Ruger produces a supressor made of quality materials.

Discussion in 'Firearms' started by HK_User, Jan 20, 2016.


  1. HK_User

    HK_User A Productive Monkey is a Happy Monkey Site Supporter

    Too late for a Christmas Gift, maybe one for the DW for Valentine's Day !


    The Ruger Silent-SR Suppressor — Shot Show 2016

    by S.H. Blannelberry on January 19, 2016

    No, you have not misread the headline. Ruger is now a suppressor manufacturer, and a great one at that.

    New for Shot Show 2016 Ruger has released its first entry into the suppressor market. Designated the Silent-SR (pronounced “silencer”) it’s designed to be the ultimate suppressor for your favorite Ruger rimfire rifles and pistols. Looking at the suppressor it’s clear that it is on par with other products Ruger produces, if not better.

    [​IMG]
    What a way to make an entrance! The Ruger Silent-SR

    [​IMG]
    With the Ruger Silent-SR, plinking will never be the same.

    You may be thinking, what makes the Silent-SR so great? Just looking at its construction we see the use of premium materials as well as innovative baffle design. However, a lot more thought has been put into this suppressor than meets the eye. Starting with the tube, Ruger is selected titanium ensure strength and cut weight. On top of that the titanium body has a Cerakote finish, making it abrasion-, corrosion- and chemical-resistant.

    On the inside, Ruger has developed their own design that uses a series of push cone pattern baffles that stack and lock together. The stack’s first piece is an enlarged blast baffle that reduces the ever-annoying first-round-pop common to many other suppressors.

    [​IMG]
    What she looks like on the inside.

    First-round-pop is a phenomenon when shooting surpressed—often, when the hot gasses expand into the baffle stack, the heat and unburned powder combine with oxygen in the suppressor and combust, making for a louder first shot on a cold can. Once that oxygen is used up, the suppressor performs at it’s full potential—With the Silent-SR that first shot’s pop is muffled too, owing to the unconventional blast baffle shape.

    Ruger opted to use 17-4 stainless steel to ruggedize the baffle stack, enough to handle full-auto fire and magnum rimfire cartridges. Looking at the aluminum end caps we see the use of O-rings. The O-rings create a seal that prevents lead and powder fouling from getting into the end cap threads, which can seize a suppressor; the O-rings also make disassembly easy.

    Specs:
    • Rated for full-auto .22 Long Rifle
    • Up to a 40-decibel reduction in sound pressure with .22 LR
    • Rated for .22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire and .17 Hornady Magnum Rimfire
    • Up to a 17-decibel reduction in sound pressure with .22 WMR and .17 HMR.
    • Premium material selection including titanium, stainless steel and alloy aluminum
    • Length: 5.37 inches
    • Outer diameter: 1.06 inches
    • Weight: 6.3 ounces
    • Threaded for 1/2×28 hosts
    • MSRP: $449
    Besides being light and affordable, another benefit of using aluminum is that even if a user over-tightens the end caps or has an end cap strike, the replaceable aluminum parts will fail instead of the titanium body. The titanium tube is the serialized part, which means for legal purposes, the tube is the suppressor and the end caps are simple wear parts. They can be user-serviced and replaced without having to go through back to the factory for repairs.

    [​IMG]
    MSRP: $449

    [​IMG]
    Very, very nice! Comes apart easy.

    For Ruger’s first entry into the suppressor market they have done one hell of a job. The Silent-SR brings a lot of value to the table as well as an opportunity for loyal Ruger fans to get into the suppressor world.

    Read more at: Ruger® Silent-SR™

    [​IMG] Tom January 20, 2016, 8:19 am
    I have been reading a few companies have been moving to have suppressors removed from the NFA. IMHO it would be an exercise in foolishness to pay $200 for a tax stamp to put on $4.00 hunk of metal. If Ruger got behind the movement I would be surprised but they would sure sell a lot more suppressors.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 20, 2016
    Marck, stg58, Tully Mars and 4 others like this.
  2. Legion489

    Legion489 Shining the Light of Truth

    Well Ruger could NEVER have done this under Bill. Bill HATED the idea of free and armed "little people", that is why Ruger is the "gun maker for RESPONSIBLE gun owners", leaving Savage, Winchester and the rest for the likes of us. Bill was an elitist and rammed through both the hi-cal mag bill, because he didn't think sheeple should be allowed to own them, AND the import of military ("assault") rifles bill because the Mini-30 when it came out was TRASH and the SKS was at least three times more accurate and half the price.
     
  3. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    I keep hearing how Bill Ruger wasn't a 2A fan. Still haven't seen credible sources for those statements. Can you cite a source?
     
    Tully Mars likes this.
  4. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

    Wouldn't mind having one.
    Legal down here too hunt with
    Day or night.
     
  5. Legion489

    Legion489 Shining the Light of Truth

    Which part? That he refused to sell 20-30 rd mags for the Mini-14 until after market sales cut in to mag sales too much? That he refused to sell the Mini-14 to the sheeple until it was obvious po-lice sales were never going to happen? Single handedly pushing the the hi-cap and assault rifle ban?

    Well let's see. American Handgunner Mag has covered ALL of these in some detail, if you want to go look those up. I'm sure I saw it in the Books on Bill Ruger and Ruger firearms if you want to look those up. You can contact the NRA and ask them and they should be able to tell you. The Neal Knox HARDCORPS REPORT reported all this in some detail. Bill himself talked about it in enough interviews that it should be easy to look up. Google is your friend.
     
  6. DarkLight

    DarkLight I self identify as a Blackhawk Attack Helicopter! Site Supporter

    And typical netiquette is to cite your source with a link rather than suggest someone else use Google to do the research for you. You said "should be able to" an awful lot there.

    If you have an assertion, back it up your own self, unless you don't have proof or can't find sources to cite.

    Maybe you can, maybe you can't, but from here it just sounds and looks like venom and bile.

    By the way, no dog in this fight, couldn't care less about the topic that brought this up so please, save any "here's your damn proof...satisfied?!?!?!" comments. This is solely about civility and forum etiquette.

    Please have a nice day. :)
     
    HK_User, ghrit and Tully Mars like this.
  7. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    Pretty much a useless response. Saying that, it's water over the dam, and with Bill gone, the company is up to modern standards. So I'll take all those statements about how ol' Bill was an anti as rumors.
     
    HK_User, BTPost and DarkLight like this.
  8. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    I like the design of the suppressor - might be worth looking at.

    This is probably best for another thread and this post can certainly be moved.

    I don't remember all the specifics of the Bill Ruger hoopla but believe that Ruger helped write some compromises to the '94 assault weapon ban and was the one that defined the 10 round mag as a 'standard capacity' creating the definition of high cap vs standard cap mags at the time of the drafting of the '94 to '04 AWB.

    Found this: The Gun Zone RKBA -- William B. Ruger, Sr.'s dirty little secret
    In his final syndicated column of 1989, Neal Knox discussed the implications of Bill Ruger's actions the previous Spring, and addressed some remarks aimed at him by Steve Sanetti, Sturm, Ruger's general counsel and the only person other than Papa Bill authorized to issue statements for the company:
    Steve Sanetti says "I know better" than to ascribe Bill Ruger's magazine ban proposal to business considerations. Maybe so; I don't think Bill is by any means "anti-gun," nor do I think he really wants a ban on either guns or magazines (after all, he got his start as a machine gun designer).

    But I do think Bill Ruger is pushing a plan that would protect his business while affecting only his competitors, and I think he's damaging the efforts of those of us attempting to stop all proposed bans. Further, I don't think his actions on this issue, and other issues in the past, allows him to be described as "the strongest supporter of our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms."

    What I know is that about 9 p.m. the night before Bill sent a letter to certain members of Congress calling for a ban on high-capacity magazines he called me, wanting me to push such a ban. His opening words, after citing the many federal, state and local bills to ban detachable magazine semi-autos, were "I want to save our little gun" -- which he later defined as the Mini-14 and the Mini-30. I'm not ascribing Bill's motives as "expedient from a business standpoint;" Bill did.

    While I agree that a ban on over-15-round magazines would be "indefinitely preferable" to a ban on the guns that use them, that's not the question. Neither I, nor the other gun groups have ever believed that we were faced with such an either/or choice. Early last year the NRA legislative Policy committee discussed various alternatives to the proposed "assault weapons" ban, and wisely decided that magazine restrictions wouldn't satisfy our foes, but would make it more difficult to stop a gun ban.

    I was particularly shocked when I realized Bill was talking about a ban on possession of over-15-round magazines, rather than a ban on sales (which is bad enough). I told him that such a law would make me a felon, for not only did I have standard over-15-round magazines for my Glock pistol (a high-capacity which has sharply cut into Ruger's police business), I have many high-cap mags for guns I don't even own, and don't even know where they all are. As I told Bill, after a lifetime of accumulating miscellaneous gun parts and accessories, there's no way I could clean out all my old parts drawers and boxes, then swear -- subject to a five or ten-year Federal prison term -- that I absolutely didn't have an M3 grease gun mag or 30-round M-2 magazine lying in some forgotten drawer.

    Bill said (and all these direct quotes are approximate).
    No, there'd be amnesty for people like you. We have to propose a ban on possession before they could take us seriously. He contended that the public's problem was with "firepower," which could be resolved by eliminating high capacity mags.

    I told him Metzenbaum and Co. would gladly use whatever he offered, but they weren't about to willingly agree to eliminate high-cap magazines as a substitute for banning guns; that their intention isn't to eliminate "firepower" but "firearms."

    Bill finally said, "Neal, you're being very negative about it." He got angry, then said "Well somebody's got to do it; by God I will." And the next day he sent his letter to the Hill; the evidence indicates a few weeks later he talked SAAMI into supporting undefined "regulation" of magazines over-15-rounds -- a vote that might have gone a little differently if any produced high-capacity magazines as standard for either rifles or pistols.

    I suspect that Ruger and SAAMI's actions are responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Bush administration's proposal to ban high-cap mags, but that proposal has been ignored -- except as evidence that "the Bush administration and the American firearms industry recognize there's a problem -- that Americans shouldn't be allowed to have such guns."

    Of course, that isn't what Bill Ruger and SAAMI are saying, but that's the message they're sending. Perhaps it isn't business expediency to propose banning only that which they don't make, in an effort to protect what they do make; but it sure can't be claimed to be in defense of the Second Amendment.
     
    HK_User, Gator 45/70 and kellory like this.
  9. Legion489

    Legion489 Shining the Light of Truth

    Yes, I use "should be able to..." a fair amount. People should be able to think for themselves. People should be able to be able to look stuff up for themselves. People should be able to think for themselves. People should be able to do for themselves. People should be able to pull their head out their.... well you get the idea. Just because they are too stupid, too lazy, too whatever, does not confer an obligation on my part.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2016
    duane likes this.
  10. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

    @ghrit

    The Gun Zone RKBA -- William B. Ruger, Sr.'s dirty little secret

    Ruger on Gun Control: Quotes from Heated Debate

    I own a few Ruger revolvers and pistols; all are pre-1989.
     
  11. NVBeav

    NVBeav Monkey+++

    Over the years I've avoided buying Ruger firearms - not that I buy very many in the first place - but they were always removed from consideration and recommendation because of W Ruger, Sr.'s actions. As the years passed, I lost track of why I'd automatically dismissed them (maybe it's age, but certainly a fading memory).
    A couple years ago I faintly remember reading how Ruger Co. was trying to overcome some of the damage their prior Chief had inflicted on them. I do think that the company is very pro-2nd now, and I think it's really too bad that Mr. R dragged the whole company down with very un-wise actions (well, it sound like he was the owner).
    I do like some of their offerings, especially the 10/22 and many of their .22LR pistols. Those new suppressors look awesome but will be pretty far out of reach with the Fed License plus the hardware. That would be so cool shooting sage rats with a setup like that!
     
  12. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

    @NVBeav
    Maybe as Ruger makes their own AR-15; it is OK now? ;)

    That being said I "love" my old model Blackhawks and my Model I BB .22RF's accuracy is stellar.

    As a accuracy addict, admittedly, the 10/22 interests me.
     
  13. NVBeav

    NVBeav Monkey+++

    Not sure the stock 10/22 is extremely accurate, but it's accurate enough for me :^)
    As to whether or not "it's OK now", that's a pretty tough question. Being a fallible human, I can only weigh their current actions more heavily to help make a decision. Also, anyone willing to battle the lawyers and politicians gets plenty of well wishes from me.
     
  14. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

    @NVBeav
    By everything my accuracy addict buds have said the 10/22's out of the box experience is they are quite accurate.

    That being said as they are addicts, they swap the barrel for a Volquartsen. They also ditch Ruger's plastic trigger group for one that reduces pull from the stock 6 pounds.
    The Volquartsen plus the trigger group is a pricey deal for a relatively short range caliber. At that point, although the tiny groups are impressive; I say enjoy excellent out of the box performance and why bother with the all the extra expense. :D
     
  15. Legion489

    Legion489 Shining the Light of Truth

    Well I for one and SHOCKED!! SHOCKED I say! Shocked that it IS possible to use your own initiative to look things up on the net by yourself with out having someone holding your hand while you make water or wiping you after you go potty! SHOCKED that once again I was proved right! Well, OK, not really, I usually am.

    Well I will continue to try to educate the ignorant (those not having a chance to learn), the stupid (those who can not learn or only able to learn very little) or the willfully stupid and ignorant who CAN learn, but refuse to because they are bitter clingers to their lack of knowledge, stupidity and refusal to learn (to look things up for themselves, among other things of course).
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7