https://ridgebackdefense.com/

We recently got SBRs and Suppressors approved at work so I have been shopping dedicated 5.56 suppressors.
As everyone knows great options are absolutely plentiful. Two names that kept popping up for excellent cans and good prices were Otter Creek Labs and Ridgeback Defense. Turns out they are both fairly local to me so that makes it even better to do business locally.
I reached out to both Otter Creek and they sent a pretty canned response (I get it these suppressor folks are super busy) and Ridgeback responded with some answers and an invite to bring my rifle down to their shop and test out the fitment and feel with the suppressors attached.

So, I went down to their facility this morning met a couple of the fellas that worked there all super nice and we discussed the options that would be best for my particular use.
I am currently using a 16” rifle so we mounted their Rhodie 6 and Rhodie 6k on my rifle that has a Rearden FHD Plan B device.
My currently suppressor is a YHM Resonator K (converted to plan B using a Breek Low pro hub mount).

Both the standard Rhodie and K length were noticeably heavier both in the hand and attached to the rifle compared to my YHM. While the added weight was noticeable it was not to a detriment. Also, I believe that the K was a blemish that he said was slightly heavier than a non blemish.
I don’t mind a rifle that is a little front heavy and neither felt clumsily heavy.

Did not get to shoot them as their facility is not setup for that. But with the way everyone talks and the videos I have seen the noise suppression will be quite good for 5.56. He said they have fired them indoors without ear pro and while it is not suggested it is worlds better than unsuppressed.
And will likely beat the pants of my YHM which is a .30 cal can. It does a good job outside never shot it indoors.

Now I need to decided between the standard length and the K. He stated that the standard length model is 1” longer and provides about 12% better sound suppression compared to the K.

I’ll be using this 16” rifle so awhile so I think I may just grab the K to keep the overall length down.
Then when I get a chance to get an 11.5” upper I’ll get the standard length and just use the K across all my 16” guns.

Now I need to squirrel away a few hundred dollars more than I currently have saved so I can order.

Added good new for me at least is I guy pick it up direct from them and are transferring on 4473s.

So if you are in the suppressor market I’d suggest giving Ridgeback a hard look!

At least from the website it appears they are only focusing on their 6mm/5.56 and .300 cans. Also sounds like there is about a 10 week lead time. Their 7.62, 9mm, and .22 all state coming soon.

I’ll keep y’all updated with what I choose and how it performs once it arrives.

Aaron Cowan (Sage Dynamics) highly approves and I value his testing procedures and opinion probably higher than anyone else in the industry.

Very cool.

Shocks, Pegs, Lucky! -Napoleon Dynamite

Black, did you get to handle the Rhodie 6ti, and was it noticeably lighter? I’m considering that one, but may just go with a Rhodie 6.

Thanks for the report!

Is there a group buy opportunity here?

quote:

Originally posted by 2Adefender:
Black, did you get to handle the Rhodie 6ti, and was it noticeably lighter? I’m considering that one, but may just go with a Rhodie 6.

Thanks for the report!

I did not.
However, looking at the specs provided by Ridgeback and YHM websites the Rhodie6Ti weighs the same as my Resonator K with my Plan B hub mount.
If that is accurate (which it should be) the Ti will be noticeably lighter in hand and on the end of the gun.
I think for my duty use the Titanium was not suggested.

quote:

Originally posted by Expert308:
Is there a group buy opportunity here?

I was just happy to be there on an unsolicited invite so I did not ask for any discounts. Also I think they currently have plenty of orders to fill and no need to be offering GBa and I am guessing next week sales will go through the roof for all suppressor manufacturers.

A few things. Not an expert by any means.
First I would not count on it being any better on a 5.56 than your Resonator .30 cal in terms of overall performance.


Second, that is cool they responded and said to drop on by.
Having said that, I would not take that as a dis by OCL's.
I would also say they are probably a notch or two better than Ridgeback as far as their can's are concerned. Ymmv.

Those are just my opinions J.

Good luck.

I did not take it as a dis. I know suppressor folks are hammered for now and the quite foreseeable future. So was not expecting much.

I will be interested to see how it performs once I get it.

I got a Breek Arms charging handle that redirects the gas to the side and I was very pleased with it. Pretty much zero gas to the face with the Resonator K.

I am curious about what part of your duty cycle makes Ti problematic. In general as I understand it no aount of semi fire from a 16" gun will cause thermal stress and at least two full mags full auto are needed to get the rise that would make it concerning. Is there some std. that you think the suppressor needs to tolerate?

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
A few things. Not an expert by any means.
First I would not count on it being any better on a 5.56 than your Resonator .30 cal in terms of overall performance.

Oh, I absolutely would lol. I have a friend who has a Resonator that he bought primarily for his .300 BO. I'll just say it: It's better than shooting unsuppressed, but it's a loud can. He hates it. The Rhodie and the Resonator don't even belong on the same page of discussion, they're so far apart. The Rhodie is currently up there with the best of them on the market, and that's hell and gone from the tech and performance of the Resonator/Turbo series. Black's gonna be a happy camper when they fill his order.

Currently, that's the big thing working against Ridgeback is that the demand is so high that people who aren't willing to wait are going with other options. If they can up their production capacity to keep up with demand, I think they'll be in a great position going into next year.

well smudge, you might have friend but I own both the Resonator and Resonator K. So while you fess to be our expert I can tell you first hand my Resonator is very quite on 5.56. I cannot speak for .300Bo. But I shoot mine on everything from 5.56 up to .300Wsm and it is a great can.

Several years ago there was a No. Dakota Suppressor shoot out. I cannot remember who did it. But there were a lot of cans tested at it. The Resonator was one of the lower cost cans tested and was near the top in terms of performance. I am sure there is reference to it on the net still. I am not saying it is the best can. But when I bought mine it was a great value. And has a good reputation as a performer.
So you making it sound like it is not a quality product and a good performer is just bullshit.

You misunderstand me. YHM makes quality stuff, but the Resonator is massively outclassed by the current generation of 3D printed suppressors. I could elaborate, but honestly, it would be a waste of both our time without you getting to compare and experience the difference for yourself. It isn't just marketing - if the Rhodie line were no quieter than a ten year old YHM budget can, they wouldn't be instantly selling out everywhere they restock and backordered six weeks out. You can take that personally and say it's bullshit if you want, but I'm calling it like I see it.

And for what it's worth, I've shot that friend's Resonator on a few of his guns and some of mine. The opinion I stated was in the context of having tried it and personally compared it with some of the new hot shit on the market. The technology has advanced in leaps and bounds in the nine years since it hit the market, and even stuff that came out last year is getting smoked with the new offerings this fall. We are in the midst of a total paradigm shift.

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
But I shoot mine on everything from 5.56 up to .300Wsm and it is a great can.

Which other suppressors have you gotten to compare them with on your hosts?

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
I am curious about what part of your duty cycle makes Ti problematic. In general as I understand it no aount of semi fire from a 16" gun will cause thermal stress and at least two full mags full auto are needed to get the rise that would make it concerning. Is there some std. that you think the suppressor needs to tolerate?

In my reading (by no means an expert) and shopping duty suppressors, I don’t think I have seen one that is marketed as a duty suppressor that has been titanium.
Usually reads that the higher heat cycling and impact possibility seem to be the thought.

And of all the companies I have reached out to in this search, none have suggested a titanium can. I have stated to them all I am looking for a duty specific can.

So not really anything I have come up with just judging by the suggestions of the folks making the can.

smudge, as far as ridgeback selling out and being back ordered that is true of just about everybody and everything right now with the lift of restrictions. Not how great any can is persae.

I will admit to being old skool on just about everything. I don't buy the greatest and latest according to whoever. I am a .30 cal can guy. Omega 300, a Griffin, YHM and most recently a Ocl. I don't own a 5.56 can. I am not going to pay over $600 and hopefully closer to $500 for a can. I don't see the need. I may look to see what is out there soon for a dedicated 5.56 can only because of the situation now with suppressors. Otherwise I would not bother.
Whether you and your friend like the Resonator of not means nothing to me. It is a great can whether it is 10 yr. old production or 3d printed last week. I will hold it up to many cans costing hundreds more and 3d printed.

It is a great time for freedom to rein.

Good luck J.

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
Whether you and your friend like the Resonator of not means nothing to me.

You are for sure at least the second and possibly the third forum member in the last month to take my criticisms of a suppressor you happen own as some sort of personal judgement when it's nothing of the like. I don't think I even went that far, it has truly been "there is far better stuff available today," and that is just objectively true. I understand that as humans, we do this, and normally it is something I'd avoid doing exactly because of how people often take it, but right now there are people coming out of the woodwork to buy their first suppressors and they are reading and taking suggestions of guys who haven't looked at anything new since Donald Trump came down the escalator. The Surefire RC2, Omega 300 & 9K, Rugged Obsidian, and Dead Air Mask still get suggested with shocking frequency and those cans all hit the market in 2015. It is 2026. So much has changed. If you bought any of those a decade and more ago and they've been working for you this whole time, they will continue to work - they're not like cellphones where the company uses some voodoo to make them turn into dogshit over time. If you buy one now, they'll still do what they have done for people since 2015. However, there absolutely are better choices on the market today vs any and all of those, and I stand by that, and guys new to the suppressor game need to hear it. Where they come down on what's important to them after that is their decision, but I think my holding my tongue to avoid stepping on some toes is a disservice to guys who might otherwise make a completely different decision. Fair?

IF your budget is YHM or OCL, it's a fantastic time be alive because they and many others in that chunk of the market now have a long track record and are proven companies with proven products. That said, there is a "latest and greatest" and some people are interested in that. There are guys who would budget 50-100% more on a suppressor if it weighed 60% less, was half as long, wouldn't blow gas in their face and all that while being quieter. We need to be careful not to conflate "just as good" with "good enough" in our discussions on these things, because one of those is a subjective statement nobody can really argue with, and the other can be objectively incorrect no matter how you try to qualify it. While you didn't say "just as good" in exactly those words, that's the assertion I pounced on, because it just isn't true. "Good enough?" Well, for many, abso-fucking-lutely.

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
It is a great time for freedom to rein.

Well and truly!

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:
So not really anything I have come up with just judging by the suggestions of the folks making the can.

I think it comes down to the current perception that because you can print in Inconel and Haynes, if you offer that, there's no good reason to suggest a printed titanium can to someone whose life may depend on its durability in a situation where they may put several magazines through it at a cyclic or nearly so firing schedule. If you tell a cop "yeah, our titanium can is duty-rated" because there's about zero chance he's going to blow one up on a patrol rifle, but he goes and repeats that you claimed "duty-rated" and that gets to guys who have other needs... I could see that being an uncomfortable situation for a manufacturer to be in.

Nobody can ever say what their needs are for sure in a job where the gun is part of the gear, and it makes sense to get the most durable, abuse-tolerant stuff you can. That said, simply put: I think an inconel can for a policeman's patrol rifle is beyond overkill for basically anything you're ever going to need it for. You could drive a Bearcat around on duty, but even if the budget allowed that, you're probably just fine with an Explorer. Maybe that's not even an apt comparison, but if you need a suppressor that'll hold up to what Inconel will do over titanium, then you need a whole-ass combat loadout and not a patrol rig.

I think weight is possibly the bigger metric. If you know you're going to be carrying it for extended periods, or often, or both, then I do suggest having a look at titanium. If you won't be carrying it often enough that it could really matter one way or another, then that's also an answer. Honestly, the more obvious difference between the two isn't whether titanium cans are capable of holding up to police duty but whether the sparking could be an issue if you actually need to use it in low light. Ammo manufacturers went to low flash powders for a reason, and a printed titanium rifle can goes a bit in the other direction. Flash reduction is an objective metric for your use case.

everyone's situation in different. But in talking about members here who are entering the suppressor realm and doing a service or dis-service to them in trying to answer questions they may or may not have. I would just add for most, not all. Saving hundreds of dollars on a purchase and future purchases is huge.
Is a $500 purchase of said suppressor a very good unit vs a $900 one.
Yeah, for most of us it is. Is the $900 one better, maybe. But not in all cases. And in many cases's the performance difference is minimal and has to be determined by the individual. Ymmv

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
Is the $900 one better, maybe. But not in all cases. And in many cases's the performance difference is minimal and has to be determined by the individual. Ymmv

We're having parallel discussions now, between here and your other thread, so I'll address this here.

This is what the kids today call "cope," and Aesop would've called it "sour grapes." You didn't answer whether you've tried these other, newer cans on your rifles. What experiences or research are you basing your claim that the performance difference is minimal? Because that doesn't line up with my experience and what I'm seeing from, well, the whole rest of the market. I'm going to maintain that the newer printed stuff is better, full stop. It just is. Nobody with lots of money, time, and experience tied up in this is saying what you're saying. I'll direct you back to what I said about "just as good" vs "good enough." In all cases the value proposition has to be determined by the individual, and I'm not saying people need to spend around a grand to get a good suppressor. Many times I've said there are great options at all price points, and I just suggested a $500 suppressor to you in your thread. In fact, you're the second forum member in the last month or so whom I've suggested a Polonium to.

Just... don't get a Tuna Can. Friends can debate stuff like this, but friends don't let friends buy Tuna Cans.

I really, really tried to stay out of this thread but I failed. Every suppressor is a full set of tradeoff's of what's important to the person buying it and the market they are trying to sell to. With a huge set of variables like price, weight, material, sound, durability, size etc. Which is why when people here ask for recomendations I always ask what's important to you. But to suggest that price is the "huge" critical driver for most as the key item is just wrong. It's certainly your key driver as seen over many posts and it may be the key driver for some and in that case you have to deal with what's available in your budget range, actual absolute suppressor performance doesn't matter. You, I and everyone here does that all the time for every purchase. But to suggest that the latest modern suppressors (which definately cost more generally but not a lot more) are even in the same league with the legacy lower cost designs on parameters other than cost is just not backed up by any facts. NONE. They are quieter full stop. by a huge amount. and that's what people normally want as one of the key parameters for a suppressor. There is no maybe about that. and its not minimal its huge. The are, or can be. way lighter. They are, or can be way better on back pressure, they are or can have better mounting options, etc.etc.etc.
No I fully get that all of this comes down to what are your criteria for what's important. But I think we should not let the idea that the extra money you are paying for a more modern design and better suppressor is somehow wasted or not needed or minimal or maybe better. that's just wrong today.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: hrcjon,

quote:

none have suggested a titanium can. I have stated to them all I am looking for a duty specific can.

I guess that was why I was curious. The word "duty" has no specific technical meaning. I was wondering if you had your own spec. or an idea of one. So in the end this is really a technical question.
I get that of the can's that I see "duty" rated they mean its approved for full auto use no barrel restrictions normally. And that gets you most of the time inconel or haynes 282 and heavy. But do you really care about that spec in and of itself? Again by itself it means nothing, is that a couple of mags or some specific known test. Example the HUX Ti does like 6 Socom surge cycles which is pretty brutal. I would guess lots of other Ti cans are that tough as well even if they don't publish that particular specification. But the haynes ones may survive 20 or more. So back to the core of my question. you can get a Rhodie in inconel, Haynes or Ti what would make you pick a specific material?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don’t know enough about the different metals properties to say well I would pick said material.
I have contacted a few companies explained my specific duty situation and how I am most likely to need to deploy my rifle.
None, have suggested a titanium suppressor. So, I really never thought much beyond that.

That is where I am coming from I don’t currently have any titanium suppressors and don’t feel any of them are too heavy for my intended uses.