The obvious solution here is to serialize the endcap and the brake and ship them with the can as an option
What am I missing?
What am I missing?
Suppressors New TBAC cans for 2024
- Thread starter Zak Smith
- Start date
That was essentially my suggestion, but ATFs fucked up rules say that the endcap must be regulated as a silencer but at the same time can't be serialized...
Maybe we could have an option to buy the RR can with the flat endcap instead of the brake? It would be nice to have the interface there for future proofing in case the ATF changes their mind on their "rule" (especially since the "solvent trap" letter is only a month and a half old). By the time the can is actually approved who knows what the ATF "rules" will be.
The brake seems great, but at the same time would be nice to just throw the flat cap on if you are switching between rifles or barrels and don't want to re-time it every time.
Anyways, I'm sure TBAC has done their research and would make it possible if there was any way to do it since there is clearly a market interest in having both the flat endcap and the brake.
And suppressors are regulated as weapons, so in essence they are regulating an endcap as a weapon.
Huh. Guess i better get a bravo anchor brake and flat ti endcap for my sico scythe before the ATF decides to clarify that end caps are weapons.
Also curious how the recoil reduction from the new RR model brakes compares to the Sico Anchor brake. Haven't seen detailed test values like TBAC did here for that brake.
Also curious how the recoil reduction from the new RR model brakes compares to the Sico Anchor brake. Haven't seen detailed test values like TBAC did here for that brake.
This is why I’m opting for the regular Magnus-S .30… Shorter than my full Magnus, but enough suppression to hunt with magnums without ear pro, and still not blow out my eardrums for the next few days.
It’s the government, therefore it’s all retarded… Full-stop.
@Zak Smith
So while talking to someone else about these some questions came up. In reference to the RR models.
Have y’all done any recoil reduction percentage test on 6mm calibers?
And does the RR focus solely on reduced recoil on a x axis. Or does it have anything to divert gas up for muzzle rise?
So while talking to someone else about these some questions came up. In reference to the RR models.
Have y’all done any recoil reduction percentage test on 6mm calibers?
And does the RR focus solely on reduced recoil on a x axis. Or does it have anything to divert gas up for muzzle rise?
This started about going backwards. Adding a muzzle brake end cap to an already existing non rr can (as in the versions available before this thread announcing the update).
From page 1
We didn't get %'s for race-gun 6mm's, but Sam's been shooting it on his Dasher all year. We can get 6mm %'s this spring. They should track 308 pretty well percentage wise though
Thanks so much for the quick reply like always. And both answers make perfect sense.
Layman's terms. A regular Magnus doesn't recoil with a Dasher. An RR recoils less than 0
I would be interested to see testing on 6mm variations as well. Maybe even compared to a few of the more popular brakes.
@Zak Smith Will there be a 6.5mm bore option in the future? I wouldn’t mind having a Magnus-S 6.5mm for my 6 ARC, .260 Rem, and .25 Creed…And other 6.5 or smaller bolt guns…
If there is enough demand, we can add 6.5mm variants. We'd make one first and test to see if there is a difference in performance to warrant it.
Would it be possible to get Sam to compare the Magnus S RR and Magnus K RR when shooting a Dasher?
Would it be possible to compare the Magnus S RR and Magnus K RR when shooting a 375 H&H?
Curious to see the 6.5 numbers vs. 7.62 versions. I hope to see that test video sometime in the near future.
I’m working on this already. I’ve been having issues with the TRIGGERCAM working in cold weather but have a video of an unweighted Dasher. By unweighted I mean no added weights.
What scope magnification do you think is best?
What range of target?
Shot positional off a bag or prone(or modified)?
Trying to gauge what you guys are after.
I don’t have a YouTube so hopefully can see it on here. I’ll work on better videos with TRIGGERCAM to show actual recoil reduction.
It is my understanding, you must have all pieces of the kit for it to be legal. It is the combined overall length. If a section were missing then the problems would start.
Would love to have my TBAC cans retrofitted for the RR option. Have not had my Genll ultra that long at all. We have to remember, TBAC is always pushing forward with new and better technology. We as consumers have helped fund that. When the innovation comes out we can then take advantage of the new technology. I'm happy to see the TBAC team constantly push the boundaries. I'll continue to support the companies the constantly support our sport.
As a side note, if their is a gray area in the law and they chose to try. Would you want profits going to lawyers? Or R&D for new technologies? My vote is new technologies and the pleasure of using them.
no, unfortunately, this has been mentioned several times by @Zak Smith
Yeah, I have a gen1 338 ultra and the gen2 RR is now just enough of an advantage over my gen1 that I'm probably going to get a Gen2RR 338 and use the gen1 for my 308 can. Or other stuff.
The sad orphan, crying in a drawer under the bench is the 30BA 9" can which has no current use.
But that is the deal with cans: they are a marriage, and you have to widow them when they get long in the tooth. No resale value that makes them worth selling.
You could always send that 30BA back to TBAC and let them update it... I think they're putting the Ultra Gen2 stacks in them, if I'm not mistaken... But I could be wrong. Then you'd have a modernized 30BA you could use, and not a gigantic paperweight.
I have thought about that, but I would lose a couple of dB and ounces (maybe), and lose $800 from my wallet; but that's really the issue - once you have so many cans and only so many rifles, there will inevitably be orphaned cans. I'm saving them for my kids' rifles, I guess
Yes, we'll get those comparisons together when we get regrouped after SHOT
Sounds like you need more rifles! Hahahaha
Would you mind unpacking this a bit? When you said it was inconsistent, you mean one cartridge would perform differently than another, or that a given cartridge was inconsistent?
Seems to me (who is not a professional suppressor manufacturer) that I'd be fine learning the behavior of a given cartridge and get muzzle rise offset, than to get none. Only centerfire can I own is a TBAC, but the purported muzzle control of the Maverick leaves me conflicted about my next purchase.
Thanks for any insight you can provide, and that's a great-looking lineup you're rolling out!
Thanks for posting that vid and gathering the info for us.
Magnification - 15x - 20x
Range - 400yds - 600yds
Position - off a bag
would you describe the recoil impulse as a push like a standard suppressor or a snap like a break?
The top ports did not make an observable difference greater than the normal recoil variance of several shooters. In other words, given any particular porting/brake setup, the difference in muzzle flip from shooter to shooter was more than the "correction" of any top port setup. Muzzle rise happens at all because the axis of rotation of the rifle is below the muzzle (or bore line)-- which happens because that's where it contacts you. Applying the principle to everyone, less recoil force will produce less rotation and thus less muzzle rise for anyone that that geometry affects. As I said before on the 50 testing, between a half dozen shooters, with top ports, some guys would end up with muzzle dip and some would not, depending on how they fit and mounted the rifle. The same principle applies to the smaller cans. So we just went for max recoil reduction period.
For me, the impulse feels like more of a snap. I’m able to recover on target pretty easily.
After shot, I’ll work on some
In for more info.
Been trying to decide what is going to be my next TBAC, didn’t plan on so many options showing up causing analysis paralysis.
Good job gentlemen.
Been trying to decide what is going to be my next TBAC, didn’t plan on so many options showing up causing analysis paralysis.
Good job gentlemen.
That’s the choice to make isn’t it…Looking forward to shooting the Magnus RR K and S this week!And ordering one or both.
Regardless I’ll always have the Magnus not RR for full
if needed. Certainly. I'm leaning 90% towards the K length given the recoil numbers (and recent podcast talking about them).That’s the choice to make isn’t it…
Regardless I’ll always have the Magnus not RR for full
I know which one I'm getting... Magnus-S (non-RR) .30 cal... I want it for a precision hunting can. IMO, hunting cans should be quiet enough to be hearing safe out in the open, but also compact enough to walk with still attached. And for me, i've found a 7" can is the goldilocks length for filling both those rolls from short-action cartridges, all the way up to magnums. And my 3 main cartridges for deer hunting are 7mm-08, .280 Ackley, and 7mm RemMag.
Can you link the podcast?
Pre-Shot Show, Thunderbeast Arms Suppressors with Sam & Kurtis
https://theeverydaysniper.podbean.com/e/the-everyday-sniper-podcast-thunderbeast-new-suppressors-with-sam-kurtis/ Pre- Shot Show, new episode out there for you all, Sam & Kurtis called in to give you the low down on the new products for 2024. Excellent discussion, creating information as...
www.snipershide.com Interface is a question as well. I understand SR now, but the secondary retention just doesn’t seem to matter to me even on say my 300prc so the added cost and length are just that - added. Though being able to swap to a 419 brake will be less of a concern due the brake on the can.
@Zak Smith
I read through this thread rather quickly but don't think i saw anything mentioned about muzzle flash. Do the suppressors outfitted with the muzzle brake produce any more/less muzzle flash than their non brake siblings?
I read through this thread rather quickly but don't think i saw anything mentioned about muzzle flash. Do the suppressors outfitted with the muzzle brake produce any more/less muzzle flash than their non brake siblings?
Would it be safe to assume that the Magnus S RR has a little less snap and more push than a Magnus K RR? Or is it negligible?For me, the impulse feels like more of a snap. I’m able to recover on target pretty easily.
After shot, I’ll work on some
I need a little more time on the K to give you a solid answer. Suppression from the shooters position with foamies in, I couldn’t tell a difference. But my squad could tell a different between the S and K
I'm looking at ordering a Magnus-S-RR. The difference in sound between the .30 and .338 caliber is almost negligible. I don't currently have anything in .338 but having the option would be nice. Are there any downsides to getting the .338 version that I'm not thinking of?
I’m interested to learn about recoil reduction performance with these “overbored” .30 RR models at various lengths using a 6mm caliber. Brakes need pressure to optimally be effective, therefore would the S and full-sized RR models have any sensible ROI? Or are we just making it louder for little recoil difference?
Im interested in if the suppressors with muzzle brakes produce more flash than the ones without?
Why not make the flat end cap an unnecessary but included part of the RR brake. So the brake can be removed and the endcap installed. Or RR left in place and the endcap screwed on the end of the RR brake for posterity sake....or not, resulting in zero difference to the braked configuration. But allowing it to be part of the total suppressor configuration. Kind of like the end cap on the fly 9. Consider the RR brake like the longer part of the FLY 9.
