Alex V 99 Posted October 30, 2015 What say y'all? Would attach to the SureFire brake. Not a suppressor, not designed to hide flash. No real need for it, just wondering. Discuss. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krdshrk 3,877 Posted October 30, 2015 Looks like it's an attachment to the SOCOM series Brakes and Flash Hiders. Not sure of the legality but the description says: The SureFire Warden Blast Diffuser directs the concussive blast of the muzzle forward of the weapon system and the shooter instead of venting to the side as seen with stand-alone muzzle break devices. This aids in reducing the overpressure and flash felt by others to the immediate left and right of the shooter’s firing position. Not sure if that's technically hiding the flash... I want to say no, but IANAL... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
carl_g 568 Posted October 30, 2015 It sux that you have to deal with this crap. such a pain in the ass. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NickySantoro 211 Posted October 30, 2015 Seems similar to the Levang Linear Compensator. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scorpio64 5,156 Posted October 30, 2015 I would be concerned that the Surefire fast attach system could be interpreted the same as a threaded barrel and that there is a suppressor available designed specifically for surefire brakes QD mounting system. Technically, it should be legal but in NJ, who the hell knows. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted October 30, 2015 That thing is sweet..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
El_Mal90 0 Posted October 30, 2015 Saw a video of this earlier today and was wondering the same thing. It's incredible what it can do Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted October 30, 2015 I doubt it's legal here in rapeallmyrightsersey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pizza Bob 1,488 Posted October 30, 2015 Would have to be permanently attached. Otherwise it would be a threaded barrel. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RecessedFilter 222 Posted October 30, 2015 Would have to be permanently attached. Otherwise it would be a threaded barrel. If the original muzzle brake is permanently attached, why does this thing have to be? Doesn't it thread onto threads on the muzzle brake? I don't know much about these tactical compensator devices but when do muzzle brakes have threads on them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted October 30, 2015 If the original muzzle brake is permanently attached, why does this thing have to be? Doesn't it thread onto threads on the muzzle brake? I don't know much about these tactical compensator devices but when do muzzle brakes have threads on them?Good points Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pizza Bob 1,488 Posted October 31, 2015 I'm assuming there is something like an Ajax thread on the brake for this device to thread onto. Once your brake is permanently attached (as required) it becomes the barrel. If the brake has an external thread you now have a threaded barrel. Unless you get rid of one of the other evil features, you are in violation. Adios, Pizza Bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted October 31, 2015 It looks like it has the same attachment type as a Surefire Suppressor. If that's the case there are no threads involved. It tightens up on a locking ring on a proprietary muzzle device - either brake or flash hider. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Krdshrk 3,877 Posted October 31, 2015 It looks like it has the same attachment type as a Surefire Suppressor. If that's the case there are no threads involved. It tightens up on a locking ring on a proprietary muzzle device - either brake or flash hider. This exactly. There are no threads on the brake itself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted October 31, 2015 So what's the consensus ? Is it legal ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted October 31, 2015 I'll say illegal because it looks to cool for NJ. . In all seriousness. I'd be careful because it says reduces flash. The sentence most likely means to the those on your side but may not. Anything that says reduces flash, even with a particular qualification, I'd be nervous to have in NJ. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted October 31, 2015 I'll say illegal because it looks to cool for NJ. . In all seriousness. I'd be careful because it says reduces flash. The sentence most likely means to the those on your side but may not. Anything that says reduces flash, even with a particular qualification, I'd be nervous to have in NJ.Good point Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJM981 924 Posted November 1, 2015 It would depend if they have a letter from the ATF. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted November 1, 2015 The only one I can think of that does is PWS for their FSC556. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted November 1, 2015 The only one I can think of that does is PWS for their FSC556.Yes it does Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pizza Bob 1,488 Posted November 1, 2015 The only one I can think of that does is PWS for their FSC556. I'd be curious as to the date on that letter. With the AWB sunsetting in 2004 there is no need for a federal agency to define something that is not affected by federal law. I'm thinking the letter dated from the period of the AWB (1994 - 2004) and you probably would not be able to obtain a similar letter for components designed after 2004. Adios, Pizza Bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted November 1, 2015 I'd be curious as to the date on that letter. With the AWB sunsetting in 2004 there is no need for a federal agency to define something that is not affected by federal law. I'm thinking the letter dated from the period of the AWB (1994 - 2004) and you probably would not be able to obtain a similar letter for components designed after 2004. Adios, Pizza Bob I'm pretty sure you are right. However, I don't think any manufacturers bother anymore given its on an NJ issue I believe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJM981 924 Posted November 2, 2015 It's legal. It's not a threaded barrel. It's a proprietary locking mechanism. The adapter piece would need to be pinned. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJM981 924 Posted November 2, 2015 This is the muzzle brake. http://www.surefire.com/sfmb-556-1-2-28.html the Flash hider is not connected at the end. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,325 Posted November 2, 2015 If you watch the video, it appears the SOCOM suppressors will also mount to this brake. This (if true) would be a bad move in the PRNJ! Please, someone else watch this video and tell me if I am wrong! Go to the site below and click on the first of the three videos. http://www.surefire.com/sfmb-556-1-2-28.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
High Exposure 5,664 Posted November 2, 2015 Yes, as I stated above this Warden uses the same attachment type as Surefire suppressors. So what? The law covers exposed threads on the end of a barrel or muzzle devices. Many suppressors will fit different muzzle breaks using friction mechanisms or locking collars - the Gemtech Halo will fit the FSC556 for example. It's still good to go as a muzzle device. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
checko 180 Posted November 2, 2015 I'm specifically using a comp that interfaces with a surpressor if (when) I move out of state Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJM981 924 Posted November 2, 2015 I'm specifically using a comp that interfaces with a surpressor if (when) I move out of state Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk This^^ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tattooo 220 Posted November 2, 2015 Yes, as I stated above this Warden uses the same attachment type as Surefire suppressors. So what? The law covers exposed threads on the end of a barrel or muzzle devices. Many suppressors will fit different muzzle breaks using friction mechanisms or locking collars - the Gemtech Halo will fit the FSC556 for example. It's still good to go as a muzzle device. Very true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob0115 1,105 Posted November 2, 2015 I'm not a lawyer and I am not sure one could tell you what muzzle devices are / aren't legal in NJ. Calling the law ambiguous is kind. The description says this: reducing the overpressure and flash You go with what you are comfortable with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites