flash hider length?

Shadow9mm · December 28, 2022, 10:29 PM

So I am looking for a flash hider. for a 16in barrel AR in 223. I was doing some low light shooting the other day and the giant fire balls from my linear comp were not to my taste.

I am somewhat undecided on design as to tines or slots. I like that the A2 has the bottom closed to minimize dust getting kicked up.

I found an extended A2 on midway. From what I can tell it was extended to make it easier to pin and weld onto a 14.5 to make it a 16in barrel. https://www.midwayusa.com/product/102177190?pid=246791

However it got me thinking about the length of flash hiders and if the length had something to do with how effective it is, as some of the better ones like the YHM Phantom and the JP enterprises flash hiders, among others, seemed to be on the longer side compared to the straight A2.

Traditional A2 bird cage 1.75
AR stoner extended A2 2.09in
YHM Phantom 2.25in
Surefire 3P Eliminator 2.67in
strike industried venom 2.165in
JP Enterprises 2.83in
Smith Enterprise Vortex G6A3 2.25in
Troy Industries Medieval 2.25in
Faxon slim flash hider 2.125in

I guess the main question is, would the extended A2 perform better than a standard A2. but it also raises the question IMHO, do longer flash hiders work better? I would think so as it gives them more time to work on the gasses. But I could be wrong.

**44 AMP** · December 30, 2022, 07:38 PM

First point, terminology. Your aren't wrong to call them flash hiders, because that's what today's makers call them, but that terminology is different from the terminology I learned and used in the US Army in the 70s.

The terms used in Army manuals in those days referred to two different devices, "flash hiders" and "flash suppressors".

Flash hiders are conical, solid metal devices (the only hole is the one the bullet goes through) and were parts that could be used on the M2HB, the M3/M3A1 Greasegun, and one variant of the M1 Garand. This device "hides" the majority of the flash from the shooter.

Flash suppressors have slots (or holes, or sometimes both) and what they do is break up the flash, "suppressing" the large globular flash, turning it into "bars" or "spikes" and thereby reducing its visibility. You find these on the M14, M16, and M60 machine guns.

TO the Army, in those days, they were different devices, different parts, with different names and stock numbers.

As to the length of flash suppressors, if you have the idea that longer means the gas gets to cool (fractionally) producing less flash, the critical distance is not the overall length of the device, it is the internal distance between the muzzle of the barrel and where the slots/holes begin. IF a 2" and a 3" long device have the same distance inside from the muzzle to the slots, there is no possible change to gas temp, or anything else.
Longer slots MIGHT make a difference, but I don't know how, or IF they would.

Also bear in mind that changing to a different powder can improve, decrease, or even negate the benefit of a flash suppressor, depending on different factors. I had an XM177 copy (semi) with the 11.5" barrel and permanently attached "long" (5.5") flash suppressor (to make legal length), shooting GI ball M193 ammo resulted in a brilliant "cross" shaped flash with arms being a good foot long. Shooting handloads with commercial powders resulted in a much smaller flash.

Adding several inches more barrel length WILL change the flash amount, generally reducing it, with or without a flash suppressor. I have an 18.5" barrel .308 carbine. Muzzle flash is a brilliant and huge fireball appearing over a foot in diameter. Same ammo fired from a 22" barrel M1A with its flash suppressor appears to be a small cone about 2" wide at the base.

From where I sit, which ever of the choices you list would be adequate, IF you find the right powder to use with it to produce your desired flash reduction. And, the only way you'll know which is best is by experimenting with different combinations to determine which, if any meets your needs.

Good Luck!!

Shadow9mm · December 30, 2022, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

First point, terminology. Your aren't wrong to call them flash hiders, because that's what today's makers call them, but that terminology is different from the terminology I learned and used in the US Army in the 70s.

The terms used in Army manuals in those days referred to two different devices, "flash hiders" and "flash suppressors".

Flash hiders are conical, solid metal devices (the only hole is the one the bullet goes through) and were parts that could be used on the M2HB, the M3/M3A1 Greasegun, and one variant of the M1 Garand. This device "hides" the majority of the flash from the shooter.

Flash suppressors have slots (or holes, or sometimes both) and what they do is break up the flash, "suppressing" the large globular flash, turning it into "bars" or "spikes" and thereby reducing its visibility. You find these on the M14, M16, and M60 machine guns.

TO the Army, in those days, they were different devices, different parts, with different names and stock numbers.

As to the length of flash suppressors, if you have the idea that longer means the gas gets to cool (fractionally) producing less flash, the critical distance is not the overall length of the device, it is the internal distance between the muzzle of the barrel and where the slots/holes begin. IF a 2" and a 3" long device have the same distance inside from the muzzle to the slots, there is no possible change to gas temp, or anything else.
Longer slots MIGHT make a difference, but I don't know how, or IF they would.

Also bear in mind that changing to a different powder can improve, decrease, or even negate the benefit of a flash suppressor, depending on different factors. I had an XM177 copy (semi) with the 11.5" barrel and permanently attached "long" (5.5") flash suppressor (to make legal length), shooting GI ball M193 ammo resulted in a brilliant "cross" shaped flash with arms being a good foot long. Shooting handloads with commercial powders resulted in a much smaller flash.

Adding several inches more barrel length WILL change the flash amount, generally reducing it, with or without a flash suppressor. I have an 18.5" barrel .308 carbine. Muzzle flash is a brilliant and huge fireball appearing over a foot in diameter. Same ammo fired from a 22" barrel M1A with its flash suppressor appears to be a small cone about 2" wide at the base.

From where I sit, which ever of the choices you list would be adequate, IF you find the right powder to use with it to produce your desired flash reduction. And, the only way you'll know which is best is by experimenting with different combinations to determine which, if any meets your needs.

Good Luck!!

Thanks, I think I did get caught in the common terminology, as actual flash hiders seem to be fairly uncommon these days. I never really differentiated between flash hider or flash suppressors, but I did understand the differences in the devices. Thank you for clarifying.

Flash suppressors can be extremely effective, nearly eliminating flash all together. Here are a couple really cool videos I found. Indoor range, with a light meter.

AR-15 Flash Hider Shootout https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JkmWVCd674

AR-15 Flash Hiding Test #2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_CM5aQroag

As far as powders I am using benchmark, CFE223, BLC-2, and TAC. I will have to do some research and testing when I get a chance.

So if a flash suppressors effectiveness is based on the the distance from the muzzle to the start of the tines, what effect do the tines have. Do they just split the gasses/flash? If the length of the tines themselves have a minimal effect why are they as long as they are? The length seems to be within a fairly standard range. and the longer one, the JP, seemed to perform the best.

**44 AMP** · December 30, 2022, 10:51 PM

Quote:

So if a flash suppressors effectiveness is based on the the distance from the muzzle to the start of the tines, what effect do the tines have.

I'm sorry, I think you got the wrong impression of what I meant about that. Let me see if I can clarify..

If you think that the effectiveness of a longer flash suppressor is because it is longer (allowing the gas to cool slightly before it reaches the slots, then the part of the device you should be measuring in order to compare longer vs. shorter for effectiveness is the distance between the muzzle and the opening of the slots.

I don't think that part of the device matters as much as the size, shape, and location of the slots.

The point is to change the large dazzling fireball some rounds produce into something that is less dazzling and less obviously distracting to the shooter and those near him. You cannot hide or really suppress the flash from someone down range.

Think of it like camouflage paint on a vehicle or person's face. You can't actually hide the object, what the camo does is use light and dark tones in a pattern that makes the object less instantly recognizable.

Another example is the "dazzle" pattern used on some ships in WWII. You couldn't hide the fact that there was a ship there, but the alternating light/dark patterns made it more difficult to tell what kind of ship, which way it was moving or how fast it was moving.

Flash suppressors change the shape and size of the muzzle flash, making more difficult to tell what and where something is firing from, and reducing its effect on your buddies nearby at the same time.

In other words, someone some distance away might see a flash of light, but not something they would instantly recognize as a muzzle flash. Effectiveness varies, of course.

Another point to consider, flash hiders and suppressors are normally found on high rate of fire arms. Full auto fire, especially from a belt fed is a clear "strobe light" in the dark, and changing that by breaking up the big flashing ball of light is a benefit to the gunner as well.

There are a lot of times and weapons where this doesn't matter, and those rarely have flash suppressors or hiders, but other guns and tactical situations make them a desirable item.

Shadow9mm · December 31, 2022, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

I'm sorry, I think you got the wrong impression of what I meant about that. Let me see if I can clarify..

If you think that the effectiveness of a longer flash suppressor is because it is longer (allowing the gas to cool slightly before it reaches the slots, then the part of the device you should be measuring in order to compare longer vs. shorter for effectiveness is the distance between the muzzle and the opening of the slots.

I don't think that part of the device matters as much as the size, shape, and location of the slots.

The point is to change the large dazzling fireball some rounds produce into something that is less dazzling and less obviously distracting to the shooter and those near him. You cannot hide or really suppress the flash from someone down range.

Think of it like camouflage paint on a vehicle or person's face. You can't actually hide the object, what the camo does is use light and dark tones in a pattern that makes the object less instantly recognizable.

Another example is the "dazzle" pattern used on some ships in WWII. You couldn't hide the fact that there was a ship there, but the alternating light/dark patterns made it more difficult to tell what kind of ship, which way it was moving or how fast it was moving.

Flash suppressors change the shape and size of the muzzle flash, making more difficult to tell what and where something is firing from, and reducing its effect on your buddies nearby at the same time.

In other words, someone some distance away might see a flash of light, but not something they would instantly recognize as a muzzle flash. Effectiveness varies, of course.

Another point to consider, flash hiders and suppressors are normally found on high rate of fire arms. Full auto fire, especially from a belt fed is a clear "strobe light" in the dark, and changing that by breaking up the big flashing ball of light is a benefit to the gunner as well.

There are a lot of times and weapons where this doesn't matter, and those rarely have flash suppressors or hiders, but other guns and tactical situations make them a desirable item.

To my understanding flash hiders and flash suppressors serve 2 purposes. As you said, they act as a camouflage to make the flash, and location of the shooter harder to detect. However they also serve another purpose, which is to prevent the shooter from being blinded by the flash in the dark/low light. The 2nd reason is more my focus.

So im still not sure if im grasping your concept. As i understanding it a flash suppressor has 3 distinct parts looking at it internally.

1, the threads to attach it to the muzzle. As most muzzles have a fairly similar ammount of threads exposed i kind of eliminated this area from the equation.

2, the area from the end of the muzzle to the start of the tines. Generally a fairly short area.

3 the tines themselves.

As the gasses exit the muzzle they expand. My understanding of flash suppressors was they helped cool the gasses by chopping them up and or dispersing them mixing them with the surrounding air. Based on the size/volume of the area between the muzzle and the start of the tines, once the device is attached, im struggling to see how that can have any significant effect on the flash.

**44 AMP** · December 31, 2022, 04:31 PM

I think you're on the right track, but the differences are difficult to visualize because we're talking about small degrees of difference happening in a very very short time.

You're right, the threaded portion is not relevant to the flash, no gas goes there.

Now, look at the internal of the device. Its larger diameter than the rifle bore, usually quite a bit. Sometimes its as large as the outside diameter of the barrel or even larger. The distance between the muzzle and the port openings acts as an expansion chamber. After the bullet exits the muzzle, its in free flight and the gas is no longer contained behind it.

Gas, being faster than the bullet actually flows around it, and this increased amount of area it fills allows some mixing with the outside air and cools the gas VERY SLIGHTLY, as it reaches the ports, and this reduces flash due to combustion with the oxygen in the outside air SLIGHTLY.

Then the slots/ports channel the gas exit somewhat, (most still goes out the front) preventing the "fireball" you get from a bare muzzle.

Look at (what I call) a flash hider, the solid cone "blast tube" used on some older guns. It moves the point where gas can escape into your field of view forward a few inches, and provides a large area where gas can mix with outside air, which is shielded from your view. This has the effect of reducing the amount of flash dazzle the shooter sees. (and, I think they look cool!

)

For your stated objective, reducing the flash YOU see when shooting in low light conditions, I would suggest the first, and hopefully most effective, thing would be to experiment with different powders to find which one meets your needs and flashes the least.

THEN look at different designs of muzzle devices to see which, if any seems to perform better than the others with that powder.

good luck with your testing!

Shadow9mm · December 31, 2022, 06:47 PM

So the way I am thinking of it as is more from a plumbing aspect. It is not so much as creating a chamber, as it is going from a small pipe at high pressure to larger pipe, which will decrease pressure.

However with the gasses exiting and or expanding faster than the bullet itself, the gasses, to some degree, get pushed out the sides, as that is the path of least resistance, rather than trying to bypass the bullet and go out the end.

In a sense its almost like a gas piston system with the bullet as the piston. as the bullet leaves the barrel it opens into an expansion chamber reducing pressure. Then as the bullet passes past the start of the tines it begins bleeding gasses out the sides. the further down the device it travels the more gas it bleeds off, until it exits. From a practical stand point there is probably a diminishing return the longer the device gets as the escape area for the gasses just gets bigger and bigger. but a shorter device would result in a faster release of the gasses, as the bullet leaves the device sooner, resulting in less cooling and mixing of the gasses and air, and more flash.

**44 AMP** · December 31, 2022, 08:38 PM

I think you are overlooking something. Look at the interior diameter of the flash suppressor, compared to the diameter of the bullet. There is a lot of room all the way around the bullet.

Gas pressure is exerted in all directions, but until the gas reaches the slots and exit the only direction the gas column move is forward. And while that column of gas, all the way from the case to the slots where it can exit, is pushing all around the circumference of the bore, including the interior of the flash suppressor, the bulk of the pressure is channeled forward, because the barrel steel doesn't allow it to go any where else.

SOME of the gas passes the bullet inside the flash suppressor, because the gas velocity is much higher than the bullet, and there is now room for it to do so, thanks to the "expansion chamber size of the flash suppressor's internal diameter. But more of it is still behind filling the barrel and still pushing.

Even though you don't see it, as flash, most of the gas pressure goes out the front. Think about how far in front of the gun you can feel the muzzle blast, or see its effect (like blowing down tall grass). Way beyond the visual flash length. With dispersion and cooling due to the distance, there is no longer a flash but the (rapidly diminishing) gas pressure wave is still enough to be felt or see its effect even yards infront of the muzzle.

If you were to attach a 3inch diameter can two feet long to the muzzle, you would also see a marked decrease in muzzle flash over the bare barrel. Even with nothing like baffles or chambers in the can it would still have that effect, allowing the gas to expand, lose some pressure and cool down a bit before it entered your field of view at the far end of the can.

Of course this isn't a practical thing to do but it would have that effect.

bamaranger · January 1, 2023, 10:22 PM

I've considered the linear comp on one of my AR's, but have held off as I did not want to add to the overall length of the carbine. As I understand it, the linear comp's claim to fame is perceived blast reduction, not necessarily flash reduction.

I've read good things about the Smith Vortex, seems like I read an article where it rated very high in cutting flash. My own experience is solely with the GI A2.

I suspect any "low light" shooting with a 16" AR is going to produce noteable flash. The way to solve that is likely the sound suppressor route .

**44 AMP** · January 2, 2023, 01:53 AM

Maxim's "Silencer" and modern suppressors use the general principle that slowing down/delaying the bulk of the gas exits reduces the amount of the report. While this is happening the gas has time to cool a bit and still burning powder gets consumed in the additional length and chambers of the device which reduced the muzzle flash considerably.

