This sound signature review includes individual test results using the Razor Resistant on the MK18 AR15 automatic rifle chambered for 5.56 x 45mm NATO with a 10.3" barrel. Federal ammo was used in the test. XM193 55gr.Standard-PEW Science MK18-Testhost-Waffensystemis described in itPublic Research Supplement 6.51.
Section 6.58.1contains contains the Razor test results and analysis.
Section 6.58.2includes suppression rating comparisons of the Razor to specific 5.56mm rifle silencers, including the OSS HX-QD 556, SilencerCo Saker 556, and Surefire SOCOM556-RC2 in the MK18.
Section 6.58.3contains the evaluation summary and the subjective opinions of PEW Science.
keep in mind thatPEW Science Member Research Supplement 6.59contains a review of the Rugged Razor with the5.56mm end capin the MK18 and compares its performance to the standard .30 caliber case.
6.58.1 Rugged Razor Sound Signature Test Results
A summary of key Silencer Sound Standard performance data for the Razor tested with the R3 Flash Concealer is shown in Table 1. The data, collected 0.15 m (6 inches) to the right of the shooter's ear, is available to members only. from PEW Science and the Silencer Sound Standard. You can support PEW Science testing, research and development as a member, here.Readers like you endorse PEW Science's state-of-the-art firearm sound signature testing and research.
22.214.171.124 SOUND SIGNATURES IN THE MOUTH
Below are the actual SPLs from a test shot of 6 shots captured with PEW-SOFT™.Six rounds were loaded into the magazine, the fire control group was set to single fire, and the gun fired until the magazine was empty and the bolt locked back into the empty magazine follower. Only five shots are considered in the analysis.Photo 6 signatures are shown in the data presentation but are not included in the analysis for consistency with the full PEW Science dataset and screw closure signatures. Waveforms are not calculated, decimated, or filtered. The data acquisition rate used in all PEW Science tests is 1.0 MS/s (1 MHz). The peaks, shape, and time phases (when the peaks occur relative to absolute time and each other) of these raw waveforms are the most accurate of any publicly available firearm silencer test. PEW SOFT data is collected through independent testing conducted by PEW Science; the industry leader in noise research for mufflers. For more information, seeQuiet sound pattern.
The main sound signature pressure trajectories for the 6 razor shots are shown in Figure 1a. The sound signatures of Plano 1 and Plano 2 are shown in Figure 1b in the initial period. Actual sound impulse (impulse transfer potential) curves from the same 6-shot test are shown in Figure 2a. Figure 2b shows a shorter time scale comparing the pulse from shot 1 to shot 2 and shot 3.
The Rugged Razor is a .30 caliber rifle silencer, and as such,clearly boredfor the 5.56x45mm gun platform. The excessively large internal diameter, together with the relatively small number of vanes (four), results in a relatively high mass flow rate (low back pressure; low PEW Science Omega Metric). This onePEW Science Omega-Metricsfor the 5.56 x 45 mm cartridge is the subject of future publications.
The high flow rate of the Razor (a .30 gauge suppressor with few baffles) in the 5.56 x 45 mm platform is highlighted by some similarities between the waveforms measured with the Razor and the waveforms measured with theOSS HX-QD 556 in Test 6.54🇧🇷 The Razor's flow rate is not as high as that of the HX-QD 556, but it does show significant initial coupling of the muzzle blast and the projectile's muzzle wave (Figure 1b) and a relatively fast twist rate to peak. maximum positive phase pulse (Figure 2a). 🇧🇷
PEW Science Research Nota 1:While the Razor shares some signature similarities with the HX-QD 556 due to the high flow rate, the mechanism by which the Razor achieves its high flow rate is different; A larger axial opening results in different gas dynamics than the more complex internal geometry of the OSS silencer. Like many rifle silencers, the Rugged Razor relies on gas capture to suppress the sonic signature. As the orifice size increases relative to the cartridge diameter, suppression performance decreases. This phenomenon is exacerbated by the relatively small number of reeds and is also reflected in the more erratic pulse waveforms (Figure 2).The Rugged Razor is an inefficient 5.56 x 45 mm short barrel suppressor., in the sense that its flow rate is significantly lower than that of OSS HX-QD 556, but its sound insulation performance is also lower. The user can choose to install a 5.56mm caliber cap on the Rugged Razor instead of the standard .30 caliber cap. Using the 5.56mm end cap changes the gas dynamics and therefore the damping performance of the Razor on this platform. This phenomenon is examined inPEW Science Member Research Supplement 6.59.
Significant differences can be seen in the pressure and pulse waveforms shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively, compared to those ofSurefire SOCOM556-RC2 no teste 6.52it's himCases SilencerCo 556 im Test 6.53🇧🇷 As with the OSS HX-QD 556, the gas jet is from the Rugged Razorimportantfaster than seen with SOCOM556-RC2 and Saker 556Behavior of the silencer at low back pressureare discussed above. The Rugged Razor has significantly lower sound signature suppression performance compared to these dedicated 5.56mm silencers, measured 1.0m to the left of the barrel. However, the performance deficit, measured at the shooter's ear on the MK18 weapons platform, is not so significant.This is an example of the impact of flow restriction (backpressure) on system performance.
Rugged Razor has significantly less flow restriction (backpressure) than Surefire SOCOM556-RC2 and SilencerCo Saker 556.Omega's metric data for the 5.56 x 45 mm cartridge is the subject of ongoing PEW Science research. the measuredErstrunden-Pop(FRP) is visible in pressure and impulse regimes, peak amplitude, timing and waveform typical of a suppressed rifle. It should be noted that the FRP measured in the Rugged Razor's mouth is significant enough to be noticed by onlookers, according to PEW Science's inner ear response analysis.
PEW Science Research Nota 2:As with all AR15 semi-automatic weapons tests, a second pressure pulse originates from the weapon's ejection port signature and occurs just in time for its waves to match those of the barrel signature. However, at a later time (about 85 ms in Figure 1a) the mechanical noise of the latch closure is observed. The pressure signature of shot 6 does not indicate this event, as the chamber remains open after the magazine's sixth and final shot is fired.
PEW Science Research Nota 3:The closing time of the MK18 bolt is directly related to the flow limitation of a silencer for a given weapon system. PEW Science has determined that screw closure time deviation from the unsuppressed state is a reliable indicator of silencer backpressure, with a strong correlation with the Back Pressure Metric from PEW Science, Omega🇧🇷 However, PEW Science also found that the indicator isunreliableif the upper receiver is dirty. The acoustic signatures are not affected by this fouling, since this kinematics occurs late after the gas is released to the atmosphere. Pulse transfer, gun condition (dirt on the upper receiver) and other factors can cause this.significantly influencelock closing time.PEW Science urges the reader to exercise extreme caution when using the published breech-lock time to make decisions about suppressor flow throttling (backpressure) or weapon system kinematics. This type of calculation can produce erroneous results, as the health of the weapon at the time of each test is not published data.The duration of the timescale indicating the closing time of the lock is only published by PEW Science so that the pedigree of the company's data can be verified.
The shape, timing, and magnitudes of the initial pressure pulses and the general shape of the impulse waveforms measured in the barrel from shot to shot are relatively consistent. The consistency of the waveform amplitudes highlights the consistency of the muzzle silencer's overall sonic performance after FRP, as well as the relative consistency of the automatic rifle firearm configuration tested.
As the saying goes, first lap audio signatures will always differ from subsequent recordings due to the changing atmosphere inside the silencer. The FRP phenomenon cannot always be shown simply by looking at the maximum sound pressure. This is one of the reasons why the Silencer Sound Standard requires the study of various sound signature metrics. Ammo consistency can play a role in determining FRP; however, due to the relative consistency of most high-quality factory ammunition, close examination of the measured impulse and pressure waveforms excludes the ammunition from potential factors that affect true FRP.
Note that theSnoutRugged Razor's suppression rate is16.5it's hima tearthe deletion index is18.6🇧🇷 same area in the suppression index dose table. The Rugged Razor creates a relatively rigid overall signature on this host weapon system; Its high flow rate helps to reduce the ejection port signature, but the muzzle signature is strong enough to increase the signature's overall severity for the shooter. Using the 5.56mm end cap changes the gas dynamics and therefore the damping performance of the Razor on this platform. This phenomenon is examined inPEW Science Member Research Supplement 6.59.
6.58.2 Suppression rate comparison (5.56 x 45 mm since MK18)
Figure 5 shows a comparison of the Rugged Razor's PEW scientific suppression rating to that of the OSS HX-QD 556, SilencerCo Saker 556, and Surefire SOCOM556-RC2 using two different mounts on the MK18 AR15 automatic rifle. This oneStandard-PEW Science MK18-Testhost-Waffensystemis described in itPublic Research Supplement 6.51.
From the above data, it can be concluded that the Rugged Razor, with its 30 caliber and small number of deflectors, is an inefficient silencer for the MK18 weapons platform. Although the Razor's in-ear suppression rate is higher thanWARCOMP equipado Surefire SOCOM556-RC2 (6.52) it's himSilencerCo 556 Cases (6.53), both squelch configurations suffer from aAssembly gas leakyExcessive flow restriction (backpressure), respectively. The Razor does not significantly outperform the Saker 556 in the shooter's ear on this platform, despite the Razor's lower back pressure. This is because the heavy barrel signature of the Razor is merged with the ejection port signature on this host weapon platform.
despite the lowBack Pressure Metric from PEW Science, Omegaof the Rugged Razor with 5.56 x 45 mm chamber, its in-ear suppression rating is almost one category lower than that of theSO HX-QD556on the same platform. The power delta between the two mufflers in the muzzle is even clearer. This is due to the different mechanisms by which the two mufflers achieve noise suppression and reduce flow restriction.
Viewers may notice the Rugged Razor as being louder than any of the silencers shown in Figure 5 when firing at the MK18 cannon. Personnel firing the weapon may risk hearing damage equivalent to using the SilencerCo Saker 556. It is important to note that the signature Rugged Razor changes when the 5.56mm stock cover is used instead of the caliber stock cover .30. This phenomenon is examined inPEW Science Member Research Supplement 6.59.
The confluence of the ejection port overpressure with the firing of the main gun aggravates the severity of the signature in the position of the shooter's head.It is not just the signature of the ejection port that determines the signature measured at the shooter's head position.The Rugged Razor's muzzle signature is strong enough to affect the signature on the ear. This power factor is important in a short barrel automatic weapon system (the MK18).
6.58.3 Review Summary: Razor Tough in the MK18 5.56 x 45mm AR15 with 10.3" Barrel
In combination with the 10.3 inch barrelMK18and shot with Federal XM193, the Rugged Razor mounted with the R3 Flash Hider mount achieved a Composite Suppression Rating™ of21.1in the PEW Science tests. As with all weapon systems, the user is asked to examine it.muzzle and ear suppression indices.
PEW Science's subjective opinion:
The Rugged Razor is a "semi-compact" .30 caliber rifle silencer designed for use with machine guns and has moderate noise suppression performance with relatively low back pressure. Compared to 5.56mm diameter dedicated silencers, it can be considered "full size". The muffler is advertised as having extreme durability and is a reasonable weight for a heavy-duty muffler of its size, with a total tested system weight of 18.6 ounces. On the 5.56 x 45mm short barrel platform, the Razor underperforms compared to dedicated 5.56mm diameter silencers.
The Rugged Razor uses an iteration of a modified reduced-function curved cone baffle, similar to the reduced-function curved cone baffle used on the Omega 300 by SilencerCo and other companies. The Razor has only four baffles to increase gas flow and reduce back pressure. This is in contrast to the method used by similar Dead Air silencers (the Sandman series), which reduce back pressure by increasing the axial bore area. PEW Science test data indicates that reducing back pressure by increasing the flow area can be more effective in reducing back pressure than reducing the number of baffles for a given cartridge. However, if a cartridge is significantly "over-drilled", the sound suppression in such designs can decrease. This example of significant overbore reduction performance (using a .30 caliber silencer on a 5.56mm host weapon) is reflected in the suppression rate in this review. Although reducing the number of baffles saves weight, particularly when the baffles are made of steel, the suppression efficiency is lost. The user can choose to install a 5.56mm caliber cap on the Rugged Razor instead of the standard .30 caliber cap. Using the 5.56mm end cap changes the gas dynamics and therefore the damping performance of the Razor on this platform. This phenomenon is examined inPEW Science Member Research Supplement 6.59.
The patented dual-cone locking bracket welded to the rear of the Razor, which interfaces with Rugged muzzle devices, is relatively easy to use. To install the muffler, the user must thread it onto a coarse thread mount that fits into a front cone, then engage the locking collar, which pushes the cam levers into a secondary rear cone. Assembly is very secure. PEW Science's anecdotal experiences with Rugged mounting on various Rugged rifle silencers and host weapons have been extremely positive and problem free.
The Rugged Razor is marketed as durable and advertised as having no barrel length limitations; therefore, it can be used with semi-automatic and aggressive automatic firing schedules. The combination of durability, small size, and relatively low backpressure compared to full-size silencers makes the Razor a reasonable choice for use with semiautomatic and full-auto centerfire rifles, especially in cases where both size and backpressure are an issue. .
Users can compare the Razor to the Dead Air Sandman-S due to the similar size of the two silencers. It's important to note that the Razor is shorter and lighter than the Sandman-S. The Razor can be thought of as a silencer, varying in length between short and "k" silencers. For semi-automatic use cases where the shooter may wear hearing protection, the Razor's smaller size and lighter weight can make it an attractive alternative well suited to exceptionally rigorous shooting schedules.(Video) OSS Suppressors 5.56 Ti Flow Through Silencer With Integral Flash Hider
In this report, the Razor's performance metrics rely on suppressing a supersonic center-fire rifle into a short-barreled gas rifle, which is an incredibly difficult task. PEW Science encourages the reader to remain vigilant regarding any claims of supersonic central rifle suppression. The volume of gas and combustion products generated when firing the 5.56 x 45 mm supersonic cartridge is significant; the measured pressure and pulse magnitudes and their duration illustrate this fact. Silencer performance on automatic (reciprocating) rifles depends on many factors. Weapon configuration can significantly affect the overall performance of the suppressed small arms system.
The potential for hearing damage from using center-fire supersonic rifles is significant. PEW Science encourages the reader to consider the suppression rating when deciding on an appropriate suppressor/host weapon combination for the desired mission.