Radical Firearms Releases Line of Low Cost Suppressors

unnamed (3)

Silencers can be expensive. The usual price for a rifle caliber silencer is in the $1,000 range, and the tax stamp from the ATF adds another $200 to the final cost. There has been an explosion in the number of silencers being purchased every year, but I get the distinct feeling that things are about to heat up even more. SIG SAUER’s silencer line already raised the bar, producing the best quality products on the market at a fraction of the price of their competitors. Now others are following suit in the war for market share, Radical Firearms being next in line . . .

Here’s their press release:

Stafford, TX – Radical Firearms is proud to announce a new line of four affordable rim fire and center fire rifle suppressors.

You are going to like these cans.

unnamed (2)

These four new suppressors are as follows:

  • The RF 7.62 Stainless Steel Suppressor is 9” long, 1.5” diameter rifle suppressor rated for 308 Winchester and higher. Finished in High Temp Cerakote and threaded to fit barrels in 5/8 X 24, this 23.6 oz. suppressor is available for $499.99 MSRP.
  • The RF 5.56 Direct Thread Suppressor is a 7” long, 1.5” diameter rifle suppressor rated for 5.56 NATO. Finished in High Temp Cerakote and threaded to fit barrels in ½ X 28, this 22.2 oz. suppressor is available for $399.99 MSRP.
  • The RF 22LR Direct Thread Suppressor is a 5.5” long, .925” diameter rim fire suppressor rated for 22 long rifle. It is completely user serviceable and features a stainless steel monocore baffle system.  Finished in High Temp Cerakote and threaded to fit barrels in ½ X 28, this 6 oz. suppressor is available for $219.99 MSRP.

  • The RF 22LR Integrally Suppressed Barrel is a 16.25” long, .925” diameter replacement barrel for the Ruger 10/22 rifle that contains a rim fire suppressor rated for 22 long rifle. It is completely user serviceable and features a stainless steel monocore baffle system.  Finished in High Temp Cerakote, this 1.5 lb. suppressed barrel is available for $399.99 MSRP.

Direct threaded rifle suppressors such as the RF 7.62 and RF 5.56 require no proprietary muzzle devices to add to the overall cost of the suppressor to the consumer. Integrally suppressed barrels, such as the RF 22LR Suppressed Barrel, offer superior sound reduction in rim fire calibers as opposed to external suppressors.

With suppressors being legal to own in 41 states as of this writing, many customers are looking for low cost solutions for their suppressor needs. Radical Firearms fills those needs offering a low cost solution in a high quality product.

The company offers an exclusive Lifetime Warranty on all firearms manufactured by Radical Firearms for the life of the product. The suppressors have a limited lifetime warranty to the original owner. (Full automatic fire and any damage from such will void the warranty, for example.)

comments

  1. avatar jwm says:

    Yay. Low cost cans. Just what we need in CA. 🙂

    1. avatar california richard says:

      Yay. Low cost cans. Just what we WANT in CA.

  2. avatar Rob C says:

    Glad to see the “Price Wars” but sad that it’s still an NFA item. That being said, I have the means and will keep working hard and purchasing what I want. No whiners please! Looking forward to what the street price will be on the 308 can. I’m over quick attach. Direct thread is the way to go. I’m not operating operationally and if you’ve shot much w/suppressors, you are aware of the dangers of trying to “quickly” attach a hot can to another host. I’m for taking my time and enjoying the freedom. Breath it! Hope this drives more folks to Just Do It and purchase a suppressor.

    1. avatar KestrelBike says:

      I’m also not an operational operator, but I like quick-detach suppressors because at this point, I only have 1 suppressor (Silencerco Omega.. another is currently on a Form 3 that I’ve paid for). I also have 4 of my weapons with the quick-detach muzzle break attachments, so even though I’m not swapping-hot on the fly, I’m most importantly not having to worry about putting a muzzle device back on each rifle after I’m done shooting it with the suppressor on.

    2. avatar poopface says:

      does anyone know if you can use the RF 7.62 for .300 BLK? Also, could you put it on a .223 wylde?

      1. avatar Dozer says:

        7.62 cans work just fine on .300 blackout. I use a SilencerCo Omega on my FAL, Remington 700 in 300 winmag and my 300 blackout.

  3. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

    STOP TAUNTING ME!!!!

