Playing off the "good reasons to not use a silencer on a rifle" thread, I am curious what others think about QD functionality. It seems to me that it shines most in the same context that most agreed justified going canless: compact size necessity. I also see a benefit when it comes to weapon maintenance. Switching hosts behind the same silencer is another perk. Considering how I feel about silencer use in general though, I don't see any need for QD functionality, in a tactical scenario. I recently saw an interview in which a former SEAL mentioned his early/mid 2000s leadership having him and his teammates take them on/off for "reasons"; he said he was confused as to why then, and still is now. What do the SIGforum pros have to say, regarding silencer QD functionality? I guess it may ultimately boil down to "why not?"; more pros than cons. Cons I perceive are more complicated and more costly.
The military stuff from KAC and SF retains QD functionality, even with a seeming shift toward constant suppression among the special troops. So, there must be a "tactical" reason; though the aforementioned practical reasons are likely enough anyway.
I guess my view is that I'm going to mount a muzzle device any way so why not one that supports QD? I get that if you have a zillion different suppressor types that's probably not a winning argument. But I use surefire on defensive rifles and I mount QD surefire FH's even if its not in my mind to suppress it on a regular enough basis to have the can on there all the time. Only downside is probably cost. But since you can get qd with an A2 is there really anything that isn't a QD mount? Or maybe I misunderstood the question.
“So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong, and strike at what is weak.”
I guess the question is "what are 'dynamic' or tactical reasons for QD functionality?"
Ten years ago, it seemed to me that silencer manufacturers and purchasers cared about the "quickness" of QD actions. If how quick it is is important, than surely the QD functionality "under duress" provides some perceived advantage to someone.
In thinking more about it, a scenario in which someone's weapon is damaged to the point of abandonment/destruction in the field, it would prove handy; the silencer could be salvaged prior to destruction of the weapon.
The bottom line is, with so many people favoring 100% suppressed shooting, what scenarios necessitate a QD functionality? It makes administrative removal easier, of course, but does it have true value outside of administrative ease?
|Powered by Social Strata|