I'm not saying I want to, or have. Just for conversation. What if any affect would tracers have on a suppressor? would they erode the blast baffle faster than standard ammo?
Suppressors Tracers in suppressor?
- Thread starter Sebben
- Start date
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
Yes they will erode the blast baffle much quicker. They produce more heat.
Yes they will erode the blast baffle much quicker. They produce more heat.
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
I dont see how they could, they dont light till aprox 75 yds out (YMMV) I shoot the Piney Mountain .22 tracers all the time and those light immediatly out of the barrel unlike the centerfire tracers with no problems so far
I dont see how they could, they dont light till aprox 75 yds out (YMMV) I shoot the Piney Mountain .22 tracers all the time and those light immediatly out of the barrel unlike the centerfire tracers with no problems so far
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
I have never noticed any noticeably heavier fouling or wear after shooting them in mine. I have put probably 6-700 rounds of tracer through mine and can't tell any difference, but I have to agree with Tom, they shouldn't do anything because they don't start in the barrel, they start downrange a bit.
I have never noticed any noticeably heavier fouling or wear after shooting them in mine. I have put probably 6-700 rounds of tracer through mine and can't tell any difference, but I have to agree with Tom, they shouldn't do anything because they don't start in the barrel, they start downrange a bit.
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
In it not uncommon for the tracers not to light when using a suppressor. I have not bothered to investigate this, but I have had this happen with 5.56 and 7.62x51. It is not a 100% thing, but alot of the time, you will not a get a tracer to light when using a suppressor.
FA / semi same-same.
I have not seen any increased wear from using suppressors with tracers, but given the above, I don't shoot tracers much with a suppressor.
In it not uncommon for the tracers not to light when using a suppressor. I have not bothered to investigate this, but I have had this happen with 5.56 and 7.62x51. It is not a 100% thing, but alot of the time, you will not a get a tracer to light when using a suppressor.
FA / semi same-same.
I have not seen any increased wear from using suppressors with tracers, but given the above, I don't shoot tracers much with a suppressor.
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
well while we are on the subject of what is potentially bad for your barrel. I heard that steel core/AP rounds wear rifling faster. does anyone have anything to back that up?
well while we are on the subject of what is potentially bad for your barrel. I heard that steel core/AP rounds wear rifling faster. does anyone have anything to back that up?
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
Well I have shot lots of tracers in my years from many different platforms and weapons. I honestly have not seen a difference or ill effect with a suppressor while shooting tracers. If they don't light off, it wasn't meant to be. They don't always work, that is for sure and yes normally its about 50-75m down range as well. Now I have notices a lot more carbon build up when shooting tracers on my 16.5" AE with the suppressor attached, on a muzzle brake attach design. The muzzle brake will build up with a nasty carbon and paint debris and its a pain to remove as well. I have not seen any issues or higher erosion factors to date between ball, tracer, AP or match. The heat difference you will see is due to the higher velocities of these rounds, normally from 2850 fps range. Hope this helps.
Well I have shot lots of tracers in my years from many different platforms and weapons. I honestly have not seen a difference or ill effect with a suppressor while shooting tracers. If they don't light off, it wasn't meant to be. They don't always work, that is for sure and yes normally its about 50-75m down range as well. Now I have notices a lot more carbon build up when shooting tracers on my 16.5" AE with the suppressor attached, on a muzzle brake attach design. The muzzle brake will build up with a nasty carbon and paint debris and its a pain to remove as well. I have not seen any issues or higher erosion factors to date between ball, tracer, AP or match. The heat difference you will see is due to the higher velocities of these rounds, normally from 2850 fps range. Hope this helps.
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AzElz34nTyw&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AzElz34nTyw&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
He doesn't seem to worried.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/AzElz34nTyw&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/AzElz34nTyw&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
He doesn't seem to worried.
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
I've not seen anything that leads me to believe tracers wear out suppressors more rapidly. I've shot a lot of M196 and M856 tracers through Ops Inc 16th model and AAC M4-2000 suppressors over the past several years. Most of the tracers I've shot were at MG shoots and the host guns were getting used pretty hard so if the tracers did add a little more heat I doubt it would have been anything significant.
If you wanted to scientifically test the possible increased heat theory, you could use a proper heat gun and simply test fire a set number of non-tracer rounds through a designated host. Take measurements at various points in the shooting sequence. Then let everything cool down and test again with tracers.
Without some science this information is all anecdotal.
Just my experiences and thoughts.
Mark
I've not seen anything that leads me to believe tracers wear out suppressors more rapidly. I've shot a lot of M196 and M856 tracers through Ops Inc 16th model and AAC M4-2000 suppressors over the past several years. Most of the tracers I've shot were at MG shoots and the host guns were getting used pretty hard so if the tracers did add a little more heat I doubt it would have been anything significant.
If you wanted to scientifically test the possible increased heat theory, you could use a proper heat gun and simply test fire a set number of non-tracer rounds through a designated host. Take measurements at various points in the shooting sequence. Then let everything cool down and test again with tracers.
Without some science this information is all anecdotal.
Just my experiences and thoughts.
Mark
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BookHound</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've not seen anything that leads me to believe tracers wear out suppressors more rapidly. I've shot a lot of M196 and M856 tracers through Ops Inc 16th model and AAC M4-2000 suppressors over the past several years. Most of the tracers I've shot were at MG shoots and the host guns were getting used pretty hard so if the tracers did add a little more heat I doubt it would have been anything significant.
If you wanted to scientifically test the possible increased heat theory, you could use a proper heat gun and simply test fire a set number of non-tracer rounds through a designated host. Take measurements at various points in the shooting sequence. Then let everything cool down and test again with tracers.
Without some science this information is all anecdotal.
Just my experiences and thoughts.
Mark </div></div>
Mark- did you have failures to light with tracers like the people posting above?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BookHound</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've not seen anything that leads me to believe tracers wear out suppressors more rapidly. I've shot a lot of M196 and M856 tracers through Ops Inc 16th model and AAC M4-2000 suppressors over the past several years. Most of the tracers I've shot were at MG shoots and the host guns were getting used pretty hard so if the tracers did add a little more heat I doubt it would have been anything significant.
If you wanted to scientifically test the possible increased heat theory, you could use a proper heat gun and simply test fire a set number of non-tracer rounds through a designated host. Take measurements at various points in the shooting sequence. Then let everything cool down and test again with tracers.
Without some science this information is all anecdotal.
Just my experiences and thoughts.
Mark </div></div>
Mark- did you have failures to light with tracers like the people posting above?
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
No, not at all.
Don't know if it makes a difference but I was shooting current production ammo. I've seen some surplus stuff fail to ignite in even unsuppressed firearms.
Mark
No, not at all.
Don't know if it makes a difference but I was shooting current production ammo. I've seen some surplus stuff fail to ignite in even unsuppressed firearms.
Mark
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure.
Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure.
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure. </div></div>
Would an all inconel can like the M4-2000 hold up to tracers better?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure. </div></div>
Would an all inconel can like the M4-2000 hold up to tracers better?
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BookHound</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've not seen anything that leads me to believe tracers wear out suppressors more rapidly. I've shot a lot of M196 and M856 tracers through Ops Inc 16th model and AAC M4-2000 suppressors over the past several years. Most of the tracers I've shot were at MG shoots and the host guns were getting used pretty hard so if the tracers did add a little more heat I doubt it would have been anything significant.
If you wanted to scientifically test the possible increased heat theory, you could use a proper heat gun and simply test fire a set number of non-tracer rounds through a designated host. Take measurements at various points in the shooting sequence. Then let everything cool down and test again with tracers.
Without some science this information is all anecdotal.
Just my experiences and thoughts.
Mark </div></div>
I'd be interested in seeing an actual scientific test with this. best bet would be a either a 308 or 556 AR and shoot handloads with the same powder and bullet weight between standard ball and the tracer.
What do new tracers normally weigh for the 308? 147gr?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BookHound</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I've not seen anything that leads me to believe tracers wear out suppressors more rapidly. I've shot a lot of M196 and M856 tracers through Ops Inc 16th model and AAC M4-2000 suppressors over the past several years. Most of the tracers I've shot were at MG shoots and the host guns were getting used pretty hard so if the tracers did add a little more heat I doubt it would have been anything significant.
If you wanted to scientifically test the possible increased heat theory, you could use a proper heat gun and simply test fire a set number of non-tracer rounds through a designated host. Take measurements at various points in the shooting sequence. Then let everything cool down and test again with tracers.
Without some science this information is all anecdotal.
Just my experiences and thoughts.
Mark </div></div>
I'd be interested in seeing an actual scientific test with this. best bet would be a either a 308 or 556 AR and shoot handloads with the same powder and bullet weight between standard ball and the tracer.
What do new tracers normally weigh for the 308? 147gr?
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
No frangibles ever, tracers should not have no impact on can internals.
No frangibles ever, tracers should not have no impact on can internals.
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF1986</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure. </div></div>
Would an all inconel can like the M4-2000 hold up to tracers better? </div></div>
The M4-2000 is not all inconel.....
Only the blast baffle. The rest is stainless
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF1986</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure. </div></div>
Would an all inconel can like the M4-2000 hold up to tracers better? </div></div>
The M4-2000 is not all inconel.....
Only the blast baffle. The rest is stainless
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sebben-I'd be interested in seeing an actual scientific test with this. best bet would be a either a 308 or 556 AR and shoot handloads with the same powder and bullet weight between standard ball and the tracer.</div></div>
email Mythbusters, oh wait they are in fuckmylifefornia, nevermind
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sebben-I'd be interested in seeing an actual scientific test with this. best bet would be a either a 308 or 556 AR and shoot handloads with the same powder and bullet weight between standard ball and the tracer.</div></div>
email Mythbusters, oh wait they are in fuckmylifefornia, nevermind
Re: Tracers in suppressor?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF1986</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure. </div></div>
Would an all inconel can like the M4-2000 hold up to tracers better? </div></div>
The M4-2000 is not all inconel.....
Only the blast baffle. The rest is stainless </div></div>
The baffles and front cap are inconel. The rear cap, tube, and spacers are 316L SS.
That's one of those marketing things- all inconel baffle stack becomes all inconel as if to imply "the whole suppressor is inconel".
Not that it needs to be or should be, but it creates the image in the customers mind that for another product to be the equal, it should be 100% inconel.
Clever programming of the masses results in superior sales.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NF1986</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KYS338</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ive shot tracers from my AR15 with a gemtech can and I will never do it again on any rifle I own. My can was red hot in half the time it took standard 77gr ammo to heat it up in.
I just say, why take the risk?! You spend that much money and time on a tube of steel dont up your chances for a failure. </div></div>
Would an all inconel can like the M4-2000 hold up to tracers better? </div></div>
The M4-2000 is not all inconel.....
Only the blast baffle. The rest is stainless </div></div>
The baffles and front cap are inconel. The rear cap, tube, and spacers are 316L SS.
That's one of those marketing things- all inconel baffle stack becomes all inconel as if to imply "the whole suppressor is inconel".
Not that it needs to be or should be, but it creates the image in the customers mind that for another product to be the equal, it should be 100% inconel.
Clever programming of the masses results in superior sales.
