Previous Post
Next Post

Courtesy Dean Weingarten SilencerCoIntegrallySuppressed9mm2016

One of the first items attracting a significant amount of attention at the Shot Show Industry Day at the Range: SilencerCo’s integrally suppressed 9mm handgun. They’d brought out a similar prototype in September of 2015; this was the new, improved version. SilencerCo hopes to have them on the market some time in 2016. Of course, you’ll need a tax stamp from the ATF and it’s not going to be cheap. Rumors place the price at around $2k. Some excellent design features have been incorporated in the prototype . . .

The prototype uses Glock magazines, which are cheap, easily available, reliable and effective. Then can be shortened by an inch or two if subsonic loads are used, easily done by the owner in a few minutes. It reduces the loudest 9mm (124 grain +P+) to 139 db, below the level recommended for hearing protection. With subsonic 147 grain loads, it will be much quieter.

As I examined the grip, it occurred to me that the frame had been created using additive technology, commonly known as 3D printing. Confirmed; the frame had been prototyped with additive engineering.


In this image, you can clearly see the layering effect produced by 3D printers, where extremely tight tolerances are not necessary. 3D printing is becoming an industry standard. It’s much cheaper to produce a prototype this way to see if everything fits, to find tweaks the product may need to work better.

Chet Alvord, Vice President of TacSol, believes that 3D printing is the way forward. “High tech machining (such as they do at Tactical Solutions) will be ‘buggy whips’ in 10 to 15 years,” Avlord pronounced.

I handled the Silencerco pistol, but didn’t shoot it. It was acceptable. It had been designed to be easily holsterable. The designer said he expected to build in capacity for a light and optical sights which wouldn’t interfere with a holster. If you’re willing to haul around a steel 1911, the SilencerCo integrally-suppressed pistol wouldn’t be a burden.

The concept seems sound, an obvious integration that would have been perfected decades ago, if not for suppression of the gun muffler market by the obsolete National Firearms Act of 1934. The Chinese had a .32 integrally suppressed pistol based on the Browning 1900 design. A 9mm moves the concept into the very useful category.

With minimal muzzle flash and hearing protection (which maintains situational awareness), an integrally suppressed pistol would make a suitable home defense gun. It would also make a great firearm for open carry, and it’s not out of the realm for concealed carry.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.  Link to Gun Watch

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. If we can get the HPA passed, these things will sell like hotcakes. I know that I’m squirreling away the money for three cans even in the current regulatory climate. (As soon as those become legal in the People’s Republik of Greater Chiraq (aka Illinois)

    • I’d bet every manufacturer would start on an integrally suppressed pistol if it passes. Exciting times.

  2. I hope the real mccoy is going to be better looking. That thing looks like it was beat with a ugly stick. It kind of looks like a Nerf gun. I guess new technology takes a while to start looking good.

    • It just takes a while for people to stop hating it because it doesn’t look like what they are used to.

      • I think the problem in its looks is in the angularity of everything. Its like the guy that designed it only used the 3 primary planes in his CAD program. I’m ok with the general outline of it, but I’m not a fan of the multiple angles in the trigger guard, or the relief cut in the side. They need to team up with the Italians and make the design more curvaceous.

  3. I guess I can see that in an OWB holster, open carried, but it doesn’t really seem like a viable CCW option. I just can’t get excited about this when it is cheaper and more practical to get a threaded barrel pistol and a surpressor i can use on othe guns. But if by releasing this they will develop more practical versions, then that is exciting.

  4. Is it still not hearing safe, too hot to put in a holster and does it still jam every other round? Call me skeptical, but the prototype of this thing was complete garbage and I don’t expect the final product to be a hell of a lot better.

    • I’ll buy that for a dollar!

      ** Not related but I did see a 3D printer in Lowes made by dremel the other day.

    • Actually their working prototype worked very well and only had a few malfunctions because of the sheer number of users during the Miami Vice event shooting it. It was and will be hearing safe as noted in the review.

    • For ranges and private practice in noise restricted areas, these make some sense. For “quiet” CCW or service weapons, I’d bet on purpose built heavier and slower projectiles, ideally fired though bullpup (longer barrel per gun length) designs, over trying to silence loud as heck standard rounds though standard pistol actions and layouts.

  5. Finally, a gun tailor made for that ridiculous half-of-a-five-gallon-bucket 2A “Standard Bearer” holster you guys reviewed about a year ago.

  6. “Chet Alvord, Vice President of TacSol, believes that 3D printing is the way forward. “High tech machining (such as they do at Tactical Solutions) will be ‘buggy whips’ in 10 to 15 years,” Avlord pronounced.”

    Another guy who doesn’t understand the nuances of economy of scale. Also he doesn’t know people have been saying that for 10 or 15 years already, I guess. This tech is that old, yes. The media hype is new, but not most of the tech.

    It IS super exciting tech, but not in the way lots of people seem to think.

    • Given the perilous legal climate surrounding guns versus many other products, there is some safety in designing guns so that they CAN be end user manufactured on short notice in a distributed fashion, even if the majority of copies sold, are intended to be manufactured more efficiently in a centralized factory.

      In addition, additive can allow for customized grip sizes and shapes, AND holsters to hold them, making up for some of the added cost over just picking up a standardized Glock from a run of 100,000.

  7. I want to know how hot the front of the gun gets while shooting. It could make the gun difficult to handle and manipulate without gloves. Silencerco also claims the pistol is quiet with supersonic ammunition and I would like to know if the 3″ barrel is ported to reduce velocity. That’s good for practice if all ammunition is subsonic, but bad for practical use, since it would lower the velocity of highly effective 147gr subsonic rounds. If it is ported, the ideal solution would be to offer two barrels that can be easily swapped, one ported to turn supersonic rounds subsonic and one not ported for subsonic rounds.

    Glock mags and sights are a good sign. I remember hearing the firearm design advice somewhere to “get a magazine that works and build a gun around it”. That’s the part of the weapon often hardest to perfect. If the Maxim 9 is reliable I will definitely buy it or a gun it inspires. I believe strongly in the integrally suppressed pistol concept. As Mr. Weingarten notes, the concept would have been well established in the civilian market decades ago if not for the NFA and other silencerphobic legislation.

    The only thing I don’t like is how Silencerco cultivates a reputation for dishonest marketing by claiming this thing is hearing safe with all ammunition and that it’s the first integrally suppressed pistol ever. They made the same false claims about the Salvo 12. Both products were tremendous achievements, absolutely groundbreaking and the first of their kind broadly commercially available. I don’t know why they can’t just report the spectacular truth and need to go one step further into making fantastic claims that are demonstrably untrue. Obviously there were predecessors, and if you shoot the Maxim 9 and Salvo 12 frequently in different situations (like indoors) without hearing protection you will likely end up like Robert Farago, with permanent hearing damage from a suppressed weapon an overeager, dishonest manufacturer claimed was perfectly hearing safe. Extant suppressor technology simply isn’t effective enough to make all—or any—supersonic 9mm and 12 gauge rounds hearing safe. And it probably never will make supersonic rounds hearing safe. If it’s not subsonic .22LR or similar, I don’t believe it when they tell me a suppressor makes a firearm hearing safe. 139dB is nowhere near hearing safe and will make you go deaf. Maybe according to NIOSH tables it’s hearing safe for a single one millionth of a second long exposure per day, sure. That is not hearing safe.

    • I was told they wanted Smart Guns with fingerprint locks, not remote connections to the Sibyl System.

  8. I see everyone thought of Robocop when they saw this. Hollywood will love this thing. No mock-up necessary.

Comments are closed.