Is there really any difference between the PWS TTO & the PWS FSC556? The FSC556 has the “flash suppressing spines.” but the ATF doesn’t consider the FSC556 to be a flash reducing attachment. If it doesn’t really reduce flash than aren’t those spines just decorative? You might as well just get the shorter TTO brake.
The PWS website says that the FSC556 has “enough flash suppression to keep the flash out of your optics and line of sight.” But later says “All of the FSC Series muzzle devices have been classified as a non-flash suppressing device.” Which statement is correct? They can’t both be correct.
I have the FSC556 it’s got a ton more flash than the birdcage also it’s got a cuncussive wave that hits hard. It’s not anything close to suppressive it’s a muzzle break made for recoil reduction. The prongs you speak of make the flash @ 1:30, 4:30,7:30 & 10:30 rather than a fireball so yes you can still see down the barrel. If your looking for anything other than a muzzle break look some where else.
The TTO was created by PWS to meet a request for a muzzle device that fits into the A2 size and form factor for competition.
The FSC556 on my 14.5" middy sounds the same as the last 10.5" upper I shot (the 10.5" has an A2).
Is the FSC556 louder than an A2 on a barrel of the same length? Of course it is…but I don’t exactly hear anybody bitching about their 10.5" upper being too loud. I A-B’d the 2 uppers on the same range session, with the same ammo, with two other buddies. Blindfold test results: we couldn’t tell the difference between the two with Federal XM193 55gr.
The point is that the FSC556 isn’t that bad for the shooter. Even when indoors (as long as you use quality ear-pro).
They just said that the tines reduce flash, but not by enough for the ATF to classify it as a flash suppressor.
The PWS website says that the FSC556 has “enough flash suppression to keep the flash out of your optics and line of sight.” But later says “All of the FSC Series muzzle devices have been classified as a non-flash suppressing device.” Which statement is correct? They can’t both be correct.
Sure they can. Having flash suppression capability and being classified as one by the ATF are two different matters.
I don’t know what the ATF’s criteria is for considering a device a flash hider. And on that note, the TTO doesn’t appear to have too much flash in Vurwappen’s tests…about the same as the battlecomp. Both are certainly better than an open muzzle, so clearly some flash suppression is allowed without being considered such. So, I guess I’ll accept PWS’ explanation on the site.
Both will have the same amount of flash at the brake portion of the device. The TTO has a secondary, smaller amount of flash forward of the device that the FSC eliminates. They look very similar to the shooter, because the smaller, secondary flash is hidden from that perspective. At night, they will both be quite visible to anyone downrange - just like with any other brake or comp.
The TTO is shorter than an A2, which comes in handy when I want to really reduce OAL and millimeters count (such as fitting in cases that weren’t designed for the rifle I’m trying to stuff inside). Other than that, they’re the same price, so…
