bsmith918
Well-Known Fanatic
I'm in for either. I know JoeBob was waiting on something with the Griffen and that was the last I heard.
How is the sound, compensation and night flash from those things? If it truly is comparable then I am in for one. The battle comp looks cooler but if it can do the same job for that much less then :72:
The fact it won't work with most suppressors, for me, was the big deal breaker for us carrying the BC2.0, as it is not the cheapest comp out there, and if it doesn't work with the A2 Quick Disconnect suppressors on the market, then it takes quite a bit away from it's appeal.Austin Green @ Griffin Armament said:"I did take a look at a battlecomp 2.0. It isn't compatible with our suppressor because it has a .12" wide accessory groove which is about .005-.010" tighter than most A2 comps on the market.
I found the Battle Comp 2.0 accessory groove to be a non-std .121" width (military A2's .125-.130" for the most part), and the length from that groove to the front of the unit, .040" over length. This means it is incompatible with the SRT/atlas Typhoon and our M4-SD and may be incompatible with the Coastal suppressor as well. So really it's designed to be compatible with the Gemtech Halo only. The M4SD comp will work with all of the suppressors mentioned.
The OD tolerance of that is a very tight .863" also. I dropped it by accident about 3 feet onto a metal part (the comp only) and it dinged (dented the metal), suggesting 300series stainless steel.
FOS and likelyhood of bulging the material is about 5 times greater with the BC2.0- this is suggesting they are both made of 17-4PH H900 treated, and I don't think that is the case, but can't verify to be sure.
The military A2's get beat up all the time without much damage other than finish wear and are 36RC. Our comp is 45RC. A weaker material, would make the FEA test in reality much more dramatic."
Here's some Finite Element Analysis (FEA) testing done by Griffin Armament versus the Battle Comp 2.0. The BC 2.0 is not able to be used with as many supressors as the M4SD and the M4SD is a much harder material, with the M4SD being made out of 17-PH 900 treated with a Rockwell hardness of 45 on the M4SD! I'm not an engineer, or an metallurgist, but that's damn hard for a muzzle attachment :blink: .