• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Suppressors Switch caliber suppressors. Do they exist?

VoxPatriam

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jan 26, 2014
198
2
Some crappy desert
I'm interested in buying or possibly making some suppressors in the near future as part of an NFA trust, but what I've been looking for I haven't been able to find. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong place. Does anyone make a can that can change calibers? For instance, I could have 30 cal baffles in for some of my guns, then switch the baffles for a 45, or whatever caliber. I realize this assumes the same thread pattern or the same muzzle device on all my guns, and that's something I'm ok with. Thanks for the help guys.
 
No. The reason being that the ATF has ruled (stupidly) that silencer parts are themselves silencers, or at least constitutes constructive intent. So you can't just have a spare baffle stack laying around to change at will.

From the ATF website:

Q: May a repair change the dimensions or caliber of a silencer?
If alterations to a silencer would increase the overall length or change the diameter or caliber of a silencer, this is the making of a new silencer, as opposed to a repair. The new silencer must be registered and transferred in accordance with the NFA and the GCA. Alterations to a registered silencer that result in a minimal reduction in the overall length for purposes of rethreading are permissible as repairs. However, the reduction in length may not result in the removal, obliteration, or alteration of the existing serial number, as this would violate 18 U.S.C. § 922(k). If such a repair is necessary, the damaged silencer should be destroyed or returned to the registrant. If it is destroyed, destruction should be reported to the NFA Branch. Any replacement silencer must be registered and transferred in accordance with the NFA and the GCA. See also “May a Federal Firearms Licensee repair a silencer by replacing worn or damaged components?” and “May the outer tube of a registered silencer be repaired due to damage? If so, may the repair be done by someone other than the original manufacturer?” for further information on repairs.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/national-firearms-act-silencers.html
 
Last edited:
And to further add to the stupidity; the ATF classified silencers as "firearms" to be able to regulate them under the National Firearms Act.

How exactly does a muffler count as a firearm you ask? Because the ATF is full of shit & a criminal organization that's why.
 
From what I believe you are saying... check out this link, as well as the followup information. Perhaps this is what you are looking for??

DK



OSS 7.62 Suppressor System


From their page:

OSS delivers the next generation of weapon suppression and signature reduction devices. Our Energy, Particulate Capture and Control Modular Devices are revolutionary, utilizing 12 patented technologies. OSS devices are specifically engineered to a weapon’s operating system, caliber, and barrel length. The function and physics of these variables are the essential basics of every design. The weapon system’s performance and reliability will not be sacrificed in order to gain the advantages of suppression.
The modular system components are designed to be configured at the end-user level in order to maximize effectiveness and tactical advantage from mission to mission. Every unit is caliber convertible allowing for the same outer housing unit to be used on multiple weapons platforms. This capability also allows for the use of all types of training ammunition, now it’s possible to practice as we play.
Modularity not only offers maximum effectiveness, OSS takes engineering to an entirely new level of cost effective sustainment. Any part of every device can be removed and replaced independently as needed. Regardless of the level of use, the cost of maintaining a suppressed capability has now been reduced to a fraction of tradition designs. A reasonable person would never consider throwing away a rifle or accepting poor performance when the barrel is burned out, we would all change out the barrel. As an essential capability, OSS applies the same principles and sensibility to suppression. Maintain your advantage!

OSS 7.62-SRM 6

Major components are described as:

Back Pressure Regulator 1 (BPR1)™ OTB

Back Pressure Regulator 2 (BPR2)™ FM

Flash Hider Muzzle Brake (FHMB)™

Signature Reduction Module (SRM)™

Combined Technology Unit (CTU)™
 
Silencerco makes the 7.62 saker with 556 end cap you can switch. Can't do a 45 but 556-30cal is very doable. Maybe they'll do a 6.5 endcap in the future.
 
Do a direct thread and can swap on any caliber size as can or smaller. I use a 30 can on 300wm, 308, 243, 6.5cm, 6cm, .556, etc. I have also used a 338 can on a 556. I have even used a 30 can on a 22. But you can't shoot a 44 mag out of a 30 cal can. The bullet is bigger than the can opening!!!
 
Why not buy a can to shoot the .45 and use it on the .30 also? It seams to work with a .30 cal can on a .22 center fire.
 
Why not buy a can to shoot the .45 and use it on the .30 also? It seams to work with a .30 cal can on a .22 center fire.

I'm not an engineer, but there is a difference in muzzle pressure between a 45 acp and a 308 Win. Silencerco says you can shoot subsonic 300 BLK through a 45 Osprey, but not supersonic. I wouldn't shoot a centerfire rifle through a pistol can.
 
Short answer is not "yes" for civilians. Swapping an endcap will do very little if excellent suppression is your goal.
 
Last edited:
I'm not really interested in using a large caliber suppressor for multiple smaller calibers if I can avoid it. I'd rather have a bunch of monocores and one really tough can to attach over the monocores. The idea is that the screw on monocore could act as a muzzle brake until the can is slid over it.
With the wrong caliber suppressor I'd be worried about excessive pressure in the can and how it would affect the ballistics.
 
That you may not have legally.
That idea of having a screw on monocore hanging off your barrel that would act as a muzzle brake?
Or excessive pressure and worrying about it affecting ballistics?
Interesting...
 
Sig is currently fighting that battle with the ATF. ATF rules that the monocore "brake" is a suppressor part. It's a pretty drawn out legal battle....
 
That you may not have legally.
That idea of having a screw on monocore hanging off your barrel that would act as a muzzle brake?
Or excessive pressure and worrying about it affecting ballistics?
Interesting...

Are we applying the Socratic Method here? I'm not saying that it needs to be a 8" monocore hanging off the barrel, but at least part of it. I'm sure I'm way off base, thus the questions in a place where I feel like they can be answered. One guy says it's legal, and another says it isn't.
I legitimately have no idea if or how the pressure waves inside a suppressor affect the stability of the round in flight. More specifically how shooting a substantially smaller bullet through a larger caliber suppressor would affect it. For example 5.56 through a .30 cal suppressor. I know it has been done, and it does work with legitimate suppressors and prepper mall ninjas with oil filters. How does it affect the bullet?
 
I would highly recommend abandoning the train of thought that leads you towards choosing one uber suppressor for all uses. It's like the never ending chase for the one single rifle that does everything better than anything else. It just ain't happening. Have you seen the threads related to suppressors that have outer tubes not fully circumferentially welded to the cores/baffle stacks? They become projectiles themselves not to mention such designs would be far inferior to fully welded cans as it relates to sound suppression.

Grab multiple cans specific to your rifle & purpose and take advantage of the size, weight and attenuation differences of each to make your rig the best possible solution in the context of the application at hand. Buying one can (regardless of the number of baffle stacks you might hypothetically have as internal volume, baffle stack design, material used, etc can all contribute to a specific advantage related to original intent of the suppressor's design) with expectations that it will be the tits on everything will leave you wanting...
 
Let me see if I can be clearer.

- It is not legal as one cannot have any pieces outside of the suppressor as each and every piece is a suppressor unto themselves.
No swapping out of anything. A small exception is made for those that run old cans with a single wiper on the end cap. That exception is treacherous water, and best avoided with a proper transition final stage.

On all things regarding pressure and accuracy, I think you are confusing two things:

1. The problems of over pressure to be found when firing high pressure rounds (center fire rifle) through low pressure constructed cans (center fire pistol.)
Example, shooting a .308 through a Sionics .45acp can. Here, the can will explode. It has nothing to do with "pressure waves" and accuracy.

2. The problem of pressure to be found when shooting a center fire rifle cartridge rated can with a caliber that has a much higher pressure than the can was designed for.
Example, shooting a .300WM through a can rated for .308 only. Here, the can will explode. It has nothing to do with "pressure waves" and accuracy.

In the example that you gave " 5.56 through a .30 cal suppressor " one is essentially acheiving suppression through the use of an "overbore" can. This is routinely done and as close to a multi caliber solution as civilians might achieve.
- The 308 can is already rated to take a .223
- All center fire rifle rounds that are of a smaller bore and pressure than the .308 can be used.
- There is no overpressure.
- There is no issue that would be detrimental to accuracy.
- There is most likely a significant reduction in suppression "potential performance," as in a .223 through .308 will not suppress as well as a .223 through a .223 can. Even excess volume can only go so far in "over bore" cans.

If one stops remember that the projectile leads all the trailing gas jets, we would not expect accuracy to suffer in most cases when shooting "over bore." In other words the bullet is long gone.
In fact, the only time accuracy suffers with a suppressor is when the suppressor has very close tolerances (purposely so, say a tight .300WM can with .300WM rounds) but has potential design flaws that create unusual issues at the exact moment the projectile passes through a baffle.
One would see this relatively rare phenomenon occur in what is called asymmetrical baffle designs that do not account for baffles with "Cross Jetting Bores." To overcome this designers must timing the next baffle's "cross jetting."
Accuracy and suppression is a great topic often debated. I can assure you as well that a fine suppressor does not detract from accuracy and can improve it in many ways, not all related to gas redirect.

In any event, I agree with Jason above, you should be buying your suppressors as, if accuracy is your concern, the "stack" with its baffles, facings, timings, chamber placement and volumes is a great deal of it.
 
Last edited:
Suppression comes in many forms, some seek to achieve what we think of when we think of silencers, some require what might be best described as a muffler. Swapping an end cap only provides marginal improvement towards one of those goals.
The folks that seek silence know that high firing schedules work against their interests. They need as quiet a can as possible for relatively few rounds.
Others realize that they will have to deal with much higher firing schedules and that silence cannot be their goal. For them a muffler is best (think Knights as an early example.)
They also know, in FA applications, it is only a matter of time before heat soak sinks in and the can is "over run." In those instances a flash hider comes into play. That much flash is never working in the interests of suppression.
In the end, they are hoping to save their hearing.

The end cap swap is the result of providing a means to let the Sionics owners deal with deteriorating wipers. It was an exception that was made years after a total "extra parts" ban.
At that time, the BATF recognized that the end cap swap values are so marginal that allowing that single final piece to exist away from the can isn't a problem.
I think I heard the person say in that video that he felt that the 7.62 can with a 5.56 end cap was quieter than what he has come to hear in 5.56 suppressors.
In my opinion, that is a telling statement and not in a good way. Their own 5.56 cans should be significantly quieter than their own 7.62 cans with a 5.56 end cap swap out.
 
Last edited:
While I'm at it, any advice on suppressors for piston guns? I'm told the piston reduces some of the effectiveness of the suppressor, but I'm wondering if there's anything to be done about it. Adjustable gas block is probably a must, yeah? I'm not opposed to shooting sub's, but I'm primarily concerned with effectiveness for factory ball ammo. Ultimately I'll need a 30 cal can for .308, 7.62x39, and 300blk, and a 5.56 can.
 
Rolling thunder, my experience is different than yours on end cap swapping. I have several cans and do a lot of tinkering. To my ear and with hundreds maybe thousands of rounds, my best can for .223 has a .344 bore through the baffles and a .264 hole in the end cap, it also has more internal volume, that could be it.
 
Laser, that could most certainly be true for your can design. The .223 is a very difficult round to suppress because of its high velocity. We would have to know what your diverter and primary looks like as well as the type of baffle, facings, timing (volume) of the chambers, firing schedule, etc. If a can strips efficiently at the onset, the volume requirements decrease down the line. But it has consequences as the heat soak/spotting comes in early and designs like these are best suited for bolt guns. If you are firing a good number of rounds, then you will need volume spread all the way down the armature and the ability to let the gasses travel down the tube (baffle overbore.) Its the age old designer's dilemma. Add to that the issues surrounding the can's back pressure through a host's gas system and another layer of complication occurs. I would say that if your end cap is playing a significant role in perceived suppression, look to the first two stages. Lastly, if in fact you have only shot a couple of thousand rounds through your suppressor, it is not even seasoned. The turbulence found in a filthy suppressor makes a significant improvement in suppression and tonality as well. Also, without incurring hydraulic lock, ablatives used with the right design and caliber can actually drive an outstanding design, significantly reducing dB as well as shortening the envelope considerably.

Vox, whether direct impingement or piston, the gas required for the action is stripped prior to the muzzle. A well designed can does not require a piston, but potentially may require an adjustable gas block. The same would hold true for direct impingement systems, they too can benefit from an adjustable gas block. In both instances, an adjustable gas block's main function is to compensate for over-pressurizing of the gas action which is, in the most part, a result of a high pressure can. Having said that, dB should remain un-effected as, if one stops to think about it, the gas for either impingement or piston systems is tapped prior to the muzzle and therefor the can. Lower pressure theoretically from the exiting of gas prior to the can would improve dB suppression (blast) at the can's exit into the atmosphere. When one remembers that gas tapping for integral systems do the same (ss -> subS) , one can see that positive things occur when we reduce pressure prior to suppression. It may however increase action noise (overpressure) and increase chamber pop....read on.

The reason for adjustable/switch gas blocks have become popular, and rightly so, is three fold 1) keeping the action gas pressures within spec when high pressure cans are deployed 2) directly decreasing the amount of propellant blowback in the operator's face (direct impingement) in some actions 3) affording by design the ability to turn off in its entirety the action. We saw the first examples of the operational use of the 3rd point in both the M1a and FN LAR (reversing the grenade launcher gas block/sight in the later) years ago. When one thinks about it there are only five sources of sound to be found in firearms 1) Blast 2) Sonic projectile signature 3) action noise 4) terminal impact of the projectile and 5) operator induce noise. #1, #2, #3 all are suppressor centric. Lastly, your comment about subsonics. Subsonics have real consequences on range, terminal force, accuracy and potentially the functioning of the host. Subsonics can create serious issues for suppression as well (baffle strike) and, dependent on propellant, debris. Having said that, "factory ball ammo" as you call it is not negatively impacted by suppression and can be enhanced in a number of areas.
 
Last edited:
Rolling thunder, in my opinion I believe the .233 is the easiest to suppress in the .224 caliber. Isn't it the one with least powder w a .224 od? You have a lot of technical info in your post but your 1st sentence makes me wonder how much expierience you have in the suppression game?
 
Really? Your first sentence makes me wonder how much experience you have in the 'suppression game'. 5.56 has - for MANY years - been the round every suppressor MFGer has been chasing in terms of effective suppression. It is blatantly clear when you eval a can like the Saker with an interchangeable end cap against a dedicated 5.56 can how dramatically inneffective it is in comparison. The end cap change is obviously a marketing gimmick for those who are merely willing to buy one can for a do-it-all purpose. It will definitely do that too. It will do eveything subpar but it will do nothing the best. Baffle designs are concocted using specific intent and use cases that vary between supreme accuracy and ability to withstand very harsh abuse. Rollingthunder is right on point. Internal volume is a single component that is only relative if youre comparing a can that wont let a shit load of gas out of the end cap because it is over-bored. Id suggest looking into what pressure levels, baffle stack design variations, build materials, dimensional tolerances, and attachment mechanisms do to attenutation levels before suggesting 5.56 is the "easiest" round to suppress. Clearly you need a bit more education on the topic, which is what id ask for guidance on before questioning an explanation that is clearly more informed than anything youve contributed.
 
Rollinthunder does however think that you need earpro with a good rifle can, which.........is either bullshit (my opinion) or something ill regret in 30 years when i probably dont want to hear much of anything anyways. ;-)

But i digress...
 
@ jasonfaz - "What?! I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome my suppressor is!"

RollingThunder thanks very much for the information.
 
My solution is a titanium 300WM rated can. It's going to go on 300wm, 300wsm, 308, 260, 6.5 grendel, maybe even a .223. The "best" thing? No, but I'm not made of money. It's going to be 9.5" long and weighs 1lb but I can live with that. Getting past lack of "efficiency" with volume.
 
My solution is a titanium 300WM rated can. It's going to go on 300wm, 300wsm, 308, 260, 6.5 grendel, maybe even a .223. The "best" thing? No, but I'm not made of money. It's going to be 9.5" long and weighs 1lb but I can live with that. Getting past lack of "efficiency" with volume.

Sounds like a pretty good plan to me!
B9AB1C6A-9D07-4629-A483-27AAF732C721.jpg
 
The solution really is two suppressors. One for lower pressure pistol rounds in the largest caliber you intend to shoot and the other for higher pressure rifle calibers in the largest caliber and highest pressure demand you plan to shoot.

Or, move to Europe where they aren't hung up on suppressors and they are much cheaper. You can shoot quietly to your heart's consent, assuming you're actually able to obtain firearms there.
 
The solution really is two suppressors. One for lower pressure pistol rounds in the largest caliber you intend to shoot and the other for higher pressure rifle calibers in the largest caliber and highest pressure demand you plan to shoot.

Or, move to Europe where they aren't hung up on suppressors and they are much cheaper. You can shoot quietly to your heart's consent, assuming you're actually able to obtain firearms there.
The solutions is not two supressors! That's just a start.
 
The solutions is not two supressors! That's just a start.

It is the most economically efficient solution if not the most acoustically efficient one. As a guy with far too many expensive hobbies and too little money economic efficiency my top priority.
 
I can certainly respect that. But it's an expensive and addicting hobby!
 
You mean I actually have to have shot a suppressed .223? Oh....well.....Can I take it all back? Yea? Great! Appreciate it.
 
I use my 338 thunderbeast can on my 338 and all my 30 Cal rifles. It's rather large for a 30 Cal, but the titanium make it so light that it's definitely as light if not lighter than many smaller 30 Cals out there.

Plus, I've never heard a 30cal can that suppresses the sound better than my 338 (granted I haven't really heard that many). Subsonic 308 sounds like an air gun.