Arguing with the internet about suppressors

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 17 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 169

  • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
    @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому +81

    This should be good, two different groups of people with different use cases talking past each other.

    • @Scorch789
      @Scorch789 Місяць тому +8

      Is sitting in a safe for eternity a use case?

    • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
      @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому +2

      @@Scorch789 Its certainly a fate I’m afraid.

  • @PolenarTactical
    @PolenarTactical Місяць тому +45

    Perfect timing for the upload 😀
    Maybe less articulated but i tried to make the same point in our video. If you shoot rifles you most probably shoot supersonics (especially in the case of 5.56) - if you shoot supersonics there is no suppressor that can make them hearing safe - if you use earpro, it doesnt really matter if the suppressor is a bit louder but it matters a lot if you're getting blasted with gasses in your eyes and face.
    So if you shoot a lot or shoot multiple rounds in fast succession, flow through suppressors are the way to go

    • @Argentum7756
      @Argentum7756 Місяць тому

      Americans have access to new tech that is changing the paradigm on what was thought possible in Sound Suppression. We have .308 caliber cans now that impart nearly the equivocal risk to the shooter as some .300 BLK subsonic set ups. Just because the bullet goes supersonic doesn't mean the overall signature can't be tame. Most of the noise is the propellant gasses and their associated blast load. Lots of misconceptions with people who own silencers unfortunately.

    • @PolenarTactical
      @PolenarTactical Місяць тому +13

      @@Argentum7756 lol, the other way around
      If you have a supersonic projectile you wont be able to make it hearing safe unless you attach a 5 meter suppressor that will move the exit point further away from the shooter.
      The only way you can make it "hearing safe" is to say that 140 decibels is ok at shooters ear (which is definitely not safe)
      Also either you never shot .300blk subsonics with a suppressor or you are just straight up lying. It's crazy to compare it to supersonic .308

    • @DZ4295DBW
      @DZ4295DBW Місяць тому +1

      The mach wave from the sonic crack is less severe than the physical report of the weapon. ​@@PolenarTactical

    • @computer_carnivore
      @computer_carnivore Місяць тому +2

      Hearing damage is cumulative. Saying a massive difference at the muzzle or the shooter's ear doesn't matter because "earpro" is insane. I thought Pew Science put this to bed years ago.

    • @PolenarTactical
      @PolenarTactical Місяць тому +4

      @@computer_carnivore what are you talking about?

  • @therealjohnsmith4811
    @therealjohnsmith4811 Місяць тому +42

    Most of the people with opinions don’t even own a suppressor

  • @jonnydroo
    @jonnydroo Місяць тому +2

    I have both an RC2 and RC3 and in my opinion, the RC3 is leaps better and so much more enjoyable to shoot (on 10.3, 10.5 and 11.5) with limited gas in the face. Even with all the adjustments combined with the RC2 (Radian SD charging handle, bootleg adjustable bcg, or even the KAK bcg that ports gas downward), RC3 still beats it all.

  • @JG_1998
    @JG_1998 Місяць тому +5

    once you go KAC you never go back. glad to hear you're willing to at least look into the Knight's MCQ. I promise you will not be disappointed, especially because you don't really care about decibels, and mostly care about things like durability and the can not affecting your ability to shoot (like on target transitions).
    You said that you only use suppressors because some places require them, this is the perfect solution because it has the least overhead (2.85 inches to the end of the muzzle), but still technically meets the requirement of being a suppressor. It’s really more like a muzzle break that reduces the sound by 12dB, kills the flash, and reduces the concussion.
    I run a surefire SPS300 on my 300blk MCX because the backpressure doesnt really matter with a piston system, but outside of that I will always go with Knight's (if possible).

  • @Slippindisc
    @Slippindisc Місяць тому +7

    people are so emotionally connected to things they bought, it's crazy. The funniest part about it is that all anybody would need to do to have the correct opinion on any number of topics, would be to ask me what mine is.

  • @annonymouslibertairian9120
    @annonymouslibertairian9120 Місяць тому +7

    I have my own opinions and thoughts about suppressors.
    But I keep them quiet.

  • @midimixlegit
    @midimixlegit Місяць тому +2

    Gotta do a PSA Dagger review my guy 😤

  • @SnapD24
    @SnapD24 Місяць тому +1

    I dunno. The reason I shoot suppressed is for concussion mitigation. The sound dampening and flash mitigation is nice, but I like not getting rocked when sending it. /shrug

  • @kc2giw
    @kc2giw Місяць тому +13

    Ben, question that may help these jabronis understand: is it true that you must have a suppressor not because you want one but because you’re teaching in situations where it’s mandated? Therefore your measure of success is simply the one that lasts the longest? Seems completely simple.

    • @Slippindisc
      @Slippindisc Місяць тому +6

      he pretty much said as much, I thought. Didnt he say in his last video that his use case is extremely niche?

    • @Yapperinos
      @Yapperinos Місяць тому +3

      He said that clearly multiple times in this video. He shoots in places that require it, probably near neighbors. He wants durability, low maintenance and less gas in the face.

  • @letsgobrandon416
    @letsgobrandon416 Місяць тому +22

    I guess if you think unsuppressed is fine the selection of the RC3 makes total sense 😂

    • @BrooklynNick718
      @BrooklynNick718 Місяць тому +2

      What's wrong with unsuppressed? Where's yours?

  • @Hondatech26
    @Hondatech26 Місяць тому +2

    I dislike shooting pistols suppressed, but I generally prefer to run my rifles suppressed for my specific use case. Most of the rifle shooting I do is 500-1200 yards and slow fire. Not having to double up on ear protection is nice and the people around you will also thank you.

  • @veryhappyturtle
    @veryhappyturtle Місяць тому

    Imo high volume sub 50 meters and in can be more fun with a can if the gun is set up to not be super front heavy. Something like an 12.5 mid gas keeps the gun smooth, reliable, and easy to shoot while shifting the weight of the can to a much more manageable location. The CAT WB 718 is also able to handle massive volume very well, and should be MUCH quieter, slightly lower backpressure, and lower weight than the RC3. 16" with a can is always unpleasant unless it's a dedicated long range range day unfortunately. Since you travel a lot a dedicated setup like this might not be a good option, though the shorter barrel would be really nice for a chunky can like the RC3.

  • @DominicZelenak
    @DominicZelenak Місяць тому +2

    My buddies are obsessed with suppressors. I have no clue why. I could only ever see myself putting one of my bolt action rifle for hunting or my predator gun.

  • @WildSnake117
    @WildSnake117 Місяць тому +17

    Combat vet and psychologist here. If you value your brain health get a suppressor. Hearing loss is associated with higher rates of dementia. It's so stupid to not use a suppressor and risk hearing damage if you can afford it.

    • @kakimotoK20
      @kakimotoK20 Місяць тому +3

      How good is doubling up? I use orange foam under some standard $60 ear muffs. It seems pretty effective, except for indoor rifles

    • @letsgobrandon416
      @letsgobrandon416 Місяць тому +6

      Finally some common sense on this thread. People have no concept of how damaging the concussion is from a rifle, and not just to your hearing. Even the most basic of suppressors these days eliminates that concussion, and is well worth it if you can swing it.

    • @WildSnake117
      @WildSnake117 Місяць тому +1

      @kakimotoK20 yeah I would suggest doubling up if you have the cheaper slimmer Howard leight style ear pro. Also because a lot of people don't realize they are breaking the seal on their muffs when they put their cheek to the stock.

    • @kakimotoK20
      @kakimotoK20 Місяць тому

      @@WildSnake117 right on. Yeah I may look into suppressing more of my weapons. I’m waiting for approval on one now but it was only to shoot subs without ear pro

    • @WildSnake117
      @WildSnake117 Місяць тому

      @kakimotoK20 yeah I am not super into the nerdy stats stuff on the cansiand mostly go with sico. Managed to get everything covered fairly cheap by doing their last three bogo deals. I don't have any flow through cans though so I might get the banish 46 to have as an option on a bunch of guns.

  • @chap23305
    @chap23305 Місяць тому +11

    Gun gets dirtier, not "hearing safe", NFA item, shot timer has issues picking up shots..... I don't care for suppressors much. They look cool.

  • @Gunbrah
    @Gunbrah Місяць тому +2

    You need a KAC MCQ

  • @Osprey1994
    @Osprey1994 Місяць тому +3

    I don't think it's that complicated. There's a muzzle device that suits peoples needs, if you want flash suppression but don't care about sound, there's a solution for that. If you want maximum recoil reduction with minimal weight increase, there's an option for that. If reduction in sound, flash, and recoil is your goal, that's where suppressors come in, but even then, not all suppressors are going to accomplish the same thing.
    I personally want to minimize hearing damage, I also wanted something small and light enough that I wouldn't want to just take it off, and I didn't want to deal with a ton of gas to the face. The Flow 556K works for my purposes. I'm sure that someone else might find a 30cal can more versatile, or maybe they don't need maximal at the ear noise reduction and they just want something that takes a little bit of the bark out of their gun , or maybe someone wants something super quiet, or a can that they can beat the fuck out of and have it keep running with no cleaning.
    Think about what works best for you, and buy it, although I would highly suggest borrowing a suppressed gun before you buy one. Get an idea of whether it works for you.

  • @Bane_Diesel
    @Bane_Diesel Місяць тому

    When I didn’t take shooting seriously I wasted so much time cleaning. Now I dislike the thought of having to clean anything especially a suppressor. Cleaning eats into my dry fire time.

  • @gageturquoise6772
    @gageturquoise6772 Місяць тому +2

    Would like to see you compare the rc3 to the knights prt

  • @musician445
    @musician445 Місяць тому +2

    Ben please consider the following,
    Buy an inconel CAT WB QD (not the hub model, if you're worried about that as a failure point) using their left hand course thread taper mount (comes included). If you want multi-cal use try an ODB, it'll be even lower backpressure. The muzzle device is rock solid, seals exponentially better than the surefire, is lighter (both MD and the can itself), doesn't jet cut the blast baffle cause its a closed tine, and its built to be run on a machine gun, you aren't going to break it.
    Testimonials of people running as many as 5000 rounds through the TI version show minimal erosion. The construction and venting structure is designed to mitigate stress points that occur during high volume fire, of which even the TI version benefits from, which lends to why its more robust compared to other TI cans. - buy that same can in inconel and you won't worry about it ever.
    Dunk it in their solution, or even simple green, for a few hours when you clean your rifle. Its not gonna get as dirty as a hux and won't reduce performance as much as a hux if you were to miss a cleaning cycle. For you, cleaning should not as big of a deal, you don't have to meticulously scrub it, just dunk it and blow it out with a compressor. For the military, perhaps it is to much of a pain, so I get that.
    There are companies that care about building suppressors that perform AND reduce back pressure. We've been gaslit for 20 years about suppressor performance characteristics by lazy manufacturers who like their ass groove.
    The way the RC3 is constructed, in my opinion, is the laziest way to achieve lower back pressure that I've seen yet. Don't get me wrong, its impressive they were able to make it suppress the way it does with a completely open ended anulus venting from the blast chamber with no obstruction whatsoever. But that choice highlights a desire to fill a very specific contract requirement knowing the bureaucrats approving it won't care how it performs in any of the other functions a suppressor is traditionally designed to. I get choosing cancer defense over hearing loss, but you literally don't have to with more advanced designs.
    If you pick up a CAT WB and you find its still not enough reduction in pressure for you, then so be it and you'll know that for yourself better than others. Using a can sucks because of what it does to the gun, using a can that's loud makes it less worth it. I'm trying to help you make this experience suck less because it is in fact not a fools errand to search for quieter suppressors. This is a lie that has been perpetuated by dealers and manufacturers who would prefer not to have to design better more complicated products and believed by users who've not have the opportunity to experience what quiet actually is. I just hate seeing people getting gaslit by big companies trying to regain lost ground because they failed to innovate for years and are now getting spanked by smaller companies doing it better.

  • @a38337
    @a38337 Місяць тому +1

    Cans can make loud guns less loud. Some more so than others.
    That may matter to you, the people you are shooting around, or your neighbors. Or not.
    They add weight, cost, complexity, make the guns get dirty quickly, and make the guns harder to swing around quickly.
    Some of these factors can be mitigated through choice of can, and/or modifications to the gun.
    I prefer cans for some applications and not so much for others.
    Only you can decide if the juice is worth the squeeze.
    Or maybe you just want it.
    You do you, people.

  • @billmcbride-oc9bs
    @billmcbride-oc9bs Місяць тому +1

    I love all firearms and firearm accessories. ;) including suppressors.

  • @loupuleff571
    @loupuleff571 Місяць тому +1

    Lol I think Ben messed the bed up before the video ! Lol

  • @techasatool4562
    @techasatool4562 Місяць тому +1

    Have you tried the new PRT / PRS (flow through equivalent) KAC cans, or shot w/ anyone who used them?

  • @eg7381
    @eg7381 Місяць тому +1

    I have a Sandman K. I have been told it sucks but I like it and it works for me.

    • @KartSmarter
      @KartSmarter Місяць тому +2

      It does suck

    • @NBT31
      @NBT31 Місяць тому

      @@KartSmarter do you own one? Why does it suck?

    • @KartSmarter
      @KartSmarter Місяць тому

      @@NBT31 high back pressure, low suppression. Used to be a very popular can.

    • @eg7381
      @eg7381 Місяць тому +1

      I feel like I’m taking the bait. According to PewScience the Sandman K has very low back pressure.
      That said it is not a quiet suppressor. With supersonic rounds it takes the edge off of the shot.

    • @NBT31
      @NBT31 Місяць тому +1

      As the shooter, I can’t tell the difference between it and a surefire mini II. On a 5.56, it has pretty low back pressure.
      If you want a quiet can, then the K is not for you. If you want a can to train a lot, it’s pretty good.

  • @alexglenn2122
    @alexglenn2122 Місяць тому +8

    I think the main discrepancy here is people who shoot heavy volume and those who don’t. Rifle cans get so stupid hot, so fast, that it’s a real problem. Sure you can spend $300+ for a Liberty’s cover but that’s an irritating extra cost that adds a noticeable amount of extra weight on top of already being front heavy. I still love having cans but rifle cans aren’t some voodoo space magic that has no downside and is all pros

    • @PretendtoImagine-k9f
      @PretendtoImagine-k9f Місяць тому +1

      The cover really only helps mitigate the risk of burning yourself with the can. The can heats up your gun faster, and keeps it hotter for longer. The cover keeps your can hotter for longer, and all that heat transfers into the rest of the gun.

  • @the1andonlySherlock
    @the1andonlySherlock Місяць тому

    I have competed in several night matches. One thing I've noticed in the white light division is that people using flow through suppressors have a worse time with gun smoke obscuring their vision of small/distant targets. Based on how those people have done in the matches, the flow through cans seem to not offer a huge benefit over an unsuppressed gun, and traditional cans seem to have a clear advantage in that one aspect. I'm curious if Ben has made similar observations?

  • @taylormartin4346
    @taylormartin4346 Місяць тому

    I have a discontinued 556 HX-QD and it’s heavy but I like it. Absolutely no gas to the face on a 16in gun

  • @mattogle2582
    @mattogle2582 Місяць тому

    Ben I think your concept is,yes they mostly all make it less louder than it was but still loud enough to cause damage and with that said ,u still need ear pro on all them,and in your eyes why worry bout a decimal or 2,cause u still need ear protection

  • @seanbrando_7456
    @seanbrando_7456 Місяць тому

    Rugged is great, Dead air is great...........both crazy durable.

  • @PnP-td1mt
    @PnP-td1mt Місяць тому +1

    The Surefire is a superior can to the hux.. Period.
    The construction and metal is significantly more durable and will live longer on a short barrel that just about any other can except for a few that are Inconel or stelite (knights or CGS)…
    The knights cans cost more than the RC3 and the muzzle devices are unobtanium..
    I suggest CGS if you can get 1 in stock…?
    My guess is not many have seen rapid baffle degradation?
    This is why barrel length specifications exist.. short 556 is absolutely brutal on baffles. Short barrel with a 3 prong shows interesting results on the blast baffle..

    • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
      @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому

      @@PnP-td1mt yeah i have been running a hux can and if i was an armorer dealing with cleaning 50 of these things every 2k rounds I would be pretty pissed.

    • @PnP-td1mt
      @PnP-td1mt Місяць тому

      @@DavidsLongRangeShooting yeah I don’t care what you run..
      The surefire use of a most robust can that will tolerate A LOT more abuse.
      Your cleaning comment tells me you haven’t been using suppressers that long.
      I have yet to see a can that needed regular cleanings that wasn’t a 22LR can.

    • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
      @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому

      @@PnP-td1mt i’m agreeing with you, the surefire is less maintenance with a longer lifespan. Going off of manufacturers spec on the hux can is what most agencies will do, that’s where the cleaning comment comes from, those hux cans get dirty quick. Primed for confrontation much?

    • @PnP-td1mt
      @PnP-td1mt Місяць тому +1

      @@DavidsLongRangeShooting have to forgive me…
      I am typically bombarded with utter stupidity 😂
      I used to make my own cans. Not only have the ability to machine and EDM exotic metals but also print it..
      form 1’s were all the rage until the aft changed the form process and started locking people up over the word “intent”.

    • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
      @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому

      @@PnP-td1mt you’re good dude no worries.

  • @modernsoul6590
    @modernsoul6590 Місяць тому

    I have read somewhere to use a blank when shooting off a surefire silencer.

    • @K-bob_45
      @K-bob_45 Місяць тому

      Blank is preferable since it’s less powder and no projectile. You can you live ammo it just launches your can farther and harder. If you scrub the mount now and again and hit it with CLP before you throw it on chances are you’ll never use that feature

  • @zact9941
    @zact9941 Місяць тому +8

    Ben; if you really want to piss the nerds off….. dump water onto your can after getting it warm. The nerds HATE it soooo much

    • @Blobertbigly
      @Blobertbigly Місяць тому

      Why's that?

    • @joeymedina7115
      @joeymedina7115 Місяць тому +3

      @@Blobertbiglycan potentially damage it. Rapidly cooling hot metal can make it break

    • @Yapperinos
      @Yapperinos Місяць тому

      @@Blobertbigly it means he'll have to buy a new can if he keeps that up and that will contribute to longer wait times REEEEEEEEEE

  • @just9911
    @just9911 Місяць тому +1

    All the activities that Ben doesn’t tell us about will soon be available on his upcoming OF

  • @coach-
    @coach- Місяць тому +1

    i have one as it's far easier to get a new person to shoot a gun the cooler it looks.

  • @CA.0verview
    @CA.0verview Місяць тому +1

    9:39 why isn’t knights flow threw suppressors in on the conversation?

  • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
    @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому +6

    Yeah look the thing with suppressors is you have regular guys that don’t *really* need them but they’re a nice and cool thing to have, those guys are going to nerd out on the pew science ratings etc. none of the high flow stuff does all that great with the exception of newer companies that specialize in those designs (CAT CGS etc), its kind of inevitable that these guys are not going to be interested in that stuff. Then there are the guys who are going to be *ACTUALLY* using them in confined spaces where you have to deal with eating brake blast or getting gas in your face on top of being shot at, yeah I’ll take the RC3 in those situations even if it isn’t the quietest. None of those teams give a shit if the newest boutique silencer shaves 10db off at the shooters ear because they all have earpro anyways, is it going to fucking work when it needs to is the main concern. Also, suppressors suck to shoot with, I get that its been a novelty forever because of the form 4 times but once people start using them they’ll realize how unimpressive they are without a real use case.

    • @joie0
      @joie0 Місяць тому +4

      This is essentially what my opinion is as well. I’m poor so I have Yhm. Honestly, I only wanted a can for home defense and once or twice a year pig hunting.

    • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
      @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому +1

      @@joie0 perfect use case for a can honestly, for the longest time those were the only real reasons people would stick out the wait. Happy you found a can that works for you man, my understanding is the YHM cans are great for the price.

    • @Yapperinos
      @Yapperinos Місяць тому

      You contradict yourself though. Lots of the nerdy pewsci guys like CAT and even CGS. And the guys who are going to ACTUALLY use them would do really well with a CAT can too.
      The guy who officially sold me on Hux Flow's is a SOF dude who tried it himself and was really impressed. This was back before CAT was a thing, so probably by now he'd like CAT better. Ya know when the Flows first came out there was a big controversy about Hux selling exclusively to feds and LEO's (in reality they opened up to civilians after a while). And right now there's a semi-controversy about CAT reserving their Alleycat line to only feds and LEO's
      Finally everyone has a use case called home defense, whether they know it or not is another issue.

    • @DavidsLongRangeShooting
      @DavidsLongRangeShooting Місяць тому +1

      @@Yapperinos i said with the exception of cat/cgs, meaning the hux cans are quite loud and so is the surefire. But you might be right about the rest of what you said. I don’t know enough about the durability of the newer SLS cans to know if they would work well with SOF or LE teams. What I do know is that I can skip getting gassed in the face with the RC3 and it has 4x the manufacturer spec lifespan of the hux can. I have used those hux cans and I am not super impressed with how dirty they can get. I am interested in the CGS and the CAT stuff though and I’ll probably check em out soon. The home defense use case is more of a what if, not to say you shouldn’t get one for home defense but you will not be using the suppressor for home defense frequently (generally).

    • @Yapperinos
      @Yapperinos Місяць тому +1

      @@DavidsLongRangeShooting Ok then I misunderstood what you meant when you said "its kind of inevitable that these guys are not going to be interested in that stuff".
      And yes of course most of us don't use a home defense gun frequently. The reason to get the home defense gun itself is a what if. Same as getting a carry gun. Idk what you meant by this, if you mean that infrequent use gives me the luxury of owning a high maintenance/low durability can like the hux, I agree. And Ben's argument for the RC3 makes sense to me too. I get why serious users want it. I wish I could shoot one side by side with a Hux and a CAT and see for myself. But no denying SF will be durable.

  • @Kenposhinobi
    @Kenposhinobi Місяць тому +12

    “Flow Through” is a licensed Huxwrks technology. The correct word outside of that is high flow rate. The problem with the RC3 is that surefire hyped it up like it was super advanced, being designed with super secrete AI 3D modeling,then proceeded to make it with one of the simplest ways to make a high flow rate can, and then overpriced the shit out of it for such subpar technology. They simply made a very direct outer annulus that vents directly to atmosphere. Basically a shitier Huxwrks can except is doesn’t need cleaned as much. And I’m not even a fan of Hux. Almost Every other company making modern hybrid designs are doing much more advanced stuff that still greatly reduces backpressure but still maintains decent to amazing muzzle suppression. Cans like the SiCo Velos LBP, LPM Vented Torch, FOR Systems Monarch, and especially CAT with their Surge Bypass tech and PTR with their PiP Tech. Both of those are maintaining RC2 levels or better at muzzle suppression, while still achieving Huxworks/Velos levels of backpressure reduction.

    • @williamboggs1682
      @williamboggs1682 Місяць тому +1

      Exactly no way around it the rc3 is literally trash compared to so many others

  • @Logan2070
    @Logan2070 12 днів тому

    What am I going to do with a suppressor? I'm not going to carry one on an edc pistol. I'm not adding extra legnth to a rifle, and I'm not doing CQB with a sub gun. Just a range toy unless you are in the military or law enforcement.

  • @ctrackthezer0
    @ctrackthezer0 Місяць тому

    Curious if you tried any of the widely touted "fixes" for gassy suppressors before getting the rc3? RTV sealant on the charging handle, bootleg bcg, adjustable gas block, brt eztune gas tube etc?

  • @bc2815
    @bc2815 Місяць тому +2

    Suppressors are the way, I have used many professionally CONUS and OCONUS from surefire, thunderbeast, AAC, dead Air, Griffen Armament, and other. They all pretty much do the same, I personally really like my Griffen HRT556 can. It's a K size can with flow through technology I have it on a 8.5inch barrel. It provides probably the least backpressure and gas then any others I have shot. Plus their dual lock mount technology is absolutely bomb proof

  • @Bryan-1980
    @Bryan-1980 Місяць тому

    With your level of round count, what would you prefer as far as cleaning goes…monocore or baffle stacks?

  • @Shelldog
    @Shelldog Місяць тому

    I bought my silencer thinking it was going to be awesome. I don't know what I thought specifically, but I was sure it would be great... It usually stays home.

    • @MrCashewkitty
      @MrCashewkitty Місяць тому +1

      They are the most overrated firearms product for sure. Outside of NVG shooting and subsonic, i dont use either of mine.

  • @overknight5226
    @overknight5226 Місяць тому

    Every time I think about buying a suppressor I ask myself, why? I’m going to wear ear pro anyway, it can add unnecessary stress to the firearm, they need regular cleaning, they can cause malfunctions, and my name gets added to a list. But damn they look cool

    • @johnc5330
      @johnc5330 Місяць тому

      If you've ever done a 4473 to buy a gun you're already on the ATFs illegal back door gun registry list. Owning a can isn't going to change anything.

  • @stephenmiller7290
    @stephenmiller7290 Місяць тому

    Ill say this, if the NFA disappeared and no longer had tax stamp. The designs of suppression would totally change, from just basic cans. Everything would be intregal, integrated into the designs of firearms. Instead of an accessory, until that happens. They will continue to suck, for competition, unless you make your own suppressors. Imho.

  • @ericl8189
    @ericl8189 Місяць тому

    hey ben, a welding glove allows me to take my hot surefire can off while it's hot so i can avoid shooting it off. might work for you

  • @danminervini9436
    @danminervini9436 Місяць тому

    Have you had a hearing test recently? “Not much of a difference” subjectively doesn’t mean that an unsuppressed AR isn’t causing hearing damage, especially with only earplugs.

  • @FirstLast94671
    @FirstLast94671 Місяць тому +9

    I don't understand the amount of guys that are emotionally attached to suppressors. I shoot tons of suppressed rifle. I'd much rather shoot without one except in some specific use cases. Nobody really cares if a PRS dude says he prefers muzzle brakes for most stages. Why are the "tactical" guys so emotional about this?

    • @ProfessionalGlockSucker
      @ProfessionalGlockSucker Місяць тому +7

      Because their favorite aesthetic is having a can and they get bullied on Facebook without it. Lmao.

    • @FirstLast94671
      @FirstLast94671 Місяць тому +2

      ​@jordanwilliams6972 yeah I have to remember that the majority of people don't actually care about measurable performance. I look at taking a can off to shoot/train like putting on running shoes to run. Sure, in real life if I have to run to save my life, I'm going to be wearing something different. That doesn't mean I only wear jeans and boots to go on a run.

  • @nickolasthefrog
    @nickolasthefrog Місяць тому

    Cans make firearms friendlier. Friendlier maintains this right.

  • @gkelley77
    @gkelley77 Місяць тому

    People get very passionate about their horribly over0priced aluminum tubes.

  • @CptHamYolo
    @CptHamYolo Місяць тому

    Im convinced people who die on the “suppressors on everything” hill have too much of their identity tied up in them. Shooting 556 with suppressors just sucks.

  • @chaoticcaninejb
    @chaoticcaninejb Місяць тому +2

    I have Knigjts and surefire and Knights IS NOT better, not sure why someone made that comment, probably validate his purchase. That simply isn't true

  • @joegumble7028
    @joegumble7028 Місяць тому +4

    Meanwhile, Silencerco Velos owners just in the corner, minding their own business. It’s like Chevy vs Ford, but then there’s Toyota.

  • @PandemicGameplay
    @PandemicGameplay Місяць тому

    Shartfire RC3 lol

  • @glefos3917
    @glefos3917 Місяць тому +16

    More butt hurt with the suppressor guys than the Sig fan bois.

  • @computer_carnivore
    @computer_carnivore Місяць тому +3

    I like how this conversation is couched as RC3 vs everything when most of the important points aren't being discussed and relevant contenders aren't even mentioned.

  • @godsdozer
    @godsdozer Місяць тому

    Lok cease 20/20. No more carbon lockup.

  • @HaydenLane9mm
    @HaydenLane9mm Місяць тому +5

    “I think there’s inherent issue with the flow through … there’s gas coming out the front of it, it’s gonna be louder”
    This is why RC3 users only compare it to Hux. They do not understand that there’s a bunch of high-flow cans with significantly better muzzle suppression than the RC3 or any Hux.
    It sounds to me like Ben needs an Alleycat.

    • @Yapperinos
      @Yapperinos Місяць тому

      Lol at the one guy who mentioned it in the video gets ignored by ben because the brand and marketing is too ridiculous

    • @HaydenLane9mm
      @HaydenLane9mm Місяць тому +1

      @@Yapperinos that legitimately made me laugh. Their branding is so fuckin dumb, but the performance is peak

    • @FirstLast94671
      @FirstLast94671 Місяць тому

      I don't think a titanium suppressor would hold up very long with aggressive practical shooting. I would also be curious how long one of the non-mil WBs would last. I've seen NT4s and RC2s get trashed, so I'm always skeptical of super lightweight cans.

    • @HaydenLane9mm
      @HaydenLane9mm Місяць тому +1

      @@FirstLast94671 Alleycat is the mil WB basically, not Ti and not super light. The WB comes in inconel.

  • @tostado22
    @tostado22 Місяць тому

    11:55 lol

  • @Fin.mint.
    @Fin.mint. Місяць тому

    Ben spends 17 minutes trying to explain he uses the can for range monkey tasks, not being a Gravy Seal.

  • @tripplej6053
    @tripplej6053 Місяць тому

    cool shirt

  • @jameschrisdavis
    @jameschrisdavis Місяць тому +2

    I have the RC3 and the knights CRS and MCQ, Knights have a better mount system IMO but the parts availably is awful and I would not recommend. Where I shoot its just good manners to have some suppression, but I also dont want to breathe cancer all day when shooting.

    • @shibaspeed
      @shibaspeed Місяць тому +1

      Is there a POI shift difference between the 3? Also, what about precision differences? Does one shrink the group size more than the other?

    • @JG_1998
      @JG_1998 Місяць тому +1

      why would you need parts availability do you need to run a 3D printed can? all the MCQ requires is the 3prong or MAMS. there's no other parts.

    • @jameschrisdavis
      @jameschrisdavis Місяць тому

      @@JG_1998 If you own multiple rifles its a lot more difficult to source muzzle devices. Thats what I meant.

    • @jameschrisdavis
      @jameschrisdavis Місяць тому

      @@shibaspeed Maybe, I havent tested that.

  • @MannElite
    @MannElite Місяць тому

    You should be legally required to use a suppressor within city limits, like a muffler on your car

  • @vettepilot427
    @vettepilot427 Місяць тому

    Suppressors are good if you need the following: 1.) ability to communicate under fire 2.) reduced concussion inside structures 3.) reduced visual and sound signatures. In exchange, the bad is: 1.) increased heat and fouling inside the firearm 2.) hearing protection still required for supersonic ammo 3.) increased exposure to poisonous and harmful gas 4.) reduced handling and increased weight 5.) extreme danger to exposed skin. That said, I’ve found that there are 2 kinds of people, 1.) I don’t care if you hit me, just don’t scream at me. These are suppressor people who don’t mind recoil, but they are very sensitive to blast and noise. 2.) I don’t care if you scream at me, just don’t hit me. These are muzzle brake people who don’t mind blast and noise, but hate recoil. Suppressors don’t reduce recoil.

    • @TheHashtagSquad2K15
      @TheHashtagSquad2K15 Місяць тому

      Suppressors do reduce recoil in the same way that having a light on your pistol will reduce recoil. You’re hanging more weight off the end of the gun, that will have an impact on the muzzle climb. More weight, same force=less movement.

    • @Yapperinos
      @Yapperinos Місяць тому

      2.) hearing protection still required for maximum damage mitigation, but less noise = less hearing damage. This is especially important in home defense where you don't have time to throw on muffs, you won't be shooting for very long, and the walls amplify however much noise you emit.

    • @vettepilot427
      @vettepilot427 Місяць тому

      @@TheHashtagSquad2K15 More weight for reduced recoil is not exclusive to the suppressor. It would be the same argument as saying adding a laser/illuminator reduces recoil. Any benefit is a result of the weight itself, not the device. A muzzle brake reduces recoil by 40% or more with no weight penalty because of function.

    • @vettepilot427
      @vettepilot427 Місяць тому

      @@Yapperinos I agree with your point for the hunter, who is probably not going to wear hearing protection, may need to fire his rifle more than once in a single encounter, and may shoot several animals in a single year. Over time, this adds up.
      When it comes to hearing damage, it’s sort of like discussing how much rat poop is allowable in your Corn Flakes. Less is better, but it’s still damage that accumulates.
      I have suppressors and I’ve shot them without hearing protection, just for my reference. If I had to fire inside my home, after 1 or 2 rounds with no protection, I wouldn’t know the difference if I had shot suppressed or unsuppressed. You can mitigate this further by using subsonic rounds, but unfortunately, thanks to lawyers, it creates a problem when claiming self-defense using subsonic rounds and a suppressor, even in a “free” state where I live.

    • @Yapperinos
      @Yapperinos Місяць тому

      @@vettepilot427 That analogy leaves me at a loss for words. But yeah less is better, less damage accumulates less than more damage.
      Your brain may not notice a difference when shooting suppressed indoors, but that doesn't mean you can tell how much hearing damage you accumulated.
      If you're in a free state I still don't think subsonic rounds are a problem. A blue lawyer will spin it however they can but it's the same as how they'll spin you using HP ammo or FMJ ammo. Or if your gun is FDE they'll say you're a wannabe commando. If you use supersonic 5.56 they'll focus on the big FPS number and how damaging that is. Damned if you do or don't. A good lawyer will take care of that. There's a big difference between that and modifying your trigger to be 2 pounds, or printing "You're Fucked!" on the gun

  • @lukeflaugher5334
    @lukeflaugher5334 Місяць тому +1

    If the RC3 was cheaper we wouldn’t be hearing all this crying! I bought my RC3 because I already owned the RC2 and just wanted less gas in the face but something still close to a traditional can.

  • @BrooklynNick718
    @BrooklynNick718 Місяць тому +2

    Most of the nerds pulling up dBs dont even shoot theirs they just take pictures of it. Thats why so many get the cheapo cans

  • @LowQuatsSquats7529
    @LowQuatsSquats7529 Місяць тому

    As an owner of a B&T SRBS we're entering an age/development of suppressor technology that traditional hasn't been there. Traditionally the mindset and rational with regard to suppressor design and use was reduction in noise and flash with newer flow through/low back pressure cans it's a fundamental shift in that view. It's not so much about noise and flash reduction more so a balance between noise, flash, and toxic gas reduction. Making it safer overall, and that is something people tend to forget with flow through cans. The reason shooting suppressed is unpleasant or sucks for long periods of time unless you're gun is super tuned for suppressed use is because of those hot gasses that contain very nasty chemicals are getting jetted back in your face. And if you do have that highly tuned gun can only run for so many mags before it bogs down with carbon and it's even worse with an overgassed gun that beats itself while dumping all that carbon back into its guts. There's trade offs to both types of cans and people need to start viewing suppressors in a more nuanced way it's not black and white and it's not linear.

  • @johnmyers8855
    @johnmyers8855 Місяць тому

    Suppressors suck except

  • @piouswhale
    @piouswhale Місяць тому

    Ben laughed at my NVG comment, and didn’t answer, which definitely mean he has Panos.

  • @LockStockNBarrel
    @LockStockNBarrel Місяць тому +1

    So Stoeger only owns a can because some ranges he goes to require it. That is a very niche reason to own a supressor which 99% of people aren't buying a supressor for. I think advice or discussion about supressors from someone whos only interest in them is because a range they go to requires it isn't very valuable.

  • @maxwellcox2844
    @maxwellcox2844 Місяць тому

    A lot of people thinking Ben is out under NV hiding from the Chinese.
    NEWS FLASH: USPSA grand wizard doesn’t have the same gear considerations as a tactical/military minded individual.
    Use some perspective folks.

  • @ArmaLife_Texas
    @ArmaLife_Texas Місяць тому +3

    Stock, milspec, unsuppressed ar’s are under rated. The huge mess around suppressors is a hard pass for me. Also, watch some combat footage, dudes struggle with pinpointing where direct fire is coming from all the time(if you’re thinking you need a can for that reason). But, the merits of them are not lost on me, just my humble opinion.

  • @Thomk121
    @Thomk121 Місяць тому

    Supressors are dumb..the tax stamp alone makes it not worth it at all. No need, save your money for anything else. There are other options that the govt does not need to know about but i dont know anything about that.

  • @mousemx1534
    @mousemx1534 Місяць тому

    The suppressor geeks are out in force!

  • @Esko_Vasya
    @Esko_Vasya Місяць тому +6

    Only 70 views in 5 minutes. Been fell off.

    • @bluyetiinc7553
      @bluyetiinc7553 Місяць тому +4

      We were all washing our hair waiting for Ben

    • @rooftopdefender
      @rooftopdefender Місяць тому +1

      Have you ever considered people are busy and have lives and don’t just wait around for someone to post a video?

    • @glidewell19
      @glidewell19 Місяць тому

      Because UA-cam doesn’t like his content. He’s being shadow banned.

    • @Esko_Vasya
      @Esko_Vasya Місяць тому +1

      @@rooftopdefender fake Ben fan

  • @jeffjones7427
    @jeffjones7427 Місяць тому

    Few individuals actually need suppressors. Boring topic.

  • @virginiaslimdsd
    @virginiaslimdsd Місяць тому

    socom mini 2 is 🤌 but it's also carbon locked hard🥲

  • @jlford30
    @jlford30 Місяць тому +1

    huxwrx works its way off....huh