Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 67

Thread: Thermal Defense Solutions Bantam II Suppressor

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    465
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Hmm - doubletap. How do I delete one of those? I didn't see an option under the edit page.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    223
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    thnx matt, for the additional insights

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    232
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurodriver View Post
    Because I dont feel like grabbing an 800 suppressor to verify its tight when shooting a heavy COF under NV.

    Direct thread is fine for low volume shooting on a square range. I suppose you could rockset it on but then you have to deal with that BS every time you want to clean it (or break it down for travel).
    The manufacturer recommends rocksett. They designed it be small and light enough that you treat it like a muzzle device. Torque it on and leave it. To clean it they recommend a mag dump to cook everything off. The inconel also seems to dissipate heat very quickly even knowing that it is rockset in place I still have a habit of reaching up to check it. I have one on a 16" precision AR and it is awesome.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    465
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatorangecat View Post
    The manufacturer recommends rocksett. They designed it be small and light enough that you treat it like a muzzle device. Torque it on and leave it. To clean it they recommend a mag dump to cook everything off. The inconel also seems to dissipate heat very quickly even knowing that it is rockset in place I still have a habit of reaching up to check it. I have one on a 16" precision AR and it is awesome.
    Thanks for that insight - since it's in jail I still haven't read the manual that came with it. Is that where you picked up the rocksett and cleaning information?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    232
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    The manual I have does not call for rocksett that direction was given directly from TDS over the phone.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,255
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Can in a can designs are receiving very high praise. I don't doubt that it performs.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,255
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatorangecat View Post
    The manufacturer recommends rocksett. They designed it be small and light enough that you treat it like a muzzle device. Torque it on and leave it. To clean it they recommend a mag dump to cook everything off. The inconel also seems to dissipate heat very quickly even knowing that it is rockset in place I still have a habit of reaching up to check it. I have one on a 16" precision AR and it is awesome.
    I have a K can on my Mk18 that is supposed to be a permanent muzzle attachment, but it has still shot loose on me before. Anyone making a direct thread can without some kind of self tightening geometry is out of their minds. I'm frustrated to the point that I designed a vortex endcap and am going to pay a machinist to make it for me. Tired of worrying about it shooting loose.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    3,433
    Feedback Score
    20 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by okie View Post
    Can in a can designs are receiving very high praise. I don't doubt that it performs.
    Thats that DMLS/3d printing magic we were talking about in that other thread. TDS, Delta P, and CGS cans.
    RLTW
    Y-you realize that nighttime makes up half of all time? -Rick Sanchez

    Disclosure: I am now affiliated with a tactical training center, but my opinions are my own, and not anyone elses, unless specifically stated otherwise by myself. I am also contracted as an austere/conflict medical resource and consultant by another org. I don't speak for them here, either.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,255
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)

    Thermal Defense Solutions Bantam II Suppressor

    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post
    Thats that DMLS/3d printing magic we were talking about in that other thread. TDS, Delta P, and CGS cans.
    The 3d printing doesn't really have anything to do with...well anything really. The basic design is completely ordinary, to the point that you can even form 1 something virtually identical in theory from off the shelf components. MAYBE, and I stress maybe, it offers some weight savings in this case. The problem I always run into though is that while you can design a 3d printed silencer that's a few ounces less than the competition, the competition normally has at least, at a bare minimum, two stainless blast baffles. So what you end up doing is either making the silencer somewhat modular to be able to have a blast baffle, making it all titanium, or simply printing it solid with Inconel (like Delta P does). The solid Inconel and modular route eat up the weight savings and normally add some at that, and the all titanium... Well, who really wants to pay a grand for a can, 200 in stamp, wait 6 months to 2 years, then find out that it's not going to last very long under anything less than ideal conditions. Especially when for a little bit more you can get the latest and greatest Inconel/titanium/stainless hybrid. If and when multi-material metal printers become a thing, then maybe. Don't get me wrong, 3d printing absolutely is the future, and will likely all but replace conventional subtractive methods in the near future. For silencers, though, I don't personally see the utility at this point, with the exception being small batches where it doesn't make sense to tool up machines. Like the MP7 silencer from Delta P, that's a poster child use case for 3d printing since it's such a niche item.
    Last edited by okie; 04-11-21 at 23:02.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    232
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by okie View Post
    The 3d printing doesn't really have anything to do with...well anything really. The basic design is completely ordinary, to the point that you can even form 1 something virtually identical from off the shelf components. MAYBE, and I stress maybe, it offers some weight savings in this case. The problem I always run into though is that while you can design a 3d printed silencer that's a few ounces less than the competition, the competition normally has at least, at a bare minimum, two stainless blast baffles. So what you end up doing is either making the silencer somewhat modular to be able to have a blast baffle, making it all titanium, or simply printing it solid with Inconel (like Delta P does). The solid Inconel and modular route eat up the weight savings and normally add some at that, and the all titanium... Well, who really wants to pay a grand for a can, 200 in stamp, wait 6 months to 2 years, then find out that it's not going to last very long under anything less than ideal conditions. Especially when for a little bit more you can get the latest and greatest Inconel/titanium/stainless hybrid. If and when multi-material metal printers become a thing, then maybe. Don't get me wrong, 3d printing absolutely is the future, and will likely all but replace conventional subtractive methods in the near future. For silencers, though, I don't personally see the utility at this point, with the exception being small batches where it doesn't make sense to tool up machines. Like the MP7 silencer from Delta P, that's a poster child use case for 3d printing since it's such a niche item.
    The TDS suppressor we are talking about is inconel, weighs 8oz, is 1.2"x5", and full auto rated not really sure what weight savings are being eaten up?

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •