Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 67 of 67

Thread: Thermal Defense Solutions Bantam II Suppressor

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Artesia, New Mexico
    Posts
    61
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt in TN View Post
    Good stuff Paco - thanks for taking the time to write all that. For the record, mine did not come with a crush washer. I agree it would be silly to use a crush washer on a suppressor, and I'm not sure why they would ever include one.

    How do we get PewScience to test one of these???
    Crush washer was listed on the webpage for it.

    "Each BANTAM comes with a 1/2×28 direct thread mount, peel washer, and crush washer."

    It doesn't need to be timed unless you want to spend a ton of time at the range making your POI shift direction just so.
    Last edited by paco ramirez; 04-12-21 at 19:57.
    CGS Group LLC
    Silencers, firing devices/initiators/detonators, and custom precision rifles.

    www.cgsgroup.com
    sales@cgsgroup.com

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,243
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by paco ramirez View Post
    After browsing this thread, without diving into proprietary info and stuff, here's how things really are.

    The silencer isn't "designed by the literal rocket scientists at Oak Ridge National Labs". It isn't even using anything meaningful or relevant to any patents ORNL holds that would provide them with any positive benefit. They didn't even have to license anything from ORNL because it's all already been done before. It's just using consumers perceptions of the entity for marketing purposes to make people believe that just because ORNL was involved in some part of the process that it makes it the best and most advanced thing ever made. CFD is completely useless for silencer development. It's a meaningless money drain for which the sole benefit to the manufacturer is that they get to tell consumers that it was DeSiGnEd WiTh SuPeRcOmPuTeRs like that actually means anything. The best silencers you can buy were never touched by CFD.

    Flow through silencers have existed since at least 1909 and in their current form since at least 1927. Full auto rated doesn't mean anything except that the manufacturer will fix it when it breaks. That applies to everyone. First round pop can be undetectable by ear because all the shots are loud. Any time you vent gas to atmosphere quicker than normal it will be loud. The TDS silencers are simple shallow vented cone baffles with a vented blast chamber directing to the spiral around the core and a vented front cap for both the core and for the coaxial. There's so much wrong with the claims on the website it would take far too long to dissect them.

    Direct thread is perfectly fine for most peoples real life applications, you don't need to "grab an 800° suppressor to verify its tight" when the silencer has wrench flats, or if it has a SIG 25 deg taper and compatible barrel shoulder if hand tightening. If the wrench flats are utilized then the silencer isn't going to come loose and it isn't a concern at all. Wrench flats are something this silencer should have had implemented into it.

    Mag dumping the silencer isn't going to magically clean it all by itself.

    This silencer absolutely can easily be made by traditional machining methods. Anyone that's actually seen the inside of one that knows machining would know that, and it would be incredibly easy to accomplish. 3D printing does provide weight savings over traditional machining.

    This silencer is not hearing safe. But also just because something brakes the sound barrier does not at all mean it will cause hearing damage or even be remotely unpleasant for the shooter or bystanders. It is possible to make a 7.62 rifle silencer on a 22" bolt gun firing supersonic 6.5 Creedmoor quieter than a fullsize 9mm silencer is on a 9mm handgun firing subsonic ammo. Not by just a little bit either, it's noticeable and measurable. It is possible to very nearly make it as quiet at the ear as a fullsize 22LR silencer on a 22LR handgun firing subsonic ammo.

    You don't have to own a silencer to know about it, all you have to do is shoot through it then you'll know plenty about how it performs on that host firearm in that exact config. This particular silencer you guys are talking about comes with a crush washer, but a crush washer shouldn't be used at all.

    Meters do not pick up the actual peak of a gunshot, and even if they did the peak dB is irrelevant anyway. The sole source of sound data anyone should ever use is PewScience.
    I feel a little less crazy now lol. Since seeing the cutaways and xrays from the Recoil article, I've been trying to figure out how any of that could be patented period, much less be applicable to the patent from Oakridge.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    463
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by okie View Post
    I feel a little less crazy now lol. Since seeing the cutaways and xrays from the Recoil article, I've been trying to figure out how any of that could be patented period, much less be applicable to the patent from Oakridge.
    What's even crazier is OSS's lawsuit against TDS for patent infringement. I'm guessing TDS is spending too much money on lawyers to defend against a stupid and blatantly false lawsuit, and not enough money on testing and production. Just a guess from my end and the details of the lawsuit are sealed because of intellectual property issues - but I look at both suppressors and it would be like McDonalds patenting a hamburger for this to work out for OSS.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    463
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Here's some more non-scientific anecdotal information: I had it out shooting some VTAC drills today, and took my ears off for several drills just to see. No discomfort at all. And the shots never would register on the PACT shot timer on my belt throughout. Which was impressive, because we've seen several k-style suppressors at matches and they always registered on timers with no issue.

    Mk262 clone ammo through a 12.5" upper. Totally happy!
    Last edited by Matt in TN; 05-02-21 at 22:37.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    3,393
    Feedback Score
    20 (100%)
    You guys that feel that this design is pretty readily done without DMLS.... how (and from what) would you make the spiral thingy between the baffles and the wall? Looking at some radiographs of the Strix and the Bantam, I see what you mean now, but my creativity needs a jog since I’m not a machinist.

    My best idea so far would be to abandon the spiral and use a perforated inner wall and a few perf’d “washers” between the inner and outer walls. But, this sounds like an expensive way to make a shitty can.

    Shoot me a PM, if you don’t mind.
    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 else’s, 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.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    463
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1168 View Post
    You guys that feel that this design is pretty readily done without DMLS.... how (and from what) would you make the spiral thingy between the baffles and the wall? Looking at some radiographs of the Strix and the Bantam, I see what you mean now, but my creativity needs a jog since I’m not a machinist.

    My best idea so far would be to abandon the spiral and use a perforated inner wall and a few perf’d “washers” between the inner and outer walls. But, this sounds like an expensive way to make a shitty can.

    Shoot me a PM, if you don’t mind.
    Silence.

    I'm a mechanical engineer and hobbyist machinist and don't see how it could be done with traditional machining. Or at least not without a whole lot of complicated welding, extra weight, and resultant warpage problems. And it sure wouldn't be one homogenous piece of Inconel when you're done.

    Waiting to be proven wrong.

    Doesn't really matter though. I'm super happy with my purchase and shared this here for anyone who might be looking for a suppressor with similar traits. If someone doesn't like it for whatever reason it's no skin off my nose.
    Last edited by Matt in TN; 06-09-21 at 08:53.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Lowcountry, SC.
    Posts
    3,393
    Feedback Score
    20 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt in TN View Post
    Silence.

    I'm a mechanical engineer and hobbyist machinist and don't see how it could be done with traditional machining. Or at least not without a whole lot of complicated welding, extra weight, and resultant warpage problems. And it sure wouldn't be one homogenous piece of Inconel when you're done.

    Waiting to be proven wrong.

    Doesn't really matter though. I'm super happy with my purchase and shared this here for anyone who might be looking for a suppressor with similar traits. If someone doesn't like it for whatever reason it's no skin off my nose.
    You’re good, man. Thanks for sharing.
    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 else’s, 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.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

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
  •