I'm wanting to suppress my SCAR-17. I'm not planning to change the barrel length from the factory 16". I'd like something with a solid QD feature. From what I see out there, Surefire's SOCOM systems seem to be optimal.

What else should I be looking at? Do I need to do anything more than changing over the muzzle device to the appropriate QD attachment, such as adjusting or replacing the gas plug/vent?

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

All I did for mine was swap out the muzzle device.
Took off the original and slapped on my SiCo flash hider.
Works like a champ.

(of course I dialed the gas system to suppressed too)

quote:

Originally posted by creslin:
All I did for mine was swap out the muzzle device.
Took off the original and slapped on my SiCo flash hider.
Works like a champ.

(of course I dialed the gas system to suppressed too)

Ditto....X2

Ditto x thrice

What suppressors are y'all using? Everyone using SiCo?

quote:

Originally posted by ShneaSIG:
What suppressors are y'all using? Everyone using SiCo?

Not specific to the SCAR, but I’m running a SilencerCo Saker and a Rugged Surge. Both have been great.

Take a look at the Rugged cans, both the Surge and the Razor. Very happ with mine, the fit and finish is excellent and the suppression is great. Right now they’re running a promo to get several extra mounts when purchasing a can.

Also might take a look at the cans from Dead Air.

Not exactly, using suppressors manufactured by a forum member, his company was known as SSD Machine & Tool, (Ken Stout) formerly located in Roswell, NM. Purchased/built two SSD 300's (model) for me few years ago. These are attached with a Griffin Armament muzzle device(s). With some of the other suppressors purchased, from him, mounts used are AAC.
On a side note, I believe SSD ( Ken Stout) relocated to Washington State a few years back.

Unless you change the barrel length (which you arent planning to do), simply change the muzzle device to an appropriate suppressor mount and click the gas regulator to suppressed.

Easy peasy. Im using an AAC-762-SDN6 but chopped to a 13” barrel. All that required was changing out the gas control screws in the gas block, an easy plug and play process.

Since the 17S has a very small shoulder on the barrel, you have to be mindful that the muzzle device seats squarely. All of my SiCo muzzle devices have worked perfectly by just threading them directly on. Do not use the factory jam nut with an aftermarket muzzle device, it will cause big problems.

If you want to verify that everything is properly aligned to eliminate the chances of baffle strikes you can use a precision ground rod to check bore concentricity. Here is a thread I started several years ago where I documented some findings and shared the info for buying the ~$5 bore rod (cheap insurance for peace of mind):

https://fnforum.net/forums/sbr...ty-measurements.html

You should also consider buying a variety of different gas control screws from Midwest Gunworks. If your 17S is a little bit overgassed from the factory (which is highly likely), then it may be VERY overgassed even on the suppressed setting if you use a can that increases backpressure substantially. It's hard to predict this since all cans are so different. If the rifle is overgassed, swapping to a smaller gas screw makes a big difference in how much the rifle moves under recoil with a can.

https://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/FNSGCL

I'd like to avoid cans that are the worst at increasing back-pressure. I saw something on Handl Defense's blog that the Surefire 762 SOCOM cans are pretty good about back-pressure levels when on a SCAR-17. Any thoughts or comments?

quote:

Originally posted by ShneaSIG:
I'd like to avoid cans that are the worst at increasing back-pressure. I saw something on Handl Defense's blog that the Surefire 762 SOCOM cans are pretty good about back-pressure levels when on a SCAR-17. Any thoughts or comments?

I have a SOCOM 762 RC can, with QD attachments for multiple rifles. Have used it on multiple 16" and 18" barrel 223 AR-15s, an 11" 300blk AR-15, a 26" 6.5 Creedmoor AR-10, a 23" bolt action 308, and a 26" bolt action 6.5 Creedmoor. I don't see back pressure as an issue with any of these rifles. Being the RC, it's not the quietest of cans, but still pretty good. I'm thinking of adding another SOCOM 762, but probably in the full-length version.

I don't find the back pressure of the SOCOM RC any different than what I get from my Thunderbeast Ultra 9, which I've used on the two bolt actions and the AR-10. The SOCOM RC's back pressure doesn't seem an different than the Thunderbeast 223 P-1, when I use it on my 223 AR-15s.

I have a certificate for TBAC can. I plan to get a Thunderbeast Ultra 7, with the QD brake attachment.

OSS cans are suppose to be better than others concerning back pressure... I can’t confirm though, I’ve never handled one.

I sold my 17 but had an Omega on it, tuned it by changing the gas screw and getting it to cycle best in supressed mode 1.4 if I remember correctly. the FN factory for the 17 is 1.5 which is overgassed. Keep in mind FN doesn't want you to shoot it supressed and the manual doesn't even mention the adjustable gas block for the little people while the .Mil manual describes it as it should be. Stupid I know but that's FN covering their ass if it breaks. Once you get the gas screws optimized its a real pussycat......

The Surefire SOCOM cans are known for having lower backpressure, which is valuable if you are trying to suppress a DI rifle without an adjustable gas system. But they are noticeably louder than comparable cans. Shooting supersonic .308 through even a "quiet" can is already still pretty loud, but shooting a SOCOM 762 can side by side I was surprised by how much louder it was than my Saker 762. Independent tests have shown it to be 7-8 dB louder than the Saker which explains why it was so noticeable. Personally if I had spent that kind of money and waited that long I would have been disappointed with the SOCOM 762 can when compared with other options.

I have used my Saker 556 and Saker 556K on my two SCAR 16S' with 16" and 10" barrels, and my Saker 762 and Specwar 762 on my SCAR 17S with 16" and 13" barrels. They have all worked very well and I think are a good balance of sound suppression, quality, and acceptable back pressure. It's very easy to tune the Scar gas system so I wouldn't buy a loud can just to mitigate back pressure. Just swap the gas screws if needed once you see how it runs with the can.

I haven't tried my Thunderbeast 30P-1 on my Scars so I can't compare it directly there for function or sound. They are excellent cans for precision bolt guns.

I have found the Omega 300 to still be a great choice for a well balanced rifle can in terms of sound, size, weight, and quality QD mount interface. Several of my friends have them and they sound great. With .308 it's even a couple dB quieter than my Saker 762. It's only rated to a 16" minimum barrel length on full power .308 so I could not use it for my 13" 17S SBR, but you said you are staying at 16" so I think it would be a great choice for your needs.

They also have a neat picture of the Omega 300 mounted on a 17S in their user manual.

https://silencerco.com/wp-cont...ega_Manual_small.pdf

First, thank you to everyone who has joined this discussion - I appreciate you all taking the time to share your insights and experiences.

Brett - I really appreciate your detailed contributions.


Here are my priorities, in general order of importance:

1) suppressor longevity and duribility
2) minimizing increased wear or necessity of modification on the host firearm
3) compatibility with an effective muzzle brake
4) Effective and consistent QD mount
5) Minimizing POI shift and repeatability of any POI shift
6) effectiveness of masking flash/shot signature (other than sound suppression)
7) level of noise reduction


-WAIT! WHAT?

That's right - level of noise reduction is intentionally the last thing on the list. It seems any suppressor that checks these other boxes is going to be "quiet enough" in my book. After all, I'm still going to be shooting full-power .308, and probably hotter hunting loads at that, when I'll be using this suppressor the most. I do not plan to shoot suppressed at all times - in fact, during typical fun/plinking range outings, I likely won't use the suppressor (which is why I want to go with a QD system that includes a good muzzle brake).

Also, cost is intentionally omitted from the list - I'm more interested in getting this right.

I may do something later for a build or another SCAR where I try to get as close to mouse-fart quiet as I can, but that's not the purpose of this endeavor.

Based on that list I would get the Saker 762 ASR. It uses Stellite baffles, is rated for full auto, and is warrantied down to 12” barrels on full power .308 and 7” barrels on 5.56. Stellite has significant erosion resistance compared with stainless steel and inconel, particularly when at very high temps.

Additionally the Saker has a thicker sleeve wall thickness in the high pressure section of the can (hence the visible step). The Saker sleeve OD is 1.485” for the first half of the length, and then steps down to 1.460” for the 2nd half of its length. The also full-auto-rated Specwar 762 has a constant 1.460” OD for its entire length by comparison. This .025” OD difference may not seem like much but the additional wall thickness goes a long way to structural rigidity of the sleeve during temp/pressure peaks. You can see the wall thickness difference in the Specwar 762 vs Saker 762 cutaway picture below. In short, the Saker is a tank.

The SOCOM 762 has lots of marketing language about durability, but it is not utilizing these more expensive materials and construction methods. It does not use Stellite for the baffles, it doesn’t have a thicker sleeve wall thickness in the high pressure section, and it’s only rated down to a 16” minimum barrel length on .308. Plenty of posts on other forums about how quickly the inconel baffles on the SOCOM cans erode, especially with SBR’s. Per their own employee’s posting on AR15.com years ago it was primarily designed to minimize back pressure and cyclic rate while keeping weight in check. There’s nothing wrong with that, and is a good approach for a DI rifle without an adjustable gas system, but it’s not as over engineered as other market options.

When looking at that cutaway picture you can also see how important the Stellite baffle material is on shorter cans. The muzzle blast is directly impinging on those first few baffles. Longer cans are able to get away with less exotic materials as they have a larger expansion chamber for the muzzle blast to slow and cool before impinging on the baffles.

No can is going to cause increased wear on the SCAR as long as you swap out the gas screw. It’s extremely easy to do and is one of the shining features of the SCAR design in my option.

POI shift is affected by: 1)repeatable bore concentricity 2)static weight causing barrel droop 3)dynamic changes to barrel whip. QD mounts only affect #1 and from my testing most modern QD mounts will do great with concentricity. However #3 is the primary driver to POI shift on thinner barrels and it’s very hard to predict. My Saker 762 on my 13” Scar 17S barrel is a repeatable 1.5 MOA shift, my Saker 556 in my 16” Scar 16S barrel is a repeatable 2 MOA shift, my SakerK on my 10” Scar 16S is immeasurable (shooting a red dot a shorter distances). The Specwar 762 on my 16” 17S barrel was 1.5 MOA and on the 13” barrel was 4MOA, but also repeatable. My buddies SOCOM 762 had a ~3 MOA shift on his HK MR762. All had near perfect concentricity when measured with the bore rod.


The biggest complaint with the Saker was the original Trifecta QD mount. I have 4 of them and they have all worked perfectly but maybe I’ve just been lucky. Regardless, the ASR mount is rock solid and a much simpler attachment method that is well proven. That’s why SiCo updated the Saker design to ship with the ASR mounts now. Note that the Rugged Surge 762 does use Stellite and it is rated to 12” barrels on .308. But I don’t know that its attachment method is as well vetted as the ubiquitous ASR mount. I have been very happy with my Rugged Obsidian 9mm can so I think they do make good products.

Wow, Brett, thank you for your detailed and thoughtful comments. Much to consider! Let me digest this a bit. I may have some further questions for you!

Brett’s posts above are spot on and are great info even for suppressor veterans.

I like the ASR mounts and am in the process of changing over my Saker to these. My Trifectea has always been problematic but only recently did it get so stuck that I had to bring it home to remove it. Strange as my best friend has the same can within a few digits of my serial # and has had no issues. Worst part is that knowing it’s had issues I’m overly attentive to cleaning the mount(s).

As a note, the Rugged attachment is an updated ASR design (Henry Graham, owner of Rugged was behind many of SilencerCo’s products prior to his departure). My experience with these are what finally convinced me to change my SilencerCo cans.

I ordered a Sandman L for mine and was able to fondle it yesterday. Unfortunately it'll be who knows how long before I get to bring it home.

There is an issue with the barrel as it has no shoulder but Dead Air makes a special brake specifically for the 17 that they will include with the suppressor. You just have to let them know or they'll include their standard one.

It was quite spendy, but it gets great reviews, so...hopefully I'll be happy with it.

Get a KBA Scar Shoulder Ring for your muzzle device.

https://www.silencershop.com/s...7-shoulder-ring.html

I’ll be using a Griffin Paladin, when it gets out of jail.