Finally swung back around here.
Sounds like you have a plan and that is great.
As others may dig up this thread in the future, let me just point out some things about what liberty may have said...and I do realize that they are not actually quoted here.
This has been a generally good thread on the subject, but really started out with the idea that .22 can leading is such a serious problem that "take-apart" cans could potentially rise to the top of the requirement list.
In my experience, that is not the case. Shooting plated .22's made with clean burning powders and using a high pressure propellant debris cleaning tool can give you tens of thousands of rounds prior to any "cleaning" being done.
Given that, suppression values and accuracy could/should return to top priorities.
"Thread on technology became good enough to render integral technology expensive at best in order to keep up."
This is misleading. In every way, all technologies found in a blast can that have to do with suppression are found in the core of the integral.
In other words, if its about baffle facings, chamber staging, end cap designs, etc. all that is the same between the two.
But, there are parts of the suppression system of integrals that cannot be found in a blast can. Gas purge, tapped gas precharging and barrel compression (harmonics) , these are not found in a threaded blast can.
If the goal is absolute quiet, the topic of shooting subsonics is important and most packaged subsonics are just not the same as port tuning a HV round down to subsonic.
If one wants to use a blast can and shoot HV at subsonic speeds, the barrel has to be cut back significantly.
A "$635 <blast> can is 1.5 dB louder than their $2,000 integral"
Again, a bit misleading. One is the price of just the blast can, the other has an integrated host (pistol) included. Most producers blue print the host, or at least do the basic tune up. Some go much farther on barrel tap and barrel compression.
But there is more inasmuch as, in an integral, there is no chance of the can becoming loose, the benefit of a longer sight picture, harmonics stabilization, maximization of tuned subsonic velocities, all mentioned above.
Paclite = Aluminum, I have always welcomed the steel weight in the Marks.
But, as mentioned one does "give up" being able to swap the can to other hosts and for MANY this is the major driver to getting a blast can and understandably so.
Good luck and let us know how it all works out.
P.S. suppressing the 5.7 is a whole topic by itself. For now, you must be very careful of the pressure differential between a .22 and the 5.7 (48,000 cup vs 24,000) and know that at 2,500 fps velocities, this can will not suffice.
Best.
Sounds like you have a plan and that is great.
As others may dig up this thread in the future, let me just point out some things about what liberty may have said...and I do realize that they are not actually quoted here.
This has been a generally good thread on the subject, but really started out with the idea that .22 can leading is such a serious problem that "take-apart" cans could potentially rise to the top of the requirement list.
In my experience, that is not the case. Shooting plated .22's made with clean burning powders and using a high pressure propellant debris cleaning tool can give you tens of thousands of rounds prior to any "cleaning" being done.
Given that, suppression values and accuracy could/should return to top priorities.
"Thread on technology became good enough to render integral technology expensive at best in order to keep up."
This is misleading. In every way, all technologies found in a blast can that have to do with suppression are found in the core of the integral.
In other words, if its about baffle facings, chamber staging, end cap designs, etc. all that is the same between the two.
But, there are parts of the suppression system of integrals that cannot be found in a blast can. Gas purge, tapped gas precharging and barrel compression (harmonics) , these are not found in a threaded blast can.
If the goal is absolute quiet, the topic of shooting subsonics is important and most packaged subsonics are just not the same as port tuning a HV round down to subsonic.
If one wants to use a blast can and shoot HV at subsonic speeds, the barrel has to be cut back significantly.
A "$635 <blast> can is 1.5 dB louder than their $2,000 integral"
Again, a bit misleading. One is the price of just the blast can, the other has an integrated host (pistol) included. Most producers blue print the host, or at least do the basic tune up. Some go much farther on barrel tap and barrel compression.
But there is more inasmuch as, in an integral, there is no chance of the can becoming loose, the benefit of a longer sight picture, harmonics stabilization, maximization of tuned subsonic velocities, all mentioned above.
Paclite = Aluminum, I have always welcomed the steel weight in the Marks.
But, as mentioned one does "give up" being able to swap the can to other hosts and for MANY this is the major driver to getting a blast can and understandably so.
Good luck and let us know how it all works out.
P.S. suppressing the 5.7 is a whole topic by itself. For now, you must be very careful of the pressure differential between a .22 and the 5.7 (48,000 cup vs 24,000) and know that at 2,500 fps velocities, this can will not suffice.
Best.
Last edited:
