Re: Best suppressor for my new MK18?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M C</div><div class="ubbcode-body">yes but when was the last time you saw a knights can on a scale! those things are stupid heavy! </div></div>
The system weight of KAC is ~5 ounces heavier than surefire (can and mount). KAC has kind of a "it's so ugly it's beautiful" thing going on. The cans really are rough looking.
Surefire on the other hand really makes a nice looking can.
I have no experience with surefire, but the KAC can's work great. The NT4's extra weight and perforated girdle help lower operating temperature for very impressive durability.
I've used the NT4, the M110, and SR25 suppressors. The basic synopsis of the companies suppressors is that they all work well and that says a lot about the people who designed them.
Over the summer I went to a course and shot a DPMS SASS rifle (no can) on a particular qual at 100 yds (a deceptively tough qual for the range) I got a minimum 90% on a 4th attempt. The DPMS gun was low grade- ditched two extractors in 300 rounds too- really surprised me. That gun had a walking zero as the gun heated up that made it a nightmare to shoot especially on the short range qual with the very small targets it offered.
10 days ago I shot that same qual with an old, fairly beat up SR25 and its can and scored a 100% first time go with the same model Leupold 10x optic despite the misconception that over the barrel suppressors are terrible for accuracy. The can is ~14.5" long, weighs about 32 ounces, is real ugly, but it's a great can in my book. Works as advertised. The whole rifle is KAC and it's an excellent system IMO. It certainly beats the hell out of the gun DPMS attempted to compete in the SASS program with.
Obviously Surefire did win the major contract these products were competing for. How government contracts break down is not something I know a lot about. I'm pretty sure it confuses the major players sometimes as well.