is as strong as 718 Inconel but easier to work with as you say. I know very little about metallurgy, but I'm wondering why more companies are using Inconel and Stallete and not the 17-4 SS if that is the case.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,157
    Feedback Score
    38 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by VIP3R 237 View Post
    It's not just a standard SS. It's 17-4PH. It has qualities very similar to inconel but is easier to machine so cost is less, however it does weight more. At 600 degrees 17-4 is actually stronger than at room temp.

    17-4ph melting point 1400deg c, Inconel 625 melting point 1290deg c, tensile strength 17-4ph 930mpa, tensile strength 625 Inconel 920mpa.
    Do you work for or have some affiliation with Griffin Armament? You seem to know a lot about their cans and post a lot of borderline-shill posts about them.

    Also, wouldn't 718 Inconel be a better comparison, and a comparison of other stats too? There are many equally-or-more important properties for high-heat/high-pressure metal applications than the ones you listed, like thermal conductivity, thermal expansion coefficients, susceptibility to stress cracking, yield strength and toughness, and a ton of other things. A metal that gets really hot really quickly and has a low modulus of elasticity, for example, could potentially be worse for suppressor use than a metal that doesn't heat up as quickly and has a high modulus of elasticity, even if the first metal may seem stronger by other stats at certain temperatures. You also didn't list which temps those tensile strengths are at.

    The use of 625 Inconel and what appear to be purposefully-obtuse stats seem really fishy here, not to mention that many 17-4PH heat treat conditions lose strength from room temp to 600C (you didn't specify which unit in your post, C or F, or which condition steel).

    Finally, for those who are interested and can understand such data, here are some data sheets on 718 Inconel and 17-4PH steels:

    17-4PH: http://www.aksteel.com/pdf/markets_p...a_bulletin.pdf
    718 Inconel: http://www.specialmetals.com/documen...lloy%20718.pdf

    (Please note that metals from different vendors may have slightly different specs, even if the metal is the same type)

    I won't claim to know which is the better material for suppressor use as I don't have the first-hand knowledge of such things or the data that Surefire, Griffin, AAC, SilencerCo, and others have, but the fact that Stellite and Inconel are being used in all the high-end, high-volume, full-auto cans on the market like the SOCOMs and Sakers is, as we say on this board, "a clue," and I highly doubt it's just weight. There are also some properties that stand out in those data sheets, like thermal conductivity, that would worry me using 17-4PH as a "just as good" substitute over Inconel, but in my day job, I don't work with 17-4PH and Inconel, so I will reserve judgment based solely on the data sheets.

    Everything here just smells suspicious to me. Color me skeptical.

    ETA: this isn't a bash of Griffin suppressors, just skepticism of some of the info and motivations in the Griffin threads as of late.
    Last edited by DreadPirateMoyer; 05-10-15 at 12:35.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •