YHM 762 Ti Phantom vs AAC 762SDN-6--a few questions - Page 5

FN Forum

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 43 of 43
Thanks Tree22Thanks

Thread: YHM 762 Ti Phantom vs AAC 762SDN-6--a few questions

  1. #41
    Senior Member Bullseye Shooter
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    SE AZ
    Posts
    131
    Thanked
    17 times
    I'd suggest getting the SDN-6. The SDN-6 sounds great on both my AR-15 SBR and my KAC SR-25EMC. Don't see any reason why it won't sound great on the SCAR-17s as well.

    If you're easy on the can the YHM Ti .30cal can would work fine as well...but I don't trust titanium for higher volume fire (and they recommend against more than a few mags being rapidly fired through the can as well). The SDN-6 only weighs 20oz...just 2.4oz heavier than the AAC M4-2000. I say go for it. It's your decision in the end and we all have our personal preferences, but whatever you do buy a can!

    Here's a video of my can on the EMC (16" .308 AR)


    On the SR-25 EMC...



    And on the 5.56 SBR...
    bluestarfish thanked this.


  2. #42
    Member Hits The Target
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    91
    Thanked
    9 times
    Anyone heard of the falken silencers?
    baffle made of 1 single piece of grade 7 TI so no welds, thus, allowing full auto (claims to have ripped thru 200 rds through m240.

    Defense Review - Falken Industries M-Series Lightweight Titanium Silencers/Sound Suppressors with Monolithic Baffle System for Semi-Auto Tactical Rifles, Assault Rifles and Machine Guns: Full-Auto-Rated! (Video!)

    Are welds indeed the point of failure on ti cans? Also video of 7 mag dumps ( ).

    Does this sound plausible? any thoughts on baffle design in terms of db reduction?

  3. #43
    Sponsor
    FN Supporter
    mjk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    SWMI
    Posts
    1,855
    Thanked
    1616 times
    Quote Originally Posted by SgtStrykerUSMC43 View Post
    We need to understand the limitations and the original intended use of the materials used during the manufacture of various suppressors to better understand the device's intended purpose and use it accordingly.

    The YHM Ti7.62 is full auto rated, but (collectively speaking) we can't expect the Ti unit to soak up continuous full-auto fire. A couple of magazine dumps and it would be most prudent to allow the suppressor to cool before we run it hard again. It's just common sense. Two mag dumps - let it cool.

    If we're looking for a unit we can whip relentlessly, I would suggest the YHM SS 7.62 Phantom. It's thick wall construction and Inconel blast baffle make it a perfect "whipping boy" suppressor. We don't need an all Inconel baffle stack. It's money spent on something needlessly, as the blast baffle is where it truly counts.

    We have a tendency to get hooked on weights of suppressors today, and as I've stated previously, there's no free lunch. A lighter suppressor manufactured from stainless steel, fitted with an Inconel blast baffle simply will not last as long as a counterpart that is using identical material during construction due to thinner profiles to stave off weight increase.

    When installing a long suppressor with a small outside diameter on a weapon such as the SCAR, we notice a substantial increase in bolt speed. In some instances to the point where the bolt speed becomes so great that the bolt fails to pick up a fresh round from the magazine. If this condition is experienced, the owner must stop shooting and remedy the situation immediately.

    There's more to it than cooling and slowing the rapidly expanding gases before they exit the suppressor. It's the path which these gases are directed through the suppressor's baffle stack that influence the weapon's reliability, and it's all based on gas port diameter, port position relative to the muzzle, as well as port position relative to suppressor's projectile exit orifice - relative to one another.

    We all have a lot to learn when it comes to suppressors and how they influence the function of our favorite weapon. Personally, I take the position that if it's hearing safe and doesn't cause me headaches with my weapon(s) functioning as designed, that's all I ask of the unit.

    It doesn't hurt to keep a few coins in my pocket for ammunition either...

    -SS
    Very Interesting , now my head hurts... I would rather talk about polymer blends and chain molecules......=

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. OD 16s with Phantom
    By AmnFlury in forum FN SCAR Photo Section
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-04-2012, 08:41 AM
  2. scar(l) w/ phantom 556
    By jonstahura in forum SBR, Suppressors and NFA Items
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-23-2012, 01:01 PM
  3. YHM Stainless Q.D. Phantom 7.62
    By emptybrass in forum SBR, Suppressors and NFA Items
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-21-2011, 07:05 PM
  4. SBR and YHM Phantom cam? Opinions?
    By JB70 in forum SBR, Suppressors and NFA Items
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-07-2011, 09:43 AM
  5. Phantom 870 Buttstock?
    By Casp in forum Handgun Room
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-17-2008, 05:32 PM

Search tags for this page

762 suppressor outside diameters
,
aac suppressor vs yhm phantom suppressor
,
aac vs yhm suppressors
,
larue obr with yankee hill phantom
,
specwar 5.56 vs yhm phantom
,
specwar 762 vs aac 762sdn
,
titanium vs steel suppressor
,

yankee hill suppressors vs aac

,
yankee hill titanium suppressor review
,
yhm 3300 suppressor vs aac 7.62 sdn
,
yhm 3300 ti
,
yhm 4350 vs aac 762sdn
,
yhm 762 suppressor ti
,
yhm phantom 7.62 titanium
,
yhm phantom titanium 7.62
,
yhm phantom vs aac sdn6
,
yhm suppressor covers
,
yhm suppressor vs aac suppressors
,

yhm vs aac

,

yhm vs aac suppressor

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» FNForum Sponsors


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1