If you were in the market for a 9mm can, prices and dB reduction being equal, would you rather have: 1) 1.375" diameter x 7" long, 10.5 ounces with piston or 2) 1.250" diameter x 8" long, 9.0 ounces with piston I knocked out the prototype 1.25" Phoenix-K IX, and now I have to decide which to go with for production. I still need to get more ears to verify, but they sound about the same to me. Length is obnoxious, but so is sight obstruction and weight. It's always a trade-off! To get similar suppression, I have one more K baffle in the skinny critter (1 stainless cone plus 5 aluminum Ks). I'm requesting opinions from ya'll!
With fair warning that this comes from someone who has no silencer yet: If diameter is smaller and it weighs less (and everything else being equal), I would think the longer one would sell better for general production. I would personally be putting a 9mm can on a rifle though and I'm guessing the shorter length would be better for that. Additionally my rifle has high sights, so if I went that route the diameter wouldn't really matter.
I would vote for the longer, lighter one. 1.25 diameter would still allow standard sights on some handguns, I think that would be a great benefit.
Can you go with the shorter thicker can but off-center the flight path? Kind of like what they do with shotgun suppressors to avoid sights being obscured. You would then need a method of indexing the can to the thread, but that's doable.
The 1.25" actually has less sight interference then the SiCo Osprey. We're talking .006", but still, it's less! Lol. I've done a couple, but unless you also do a piston set up more like the slide, barrel and recoil spring on the gun itself, there's really no getting around ~.625" from centerline on the piston housing + tube. I've considered doing that kind of a booster, but it would really need to be a monocore. After many, many prototypes and having sampled what production offerings there are, I'm just not impressed with the suppression of monocore designs on centerfire guns in general. I did a monocore that's severely offset like that, doesn't interfere at all with the sights on my CZ83. But that's a blowback gun, so I could get away with direct thread. I also did a rectangular critter SiCo used their ratchet tooth system on the Osprey with a two-piece piston, but on the couple I've done, I elected a simpler and more finely adjustable clamp system. I don't have any photos of the internals right now, but both simply use a socket head screw to lock down a collar. On the rectangular Pyxis, it's accessible from the outside. On the Cyclops, you remove the tube. AAC makes an offset thing, the Illusion, and it just hasn't done real well. Even the Osprey isn't overwhelmingly popular. I think people just gravitate toward symmetrical, round, concentric cans. Offset or eccentic designs are awkward to screw on, so maybe that's part of it.
I'd go with the longer, small diameter, lighter model, for the sight and weight reasons. If I were in the market for another silencer. I own a Osprey, and it is actually quieter to the ear than a comparable baffles style silencer an acquaintance has - we tested them side by side, and everyone agreed mine was quieter. It is also slightly longer and has more volume ("Mine's bigger!").
The Ospreys are very quiet, owing to that large volume. It's my favorite production can. I still need to do a side-by-side with this skinny one, but the 1.375" x 7.0" Phoenix IX seems to very closely approximate Osprey performance. A little different tone, and it has a noticeable but not offensive FRP compared to subsequent shots, but I dare say I've managed to equal the performance of other cans with an inch less length and a couple ounces lighter. Still trying to get my hands on a meter to put numbers to it, but ultimately our ears are the best test, since dB doesn't tell the whole story. Lower dB can be more offensive if the tone is sharper, the pitch higher. That's one thing I've run into with not-round cans, and even materials affect the tone. Aluminum absorbs vibration (sound) better than steel, for example. Think whacking a pipe with a wrench. And gr. 9 Ti has characteristics all it's own in that department. Not as deadening as Al, but doesn't reverberate like steels, despite it's high tensile strength, "springiness" and greater hardness than most austenitic or annealed martensitic carbon or stainless steels. Here's a visual of the two cans, with an Osprey for reference. I'm a lousy photographer, so don't hold that against them!
Had a chance to do testing with both the 1.375" and 1.250" Phoenix by side with a Rugged Obsidian in the long configuration with 12 pairs of ears bearing witness. My cans are decidedly quieter with a softer tone
Long overdue video here, just been a crazy busy summer, and despite how much testing I've done, never got to filming for a variety of reasons. But now that the Phoenix IX has been extensively tested, including heavy full auto fire, I feel it's ready for prime time. And the Phoenix XLV .45 cal
You know, if I'd learn to comprehend what I'm reading I would likely end up much better off. I confused this post for your other one about the new PCC/blowback can. I know you had mentioned price here on this can at some point. My apologies.
They look cool and sound good! I recommend you take your profits from your first sale and invest in a dead cat for your camera mic.
I have a Liberty Mystic X which I got for 9mm and is cerricert for about 40 other calibers too. Stainless monocore and titanium shell. It is 1.375 diameter. I know nothing about the Phoenix cans. https://libertycans.net/mystic-x/
MachIV is building and selling the Phoenix cans and is putting information here in this thread so you can learn more about them.
My bad, sorry. Thought he was looking to buy. Been a long weekend..... Good luck with your sales MachIV.
Finally got set up with my Bruel & Kjaer impulse sound meter. The Phoenix IX meters 122.7 dB average 40" (1M) perpendicular to the muzzle running Speer Lawman 147 gr subs.
