Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 62

Thread: Pic Request: Surefire FA556K Flash Hider

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    324
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rsilvers View Post
    I did detailed tests with a camera on manual exposure, and then had software measure the luminosity of the flash by summing the brightness of the pixels. The Surefire had as much as 25% more flash than a Vortex. No doubt if you had certain ammo with flash inhibitors or a longer barrel it would appear the same to the eye under non-controlled circumstances -- but I would not consider it an equal-performance flash suppressor to a Smith Vortex.

    Really nice looking rifle. What front sight is that?
    Well there you go. In daylight side by side with a 16" rifle it did look equal. We were using M193. Your method would of course be much more accurate. It was certainly better than the Phantom and birdcage that were also on hand.

    The sights are HK MP7s. The uber-irons were made available to me through the generosity of a friend. I'll post some pics of them soon.

    Jeff, in case you didn't get my PM, the answer is 18.4"
    "No you don't, sunshine"

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northwest IN
    Posts
    3,119
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rsilvers View Post
    I did detailed tests with a camera on manual exposure, and then had software measure the luminosity of the flash by summing the brightness of the pixels. The Surefire had as much as 25% more flash than a Vortex. No doubt if you had certain ammo with flash inhibitors or a longer barrel it would appear the same to the eye under non-controlled circumstances -- but I would not consider it an equal-performance flash suppressor to a Smith Vortex.

    Really nice looking rifle. What front sight is that?
    Good thing we aren't fighting against androids yet.

    I believe you Robert, as always, but your data just gets a little too involved and doesn't take into account the human element.

    Is 25% more than a standard vortex visible to the human eye? No? Well then keep it to yourself.

    ZGXtreme was asking about it's usefulness in the real world, not imaginary world.

    But then again, it's made by a competitor of yours so you might as well provide all evidence that it's sub par.

    Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,705
    Feedback Score
    0
    Guns might be fun hobby objects to you, but some people get shot at if someone can identify their location. 25% less bright might translate into getting killed 25% less often. Might not matter to you, but we have customers that care very much. Also, the eye is not the only thing watching for flash. There are a lot of electro-optics out there looking for gunshot flash. Better is better. Not everyone needs the best, but some do.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northwest IN
    Posts
    3,119
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    My point was that I don't think 25% over the vortex's super low signature is enough for the human eye to see.

    ETA: I see you mentioned "electro optics." Didn't I say "human eye" in my first reply? Now I'm mentioning it again. IF it's a perceivable difference to the human eye then I'll listen to you but I'm betting it's not.

    Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball...

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Here is my POV on the subject of muzzle flash. After the first round, the BG knows where your at.

    All of this matters not though as you would be using your can if your going to pick a fight.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,705
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SuicideHz View Post
    My point was that I don't think 25% over the vortex's super low signature is enough for the human eye to see.

    ETA: I see you mentioned "electro optics." Didn't I say "human eye" in my first reply? Now I'm mentioning it again. IF it's a perceivable difference to the human eye then I'll listen to you but I'm betting it's not.
    Ok, sure. It is like anything else. A computer that is 25% faster might be hard for some to notice without measuring it. An engine that gets 25% more mpg might go unnoticed unless tested. Some don't care and that is good enough for them. I like to test things. I just do. I do strange things like put new batteries in flashlights and time how long they last. I measure my car's fuel consumption. When film was used for cameras I used to compare them carefully. So I care, and when I work on a design of a flash suppressor, I put the same comparative testing into my designs to make sure they perform to the point where instrumentation verifies the performance and don't just leave it to the point where most people think it is good enough on casual observance. It was during this testing that I learned where each flash hider stands on performance. At least with M855 and 10 inch barrels. On longer barrels it matters less.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    356
    Feedback Score
    0
    How much more flash percentage-wise did the SF FH have over the Vortex on longer barrels such as 14.5" and 20"?

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,705
    Feedback Score
    0
    I only tested them on an HK416 with a 10 inch barrel and an FN SCAR with a short barrel.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    356
    Feedback Score
    0
    So on a longer barrel there may not be a 25% difference in flash suppression?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,705
    Feedback Score
    0
    Whether there would still be the same difference or a smaller one, I am not sure. No matter which case was true, the total flash with either suppressor would be less noticeable overall and hence harder to differentiate which flash suppressor was superior. With a short barrel, flash suppressor performance is more critical. I designed the AAC BLACKOUT for the short barreled SCAR and 416 as the customers were demanding better flash reduction for those platforms.

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
  •