    The Land of Stinkin’ Lincoln wont let me own these hearing saving devices. Deaf, dumb and blind… Just how the politicians want us.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Deaf, dumb and blind… Just how the politicians want us.”

      Deaf, dumb, blind and broke, actually… 🙁

  4. avatar AlanInFL says:

    If RF can pull this off, it will be great. Unless, they produce another issues like the barrel extension problem.

  5. avatar Lost Down South says:

    That’s getting down towards my price range. The the stamp were $5, I’d be spending money right now.

  6. avatar Benzo says:

    Does the integrally supressed barrel still require the $200 tax stamp?

    1. avatar BillC says:

      Of course, but only one stamp. Think of it as getting a SBR and suppressor for one stamp.

    2. avatar LarryinTx says:

      Yes. Related question; if the barrel in question is shorter than 16″, do you have to pay two $200 tax payments for one item? Because that seems screwy.

      1. avatar Alex waits says:

        If the Supressor is permanently attached making the “barrel” greater than 16 inches than only one stamp. If it’s removable, than you have an SBR and a supressor thus two 200 stamps, also, if the supressor is permanently attached and the length is less than 16 inches, two stamps again

        1. avatar Matt meyer says:

          Not true. All cans are removeable. If you have an actual stock on your ar and the barrel is shorter than 16 inches long it’s an sbr and requires a tax stamp of $200. The muzzle device has to be pinned and welded making it permanent and making the total barrel length 16 inches long. That’s why all integrally suppressed rifle barrels are 16 inches or longer.

        2. avatar Shawn says:

          Matt Meyer you are wrong. Do some reading.

        3. avatar Matt meyer says:

          Lmao trust me I’m not wrong I own 4 sbrs and 9 cans. Go ahead and build one take pictures and post all over facebook and carry it every where. I hope your dumb ass gets caught. Even direct thread cans come of easily I own 2 direct thread cans. No one will permanently attach a can to your barrel and call it good. Go ahead and call the atf and ask them I’ll sit and wait for you to post a response. The only way to avoid it being an sbr is by putting a gay ass sig brace on it.

        4. avatar Matt meyer says:

          If the barrel is shorter than 16 inches or the overall lenght of a shoulder fired rifle is less than 26inches it’s an sbr. And it’s illegal unless you have a tax stamp.

        5. avatar Mike H says:

          Don’t pay attention to Matt Meyer. There are plenty of examples of suppressors pinned to barrels that are shorter than 16″, but with the suppressor pinned it is over 16″ long and does not require a tax stamp. (RJF ZKSD, Leonidas, priority tool and machine 10/22s, etc). I’m a machine gun collector and FFL/SOT, so I actually do know what I am talking about unlike Matt who just got in the game.

        6. avatar Randy Taylor says:

          Hahahaha. Come on Matt, quit spreading misinformation. I have a 5.56 can welded to a short barrel, and at 16.5″ OAL, I’m perfectly legal.

  7. There have been quite a few posts recently on silencers/suppressors/moderators. Nothing wrong with that, but I guess it suggests that it’s a topic of real interest to the readership on TTAG…?

    With that in mind, I’d like to throw in my $0.02 as a Brit living in the UK:

    Our firearms laws are much less permissive than those in the States (on the whole). But the silencer thing is really not an issue over here.

    Silencers are legally classed as a “weapon” in their own right, and must be registered with the Police in the same way as any other firearm. But that’s it! No tax stamp, no long waiting period with the ATF, etc., etc. Shall-issue presumption, assuming you already have a registered rifle (or pistol or shotgun) of the same calibre.

    In fact, it goes one further. Police firearms licensing departments actively encourage shooters to get cans for their rifles, particularly full bore, in order to minimise noise pollution etc.* Not that you’re obliged to use it, obviously. But it’s still great to have that support.

    *At least, this has been my experience in every county I’ve lived in (you have to re-register with the new force if you move your guns there permanently).

    Now, what’s the take-away point for POTG in the States? In my view, it’s that even the generally anti-gun UK, with a gun owning population <1% of the total, recognises that suppressing firearms is broadly harmless or even a positive benefit.

    Wave that argument at whoever might pay attention, and help change the rules.

    …or don't, and instead have a crack at us for not having good enough guns, if that's your thing (/sarc). Anyways, I'm off to shoot some foxes with my hush-puppy!

    1. avatar Alex waits says:

      Supressors won’t ever get off the NFA because Hollywood tells the antis that if we own them we are automatically ninja assassins that could kill hundreds before anyone knew what was happening.

      1. Broadly, that’s the view (most) Brits have of guns in general. They’re evil death machines and only Mil/LE could possibly need or want them.

        And I certainly understand the “image problem” that silencers have, in the US and elsewhere. But at the same time there’s such a strong health/safety and basic utility case to be made, I guess I’m just wishing you guys all the best for having some common sense de-regulation, at some point.

        As I say, if you can point to a “gun free utopia” where a high percentage of the legally owned guns are silenced, with no adverse effect, that can only be a good thing – right…? I mean, what percentage of firearms crime is committed in such a manner that silencers would be of much value? Not much, would be my guess.

        1. avatar pod says:

          Slowly the tide is turning in the US. We have legislation on the table to make suppressors in the same class as a normal firearms (background check and go – no tax, no extra paperwork) and even mainstream media publications (which are almost all anti-gun) have been presenting articles that demystify suppressors. Mainly for clicks, i.e. us gun people love to crash the party when there’s a gun article on a mainstream site, but it’s nice to see the press, even if it is just the mainstream publications doing it to get views aka money.

          Ideally suppressors would be sold as they are in New Zealand where they are just accessories with no special permission needed. You can even order them online and have them shipped to your door. The interesting thing in NZ is that it has led to low-priced “disposable” cans that are good for a day out at the range, i.e. 100 shots and they are worn out. But it only set you back $50 US or whatever.

      2. avatar int19h says:

        And yet, how many states have legalized suppressors in the past decade?

        And not just Republican-dominated states. Washington State legalized suppressors back in 2012, and the bill passed with 88 yeas and 4 nays in the House, and unanimously in the Senate – both House and Senate having Democratic majorities at the time – and then signed into law by a Democratic governor.

        This is very much a winnable issue, reason being that it’s very easy to decouple from all the Second Amendment “molon labe” rhetoric – just present it as a safety and health issue (which it really is!).

    2. avatar HandyDan says:

      Here in the US we have a bill pending in legislature that would regulate surpressors as a firearm and would deregulate them from the NFA. Given our current political atmosphere, it is unlikely to become law.

      1. avatar Ben says:

        Tired of hearing this “waaahh, it won’t happen, waaahh”. The number of silencer owners has skyrocketed. CCW is happening in almost every state. Permitless CCW is happening at an amazing rate all over the country. Hunting with silencers is being legalized all over the country. The Hearing Protection Act (the bill you mentioned) has now picked up over 50 co-sponsors last I checked. Instead of posting negative stuff why not post links to ways to contact your reps about the HPA? Mine already support it.

        http://americansuppressorassociation.com/hearing-protection-act/

        I remember when I got my first suppressors and took them to a public range and everyone was in awe and shocked you could own one. Now that range sells them and I commonly have people telling me about “their” suppressors. Almost no one is impressed anymore, it’s just another firearm accessory. Let’s keep the momentum going and get them pulled off the NFA.

        My favorite line for telling people about the HPA? “Do you want to save the hearing of the countries hunting dogs? Are you for or against deafening dogs? Then support the HPA!!” It’s hard to put muffs on your dog, so let’s get suppressors of the NFA and on hunters rifles.

  8. avatar BillC says:

    “SIG SAUER’s silencer line already raised the bar, producing the best quality products on the market at a fraction of the price of their competitors.” Really how? A fraction? The best quality? Didn’t “some” employees just jump ship from their suppressor line?
    Your SIG fanboyism shows yet again.

    1. avatar Alex waits says:

      I think when he says “fraction” he means 9/10th which coincidently, is a fraction.

      1. avatar BillC says:

        Don’t be semantic /sarc/. The idiom of “a fraction of the cost”generally means “super-duper” cheaper.

        1. avatar Rob C says:

          I get your point that he went a little overboard in the post, but there is no denying Sig has changed the game. Take it from the mouth of the key employee who jumped ship:
          http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/03/foghorn/kevin-brittingham-launches-q-new-firearms-rd-manufacturing-shop/

          Brittingham led Sig from nowhere to among the best for the price, and it took a major player like Sig to drive the market to compete – an opportunity the Freedom Group missed when it acquired AAC.

    2. avatar Rusty Owen says:

      Also, how much of that silencer line is actually available? 3 or 5 of the advertised dozen?

    3. avatar Tyler Frizzell says:

      Brand loyalty shiznit. I myself am a magpul snob. I don’t buy surefire anything except batteries for my lights. I like equipment that isn’t sold based on a name, but function and price point as well as reliability. As for sig, they tend to make proprietary stuff so you have to pay their costs for accessories that only fit with their firearms.

  9. avatar Alex waits says:

    What prices should be, I’m not saying high end cans shouldnt be on the market, but all the fancy metals and hydrodynamic computer modeling only raise prices out of the hands of the commen man, these things can be built ina garage with a hand tools and still be effective . I don’t need a LS1 in my Honda civic. In my situation with family, job, and life expenses, itll take 6 months to save 500 dollars, with these on the market, I could “silence” my rifle in 8-10 months as opposed to 18 with a fancy full auto magic metal. Inexpensive is a good thing for me.

    1. avatar BillC says:

      Well, it’s not so much all what you just said. There are so many other variables to consider; weight, length, diameter, dB reduction, tone, adaptability, durability, full-auto, barrel length requirements. Cost, stamp, and wait time for just one suppressor, this probably isn’t for you. One can to fit many rifles, not for you. First time purchase, not for you. Want a can to live on ONE rifle (hopefully short barrel as these are not short or light), perfect. These seem like good “intro” cans, but they are not. They are thread specific and are not exactly compact or lightweights. I’m not badmouthing them, but it appears the term “low-cost” can be convoluted to “buy these ones first because they are ‘cheap(er)’.”

      1. avatar Alex waits says:

        I’m not a warfighter operating on the edge extreme durability, where my mission comprised and team killed because I wasn’t operating an ultra low weight movie quiet supressor, or my weapon goes down because my can couldn’t last the 19 hour fire fight and the United states was over run by tribbles. Supressors are being over built for us not operating operationally.

        1. avatar BillC says:

          They are being overbuilt because we have to have them last (you know, due to a tax stamp), and we are demanding as a consumer base to have the adaptable (you know, due to a tax stamp)

        2. avatar pod says:

          We need our cans to be durable because it’s not easy to get them. Unless the laws change here, you can needs to be movable from host to host without a problem, and durable as hell since it takes about 8-9 months to get one. I have a Specwar 7.62 and I think it’ll outlast me.

          In New Zealand where suppressors are accessories in the same class as a magazine, they make cheap ones since you can just go get a new one if it wears out or gets damaged. Not uncommon to see NZ$100 cans for sale. They suppress for a few hundred rounds, then you toss it and get a new one. I’m sure if the material held up, you could 3D-print crates of them over there and no one would care.

        3. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “…and the United states was over run by tribbles.”

          Tribbles. What’s a good round to pop those furry little… whatever the hell they are?

          .17 HMR might be good to start with… 🙂

    2. avatar LTNC says:

      I’m in the same boat as Alex. There are some small players making a more budget minded can that compromises in some areas like full auto, length, and/or weight. For example I came across ajguns.net while clicking around on the red; $225 for a 9mm can with booster and piston. You can’t always find more reviews or empirical data on performance but people are starting to experiment with the budget can niche.

  10. avatar Caveman says:

    Good gawd allmighty. Who the fck needs a silencer. You all workin for the mafia?

    1. avatar jwm says:

      You support 2a, but……..

      1. avatar Caveman says:

        Id rather have the rock n roll switch, yeh

    2. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Good gawd allmighty. Who the fck needs a silencer.”

      It would be really nice to just step out into the backyard a do a ‘lil plinking without pissing off the neighbors…

    3. avatar Ian says:

      People with hearing damage maybe? People who want to defend their homes without going deaf? Plenty of reasons you seem incapable of thinking of.

    4. avatar rosignol says:

      Tinnitus is endemic among recreational shooters, and I’d prefer mine not get any worse.

    5. avatar Matt meyer says:

      It should be illegal to fire a gun without a can. I support the safe hearing act. I own 9 cans. And will buy more.

      1. avatar JC says:

        It should be illegal to fire a gun without a can? Sounds like someone wants to make themselves feel better about paying the govt $1,800 for 9 permission slips.

        1. avatar Matt Meyer says:

          No sir. Trust me I wish we could just go buy them without paying a tax stamp. But it just sounds like your a cheap piece of shit. I can sit next to my 15 month old son and shoot all day and not worry about hurting his ears. He doesn’t even flinch. Get a better job. Your wife’s probably the bread winner in your house. She probably won’t even let you buy one.

      2. avatar clickboom says:

        Cans should not be regulated in any way. At most, a quick NCIS background check and done. In no way should it only he legal to shoot with a can, talk about a barrier to entry for new members of the tribe…

        1. avatar Jason Montgomery says:

          I agree with you that cans should not be regulated.

        2. avatar Ben says:

          If you want them to be unregulated (or no more regulated then a firearm) fill out this email form and contact your reps!!

          http://americansuppressorassociation.com/hearing-protection-act/

    6. avatar Big E says:

      For the EXACT same reason I presume you have muffler on your car- otherwise it’s obnoxiously (and necessarily) loud. I’m guessing you have no experience with a suppressor? They make shooting more fun for you and less bothersome to others- what is the down-side?

  11. avatar Caveman says:

    I got a mattel shooting shell because it was light, I kept on adding junk to it, now its heavier than a M14 and a whole lot harder to deploy.

  12. avatar Rob C says:

    Dear Radical Firearms: please make an integrally suppressed Ruger 10/22 Charger barrel in the 8-10″ range. And keep it under $350. In stainless. That can be disassembled.

    Sincerely,

    10/22 Takedown SBR owners

    1. avatar HB says:

      And make a 16″ barreled version for those of us non-SBRed 10/22 takedown owners. Thanks!

  13. avatar samuraichatter says:

    Serious question here. Wouldn’t the 3D print your own adapter to fit an oil filter trick be so much cheaper? If you want to stay legal the adapter could be the serialized part.

    Consider:

    The first shot (often the most important) is fully contained by metal so no flash and less sound (theoretically).

    Baffle strike – no problem. Get another filter.

    Cleaning the thing (can often be difficult & expensive w/ cans) – no problem. Get another filter.

    Heck you could probably print an adapter for the adapter so you only need one serialized part and thus one suppressors for all (most) your firearms.

    Cans are only 1,000+ because they are “evil” and serialized. They have no moving parts. I challenge anyone to find a widget of similar complexity that is anywhere near that price. Heck they are not worth (yeah loaded term) 400.00.

    Apologies, I have micro strokes when I see the prices for what looks like a coffee tumbler 🙂

    1. avatar Tex300BLK says:

      Huh? Suppressors (the really expensive ones for the most part at least) are made out of metals that are so hard and heat resistant conventional tools and machining processes can’t even be used to make them. This means expensive tools and complex manufacturing processes. Heck the raw materials (inconel, stellite, titanium, very high grades of stainless) aren’t exactly cheap to begin with.

      You want to see what a sub $400 556 can looks like? Read the above descriptions, it’s 7 inches long and weighs nearly two lbs. no free lunches in this world.

    2. avatar pod says:

      There are oil filter suppressor adapters that are made as you say. Google for Cadiz Gun Works, they make them. They are treated like a suppressor would be in and of it’s own. A little $80 widget with a $200 tax stamp and a six-month wait. But yes, it’s a cheap alternative for the sort that like to tinker. Blow up 50 oil filters and the serialized part keeps trucking. It’s like in the machine-gun world where having an RDIAS is great. It’s a small simple part which isn’t likely to be damaged when something bad happens. And even then if it gets dinged or starts to split, it can be welded.

    3. avatar Jeremy S. says:

      This doesn’t actually work as well as you’d think. Unless a specific variance is granted to a certain part, no silencer component can be repaired or replaced by anyone but an FFL07/SOT. For instance, if I have a nasty baffle strike on my Liberty Mystic, Liberty cannot simply mail me a new baffle core even though that isn’t the serialized part and despite the fact that it would be a very easy, drop-in swap. That would be illegal. I have to mail it to Liberty so they can do it, or a different SOT could do it. This is actually the same case with the oil filter adapter. The oil filter is considered a non-user-replaceable part of the suppressor. When it needs replacement, which happens rather quickly, an SOT must do it. Cadiz does actually engrave the serial number into the oil filter as well in order to prove that it’s the original one, and when you need a new one you have to send it to them so they can swap it with a new, serialized one and destroy the old one. This is all on their website:

