I've been wondering for years why suppressors are cylindrical. A big fat round thing hanging onto the end of a barrel may make sense on a rifle, but it tends to stick up over the sights of a pistol, is often wider than the pistol, and fails to use the space under the bore. There are plenty of multi-port compensators that are streamlined into the slide of competition pistols. Except for the seam, it looks like one piece.
Why not just make a multi-port compensator or brake and close off the ports? No more baffles to align, it will look like part of the gun, and still offer plenty of volume for the gas to expand into without increasing the size of the pistol in any dimension apart from length. Hell, you could even make holsters for it.
Well it looks like AAC is halfway there. The Prodigy is basically a big old muzzle brake with a sleeve over it to close off the ports. Good idea. And of course they've patented it. But the sleeve is still a freakin' tube.
The Evolution 9mm is 1.25" in diameter and 7.25" long. That's about 8.9 cubic inches, minus baffles and threading. A box-shaped suppressor with the same volume could be over 2" shorter if it were 1.75" tall and 1" wide. And it wouldn't block your sights.
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Comments
The sight issue is a valid and long runing problem. It's worth noting that the early Maxim suppressorsd were actually offset so that the bulk of the suppressor hung -below- the line of sight.
If I had a CNC machine I would be banging out stainles steel Colt M1908 .380 Hammerless' to beat the band!
Download their software. Use it to create a hexagonal block, with holes drilled radially inward from each of the six faces to the center.
While one could make a spherical suppressor, that'd be silly. Cylinders are the next best bet.
Also, cylindrical suppressors allow for uniform distribution of gases within the can, as well as uniform distribution of pressure. Having rectangular suppressors means that certain points deal with higher pressure than other points.
Also, with a cylindrical suppressor there's no "up", so it doesn't matter how the threads are machined. With a rectangular one, it could be rotated at some odd angle, looking weird.
Worst, you mean. When it comes to guns, you want more surface and less volume. That's why we have fluted barrels. The greater the surface area, the greater the cooling.
The baffles already ensure that some parts of the can will get stressed more than others. As you can see from the prodigy, the baffles are even angled. As long as it's strong enough to contain the highest pressures, it's no problem.
This is true, but many brakes are indexed, and QD mounts make attachment with repeatable orientation easy.
No, I meant "best". While a greater surface area increases cooling, a greater volume maximizes the loss in pressure, and thus the quieting effect of suppressors.
The baffles already ensure that some parts of the can will get stressed more than others.
True. So long as the parts are strong enough to deal with the highest pressures, it should be ok.
The baffles in my Outback II are symmetrical around the central hole, which seems to be the most common way to make baffles...as far as I know.
This is true, but many brakes are indexed, and QD mounts make attachment with repeatable orientation easy.
Agreed. That is true.
Personally, I'm surprised there's no heat sink fins on some full-auto rated suppressors. Maybe go back to the old-school machine gun designs and use water-cooled jackets, but this time use them on suppressors rather than just the barrels? :)
www.cnczone.com
If you know some basic electronics, you can put together a nice benchtop one that would probably work just fine for smaller work.