View Poll Results: Best Overall M4 Suppressor

Voters
143. You may not vote on this poll
  • KAC QDSS-NT4

    18 12.59%
  • Surefire FA556SA

    52 36.36%
  • AAC M4-2000

    73 51.05%
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 99

Thread: M4 Suppressors

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    117
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    How would you say the AAC Ranger 2 compares to the M4-2000 mod 8 far as performance? I was thinking I don't really need a QD mount so a thread mound would work and the cost looks very good.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Deep South Texas
    Posts
    2,521
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    stay with the quick detach for an M4 jack...i would love to own any of the top shelf cans you have listed. My wallet and the crazy offer i got from my class iii buddy put me into a ss phantom that I use on a 12.5"

    It's a good robust unit and other than being a boat anchor, I can't complain. If the throw down $$$$ was not an issue, I would pick the SF only to have something different as u see a lot of aac down here.

    A buddy of mine has the ranger but i just don't like direct thread on most AR platforms.
    "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."
    Japanese Admiral Yamamoto, 1941




    "A wise man's heart directs him toward the right, but a foolish man's heart directs him toward the left."
    Ecclesiastes 10:2:

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,981
    Feedback Score
    15 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    Can you elaborate on "supposed to"? This is a claim I've seen a lot, maybe even repeated, but is so far just marketing noise from SF from what I can tell. I have seen very little in the way of empirical testing of shift between cans.
    Well I only know one person personally who owns a K can. He says the POI shift at 100 yds is less than 1.5" and is repeatable. That seems pretty good. By comaprison, on my 18" Noveske the POI shift with my M42K is 3" at 100 yards and repeatable (I never shoot my 6933 with the can off). Fortunately it's entirely elevation with no windage shift at all, which is easily corrected for.

    Perhaps we should request members who own these cans to go out and do some formal bench testing and post pics of targets with both suppressed and unsuppressed groups, with no sighting adjustments?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    117
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Well from what I've heard here and on other forums I think I'll go with the AAC M4-2000 mod 8 for my Colt M4 A2 with 14.5" barrel. All that remains now is a 3-4 month waite.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,367
    Feedback Score
    9 (100%)
    In a few months I should have a Mini and 212, with access to a number of different platforms to try it out on, as well as a M4-2007, and possibly an M4-2008. I'll try to get some decent data, but mind you I will be a sample of but one end user.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    592
    Feedback Score
    0
    I have an NT4, and have heard the other two. The KAC can has a deeper tone to it than the other two, which makes it more pleasant to my ears, despite not doing as well as the others in the "DB rating" category.

    I'm sure all three meet the standards in durabilty, but you can really tell that the NT4 is built like a tank. It's a heavy sumbitch!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    Can you elaborate on "supposed to"? This is a claim I've seen a lot, maybe even repeated, but is so far just marketing noise from SF from what I can tell. I have seen very little in the way of empirical testing of shift between cans.
    I have tested it. SF cans have the least POI shift of any of the cans I have used.

    Cans tested:

    SF 212 X 2
    SF Mini
    AAC SCAR Blackout
    AAC M42K Mod 8

    Personally witnessed many other SF CAN's have under 1MOA POI Shift.



    C4
    Last edited by C4IGrant; 01-26-11 at 23:02.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,760
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by S-1 View Post
    I have an NT4, and have heard the other two. The KAC can has a deeper tone to it than the other two, which makes it more pleasant to my ears, despite not doing as well as the others in the "DB rating" category.

    I'm sure all three meet the standards in durabilty, but you can really tell that the NT4 is built like a tank. It's a heavy sumbitch!
    S-1 and I shot his NT4 and my M4FA back to back. I prefer the weight, length and attachment system of the Surefire, but the NT4 makes a pleasant sound.

    That said of all the cans on the market, the one I think is the one to have is the Surefire Mini.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    10
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    I have tested it. SF cans have the least POI shift of any of the cans I have used.

    Cans tested:

    SF 212 X 2
    SF Mini
    AAC SCAR Blackout
    AAC M42K Mod 8

    Personally witnessed many other SF CAN's have under 1MOA POI Shift.



    C4
    Grant, if you know, how have the SF cans performed high volume fire? In every video I see of them they seem to get to glowing orange much quicker then other cans.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    7,868
    Feedback Score
    0
    The AAC (I owned a Mod. 08) can is lighter, and the KAC can has less shift IMO.

    They sound almost identical to me, the KAC sounds a little better to me because it's a little deeper.

    Decibels don't mean much, except on paper.
    We miss you, AC.
    We miss you, ToddG.

Page 2 of 10 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
  •