However, there's no free lunch, and when you want to reduce the flash from lighting off 20-25gr (or more in larger cartridges) of powder in a short barrel, you have to give up something to get something.

Shadow9mm · January 2, 2023, 10:05 AM

Suppressors can reduce flash. Some are better than others. But they are expensive, long, heavy, and have paperwork attached. But they also reduce blast like a linear comp.

The kaw valley linear comps are good, but shorter than many if your looking to keep your length short.

Shadow9mm · January 3, 2023, 02:14 PM

Well I ordered an extended A2 from midway. Idea being it will provide better flash suppression due to it being a more similar length to the YHM Phantom and most 3 and 4 prong flash suppressors. will hopefully be able to test it out in the not too distant future. Next to a standard A2 and a Kaw Valley standard 223 linear comp for comparison.

Shadow9mm · January 3, 2023, 06:06 PM

On a side note, I found a military engineering document titled

"ENGINEERING DESIGN HANDBOOK
GUNS SERIES
MUZZLE DEVICES"

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD0838748.pdf

This document has been very enlightening so far. Flash Suppressors start at the bottom of page 20.

this thread seems to repeat itself a lot, but has a lot of interesting points as well. https://www.m4carbine.net/archive/in.../t-230944.html

the A2, from what I can tell was built based on somewhat pre-exsisting standards. External dimensions to fit nato rifle grenades and the blank firing adapters from the A1 are a couple ideas put forth, and they make sense to me.

Heres a quote from the document. It appears the length of the tines(bars) has to do with the relationship of the volume of the barrel and volume of gasses.

Quote:

The length of the gun tube, therefore total
gun volume, for any given propellant
charge and projectile has a decided effect
on this length of the flash suppressor bar.
For instance, large bore guns, the total
volume-to-propellant charge ratio of which
is much smaller than that for small bore
guns, will need relatively much longer bars,
in fact, far out of proportion to the length
of gun tubes. Sample calculations will demonstrate this peculiarity. One fortunate discovery during experimentation with suppressors of theoretical proportions was
their retention of effectiveness after the
bars were shortened.

**44 AMP** · January 3, 2023, 10:43 PM

Quote:

For instance, large bore guns, the total
volume-to-propellant charge ratio of which
is much smaller than that for small bore
guns, will need relatively much longer bars,
in fact, far out of proportion to the length
of gun tubes.

While I guess its nice to find this in some study, it not like it is anything newly discovered or realized.

Just LOOK at the flash suppressors for the M14 rifle and M60 Machine gun. Compare their size against the flash suppressors for the M16 series rifles and SAW.

.308 Win vs .223 Rem or if you prefer
7.62x51mm vs 5.56x45mm
45-ish grains of powder vs or 25-ish grains of powder.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon or a brain scientist to figure out that the larger cartridge will need a larger device/mechanism to achieve the desired effect.

December 28, 2022, 10:29 PM	#1
Shadow9mm Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 3,977	flash hider length? So I am looking for a flash hider. for a 16in barrel AR in 223. I was doing some low light shooting the other day and the giant fire balls from my linear comp were not to my taste. I am somewhat undecided on design as to tines or slots. I like that the A2 has the bottom closed to minimize dust getting kicked up. I found an extended A2 on midway. From what I can tell it was extended to make it easier to pin and weld onto a 14.5 to make it a 16in barrel. https://www.midwayusa.com/product/102177190?pid=246791 However it got me thinking about the length of flash hiders and if the length had something to do with how effective it is, as some of the better ones like the YHM Phantom and the JP enterprises flash hiders, among others, seemed to be on the longer side compared to the straight A2. Traditional A2 bird cage 1.75 AR stoner extended A2 2.09in YHM Phantom 2.25in Surefire 3P Eliminator 2.67in strike industried venom 2.165in JP Enterprises 2.83in Smith Enterprise Vortex G6A3 2.25in Troy Industries Medieval 2.25in Faxon slim flash hider 2.125in I guess the main question is, would the extended A2 perform better than a standard A2. but it also raises the question IMHO, do longer flash hiders work better? I would think so as it gives them more time to work on the gasses. But I could be wrong. __________________ I don't believe in "range fodder" that is why I reload. Last edited by Shadow9mm; December 28, 2022 at 10:49 PM.

December 31, 2022, 04:31 PM	#6
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,871	I think you're on the right track, but the differences are difficult to visualize because we're talking about small degrees of difference happening in a very very short time. You're right, the threaded portion is not relevant to the flash, no gas goes there. Now, look at the internal of the device. Its larger diameter than the rifle bore, usually quite a bit. Sometimes its as large as the outside diameter of the barrel or even larger. The distance between the muzzle and the port openings acts as an expansion chamber. After the bullet exits the muzzle, its in free flight and the gas is no longer contained behind it. Gas, being faster than the bullet actually flows around it, and this increased amount of area it fills allows some mixing with the outside air and cools the gas VERY SLIGHTLY, as it reaches the ports, and this reduces flash due to combustion with the oxygen in the outside air SLIGHTLY. Then the slots/ports channel the gas exit somewhat, (most still goes out the front) preventing the "fireball" you get from a bare muzzle. Look at (what I call) a flash hider, the solid cone "blast tube" used on some older guns. It moves the point where gas can escape into your field of view forward a few inches, and provides a large area where gas can mix with outside air, which is shielded from your view. This has the effect of reducing the amount of flash dazzle the shooter sees. (and, I think they look cool! ) For your stated objective, reducing the flash YOU see when shooting in low light conditions, I would suggest the first, and hopefully most effective, thing would be to experiment with different powders to find which one meets your needs and flashes the least. THEN look at different designs of muzzle devices to see which, if any seems to perform better than the others with that powder. good luck with your testing! __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

December 31, 2022, 06:47 PM	#7
Shadow9mm Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 3,977	So the way I am thinking of it as is more from a plumbing aspect. It is not so much as creating a chamber, as it is going from a small pipe at high pressure to larger pipe, which will decrease pressure. However with the gasses exiting and or expanding faster than the bullet itself, the gasses, to some degree, get pushed out the sides, as that is the path of least resistance, rather than trying to bypass the bullet and go out the end. In a sense its almost like a gas piston system with the bullet as the piston. as the bullet leaves the barrel it opens into an expansion chamber reducing pressure. Then as the bullet passes past the start of the tines it begins bleeding gasses out the sides. the further down the device it travels the more gas it bleeds off, until it exits. From a practical stand point there is probably a diminishing return the longer the device gets as the escape area for the gasses just gets bigger and bigger. but a shorter device would result in a faster release of the gasses, as the bullet leaves the device sooner, resulting in less cooling and mixing of the gasses and air, and more flash. __________________ I don't believe in "range fodder" that is why I reload.

December 31, 2022, 08:38 PM	#8
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,871	I think you are overlooking something. Look at the interior diameter of the flash suppressor, compared to the diameter of the bullet. There is a lot of room all the way around the bullet. Gas pressure is exerted in all directions, but until the gas reaches the slots and exit the only direction the gas column move is forward. And while that column of gas, all the way from the case to the slots where it can exit, is pushing all around the circumference of the bore, including the interior of the flash suppressor, the bulk of the pressure is channeled forward, because the barrel steel doesn't allow it to go any where else. SOME of the gas passes the bullet inside the flash suppressor, because the gas velocity is much higher than the bullet, and there is now room for it to do so, thanks to the "expansion chamber size of the flash suppressor's internal diameter. But more of it is still behind filling the barrel and still pushing. Even though you don't see it, as flash, most of the gas pressure goes out the front. Think about how far in front of the gun you can feel the muzzle blast, or see its effect (like blowing down tall grass). Way beyond the visual flash length. With dispersion and cooling due to the distance, there is no longer a flash but the (rapidly diminishing) gas pressure wave is still enough to be felt or see its effect even yards infront of the muzzle. If you were to attach a 3inch diameter can two feet long to the muzzle, you would also see a marked decrease in muzzle flash over the bare barrel. Even with nothing like baffles or chambers in the can it would still have that effect, allowing the gas to expand, lose some pressure and cool down a bit before it entered your field of view at the far end of the can. Of course this isn't a practical thing to do but it would have that effect. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

January 1, 2023, 10:22 PM	#9
bamaranger Senior Member Join Date: October 9, 2009 Location: North Alabama Posts: 8,318	linear comp I've considered the linear comp on one of my AR's, but have held off as I did not want to add to the overall length of the carbine. As I understand it, the linear comp's claim to fame is perceived blast reduction, not necessarily flash reduction. I've read good things about the Smith Vortex, seems like I read an article where it rated very high in cutting flash. My own experience is solely with the GI A2. I suspect any "low light" shooting with a 16" AR is going to produce noteable flash. The way to solve that is likely the sound suppressor route .

December 30, 2022, 07:38 PM	#2
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,871	First point, terminology. Your aren't wrong to call them flash hiders, because that's what today's makers call them, but that terminology is different from the terminology I learned and used in the US Army in the 70s. The terms used in Army manuals in those days referred to two different devices, "flash hiders" and "flash suppressors". Flash hiders are conical, solid metal devices (the only hole is the one the bullet goes through) and were parts that could be used on the M2HB, the M3/M3A1 Greasegun, and one variant of the M1 Garand. This device "hides" the majority of the flash from the shooter. Flash suppressors have slots (or holes, or sometimes both) and what they do is break up the flash, "suppressing" the large globular flash, turning it into "bars" or "spikes" and thereby reducing its visibility. You find these on the M14, M16, and M60 machine guns. TO the Army, in those days, they were different devices, different parts, with different names and stock numbers. As to the length of flash suppressors, if you have the idea that longer means the gas gets to cool (fractionally) producing less flash, the critical distance is not the overall length of the device, it is the internal distance between the muzzle of the barrel and where the slots/holes begin. IF a 2" and a 3" long device have the same distance inside from the muzzle to the slots, there is no possible change to gas temp, or anything else. Longer slots MIGHT make a difference, but I don't know how, or IF they would. Also bear in mind that changing to a different powder can improve, decrease, or even negate the benefit of a flash suppressor, depending on different factors. I had an XM177 copy (semi) with the 11.5" barrel and permanently attached "long" (5.5") flash suppressor (to make legal length), shooting GI ball M193 ammo resulted in a brilliant "cross" shaped flash with arms being a good foot long. Shooting handloads with commercial powders resulted in a much smaller flash. Adding several inches more barrel length WILL change the flash amount, generally reducing it, with or without a flash suppressor. I have an 18.5" barrel .308 carbine. Muzzle flash is a brilliant and huge fireball appearing over a foot in diameter. Same ammo fired from a 22" barrel M1A with its flash suppressor appears to be a small cone about 2" wide at the base. From where I sit, which ever of the choices you list would be adequate, IF you find the right powder to use with it to produce your desired flash reduction. And, the only way you'll know which is best is by experimenting with different combinations to determine which, if any meets your needs. Good Luck!! __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

January 2, 2023, 01:53 AM	#10
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,871	Maxim's "Silencer" and modern suppressors use the general principle that slowing down/delaying the bulk of the gas exits reduces the amount of the report. While this is happening the gas has time to cool a bit and still burning powder gets consumed in the additional length and chambers of the device which reduced the muzzle flash considerably. However, there's no free lunch, and when you want to reduce the flash from lighting off 20-25gr (or more in larger cartridges) of powder in a short barrel, you have to give up something to get something. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

January 2, 2023, 10:05 AM	#11
Shadow9mm Senior Member Join Date: March 21, 2012 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 3,977	Suppressors can reduce flash. Some are better than others. But they are expensive, long, heavy, and have paperwork attached. But they also reduce blast like a linear comp. The kaw valley linear comps are good, but shorter than many if your looking to keep your length short. __________________ I don't believe in "range fodder" that is why I reload.