Suppressing a Krinkov?

[.Scarecrow.]

Well it looks like I want to throw together a 7.62x39 chambered Krinkov SBR. I'm also playing around with the idea of suppressing it. Though, being it will have so much blast from the short barrel, is suppressing such a weapon even worth it? As in would a suppressor have enough effect on it to have justification.

 

[wally]

I've run my Draco-C SBR suppressed, the AK is so over gassed its still pretty loud. I've never considered suppressing my Mini-Draco SBR.

Also the POA/POI shift suppressed vs. unsuppressed is the largest I've seen yet despite the concentricity being better than many of my ARs that show not enough shift to worry about.

Shorter barrels would be stiffer which might help the harmonics of POA/POI shift, but better check with your suppressor maker first as there is a point where the barrel gets too short and the "uncorking" pressure exceeds the suppressor's max ratings.

 

[eldon519]

If you do, check with the suppressor manufacturer to see if they have a minimum barrel length for 7.62x39 for their warranty. There is the pressure exposure as mentioned above but there is also the abrasion to the blast baffle from unburned powder.

 

[LawBot5000]

I looked into this like 10 years ago and eventually gave up trying to make a silent AK. I settled on an integrally suppressed 45 caliber AR-15.

Ironically the supersonic projectiles aren't the main problem. AKs tend to throw a low of pressure out the gas port and the front end of the gas tube vents a lot of that pressure directly to atmosphere. Any residual pressure still in front of the piston as it goes back (if you plugged those holes) would go out the receiver end of the tube as as the piston is driven back. So you'll either end up sending all the muzzle noise out the gas tube or you'll end up with all the pleasures of a direct impingement system instead.

The only feasible idea I could come up with for a practical suppressed AK was the following design which would kind of be a pain in the ass to fabricate and might be kinda heavy.

• krinkov gas system
• barrel that extends 2-3 inches beyond the gas system, with porting between muzzle and 1-2 inches in front of gas port
• blast baffle and k-baffles past the muzzle
• circular flange at the receiver end of the barrel to accept base of suppressor tube. Externally thread it for free float barrel tubes, yankee hill comes to mind, but any is fine. This is so you have a place to mount handguards.
• suppressor tube that runs whole lenth of the barrel and baffles all the way back to the receiver, covering the barrel and the gas tube completely.
• you clean the gas tube with a brush on a rod, clean the barrel with a boresnake
• You now have a well suppressed AK. If you used a high enough twist barrel you can even use subsonics.

In other words, it's a lot more trouble than it's worth. Less hassle to just get a honey badger.

 

[JustinJ]

I've seen an adjustable gas block for the AK but don't know that they make one for Krink configurations. If so that would make it a more viable candidate for a can.

 

[LawBot5000]

Actually, that's a good idea. I forgot about that.

But fundamentally, there are better options out there than suppressing a krink, especially one that is just a vanilla configuration standalone gun that you've already built.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of them are not going to have the twist rate for heavy subsonic projectiles, and 7.62x39 doesn't have as wide a selection as the cartridges based on 308 diameter projectiles. And what projectiles there are for the 311 diameter tend to be blunter and have lower BC.

Again, we're back to 300 BLK, which is designed from the ground up to fit AR mags, do both supersonic and subsonic well and work with a regular direct impingement gas system.

 

[Willie Sutton]

Having had a play with a suppressed Krink (SBR based on a PAP Pistol, with a can made locally on a Form 1 that resembles the original Russian can both inside and out), all I can add is that the can makes the thing "tolerable to shoot" versus "this darned Krink-thing is intolerable to shoot" which is the case when they are shot without a can installed.

There ain't no such thing as a "quiet" Krink. But the cans do tame them some.


Willie

.

 

[Telekinesis]

Having had a play with a suppressed Krink (SBR based on a PAP Pistol, with a can made locally on a Form 1 that resembles the original Russian can both inside and out), all I can add is that the can makes the thing "tolerable to shoot" versus "this darned Krink-thing is intolerable to shoot" which is the case when they are shot without a can installed.

There ain't no such thing as a "quiet" Krink. But the cans do tame them some.

That may be your problem.
The old Russian designs were pretty poor, and I have heard that even the suppressors on the 9x39 guns were lacking as well. Current American suppressors are much more advanced than the old Russian designs.



The 7.62x39 cartridge itself is actually an ok place to start as far as suppression goes, as it and the .300 Blk are very similar. Considering the 7.62x39 burns its powder quickly, I would think you'd be ok putting a can on a barrel around 8". I don't think you'd have too much risk of eroding the blast baffle at that length.

But then we get back to the issues that the AK has with being overgassed which makes it louder when suppressed, and the barrel twist not being right to stabilize heavier bullets from subs. Also, I've seen examples of AKs that wouldn't cycle subs (though I don't know if that was because of the gun or the loads) which turned the gun into a single shot.

I love suppressing odd weapons just to have something different, but it probably won't be as quiet as your hoping. If you want something that's similar but will be very quiet, it's hard to beat a suppressed .300 Blk AR with a 8" barrel.

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^ This.

The project we did here was just to see how the Russians did things and to produce something that looked original. They built the originals as a carbine that would be able to be used as-is for PDW purposes and with the can was able to be lived with... but it wasn't "silent" by any stretch of the imagination. A more modern can is, as you said, going to be better. But the basic rifle + cartridge design is not optimal for being really quiet for the reasons you cite.



Willie

.

 

[.Scarecrow.]

I'm not looking to use subs actually. I'm just wondering how much the sound COULD be reduced with an average high quality suppressor. If it would even make a significant difference on the sound signature.