SSS.6.118 - AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD, 9M, 9 and the HK P30L
/AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD, 9M, and 9 Generational Performance on the HK P30L Full-Size Semiautomatic Pistol - PEW Science Case Study
The Ti-RANT 9M-HD is manufactured by Advanced Armament Company (formerly Advanced Armament Corporation). It is a 9mm centerfire silencer, intended to suppress many cartridges with projectiles appropriately sized to travel through the bore, up to and including supersonic 300 BLK for limited shots. The Ti-RANT 9M-HD is a modular silencer with a 1.38-inch primary diameter and its long configuration is 8 inches in length. In its short configuration, the silencer is 5.9 inches in length. The silencer may be attached to a pistol with an internal inertial-decoupling piston possessing 1/2-28tpi or 13.5x1mm LH threading. Users should note the Ti-RANT 9M-HD is compatible with its own pistons and legacy Ti-RANT 45 pistons, but not legacy Ti-RANT 9/9M pistons. 3-lug attachment is possible with the AAC TRIAD mount. The baffles in the primary section of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD are 17-4 heat treated stainless steel, whereas the forward section baffles are 7075-T6 aluminum. The tube of the silencer is Grade 9 titanium, and the pistons are heat treated stainless steel. The silencer is user-serviceable and configurable, and weighs 13.1 ounces in the long configuration and 10.9 ounces in the short configuration, with the inertial-decoupling piston and spring assembly installed, as tested. The Ti-RANT 9M-HD can be obtained from Silencer Shop.
Historical Note: The AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD is preceded in development, design, and distribution by two legacy models; the AAC Ti-RANT 9M (2017) and the original AAC Ti-RANT 9 (circa 2009). The gross differences in the three models are summarized below:
The current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD is 2.2 ounces heavier than the Ti-RANT 9M, and 3.4 ounces heavier than the Ti-RANT 9.
Whereas the entirety of the baffles in the first section the Ti-RANT 9M-HD are stainless steel, only the blast baffle is stainless steel in the legacy models. The remainder of the legacy model baffles are aluminum.
As stated above, the Ti-RANT 9M-HD uses its own pistons that are compatible with the AAC Ti-RANT 45. The Ti-RANT 9M and Ti-RANT 9 pistons may not be used with the current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD.
Only the current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD and legacy Ti-RANT 9M are modular. The original legacy Ti-RANT 9 is non-modular. In addition to signature differences, this difference in construction results in the original non-modular version being approximately 1/8-inch shorter than the modular versions.
Many of the above gross differences between the silencers influence the sound signature to both bystanders and the shooter when using a semiautomatic pistol. Pistol system mass, length, construction, and piston configuration all contribute to the holistic signature of the weapon system. This publication contains performance evaluations of all three silencers in all configurations on the Heckler and Koch P30L semiautomatic pistol.
PEW Science Suppression Ratings for the current generation are shown in the graphic at the top of the page; the Suppression Ratings for the two legacy models are shown in the two graphics, below.
This Sound Signature Review contains test results and analysis for five silencer configurations in five tests. Test data was generated using the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long and Short), AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Long and Short), and AAC Ti-RANT 9 on the HK P30L full-size semiautomatic pistol, chambered in 9mm with a 5-inch factory HK threaded barrel. Speer Lawman 147gr ammunition was used in the test.
Section 6.118.1 contains the Ti-RANT 9M-HD test results and analysis in the long configuration.
Section 6.118.2 contains the Ti-RANT 9M-HD test results and analysis in the short configuration.
Section 6.118.3 contains the Ti-RANT 9M-HD, Ti-RANT 9M, and Ti-RANT 9 Generational Case Study with data for all five tests and signature comparisons (Members Only)
Section 6.118.4 contains Suppression Rating comparisons of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD, Ti-RANT 9M, and Ti-RANT 9 with the HUXWRX CA$H 9K, Resilient Suppressors RSP, CGS MOD9 FS, Rugged Obsidian 45, and SWR Trident-9 silencers, fired on the Heckler and Koch P30L.
Section 6.118.5 contains the review summary and PEW Science subjective opinions.
Summary: When paired with the HK P30L full-size semiautomatic pistol and fired with Speer Lawman 147gr ammunition in its long configuration, the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD achieved a Suppression Rating™ of 54.9 in PEW Science testing. In its short configuration with the same host weapon and the same ammunition, the Ti-RANT 9M-HD achieved a Suppression Rating of 43.2. As with all weapon systems, the user is encouraged to examine both muzzle and ear Suppression Ratings.
The legacy AAC Ti-RANT 9M and Ti-RANT 9 models achieved Suppression Ratings of 53.8, 42.6, and 53.9, respectively.
An in-depth Generational Case Study is provided in Section 6.118.3.
Relative Suppression Rating Performance is Summarized in SSS.7 - PEW Science Rankings
6.118.1 AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long) Sound Signature Test Results
A summary of the principal Silencer Sound Standard performance metrics of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD in its long configuration tested on the HK P30L is shown in Table 1. The data acquired 1.0 m (39.4 in) left of the muzzle is available for viewing to all. This is a members-only review and includes pressure and impulse waveforms measured at the shooter’s ear. PEW Science thanks you for your support; further testing, research, and development of PEW-SOFT and the Silencer Sound Standard is made possible by members like you!
Table 1. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) Sound Metric Summary
6.118.1.1 SOUND SIGNATURES AT THE MUZZLE
Real sound pressure histories from a 6-shot test acquired with PEW-SOFT™ are shown below. Six cartridges were loaded into the magazine and the weapon was fired until the magazine was empty, and the slide locked back on the slide-release lever actuated by the follower of the empty magazine. Only five shots are considered in the analysis. The signatures of Shot 6 are displayed in the data presentation but are not included in the analysis to maintain consistency with the overall PEW Science dataset. The waveforms are not averaged, decimated, or filtered. The data acquisition rate used in all PEW Science testing is 1.0 MS/s (1 MHz). The peaks, shape, and time phasing (when the peaks occur in relation to absolute time and to each other) of these raw waveforms are the most accurate of any firearm silencer testing publicly available. PEW-SOFT data is acquired by PEW Science independent testing; the industry leader in silencer sound research. For more information, please consult the Silencer Sound Standard.
The primary sound signature pressure histories for all 6 shots with the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD in its long configuration are shown in Figure 1a. The sound signatures of Shot 1 and Shot 2 are shown in Figure 1b, in early time. The real sound impulse (momentum transfer potential) histories from the same 6-shot test are shown in Figure 2a. In Figure 2b, a shorter timescale is shown comparing the impulse of Shot 1 through Shot 4, and Shot 6.
Fig 1a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 1b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Sound Pressure Signature
Figure 2a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 2b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature
The AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD in its long configuration possesses a relatively low flow rate, compared to most pistol silencers on the current market. This characteristic results in some unique performance factors, when compared to the behavior of the same silencer in its short configuration, or to higher flow rate pistol silencers such as the Resilient Suppressors RSP (Review 6.87) or HUXWRX CASH 9K (Review 6.96). Two predominant signature characteristics of the Ti-RANT 9M measured at the muzzle highlight this behavior:
Significantly delayed jetting is noted in early time, even during first-round-pop (FRP), as shown in pressure space (Fig 1b).
The rate of rise to maximum positive phase gas momentum transfer potential is relatively low, as shown in impulse space (Fig 2a).
There are other signature characteristics highlighting the aforementioned behavior that are measured at the shooter’s ear. That data and analysis is provided in Section 6.118.1.2 of this article. This behavior is further confirmed, holistically, by the shooter’s-ear Suppression Rating. Comparisons with models tested, to date, are provided in Section 6.118.4.
PEW Science Research Note 1: The AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD does have significant FRP to bystanders on this platform. On average, the severity of FRP, to bystanders, may be over twice as severe as subsequent shots, in accordance with PEW Science inner ear modeling. FRP performance of legacy Ti-RANT 9 silencer models is provided to PEW Science Members in the Case Study (Section 6.118.3 of this article).
