![]() ![]() The question is with regard to the SFCT which doesn't have ports nor labyrinth seals.Most rifle barrels in the past several years have come threaded from the factory so the shooter can add a muzzle device such as a muzzle brake or a compensator. Not having the ports is the primary driver.Did I present the issue of labyrinth seals correctly? As part of the SOCOM762-RC2 evaluation, Jay recommended SureFire muzzle devices without ports and with labyrinth seals, namely the muzzle break and the three- and four-prong flash hiders. However, there could be a signature difference. I postulate the main benefit of the rings with no ports is longer time between cleanings, possibly, due to less gas propagation into/through the mount mechanism. That is interesting that the closed-tine flash hider doesn't have ports but also doesn't have the seal rings. SureFire Muzzle Devices / SOCOM Suppressor AdaptersĮTA: Jay wanted me to emphasize this is a tentative test plan. The question is with regard to the SFCT which doesn't have ports nor labyrinth seals. Not having the ports is the primary driver.Did I present the issue of labyrinth seals correctly? As part of the SOCOM762-RC2 evaluation, Jay recommended SureFire muzzle devices without ports and with labyrinth seals, namely the muzzle brake and the three- and four-prong flash hiders. Would you expect the SFCT-556-1/2-28 to perform as well as the 3/4-prong flash hider?and his reply, Will you be able to evaluate that? For example, the SFCT-556-1/2-28 closed-tine flash hider doesn't have ports, but I don't believe it has labyrinth seals. There's a lot of talk regarding the role the labyrinth seals play. ![]() View QuoteMy message to Jay at Pew Science, I'm curious if it performs the same as the 3/4 prong. It does not have any ports in the rear of the muzzle device but it also doesn't have the labyrinth seals. The SFCT-556-1/2-28 closed tine is what I was wondering about. Through his detailed Sound Signature Review, Jay raised concerns with the combination of a SOCOM762-RC2 and WARCOMP, Quoted: I don't know who this is or how to contact him, but any chance he could do a closed tine as well?This is Pew Science. Are you interested in the WARCOMP-556-CTN-1/2-28 closed-time flash hider (which is ported, although not to the extent of the WARCOMP) or the SFCT-556-1/2-28 closed-time flash hider (which is not ported)? I can certainly ask him to consider another muzzle device. It is possible that prolonged use of a ported WARCOMP with a silencer could result in higher sight or hearing risk to an operator if not properly equipped with the recommended PPE.He was asked to conduct a similar review with a SOCOM556-RC2. PEW Science highly recommends the use of a non-ported “labyrinth seal” equipped mount with the SOCOM762-RC2 for the reasons stated in this review. Surefire advises that the WARCOMP mount, while able to be used with the SOCOM762-RC2, is intended for operators that are using their weapon unsuppressed and may use their silencer to suppress their weapon system infrequently.and, 308 (Free Version)From his "Subjective Opinion", SSS.6.26 - Surefire SOCOM762-RC2 and the Savage Model 10 PC. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |