Besides size what is the difference between the two? They have the same decibel reading.
I am thinking about buying one of these. Is there any good info out on them. I did a search here and on google and there doesn’t seem to be too much?
Thx
[Edited for dreadful reading comprehension]
I was thinking 212 vs Mini - didn’t realize you were comparing the two smaller ones.
I would expect the Micro to be fairly close to the OPS M4S for performance (20dB drop at best), but comparing the micro and M4S isn’t really an apples-apples comparison (QD muzzle attached vs. budget reflex thread-on) - I really need to read up on this and then provide input…
“I see no reason not to go with the Mini all things considered - it gives up some performance, but firing supersonic cartridges it handles the rest.”
Do you by chance mean micro? The Mini is 5 inches long the micro is 4 inches long. Both small.
Just following up. Anyone have experience with the Micro? I’ve got the 212 and have been considering a Mini but it appears the Micro has the same basic performance on 16 inch carbines (for which it would be used in my case).
Any info would be appreciated. Both the Micro and Mini cost about the same.
You might call SF or LaRue and ask them. I shot the Mini and the 212 side by side at the LaRue shoot on an OBR at 500yds with cans on and cans off the OBR to compare POI shift and went 10 for 10 with each can off and on at gongs not very scientific POI shift test, but SF made their point :). I could not take the ear/pro off as too many guns on the line to check for sound differences. From what I understand they were not meant for SBRs but for carbine or longer guns. I’m interested to see what y’all find out in detail as I’m looking for a short can for a 14.5 & 16" bbls.
I am also very interested in the findings. I have a 10.5 because I want the shortest and lightest system with reasonable performance. I am very interested in the SF Micro to keep the system as short as possible. My goal would only to be able to shoot outside without hearing protection. Thanks and please keep me informed!
SBB
I’d rather have a full size silencer.
These short silencers that companies sell look cool but suck ass in the real world. They are too loud and get used up too fast.
Yea im actually planning on picking up a Suppressor pretty soon for my SBR.
Even though the SF Micro might not last as long i really like its size, being that id like to keep my rifle short like soggy stated.
But alot of people i speak to recommend the same thing that scott mentioned, to go with a full size Suppressor.
Im gonna have to do a little more reading and thinking.
Considering the cost involved I would seriously consider a Mini over a Micro. Unless you are going to use it sparingly.
Can I ask why you guys say the smaller can would not last as long?
I just do not see how this is possible, as both cans are enduring the same muzzle blast; actually the longer can is containing more of the blast than the shorter.
I think the stubby can is a great idea, if you know going into the game that you will be giving up some sound reduction for better handling. Before ANY small cans were on the US market, I heard Dean Caputo at a class wishing someone would make one for their 6933’s, saying all he wanted was something that dropped the noise level down to that of the sidearm or quieter, that was small enough not to impede the use of the 6933 in their cruiser mounts, and not mess up the handling of the 6933. I personally tried to get someone I know in a major US suppressor company to run with the idea, but had no luck. Now they are all the rage. They actually make a lot of sense on the longer rifles where the muzzle blast is less than the carbine lengths. Instead of a fence post + 5", you have a fence post + 3-4".
I plan on buying a mini for my SCAR 16 CQC.
Because the erosion on the blast baffle will be bad. I have 2K rounds through my AAC M4-2000 MOD08 which is constructed from Inconel 718 & 316L SS. It has blast baffle erosion and thats from being on a 16" carbine with a BH flash hider. I couldnt imaginge what erosion these little guys get after 2K rounds.
I love the concept but dont want to have a loud can after 6K rounds.
I have run both the SF K and mini can’s. On a 10.5, there is a noticeable sound difference. Not so on a 16" (to the human ear).
The SF Mini is being used by the Military as it does what they want (kill flash, reduce sound, reduce weight).
The Mini is also $100 less than the 212.
C4
I made my statement simply based off the recommendations from Surefire. I posted the email exchange in another area.
I called SF today and ordered a mini and micro. I also have the K can already. Will post some pics and opinions when I get all three together.
C4
Because the blast is spread out over a larger volume in the larger cans.
Why? What is the point.
It is still going to make the gun muzzle heavy.
It is still going to be loud. It is still going to be expensive.
An unspressed pistol is not hearing safe, so why do you want it to be like an unsupressed pistol?
You spend just about as much money as a full size silencer, yet you get half the noise reduction and half the life and all the dicking around that comes with a silencer.
What are the chances that this technology will make its way into small cans for handguns? Something to take the flash and some of the boom from a home defense situation with out something that is so long and unwieldy.
The only real use for these is if you are regularly doing private security out of an armored Suburban and need to get the muzzle blast tamed in such a tight confined space.
Its good to be Grant 
I hear that a lot.
C4