Re: Surefire Cans
That goes really well w/ your well deserved tatoo!
That goes really well w/ your well deserved tatoo!
Suppressors Surefire Cans
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That goes really well w/ your well deserved tatoo! </div></div>
Yeah right next to your CITE for FN dropping AAC....
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That goes really well w/ your well deserved tatoo! </div></div>
Yeah right next to your CITE for FN dropping AAC....
Re: Surefire Cans
To give credit to AAC they simply could not meet the volume that would be needed!
Hope this helps!
http://www.wreckingbalm.com/
To give credit to AAC they simply could not meet the volume that would be needed!
Hope this helps!
http://www.wreckingbalm.com/
Re: Surefire Cans
Again, to answer the original question and to get away from the horseshit about who's dick is longer, bigger, or more diseased, the length required to successfully mount a Surefire can is minimum 3" from the muzzle to the gas block.
The adaptor over the threads and barrel will cover about 2-3/4" and the suppressor nut needs about 1/8" behind the adaptor.
Instruction Manual says:
556AR with 12.5" barrel or longer, must have 2.15" unobstructed barrel behind the threads. Doesn't seem to want the 10" barrel.
556K, any barrel with .170" unobstructed barrel behind the threads
Again, to answer the original question and to get away from the horseshit about who's dick is longer, bigger, or more diseased, the length required to successfully mount a Surefire can is minimum 3" from the muzzle to the gas block.
The adaptor over the threads and barrel will cover about 2-3/4" and the suppressor nut needs about 1/8" behind the adaptor.
Instruction Manual says:
556AR with 12.5" barrel or longer, must have 2.15" unobstructed barrel behind the threads. Doesn't seem to want the 10" barrel.
556K, any barrel with .170" unobstructed barrel behind the threads
Re: Surefire Cans
Surefire makes decent flashlights
Surefire makes decent flashlights
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ZOMBIE101</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Surefire makes decent flashlights </div></div>
LOL!!!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ZOMBIE101</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Surefire makes decent flashlights </div></div>
LOL!!!
Re: Surefire Cans
This old debate? SF vs AAC vs Gemtech vs... zzzzzzz.
What next 9mm vs .45 vs .40?
This old debate? SF vs AAC vs Gemtech vs... zzzzzzz.
What next 9mm vs .45 vs .40?
Re: Surefire Cans
I didn't meen to start the whole debate, I just wanted to know from those who have them if they liked them or if they wished they would have bought another brand.
I did by a SF FA556AR for less than a SPR/M4. I already have an older M4-2000 so this will make my collection more diverse. If I don't like it, well no biggie, I'll just trow it on the wifes rifle and get something else.
I didn't meen to start the whole debate, I just wanted to know from those who have them if they liked them or if they wished they would have bought another brand.
I did by a SF FA556AR for less than a SPR/M4. I already have an older M4-2000 so this will make my collection more diverse. If I don't like it, well no biggie, I'll just trow it on the wifes rifle and get something else.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ZOMBIE101</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Surefire makes decent flashlights </div></div>
Now this i can agree with.
I have 3 of them.....
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ZOMBIE101</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Surefire makes decent flashlights </div></div>
Now this i can agree with.
I have 3 of them.....
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: weazer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didn't meen to start the whole debate, I just wanted to know from those who have them if they liked them or if they wished they would have bought another brand.</div></div>
I like the SF cans I've used. AACs work well too. Seems though everyone picks one side or the other and throws stones at the other.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: weazer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didn't meen to start the whole debate, I just wanted to know from those who have them if they liked them or if they wished they would have bought another brand.</div></div>
I like the SF cans I've used. AACs work well too. Seems though everyone picks one side or the other and throws stones at the other.
Re: Surefire Cans
I hope you don't mind if I cite this though. I also hope you have the patience to read thru all of it especially the part where the AAC rep is asked about the welds and their supposed superiority!!!
http://download469.mediafire.com/crwn9dylxlcg/tqdjngngimn/Silvers+Depo+1.pdf
http://download122.mediafire.com/lxaznjyxifzg/wrd2q2mkavd/Silvers+Depo+2.pdf
If you read in to it;you'll see the mention of this site!!! So you can see the consequences of running your .... Perhaps you can consider the advice you have given me to be more suitable for you!!! Zip it! Enjoy!!!
I hope you don't mind if I cite this though. I also hope you have the patience to read thru all of it especially the part where the AAC rep is asked about the welds and their supposed superiority!!!
http://download469.mediafire.com/crwn9dylxlcg/tqdjngngimn/Silvers+Depo+1.pdf
http://download122.mediafire.com/lxaznjyxifzg/wrd2q2mkavd/Silvers+Depo+2.pdf
If you read in to it;you'll see the mention of this site!!! So you can see the consequences of running your .... Perhaps you can consider the advice you have given me to be more suitable for you!!! Zip it! Enjoy!!!
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What next 9mm vs .45 vs .40?
</div></div>
9MM is the best and everything else won't even kill a fly!!!!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What next 9mm vs .45 vs .40?
</div></div>
9MM is the best and everything else won't even kill a fly!!!!
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you don't mind if I cite this though. I also hope you have the patience to read thru all of it especially the part where the AAC rep is asked about the welds and their supposed superiority!!!
http://download469.mediafire.com/crwn9dylxlcg/tqdjngngimn/Silvers+Depo+1.pdf
http://download122.mediafire.com/lxaznjyxifzg/wrd2q2mkavd/Silvers+Depo+2.pdf
If you read in to it;you'll see the mention of this site!!! So you can see the consequences of running your .... Perhaps you can consider the advice you have given me to be more suitable for you!!! Zip it! Enjoy!!! </div></div>
What consequences? SF had thier case dismissed because, and I CITE the JUDGE:
"However, <span style="font-weight: bold">SureFire fails to provide evidence that the advertisement's implicit messages are false</span>."
SF lost...........time and money.........only to be be judged against......
The military was never able to fire a M4 carbine 596 rounds..............Yet SF does 1500.
Thanks for proving my point......
<span style="text-decoration: underline">citation</span> is a reference to a published or unpublished source (not always the original source).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope you don't mind if I cite this though. I also hope you have the patience to read thru all of it especially the part where the AAC rep is asked about the welds and their supposed superiority!!!
http://download469.mediafire.com/crwn9dylxlcg/tqdjngngimn/Silvers+Depo+1.pdf
http://download122.mediafire.com/lxaznjyxifzg/wrd2q2mkavd/Silvers+Depo+2.pdf
If you read in to it;you'll see the mention of this site!!! So you can see the consequences of running your .... Perhaps you can consider the advice you have given me to be more suitable for you!!! Zip it! Enjoy!!!
What consequences? SF had thier case dismissed because, and I CITE the JUDGE:
"However, <span style="font-weight: bold">SureFire fails to provide evidence that the advertisement's implicit messages are false</span>."
SF lost...........time and money.........only to be be judged against......
The military was never able to fire a M4 carbine 596 rounds..............Yet SF does 1500.
Thanks for proving my point......
<span style="text-decoration: underline">citation</span> is a reference to a published or unpublished source (not always the original source).
Re: Surefire Cans
The case is not over, and as far as the 1500 rounds they used 3 different weapons w/ the same suppressor! Do yourself a favor and read before you run your mouth! Right now you are really hurting your cause!!! You may even excercise your right to take the 5th as it may be more beneficial for you!!!
The case is not over, and as far as the 1500 rounds they used 3 different weapons w/ the same suppressor! Do yourself a favor and read before you run your mouth! Right now you are really hurting your cause!!! You may even excercise your right to take the 5th as it may be more beneficial for you!!!
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The case is not over, and as far as the 1500 rounds they used 3 different weapons w/ the same suppressor! Do yourself a favor and read before you run your mouth! Right now you are really hurting your cause!!! You may even excercise your right to take the 5th as it may be more beneficial for you!!! </div></div>
Again,
<span style="font-style: italic">Santa Ana, CA – <span style="font-weight: bold">The court denied Surefire’s preliminary injunction motion and silenced its attempt to shoot down Advanced Armament’s silencer advertising.</span>. The court quickly pointed out that the accused advertisement doesn’t make any reference to Surefire and the pictured suppressor is not readily identifiable as a Surefire product. Surefire must be questioning its decision to file a lawsuit that – unlike the advertisement at issue – unequivocally identified its product as the one pictured in the advertisement <span style="font-weight: bold">and brought more attention to it than the advertisement itself</span>. Indeed, <span style="font-weight: bold">Surefire submitted discussions from weapon forums that referenced the lawsuit and the advertisement at issue</span>.
The alleged four false statements at issue were: “(1) the SureFire suppressor shown uses spot welds; (2) SureFire’s spot welds are not as strong as the fusion welds used by AAC; (3) SureFire’s spot welds are likely to fail during normal semi-automatic and full-automatic firings; and (4) AAC’s suppressors are more durable than suppressors like the SureFire suppressor shown.” <span style="font-weight: bold">The court determined that the statements were not literally false on their face </span>or by necessary implication because the suppressor cannot be positively identified as Surefire’s. As a result, the court also found that <span style="text-decoration: underline">Surefire could not evidence actual injury because the non-comparative statements cause injury to all competitors and “none is more likely to suffer from the offending broadcasts than any other.”</span> Thus, <span style="font-weight: bold">Surefire could not show a likelihood of success on the merits </span>or significant hardship if the preliminary injunction was not granted. The case is SureFire, LLC v. Advanced Armament Corp., SACV 08-1405 DOC (C.D. Cal. 2008).</span>
<span style="font-style: italic">Santa Ana, CA – Gun suppressor manufacturer SureFire, LLC filed a false advertising lawsuit, in the Central District of California (Santa Ana Division), against Advanced Armament Corp. (“AAC”), details blogged here. Returning fire, AAC then filed its own false advertising counterclaim (copy available here) alleging that <span style="font-weight: bold">SureFire’s representation that its suppressors could withstand the continuous firing of 1,5000 rounds without failure is false and no tests were conducted to support the statements</span>.</span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"However, <span style="font-weight: bold">SureFire fails to provide evidence that the advertisement's implicit messages are false</span>."</div></div>
<span style="text-decoration: underline">The case is over...............SF lost. </span>
So you actually belive that the SF is 6X better than the KAC can then as well, bc they talk about how the KAC can is only good for 5K rounds, but the SF is good for 30K.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The case is not over, and as far as the 1500 rounds they used 3 different weapons w/ the same suppressor! Do yourself a favor and read before you run your mouth! Right now you are really hurting your cause!!! You may even excercise your right to take the 5th as it may be more beneficial for you!!!
Again,
<span style="font-style: italic">Santa Ana, CA – <span style="font-weight: bold">The court denied Surefire’s preliminary injunction motion and silenced its attempt to shoot down Advanced Armament’s silencer advertising.</span>. The court quickly pointed out that the accused advertisement doesn’t make any reference to Surefire and the pictured suppressor is not readily identifiable as a Surefire product. Surefire must be questioning its decision to file a lawsuit that – unlike the advertisement at issue – unequivocally identified its product as the one pictured in the advertisement <span style="font-weight: bold">and brought more attention to it than the advertisement itself</span>. Indeed, <span style="font-weight: bold">Surefire submitted discussions from weapon forums that referenced the lawsuit and the advertisement at issue</span>.
The alleged four false statements at issue were: “(1) the SureFire suppressor shown uses spot welds; (2) SureFire’s spot welds are not as strong as the fusion welds used by AAC; (3) SureFire’s spot welds are likely to fail during normal semi-automatic and full-automatic firings; and (4) AAC’s suppressors are more durable than suppressors like the SureFire suppressor shown.” <span style="font-weight: bold">The court determined that the statements were not literally false on their face </span>or by necessary implication because the suppressor cannot be positively identified as Surefire’s. As a result, the court also found that <span style="text-decoration: underline">Surefire could not evidence actual injury because the non-comparative statements cause injury to all competitors and “none is more likely to suffer from the offending broadcasts than any other.”</span> Thus, <span style="font-weight: bold">Surefire could not show a likelihood of success on the merits </span>or significant hardship if the preliminary injunction was not granted. The case is SureFire, LLC v. Advanced Armament Corp., SACV 08-1405 DOC (C.D. Cal. 2008).</span>
<span style="font-style: italic">Santa Ana, CA – Gun suppressor manufacturer SureFire, LLC filed a false advertising lawsuit, in the Central District of California (Santa Ana Division), against Advanced Armament Corp. (“AAC”), details blogged here. Returning fire, AAC then filed its own false advertising counterclaim (copy available here) alleging that <span style="font-weight: bold">SureFire’s representation that its suppressors could withstand the continuous firing of 1,5000 rounds without failure is false and no tests were conducted to support the statements</span>.</span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"However, <span style="font-weight: bold">SureFire fails to provide evidence that the advertisement's implicit messages are false</span>."</div></div>
<span style="text-decoration: underline">The case is over...............SF lost. </span>
So you actually belive that the SF is 6X better than the KAC can then as well, bc they talk about how the KAC can is only good for 5K rounds, but the SF is good for 30K.
Re: Surefire Cans
What are you trying to do?...Convice him with facts?...It's not gonna happen!
What are you trying to do?...Convice him with facts?...It's not gonna happen!
Re: Surefire Cans
Your "Oral" skills are outstanding!
Your "Oral" skills are outstanding!
Re: Surefire Cans
LoL'
LoL'
Re: Surefire Cans
I wish SF would hurry up and make/release this already.
I wish SF would hurry up and make/release this already.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The case is not over, and as far as the 1500 rounds they used 3 different weapons w/ the same suppressor! Do yourself a favor and read before you run your mouth! Right now you are really hurting your cause!!! You may even excercise your right to take the 5th as it may be more beneficial for you!!! </div></div>
It's funny you mention 5th amendment rights.
<span style="font-style: italic">Defamation.............</span>
<span style="text-decoration: underline">You are posting BS comments on this board about AAC and them "losing the SCAR" contract. Even though you can't back up your statements with any facts.</span>
IAN on ar15.com just had to eat MASSIVE crow for the same BS you are saying, you really should stop making BS lies.....they could wind your ass up in court.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
IAN:
<span style="font-style: italic">The defamation lawsuit regarding certain internet postings filed by AAC has been settled on terms and conditions that are confidential and mutually agreeable. I was acting without malice toward AAC, and completely on my own when I made the challenged postings. I made the postings based upon prior postings by AAC concerning its relationship to the SCAR program. At the time, I believed my postings to be accurate although <span style="font-weight: bold">now I understand that they were not true in certain important respects. In particular, I now know that AAC’s relationship with FN for the SCAR program has been and is ongoing.</span> I believe in the open and free exchange of information and ideas on these types of websites but I also believe in being accurate. <span style="font-weight: bold">I regret that I made the postings at issue that were not true in certain important respects</span></span>.</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The case is not over, and as far as the 1500 rounds they used 3 different weapons w/ the same suppressor! Do yourself a favor and read before you run your mouth! Right now you are really hurting your cause!!! You may even excercise your right to take the 5th as it may be more beneficial for you!!!
It's funny you mention 5th amendment rights.
<span style="font-style: italic">Defamation.............</span>
<span style="text-decoration: underline">You are posting BS comments on this board about AAC and them "losing the SCAR" contract. Even though you can't back up your statements with any facts.</span>
IAN on ar15.com just had to eat MASSIVE crow for the same BS you are saying, you really should stop making BS lies.....they could wind your ass up in court.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
IAN:
<span style="font-style: italic">The defamation lawsuit regarding certain internet postings filed by AAC has been settled on terms and conditions that are confidential and mutually agreeable. I was acting without malice toward AAC, and completely on my own when I made the challenged postings. I made the postings based upon prior postings by AAC concerning its relationship to the SCAR program. At the time, I believed my postings to be accurate although <span style="font-weight: bold">now I understand that they were not true in certain important respects. In particular, I now know that AAC’s relationship with FN for the SCAR program has been and is ongoing.</span> I believe in the open and free exchange of information and ideas on these types of websites but I also believe in being accurate. <span style="font-weight: bold">I regret that I made the postings at issue that were not true in certain important respects</span></span>.</div></div>
Re: Surefire Cans
This thread has turned into a big frickin' joke and all because 2 people choose to carry on over a stupid argument. Whining about personal attacks? Threats of lawsuits to prove points? Good lord, let it go-you're not going to change each others minds.
I have Surefire and AAC cans and I like both of them and they do what they were designed for very well. Pick what you like and be happy with it.
As for what the SCAR rifles are coming with I know for a fact that the units that have been getting them so far are coming with AAC suppressors. That's not coming from either of the manufacturers, but instead from end users getting them issued to them. If other units are opting for different suppressors, I don't know-they are both terrific choices regardless.
This thread has turned into a big frickin' joke and all because 2 people choose to carry on over a stupid argument. Whining about personal attacks? Threats of lawsuits to prove points? Good lord, let it go-you're not going to change each others minds.
I have Surefire and AAC cans and I like both of them and they do what they were designed for very well. Pick what you like and be happy with it.
As for what the SCAR rifles are coming with I know for a fact that the units that have been getting them so far are coming with AAC suppressors. That's not coming from either of the manufacturers, but instead from end users getting them issued to them. If other units are opting for different suppressors, I don't know-they are both terrific choices regardless.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually let's talk about aggresive a little! Who's bashing who w/ BS comparisons. comparing a K model to the rest, showing pictures of a brand new AAC compared to a well used SF. God only knows what was done to it??? Show the bottom of the pic; where it is clear that they copied SF's design! Yeah I know SF didn't design it either, but so much for AAC being in the forefront! The fact remains we are humans and I can hear equally well the sound from SF and AAC! If AAC is so much better why did they get canned from the FN SCAR rifle; after all they are less expensive? </div></div>
Be very careful.
Your statement is 100% incorrect. Everything you stated. Cite it or retract it.
We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually let's talk about aggresive a little! Who's bashing who w/ BS comparisons. comparing a K model to the rest, showing pictures of a brand new AAC compared to a well used SF. God only knows what was done to it??? Show the bottom of the pic; where it is clear that they copied SF's design! Yeah I know SF didn't design it either, but so much for AAC being in the forefront! The fact remains we are humans and I can hear equally well the sound from SF and AAC! If AAC is so much better why did they get canned
Be very careful.
Your statement is 100% incorrect. Everything you stated. Cite it or retract it.
We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program.
Re: Surefire Cans
First off I don't recall saying that any one can is better or worse then the other! Secondly if you do have the contract great; why don't you cite it? Or what? You gonna do the same thing that you were complaining about that SF has done to you??? Go for it! AAC is a great can but it isn't any better. Stop trying to convince others that it is thru.....
First off I don't recall saying that any one can is better or worse then the other! Secondly if you do have the contract great; why don't you cite it? Or what? You gonna do the same thing that you were complaining about that SF has done to you??? Go for it! AAC is a great can but it isn't any better. Stop trying to convince others that it is thru.....
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF Optics-Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This thread has turned into a big frickin' joke and all because 2 people choose to carry on over a stupid argument. <span style="font-weight: bold">Whining about personal attacks? Threats of lawsuits to prove points?</span> Good lord, let it go-you're not going to change each others minds.
I have Surefire and AAC cans and I like both of them and they do what they were designed for very well. Pick what you like and be happy with it.
As for what the SCAR rifles are coming with <span style="font-weight: bold">I know for a fact that the units that have been getting them so far are coming with AAC suppressors.</span> That's not coming from either of the manufacturers, but instead from end users getting them issued to them. If other units are opting for different suppressors, I don't know-they are both terrific choices regardless. </div></div>
<span style="text-decoration: underline">So whining about personnal attacks is now a bad thing?</span> It's childish posting that is done merely becasue the man has nothing to back up his posts.
<span style="text-decoration: underline">Threats of lawsuits?</span> Turk is flat out making lies about the FN SCAR program, your own post/expirence shows this too.
<span style="font-style: italic">If I started making lies about Nightforce without facts to back it up, becasue I don't like nightforce... Nightforce might not be too pleased about it......</span>
?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF Optics-Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This thread has turned into a big frickin' joke and all because 2 people choose to carry on over a stupid argument. <span style="font-weight: bold">Whining about personal attacks? Threats of lawsuits to prove points?</span> Good lord, let it go-you're not going to change each others minds.
I have Surefire and AAC cans and I like both of them and they do what they were designed for very well. Pick what you like and be happy with it.
As for what the SCAR rifles are coming with <span style="font-weight: bold">I know for a fact that the units that have been getting them so far are coming with AAC suppressors.</span> That's not coming from either of the manufacturers, but instead from end users getting them issued to them. If other units are opting for different suppressors, I don't know-they are both terrific choices regardless. </div></div>
<span style="text-decoration: underline">So whining about personnal attacks is now a bad thing?</span> It's childish posting that is done merely becasue the man has nothing to back up his posts.
<span style="text-decoration: underline">Threats of lawsuits?</span> Turk is flat out making lies about the FN SCAR program, your own post/expirence shows this too.
<span style="font-style: italic">If I started making lies about Nightforce without facts to back it up, becasue I don't like nightforce... Nightforce might not be too pleased about it......</span>
?
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">First off I don't recall saying that any one can is better or worse then the other! Secondly if you do have the contract great; why don't you cite it? Or what? You gonna do the same thing that you were complaining about that SF has done to you??? Go for it! AAC is a great can but it isn't any better. Stop trying to convince others that it is thru..... </div></div>
FN website:
http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/family.asp?fid=FNF022&gid=FNG007
http://www.fnherstal.com/index.php?id=182
Look, they all have a AAC hider on them! Imagine that!
Military.com:
http://www.military.com/news/article/operators-test-new-commando-rifle.html?ESRC=dod.nl
Video from Military.com
http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=172738&page=1
You are making statements about AAC and the FN SCAR program that are simply not true..........he's not trying to convince you of anything, he might , imagine this, want you to stop posting lies without proof to back it up.
I have posted the FN catalog with AAC hiders and cans all over it, people in the know have chimed in about them coming with AAC cans, etc......
Vs.
You can't cite anything.
Ok.......
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">First off I don't recall saying that any one can is better or worse then the other! Secondly if you do have the contract great; why don't you cite it? Or what? You gonna do the same thing that you were complaining about that SF has done to you??? Go for it! AAC is a great can but it isn't any better. Stop trying to convince others that it is thru..... </div></div>
FN website:
http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/family.asp?fid=FNF022&gid=FNG007
http://www.fnherstal.com/index.php?id=182
Look, they all have a AAC hider on them! Imagine that!
Military.com:
http://www.military.com/news/article/operators-test-new-commando-rifle.html?ESRC=dod.nl
Video from Military.com
http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=172738&page=1
You are making statements about AAC and the FN SCAR program that are simply not true..........he's not trying to convince you of anything, he might , imagine this, want you to stop posting lies without proof to back it up.
I have posted the FN catalog with AAC hiders and cans all over it, people in the know have chimed in about them coming with AAC cans, etc......
Vs.
You can't cite anything.
Ok.......
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Arevalosocom</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="text-decoration: underline">So whining about personnal attacks is now a bad thing?</span> It's childish posting that is done merely becasue the man has nothing to back up his posts.
<span style="text-decoration: underline">Threats of lawsuits?</span> Turk is flat out making lies about the FN SCAR program, your own post/expirence shows this too.
If I started making lies about Nightforce without facts to back it up, becasue I don't like nightforce... Nightforce might not be too pleased about it...... </div></div>
A - If you think my post was directed solely at you, you are sorely mistaken.
B - AAC is run by adults who can handle their own matters without you running to their defense regarding contract matters and Kevin himself does visit regularly. I'm sure that there are competent people within the organization who can handle any potential legal issues that may arise on their own-without having some guy on the internet making points or warnings of legal action for them.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Arevalosocom</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="text-decoration: underline">So whining about personnal attacks is now a bad thing?</span> It's childish posting that is done merely becasue the man has nothing to back up his posts.
<span style="text-decoration: underline">Threats of lawsuits?</span> Turk is flat out making lies about the FN SCAR program, your own post/expirence shows this too.
If I started making lies about Nightforce without facts to back it up, becasue I don't like nightforce... Nightforce might not be too pleased about it...... </div></div>
A - If you think my post was directed solely at you, you are sorely mistaken.
B - AAC is run by adults who can handle their own matters without you running to their defense regarding contract matters and Kevin himself does visit regularly. I'm sure that there are competent people within the organization who can handle any potential legal issues that may arise on their own-without having some guy on the internet making points or warnings of legal action for them.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF Optics-Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Arevalosocom</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="text-decoration: underline">So whining about personnal attacks is now a bad thing?</span> It's childish posting that is done merely becasue the man has nothing to back up his posts.
<span style="text-decoration: underline">Threats of lawsuits?</span> Turk is flat out making lies about the FN SCAR program, your own post/expirence shows this too.
If I started making lies about Nightforce without facts to back it up, becasue I don't like nightforce... Nightforce might not be too pleased about it...... </div></div>
A - If you think my post was directed solely at you, you are sorely mistaken.
B - AAC is run by adults who can handle their own matters without you running to their defense regarding contract matters and Kevin himself does visit regularly.
C - This isn't about Nightforce and if it was, there are competent people within the organization who can handle any potential legal issues that may arise on their own-without having some guy on the internet making points or warnings of legal action for them. This ties into the above. </div></div>
A. Thanks for the clarification
B. Kevin posted on this page, <span style="font-weight: bold">he basically said the same thing......Cite or STFU.</span>
C. I'm not taking action for them. I'm simply pointing out that people have been sued for Defamation by making the same exact posts he has made and is making. Ian had to deal with mounting legal costs and a big fat "i'm sorry/ I was wrong" for doing what Turk is doing.
P.S. My uncle's roomate's cousin's aunt told me Nightforce scopes no longer have a NSN# becasue they are made in china with shitty glass. The Military dropped Nightforce......
See how stupid that sounds without me "citing" anything to back up a claim like that.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF Optics-Bill</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Arevalosocom</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="text-decoration: underline">So whining about personnal attacks is now a bad thing?</span> It's childish posting that is done merely becasue the man has nothing to back up his posts.
<span style="text-decoration: underline">Threats of lawsuits?</span> Turk is flat out making lies about the FN SCAR program, your own post/expirence shows this too.
If I started making lies about Nightforce without facts to back it up, becasue I don't like nightforce... Nightforce might not be too pleased about it...... </div></div>
A - If you think my post was directed solely at you, you are sorely mistaken.
B - AAC is run by adults who can handle their own matters without you running to their defense regarding contract matters and Kevin himself does visit regularly.
C - This isn't about Nightforce and if it was, there are competent people within the organization who can handle any potential legal issues that may arise on their own-without having some guy on the internet making points or warnings of legal action for them. This ties into the above. </div></div>
A. Thanks for the clarification
B. Kevin posted on this page, <span style="font-weight: bold">he basically said the same thing......Cite or STFU.</span>
C. I'm not taking action for them. I'm simply pointing out that people have been sued for Defamation by making the same exact posts he has made and is making. Ian had to deal with mounting legal costs and a big fat "i'm sorry/ I was wrong" for doing what Turk is doing.
P.S. My uncle's roomate's cousin's aunt told me Nightforce scopes no longer have a NSN# becasue they are made in china with shitty glass. The Military dropped Nightforce......
See how stupid that sounds without me "citing" anything to back up a claim like that.
Re: Surefire Cans
When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon!
When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon!
Re: Surefire Cans
This doesn't look like it's going to end well.
This doesn't look like it's going to end well.
Re: Surefire Cans
<span style="font-style: italic">We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program</span>
Sounds a little Clinton like....I did not have sex with that woman....
And just being a casual observer of the whole Ian vs AAC thing - it looks radically different than Ian was forced to make an apolgy. That may have been part of the terms, but from the outside looking in, it certainly isn't indicative of a clear cut victory for AAC.
<span style="font-style: italic">We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program</span>
Sounds a little Clinton like....I did not have sex with that woman....
And just being a casual observer of the whole Ian vs AAC thing - it looks radically different than Ian was forced to make an apolgy. That may have been part of the terms, but from the outside looking in, it certainly isn't indicative of a clear cut victory for AAC.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon! </div></div>
My scar h had an nsn number on it.......And i believe my m4-2008 does as well
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon! </div></div>
My scar h had an nsn number on it.......And i believe my m4-2008 does as well
Re: Surefire Cans
I actually found the NSN# on AAC's website!
I actually found the NSN# on AAC's website!
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This doesn't look like it's going to end well. </div></div>
Hopefully it'll end with Turk getting a 2nd mortage on his home to pay his legal fees.......
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This doesn't look like it's going to end well. </div></div>
Hopefully it'll end with Turk getting a 2nd mortage on his home to pay his legal fees.......
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic">We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program</span>
Sounds a little Clinton like....I did not have sex with that woman....
And just being a casual observer of the whole Ian vs AAC thing - it looks radically different than Ian was forced to make an apolgy. That may have been part of the terms, but from the outside looking in, it certainly isn't indicative of a clear cut victory for AAC.
</div></div>
Who said I'm sorry?
AAC or IAN?
Who had to retract their statements?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic">We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program</span>
Sounds a little Clinton like....I did not have sex with that woman....
And just being a casual observer of the whole Ian vs AAC thing - it looks radically different than Ian was forced to make an apolgy. That may have been part of the terms, but from the outside looking in, it certainly isn't indicative of a clear cut victory for AAC.
</div></div>
Who said I'm sorry?
AAC or IAN?
Who had to retract their statements?
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon! </div></div>
i prefer it in public, there is nothing i wouldn't say publically that i would in PMs, PMs are pure gutlessness. Say what you believe right here. It'll make the deposition easier.......
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon! </div></div>
i prefer it in public, there is nothing i wouldn't say publically that i would in PMs, PMs are pure gutlessness. Say what you believe right here. It'll make the deposition easier.......
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lazlo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good luck finding one. I've been looking for a 7.62SS for almost 2 months now, without success. </div></div>
I just got one of these from Iron Brigade Armory in NC, which had them in stock. Give them a call.
I too am really bored with the antics here. Let's get back on track and talk contructively. thx
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lazlo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good luck finding one. I've been looking for a 7.62SS for almost 2 months now, without success. </div></div>
I just got one of these from Iron Brigade Armory in NC, which had them in stock. Give them a call.
I too am really bored with the antics here. Let's get back on track and talk contructively. thx
Re: Surefire Cans
I apologize for getting off the subject! I just get a little caught up when some of those; this is better, that is better gets started! Many good suppressor manufacturers out there including SF and AAC to name a few.
I apologize for getting off the subject! I just get a little caught up when some of those; this is better, that is better gets started! Many good suppressor manufacturers out there including SF and AAC to name a few.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic">We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program</span>
Sounds a little Clinton like....I did not have sex with that woman....
</div></div>
Silencers, flash hiders, etc. Sorry, I thought you guys would get it...I was not trying to be elusive.
NSN's are probably on our website or through a Google search. There are NSN's for the SCAR-L and SCAR-H silencers.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-style: italic">We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program</span>
Sounds a little Clinton like....I did not have sex with that woman....
</div></div>
Silencers, flash hiders, etc. Sorry, I thought you guys would get it...I was not trying to be elusive.
NSN's are probably on our website or through a Google search. There are NSN's for the SCAR-L and SCAR-H silencers.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fastford</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon! </div></div>
My scar h had an nsn number on it.......And i believe my m4-2008 does as well </div></div>
Yes, the M4-2000 does have a NSN too.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fastford</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you get a chance from taking a break from being AAC's "Blowup Doll"
take it on the PM side!!! Muzzle accsesories!!! What a F'n joke!!! I showed repeatedly that by AAC's admission the weld's aren't superior! How about an NSN # from AAC on the SCAR? I think that would suffice! Personally I really prefer that you PM me; actually look forward to it! And save those FN catalogs for the next time you are sitting on the Jon! </div></div>
My scar h had an nsn number on it.......And i believe my m4-2008 does as well </div></div>
Yes, the M4-2000 does have a NSN too.
Re: Surefire Cans
Kevin, is it possible to use any of your 7.62 fast attach suppresors on a M4 w/ out recutting the threads?
Kevin, is it possible to use any of your 7.62 fast attach suppresors on a M4 w/ out recutting the threads?
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">+1 Notice any similarities?
How convenient for the test to use a 10 inch barrel so one couldn't use a FA model! Use what you want and stop bashing w/ stuff that doesn't make a difference in the real world! </div></div>
We were doing this before they were making silencers...you know, when Barry was still working for OPS. OPS and other companies have always used this method for venting OTB silencers...we probably did it first for muzzle mounted ones.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">+1 Notice any similarities?
How convenient for the test to use a 10 inch barrel so one couldn't use a FA model! Use what you want and stop bashing w/ stuff that doesn't make a difference in the real world! </div></div>
We were doing this before they were making silencers...you know, when Barry was still working for OPS. OPS and other companies have always used this method for venting OTB silencers...we probably did it first for muzzle mounted ones.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Kevin, is it possible to use any of your 7.62 fast attach suppresors on a M4 w/ out recutting the threads? </div></div>
Yes. You can use the 762-SD on the M4-1000 flash hider.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Kevin, is it possible to use any of your 7.62 fast attach suppresors on a M4 w/ out recutting the threads? </div></div>
Yes. You can use the 762-SD on the M4-1000 flash hider.
Re: Surefire Cans
I have no beef w/ AAC! FWIW AAC always had great customer service! They even in the past helped me w/ my SF problem! Up untill recently SF customer service wasn't so hot. Even now Howard Feng is the only one that you can talk to there! It is well known that AAC has been in business longer, and until a few years ago had somewhat of a relationship w/ the guys at SF. I guess time changes things!
I have no beef w/ AAC! FWIW AAC always had great customer service! They even in the past helped me w/ my SF problem! Up untill recently SF customer service wasn't so hot. Even now Howard Feng is the only one that you can talk to there! It is well known that AAC has been in business longer, and until a few years ago had somewhat of a relationship w/ the guys at SF. I guess time changes things!
Re: Surefire Cans
Thanks for the lead, but I noticed IBA's pricing was a bit high, and I'm in no particular hurry.
I did, however, get a PM from another member saying Leif at Larsen's Firearms in WA had some in stock, and I sent off a check Thursday for several hundred less than IBA's posted price. We'll see how it goes.
After firing this model on a 7.62, and an OpsInc in 5.56 over in Iraq, I'm looking forward to accumulating a few suppressors (this will be the first).
Thanks for the lead, but I noticed IBA's pricing was a bit high, and I'm in no particular hurry.
I did, however, get a PM from another member saying Leif at Larsen's Firearms in WA had some in stock, and I sent off a check Thursday for several hundred less than IBA's posted price. We'll see how it goes.
After firing this model on a 7.62, and an OpsInc in 5.56 over in Iraq, I'm looking forward to accumulating a few suppressors (this will be the first).
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kevin/aac</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually let's talk about aggresive a little! Who's bashing who w/ BS comparisons. comparing a K model to the rest, showing pictures of a brand new AAC compared to a well used SF. God only knows what was done to it??? Show the bottom of the pic; where it is clear that they copied SF's design! Yeah I know SF didn't design it either, but so much for AAC being in the forefront! The fact remains we are humans and I can hear equally well the sound from SF and AAC! If AAC is so much better why did they get canned from the FN SCAR rifle; after all they are less expensive? </div></div>
Be very careful.
Your statement is 100% incorrect. Everything you stated. Cite it or retract it.
We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program.</div></div>
OHHH, more threats from AAC...
What a surprise.
Back when I started looking at supressors, AAC's behavior convinced me to never buy one of their products. Appears I made the correct choice, wouldn't want my dollars to support this type of crap.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kevin/aac</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually let's talk about aggresive a little! Who's bashing who w/ BS comparisons. comparing a K model to the rest, showing pictures of a brand new AAC compared to a well used SF. God only knows what was done to it??? Show the bottom of the pic; where it is clear that they copied SF's design! Yeah I know SF didn't design it either, but so much for AAC being in the forefront! The fact remains we are humans and I can hear equally well the sound from SF and AAC! If AAC is so much better why did they get canned
Be very careful.
Your statement is 100% incorrect. Everything you stated. Cite it or retract it.
We have been and are continuously receiving delivering the muzzle accessories for the SCAR program.</div></div>
OHHH, more threats from AAC...
What a surprise.
Back when I started looking at supressors, AAC's behavior convinced me to never buy one of their products. Appears I made the correct choice, wouldn't want my dollars to support this type of crap.
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lazlo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the lead, but I noticed IBA's pricing was a bit high, and I'm in no particular hurry.
I did, however, get a PM from another member saying Leif at Larsen's Firearms in WA had some in stock, and I sent off a check Thursday for several hundred less than IBA's posted price. We'll see how it goes.</div></div>
Sure thing. I am not sure if you called or looked at the price on the site. I as well got mine for many less as well. Just call Abby and talk to her. They are friendly and will help out.
All things being said here, you ultimately get what you pay for. I feel the SF concept in whole is great and I am willing to spend more bucks. I did the same with my rifle with the SF muzzel brake and I am very glad I did. It's a great package.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lazlo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the lead, but I noticed IBA's pricing was a bit high, and I'm in no particular hurry.
I did, however, get a PM from another member saying Leif at Larsen's Firearms in WA had some in stock, and I sent off a check Thursday for several hundred less than IBA's posted price. We'll see how it goes.</div></div>
Sure thing. I am not sure if you called or looked at the price on the site. I as well got mine for many less as well. Just call Abby and talk to her. They are friendly and will help out.
All things being said here, you ultimately get what you pay for. I feel the SF concept in whole is great and I am willing to spend more bucks. I did the same with my rifle with the SF muzzel brake and I am very glad I did. It's a great package.
Re: Surefire Cans
Im with you on this one...to make things worse I like their products. Having said that I will not spend my hard earned $$$ on an AAC product.. simply as a recogition of shitty business practices...
Im with you on this one...to make things worse I like their products. Having said that I will not spend my hard earned $$$ on an AAC product.. simply as a recogition of shitty business practices...
Re: Surefire Cans
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Malaga2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im with you on this one...to make things worse I like their products. Having said that I will not spend my hard earned $$$ on an AAC product.. simply as a recogition of shitty business practices...</div></div>
Like what?
Real question... not a flame...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Malaga2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Im with you on this one...to make things worse I like their products. Having said that I will not spend my hard earned $$$ on an AAC product.. simply as a recogition of shitty business practices...</div></div>
Like what?
Real question... not a flame...
