Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 83

Thread: 90 something tooth AAC mount?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    6,323
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    Yea, but the 5.56 cans are good to go. I have a mini 4 that I should get a stamp for within the next 30-60 days. I'm looking forward to hanging that guy off some 16 inch guns. I had a 14.5 that I bought it for, which got horse traded for a Scope.

    I wouldn't worry about any 5.56 cans. I would buy those all day long with a 51 toofer.
    "Air Force / Policeman / Fireman / Man of God / Friend of mine / R.I.P. Steve Lamy"

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    171
    Feedback Score
    0
    I think all the anger in this thread can be summed up with this picture.



    This is the amazing engineering breakthrough???? Finer teeth so there is more tolerance for poorly indexed threading on the can and mount? Hard to defend this as “progress”. It could be more accurately described as bullshit.

    At least Silencer Co is trying.

    For the record I'm waiting on a SDN-6 and TiRant.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    MidTN
    Posts
    344
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Look in front of the teeth. That is a tapered bearing surface. That is what promotes better lock up. Its not just finer teeth.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    402
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dpaqu View Post
    I think all the anger in this thread can be summed up with this picture.



    This is the amazing engineering breakthrough???? Finer teeth so there is more tolerance for poorly indexed threading on the can and mount? Hard to defend this as “progress”. It could be more accurately described as bullshit.

    At least Silencer Co is trying.

    For the record I'm waiting on a SDN-6 and TiRant.
    Wow, you've got it way wrong. The teeth are only there to keep the can from backing off. The tapered mating surface in front of the teeth is what is new and is what now locks the can in place. The 90T mount appears to have about 5x the mating surface of the 51T mount, and the more gradual taper will allow it to wedge itself into the can much better.

    The photo is perfect for showing the BIG difference between the two locking systems. This is why they can't just give existing can users a new 90T latch or something and make them work with the new mounts.

    Do you see it now?

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Lancaster, PA
    Posts
    1,165
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dpaqu View Post
    I think all the anger in this thread can be summed up with this picture.



    This is the amazing engineering breakthrough????
    It reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpOvzGiheOM

    If it didn't work, then WHY release it? Why not simply make up their minds on what really does work, make something that does, and be done with it?
    Last edited by yellowfin; 02-04-12 at 16:30.
    "You can't stop insane people from doing insane things with insane laws...it's...insane!" -- Penn Jillette

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,427
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    What AAC could do is allow 51T cans to have a second latch installed on them 1/2 a tooth opposite of the existing latch.

    That way, one latch is guaranteed to lock up on the very last tooth.
    "Not every thing on Earth requires an aftermarket upgrade." demigod/markm

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    807
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by scottryan View Post
    What AAC could do is allow 51T cans to have a second latch installed on them 1/2 a tooth opposite of the existing latch.

    That way, one latch is guaranteed to lock up on the very last tooth.
    Or come up with a way to cut the mount off (leaving the serialized part along) and weld a 90T mount section on for customers that want to change.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    723
    Feedback Score
    62 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonM View Post
    Or come up with a way to cut the mount off (leaving the serialized part along) and weld a 90T mount section on for customers that want to change.
    This!!!

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    625
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by scottryan View Post
    What AAC could do is allow 51T cans to have a second latch installed on them 1/2 a tooth opposite of the existing latch.

    That way, one latch is guaranteed to lock up on the very last tooth.

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonM View Post
    Or come up with a way to cut the mount off (leaving the serialized part along) and weld a 90T mount section on for customers that want to change.
    Both would probably work to satisfy most AAC owners with the 51T mounting solution, but with the current owners of the company, I doubt that would ever happen.

    My SDN6 just arrived at my SOT, I will bring my upper to check the fit while I pick up the paperwork.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    600
    Feedback Score
    0
    YHM cans are heavy and OK in performance, but I've never had one come remotely loose with one of their QD mounts. Since I've been an SOT in 2007 they haven't changed their mounts. You'd think a company like AAC would have their ducks in a row.
    I'm an FFL/gunsmith, not the holster company. We specialize in subsonic ammunition and wholesale rifles.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •