OSS Flow through suppresor

[KDinTX]

Anyone seen or heard of these? Looks interesting. http://thefunnybeaver.com/meet-the-o...gh-suppressor/

[SC-Texas]

Rubesh Goldberg. Loud. Complicated expensive

[trophy8]

OSS is terrible lol

[SC-Texas]

It's really the *** suppressor.

The only good thing is that it's extremely low back pressure and doesn't significantly increase the bolt carrier velocity.

Then again, neither does a mini and a mini isn't much louder than the *** and it's shorter.

Notice that there are no meter test results with an ***. At least I haven't seen any.

[SC-Texas]

Love that. The site censored the A S S auppressor

[zac221]

I've shot with one and was pleased. Was happy to learn about them. They actually test the noise from the shooters position instead of 10' away so of course it's going to be louder. It's not a baffle system so if it wears down you can buy a $45 part to replace and it's back up and going. No over pressure to speed up the bolt or blow back which was nice. They were a bit more expensive but the compromise seemed worth it. I don't own any suppressor, but would probably buy theirs if I did get one.

Now I'm not a professional or a suppressor snob so my thoughts were just that, my thoughts on how it functioned. We put close to 2-300 rounds through 2 and nobody wore ear pro, which I guess it worked in making it quieter.

[SC-Texas]

Yeah . . . . Okay. So they have unilaterally decided to test their suppressors in a non-standard manner which prevents any comparison at all between their suppressor and all of the others. Is reason they do this and that is because there are suppressors do not perform nearly as well as the standard baffle design.

[lnester]

Yeah . . . . Okay. So they have unilaterally decided to test their suppressors in a non-standard manner which prevents any comparison at all between their suppressor and all of the others. Is reason they do this and that is because there are suppressors do not perform nearly as well as the standard baffle design.

From this reddit post:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ar15/comments/43zpae/oss_suppressor_30_psi_no_blowback/

Over at Battlefied Vegas I ran their cans on a FA Daniel Defense MK18, an HK 417, and a remington 700 based .308. On the bolt gun, it was just another silencer, I didn't see much advantage of that design over my Omega or Saker. On the MK18 though, the difference was huge. Especially with AR's the decibel reduction numbers that most manufacturers put out are very misleading- it may only be 136db at the muzzle, but at the shooter's right ear its going to be substantially louder, usually over 140 db, because gas from the gas tube is way over pressure and the chamber opens while the barrel is still pressurized because of the silencer.

The thing about the OSS equipped rifle was that it runs exactly like an unsuppressed rifle. The recoil felt exactly like an unsuppressed 10.3" AR, the bolt was obviously cleaner, there was no gas blowing back out of the receiver, and to my right ear, it seemed far quieter than a competing baffled suppressor design. (and I checked, in the Mk18 I was shooting M855) When I was standing around watching other people shoot, it sounded like every other suppressed AR, but shooting it is a whole different experience. The 417 shot the same way. It really was the benefits of shooting with a can, without the side effects.
I ordered two on the spot for myself, and signed up as a dealer.

[SC-Texas]

At the ear testing has shown that most every suppressor results in approximately 137 dB at the ear. It does not matter whether it is a 308 can on a 556 or a 556 can.

What OSS is done just found a way to make it louder at the muzzle and then not measure how loud it is so they don't have to explain to everyone that this is more of a moderator than a suppressor.

The fact is the only thing that the OSS can does yes it does not over pressurize the gas system. It does not increase both velocity and wear and tear on the weapon.

Those are the two things that this suppressor system does very well. Unfortunately, it does not suppress very well. So you, as the customer, as the end user, have to decide what your primary goal is. If you're primary goal of suppression in this is not the system for you. If your primary goal is reducing the back pressure in the system, then this may be the system for you.

The quote above is more anecdotal evidence. Unfortunately, it is not scientifically valid in any way shape or form.

[SC-Texas]

I'm sorry, in my opinion, these guys not invented a better mousetrap. This system is overly complicated overly expensive and is pretty much limited to use I own one rifle. The flash hider mount system is a Rube Goldberg dream of f sharp turbine looking blade thingies that will catch on anything that touches and cut it and scratch it. From a functional standpoint, you cannot take the suppressor module off of one rifle and use it. But this is my opinion based on what I've seen.

[SC-Texas]

As far as back pressure goes, and gas in the face goes, my surefire so come 556 RC has never given me noticeable gas in the face. My old AAC sPRM 4 requires the use of a gas Buster charging handle.

[lnester]

I'm sorry, in my opinion, these guys not invented a better mousetrap. This system is overly complicated overly expensive and is pretty much limited to use I own one rifle. The flash hider mount system is a Rube Goldberg dream of f sharp turbine looking blade thingies that will catch on anything that touches and cut it and scratch it. From a functional standpoint, you cannot take the suppressor module off of one rifle and use it. But this is my opinion based on what I've seen.

And your opinion would be uninformed and wrong. Go shoot one and see. The future of military suppression will utilize Flow-Through technology, but it's not for everyone.

[SC-Texas]

Uh okay. Unfortunately I actually am correct on this one.

[SC-Texas]

By the way I have shot them. And in one evening two of them puked their guts and sent their core bouncing down the range. Two of them. So yes. I have shot them. The main benefit was less gas in the face.