Griffin Gp5

[FrankW]

Wait. The GP5 hits on all those points. Why not buy that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1168]

Wait. The GP5 hits on all those points. Why not buy that?

If it meets your needs, absolutely. It sounded like you were considering other DT cans, so I pointed out a couple others that are a little different.

Edit: not trying to talk you out of the GP5, just some food for thought following Aries post.

[FrankW]

Ok. Cool. Thanks. Yeah. I’m trying to buy the best right now. Cause after waiting a year there’ll be another new hotness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[VIP3R 237]

17-4ph is one of the better materials out there for suppressors, in most cases I prefer it over stelite and inconel, and all day long over Titanium (unless weight is your most important criteria, or going on a bolt gun)

From what I’ve seen on the internet, they might be worth checking out even if money isn’t tight. Hopefully my Turbo K clears purgatory soon so I can find out if the hype is real. But, Silencershop meters the K just under 140 at the muzzle and just over 140 at the ear on a 16”. Its got inconel and its tubeless; very lightweight. I’ll be interested to see how the longer Turbo T2 meters at the ear, with more space and another baffle.

If not concerned about needing inconel or stellite, Rex Silentium has modular mount cans that come with a direct thread module. They are all stainless, 1.75” diameter, tubeless, and lightweight. They’ll make them in whatever length and bore you desire. Also, inexpensive. I’m waiting on one of these, also, so I can’t give any direct input, just throwing out another option to consider.

Its a great time to be into suppressors.

[1168]

17-4ph is one of the better materials out there for suppressors, in most cases I prefer it over stelite and inconel, and all day long over Titanium (unless weight is your most important criteria, or going on a bolt gun)

I’m sure this is true. My Griffin M4SDk is holding up just fine, as is my buddy’s Recce and SPR, and those are all 17-7ph.

[Aries144]

I’m sure this is true. My Griffin M4SDk is holding up just fine, as is my buddy’s Recce and SPR, and those are all 17-7ph.

Isn't that the same material Ops Inc used to use to make their cans? If so, it absolutely did not hold up to short barrel use as well as inconel. I saw one with about 10k rounds through it, used mostly on a 10.5" AR. The blast baffle had taken on an irregular shape and its orifice was about 2x the diameter of the following baffles. The 2nd and 3rd baffles showed some pretty nasty erosion as well. A Surefire can with comparable round count used on another 10.5 AR showed significantly less wear, IIRC.

If it's not used with full auto or rapid fire with short barrels, stainless might be just fine. Unless something has changed in the industry, inconel and stellite resist erosion better than the 17 series stainless at high temps, but 17 series stainless is a little lighter and significantly cheaper.

[VIP3R 237]

Iirc they were 304 ss not 17-4ph, which isn’t even in the same ballpark, and baffle design comes into play here as the ops/Allen baffles design isn’t as well engineered as current cans. A proper designed 17-4 baffle will erode less than an improper 718 or stelite baffle, and 17-4 competes well with 718 at much lower price point.

https://www.makeitfrom.com/compare/N...tainless-Steel

Isn't that the same material Ops Inc used to use to make their cans? If so, it absolutely did not hold up to short barrel use as well as inconel. I saw one with about 10k rounds through it, used mostly on a 10.5" AR. The blast baffle had taken on an irregular shape and its orifice was about 2x the diameter of the following baffles. The 2nd and 3rd baffles showed some pretty nasty erosion as well. A Surefire can with comparable round count used on another 10.5 AR showed significantly less wear, IIRC.

If it's not used with full auto or rapid fire with short barrels, stainless might be just fine. Unless something has changed in the industry, inconel and stellite resist erosion better than the 17 series stainless at high temps, but 17 series stainless is a little lighter and significantly cheaper.

[Aries144]

Iirc they were 304 ss not 17-4ph, which isn’t even in the same ballpark, and baffle design comes into play here as the ops/Allen baffles design isn’t as well engineered as current cans. A proper designed 17-4 baffle will erode less than an improper 718 or stelite baffle, and 17-4 competes well with 718 at much lower price point.

https://www.makeitfrom.com/compare/N...tainless-Steel

Great post and great link! Thank you for the information.

[Tokarev]

Anyone pinned one to an 11inch-ish barrel thereby making the barrel the suppressor? I kind of like the concept especially for something like the SIG MCX or RobArm XCR where barrels could be swapped if the suppressor wasn't needed for some reason.

[1168]

Isn't that the same material Ops Inc used to use to make their cans? If so, it absolutely did not hold up to short barrel use as well as inconel. I saw one with about 10k rounds through it, used mostly on a 10.5" AR. The blast baffle had taken on an irregular shape and its orifice was about 2x the diameter of the following baffles. The 2nd and 3rd baffles showed some pretty nasty erosion as well. A Surefire can with comparable round count used on another 10.5 AR showed significantly less wear, IIRC.

If it's not used with full auto or rapid fire with short barrels, stainless might be just fine. Unless something has changed in the industry, inconel and stellite resist erosion better than the 17 series stainless at high temps, but 17 series stainless is a little lighter and significantly cheaper.

Since I posted before, a significant amount of blast baffle wear has occurred with my M4SDk. It hasn’t affected sound, as far as I can tell, but even if it did, the can has gained quite a bit of weight, now weighing as much as my 30SDk, so I would try to address that first. The blast baffle orifice is irregular now and visibly a bit larger than the rest. It is not big enough to pass a .308. The second baffle shows similar, but less wear, and the remaining baffles seem fine, although the face of the third one has a well-used look. I must emphasize that it has been shot a lot, some auto, mostly on 11.3”-12.5” hosts with full power ammo.

I still don’t think it is much to be concerned with for most users.

Tok, that sounds like an interesting idea, perhaps one of the few things about a QD barrel that would really appeal to me.