3D printed suppresor?

MachIVshooter said:

If you had the machines & tooling (or access to them), you absolutely could. My Ocelot takes about $20 worth of material to make and will markedly outperform the monocore GM22, especially on handguns.

Heck, even if you don't have much tooling, you can do OK for rimfire. I experimented with some of the imported "fuel filter kits" you see on ebay as both a service to the F1 community since I don't have to pay NFA tax to manufacture, and out of my own curiosity, actually got pretty respectable performance out of them using a few of the baffles from a second $9 kit:

View attachment 866474

https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/The-cheap-chinese-can-experiment/55-502440/

To make the alterations I did would take a decent amount of time without a mill and lathe, but you really could pull it off with a small drill press, a vise, hand files and a hack saw.

Click to expand...

Where are you finding those for $9?

Elkins45 said:

Where are you finding those for $9?

Click to expand...

Ebay, but they're constantly getting removed & relisted, so you have to look hard and look often with creative search words.

MachIVshooter said:

Ebay, but they're constantly getting removed & relisted, so you have to look hard and look often with creative search words.

Click to expand...

The current term seems to be storage cups.

Only gain I see to it is being able to print things one can't machine, IF, that is a gain and I don't know enough to know if it is or not.

Ohen Cepel said:

Only gain I see to it is being able to print things one can't machine, IF, that is a gain and I don't know enough to know if it is or not.

Click to expand...

It can be in many instances. Casting and injection molding can also create some of those impossible-to-machine features.

Is it beneficial in the world of suppressor manufacturing? I don't see that it really is. The reports on the performance of the Delta P cans are positive, but everyone else is still machining bar stock, including manufacturers with a lot more capital than Delta who could easily buy DMLS machines if they wanted to.

mcb said:

There have been several 3D printed suppressors made by several companies using various laser sintering based 3D metal printers. General Dynamics new bullpup that will compete for the new Next Generation Squad Weapon utilizes a one piece 3D printed muzzle-device/suppressor. No doubt there are some post printing clean up of the threads. I handled the rifle earlier this week at AUSA.

Click to expand...

Exactly this. I know there are already several examples of people who used 3D metal printers based on laser sintering to manufacture very effective and intricate suppressors. Hell, there was even one company who used a 3D metal printer to print an entire 1911, which functioned perfectly with .45 ACP loads. The only problem is the cost, currently 3D metal printers are still incredibly expensive and far beyond what regular citizens can afford. But the same thing was true for 3D plastics printers a decade or so ago, and look at them now, they're only several fold more expensive than regular inkjet printers. So give it some time, a decade or maybe even less, and 3D metal printers will be within reach for us mortals.

3D printing is not the only additive manufacturing process. For cylindrical cannisters, spun carbon fiber has been around for a long time and would almost certainly produce a stronger envelope than 3D printing even with sintered metals. The internal structures do not have to be made with subtractive machining either. There are a lot of additive fabrication techniques done to ceramics and composite materials. Making a clay pot or a fiberglass boat are both additive manufacturing processes, and neither one requires a X,Y,Z axis 3D printer.

So what is "interesting" about a 3D printer is not that it is "additive" but that it is a single device that can be used to produce practically unlimited shapes with a wide variety of materials. It is additive and it operates based on CAD/CAM/CNC principles. Legally and ethically, it is interesting to consider "what if" it were to be used to create contraband? It is interesting because there are questions about whether the potential to instantly and surreptitiously supply contraband effectively thwarts efforts to control it and whether such efforts become a waste of resources. Alternatively, some might consider regulating the mere knowledge or intelligence to create contraband, which begets a bizarre and disturbing regulatory environment.

Yeah I think the form 1 solvent traps are a better option than form 1 printed.
The solvent traps are serviceable and the better large ones can take up to a 300 win mag.
If you want to do it for research and to ensure the absolute proliferation of 22lr cans, by all means.