Why not more pinned/permanent suppressors to short barrels.

Status
Not open for further replies.

SVTOhio

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
380
I've been doing some research on pinned suppressors to short barrels for ARs and am not having much luck finding options. A pinned 6" suppressor on a 10.2" ar would have an overall length of over 16 inches and in turn allow you to only have one tax stamp for a suppressed SBR. I've also heard some chatter about possibly the tax stamp going away here in Ohio for suppressors aswell. Anybody have any insight?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've been doing some research on pinned suppressors to short barrels for ARs and am not having much luck finding options. A pinned 6" suppressor on a 10.2" ar would have an overall length of over 16 inches and in turn allow you to only have one tax stamp for a suppressed SBR. I've also heard some chatter about possibly the tax stamp going away here in Ohio for suppressors aswell. Anybody have any insight?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The tax stamp is a federal requirement. I don't see how Ohio could make that disappear. I would love to see suppressors taken out of the NFA. There is no reason for them to be in there (the whole NFA needs to go away, but suppressors are an easier bite of that pie).
 
There are a few issues. Cleaning the barrel and/or the suppressor becomes a bit more of an issue. And many or most users like to move their cans around to different guns.
And you're still filling out the paperwork and registering it, so aside from saving $200 (which isn't much compared to the cost of that device) and a little ink, there's not a whole lot of benefit.

Now I'd certainly consider one if it was a very well designed assembly that matches the silencer to the cartridge and gun very well and gives the maximum silencing effect, while in the smallest and least obtrusive package. Something like a De Lisle carbine or integrally suppressed Sterling is a real joy!
 
The tax stamp is a federal requirement. I don't see how Ohio could make that disappear. I would love to see suppressors taken out of the NFA. There is no reason for them to be in there (the whole NFA needs to go away, but suppressors are an easier bite of that pie).



I'm sorry I think is a national thing not just Ohio. It's called the hearing protection act if you would like to research it.
 
I'm sorry I think is a national thing not just Ohio. It's called the hearing protection act if you would like to research it.
Yes, that bill has been introduced. No clear indication that it will move at all, but depending on outcomes of the next election cycle it isn't necessarily purely a dead letter.
 
Well the states have chosen to ignore federal drug and immigration laws and are getting away with it, you never know. The move to more states rights is growing. I can see a state or two making a law that forbids their LE from acting or enforcing federal law on any new gun legislation. Would be more of a moral victory than anything else, but it's a start.


Regarding the pinning of a can to a short barrel, I have always thought that was a good idea. I think the market would eat up a inexpensive set up like that. When I look at what suppressors cost in Europe vs. what they cost here, I see the manufacturing costs are out of line here, so there is room to move to a more budget solution. My guess you could make a complete integrally suppressed upper, requiring 1 stamp, with a retail price of $600-700, minus bcg.

When a gunsmith and I were looking at it a couple of years ago, we had settled on a Russian design for the baffles. Basically a bent piece of steel that created 4 or so expansion chambers. The tube could be removed for cleaning of the inside, but the baffle piece would be permanently attached to the end of the barrel. It would not appeal to the latest and greatest crowd. It was very basic, did not use exotic materials or the latest in sound moderation technology. But it was quick and inexpensive to make, solid and would have performed like other budget cans. We had the cost figured that we were going to make a fair profit with a moderate volume of sales. Buyer got the benefit of a good price and only 1 stamp. Other reasons got in the way of further development.


.
 
In Iowa, silencers are now legal but SBR's are not. So I am waiting for the paperwork to proceed building a Form 1 silencer that WILL be permanently attached to my 12.5" pistol, which will put into a rifle configuration (once I add a stock).

If I could have an SBR here, I would probably pay the extra $200 so I could move the silencer around. It's just not an option for Iowans at this point though. I don't know if there are other jurisdictions with similar restrictions, but I wouldn't be surprised.
 
Well the states have chosen to ignore federal drug and immigration laws and are getting away with it, you never know.

The states cannot be required to enforce federal law (although the feds can use other means to convince them to do it). That said the issue with respect to marijuana, immigration, and in this case firearms, is whether the feds will enforce their own law and whether state laws are preempted by Federal law.

The feds actually have been doing some enforcement with respect to marijuana in states that have legalized it at the state level, most notably federal agents on federal land. That is to say, rangers on federal land have been citing people for possession of MJ. The feds lack of enforcement on a broader scale is just the whims of who is currently in charge and a decision on their part that they wont do their job and enforce the law. They could change their mind tomorrow and the state laws would offer zero protection from that. I highly doubt that the current administration (or a Hillary administration) will take the same hands off approach to illegal silencers as they due to marijuana or persons unlawfully in the country.

As to why you don't see more pinned suppressors. My theory would be that it is cheaper to pay $200 and be able to to move the can to different hosts than to buy additional suppressors and pin them. There is also the fact that being able to remove the can offers more versatility. If suppressors were non NFA and their prices came down accordingly I think you'd see it more often. You likely would also see more factory offerings of suppressed 16" barrel length guns.

For me, the marginal savings do not outweigh the downsides to that setup as things stand now.
 
I did that with one of mine, it's 16.125" with the end cap removed.

DSC01676.jpg

And fits inside the FFT.

DSC01669.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top