      If or when you need to change the filter out, the ATF/NFA rules says it needs to come back to the original manufacture, which Cadiz Gun Works is. The cost is $25.00. The complete Econo-Can Suppressor can be shipped directly to us, for gunsmithing, which would be replacement/rehab/repair of the oil filter, with the serial # remarked, and documented as being replaced/rehabbed/repaired. The completed Econo Can Suppressor can be sent back to you at your address on your NFA Tax Stamp Form. You do not need to go though a dealer for gunsmithing services. The life of the oil filter varies depending on caliber used and bullet type. (ex. AR15=300-500 rds)

      1. avatar LadiesMan217 says:

        You ever shoot one of the oil filter suppressors? They are NOT accurate at all. Even on a .22 LR, you are lucky to get a group at 20 yards.

  14. avatar Wv cycling says:

    Disregarding quality to a certain consideration, what is the cheapest suppressor available in the states that can handle 5.56?

    (Purely academic)

    1. avatar Sian says:

      I’m sure an oil filter adapter can handle at least two or three shots.

      1. avatar Wv cycling says:

        I’very seen the Cadiz Gun Works Econocan, but meh.

        That one fell off the boat into the incinerator after a 10/22 box mag due to the unwieldy size. Fun novelty though.

  15. avatar James says:

    With all the technical advances in the industry, new materials, 3D printing, computer modeled fluid physics, and a greater understanding of how and why things behave, why are suppressors still designed exactly like Maxim’s 1908 design?
    For what is being offered, none of the cans should be north of $100.
    With more manufacturers, the price will come down, and hopefully stimulate competition and innovation.
    OSS Suppressors came up with a different design, but I’ve never seen one in person.

  16. avatar mike says:

    These rifle cans are cheaper because there is no QD/QA mount system, and the material used is only stainless steel. They may cost less, but they also won’t last as long. Baffle erosion will be a big problem.

  17. avatar Chris says:

    It’s great how the muffler for a car costs 40 bucks yet a suppressor costs 800 for basically the same technology. Red tape adds a good 900 dollars and 6-9 months to the cost of very basic device.

    1. avatar rosignol says:

      Go get the appropriate stamps and hang a car muffler off your gun if you like. I’m sure you’ll figure out why the ones made for firearms don’t cost $40 eventually. 😀

      1. avatar JC says:

        The high cost is almost completely due to our laws in the US. Overseas where suppressors aren’t overly regulated you can get a very nice one for a few hundred.

      2. avatar Chris says:

        Well, you know how to write. Too bad you didn’t figure out how to read

      3. avatar Mike says:

        Yea it takes amazing amounts of technology to suppress a firearm report

        http://www.2acheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/econocan.jpg

  18. avatar LadiesMan217 says:

    How about RF stick to producing ARs that don’t take 6 months to get? They can’t even keep up with gun production and now they want to start making low cost suppressors using old technology? Stick with what you know and catch up on your orders first.

  19. Appreciation to my father who shared with me regarding this web site, this blog is really awesome.

  20. avatar 101 status says:

    Hurrah! After all I got a website from where I be capable of really obtain useful data concerning my study and knowledge.

  21. I am glad here after reading this post. I got information about this blog by my close friend. Now I can say that you post such as an excellent and very helpful post. Thanks a ton for sharing. Please keep sharing for next time.

  22. 646862 7259Hi. Cool post. Theres an issue with your site in chrome, and you may want to test this The browser is the marketplace chief and a good element of people will omit your excellent writing because of this problem. 597094

  23. avatar Steve W says:

    In the UK a center fire suppressor will set you back between £200.00/$260.00 & £300.00/$390.00, & rim fire suppressors start at £39.00/$50.00 (for a SAK), up to £140.00/$180.00.(for an LEI).
    If a suppressor is for a firearm its classed as “pressure bearing” & is therefore licensed. (£20.00 for the pleasure).
    Though you can buy the same suppressor off the shelf, with no license, if its for an air rifle below 12 ft/lb.
    The only reason you need to quote for owning suppressors in the UK is for “Health & Safety”. Though if you dont hunt, but only shoot on ranges, the law will prob say you dont need one as you will be wearing hearing protection anyway.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email