After FRP, the signature of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD does normalize, and is relatively stable during the first three shots. However, as is the case with many centerfire pistol silencers exhibiting significant flow restriction used on a semiautomatic pistol, the measured signatures during later shots begin to experience divergence. This signature inconsistency later in the shot string does not necessarily adversely affect the hearing damage risk potential to bystanders. Nonetheless, it is measurable, and is the result of significant temperature differentials developing throughout the silencer internal baffle geometries. The Ti-RANT family of silencers uses a legacy so-called K-baffle; a type of simple pistol silencer baffle that is pressure sensitive. The relative performance of this baffle type generally increases proportionally with pressure. The converse also generally holds.
PEW Science Research Note 2: A side effect of the excessive pressure stagnation described above, when operating a suppressed centerfire pistol with a modified tilting barrel Browning action, is erratic early-time combustion propagation. Like with many silencers used on semiautomatic centerfire handguns, the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD produces semi-random early time pressure shocks on the HK P30L semiautomatic pistol. This phenomenon manifests in the waveforms measured at the shooter’s ear. This measured early-time shock load is postulated by PEW Science to result from a possible pressure leak from the breach of the locked semiautomatic HK P30L pistol. This phenomenon also occurred in the PEW Science tests of the aforementioned Resilient Suppressors RSP and HUXWRX CASH 9K, the SWR Trident-9 (Review 6.8), the Rugged Obsidian 45 in both long and short configurations (Review 6.7), and the CGS MOD9 FS (Review 6.6). Interestingly, the phenomenon occurs less frequently with the RSP and CASH 9K. PEW Science postulates this is directly related to early time shock propagation at the muzzle and pistol silencer flow rate.
PEW Science Research Note 3: As in most semiautomatic weapon testing, a second pressure pulse originates from the ejection-port signature of the weapon and it occurs early enough in time such that its waves coalesce with that of the muzzle signature. However, in late time (at approximately 72 ms in Figure 1a) the mechanical noise of the slide closing is observed. The pressure signature of Shot 6 does not display this event due to the slide remaining locked to the rear after the sixth and final round is fired from the magazine.
The shape, timing, and magnitudes of the early-time pressure pulses and overall shape of the impulse waveforms measured at the muzzle, from shot-to-shot, are relatively consistent. The consistency of the waveform amplitudes highlight the silencer’s overall sound performance consistency at the muzzle after the FRP, as well as the relative consistency of the tested semiautomatic firearm configuration.
PEW Science Research Note 4: Note that the muzzle Suppression Rating of the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD used on the full-size HK P30L semiautomatic handgun test host is 54.4 and the shooter’s-ear Suppression Rating is 42.3; which are different zones on the Suppression Rating Dose Chart. The gross suppression of a silencer, as well as its flow rate, influences the holistic signature on a semiautomatic host weapon. The signatures measured at the shooter’s ear are presented below.
6.118.1.2 SOUND SIGNATURES AT SHOOTER’S EAR
Real sound pressure histories from the same 6-shot test of the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD in its long configuration acquired with PEW-SOFT at the shooter’s ear are shown below. Again, the waveforms are not averaged, decimated, or filtered. The data acquisition rate used in all PEW Science testing is 1.0 MS/s (1 MHz).
The primary sound signature pressure histories at the ear for all 6 shots are shown in Figure 3. The primary sound signature history is shown in Figure 3a. A zoomed-in timescale is displayed in Figure 3b, in the region of peak sound pressure for Shot 1, Shot 2, and Shot 4. The real sound impulse (momentum transfer potential) histories at the ear from the same 6-shot test are shown in Figure 4. Again, full and short timescales are shown.
Figure 3a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Pressure Signature
Figure 3b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Pressure Signature, Short Time Window
Figure 4a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 4b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Long Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signature Peaks
Typical phenomena is observed from restrictive pistol silencers on centerfire handguns is shown in pressure space (Figure 3b) and impulse space (Figure 4). Note the aforementioned early time shock loads occuring at approximately 28.5 ms later in the shot string. these shocks are pressure leaks from early weapon unlock, originating from the breech. It is important to note that system kinematics may be influenced by early time internal shock loads at the muzzle which propagate significantly differently depending upon silencer characteristics. Note the longer duration blow-down evident at the shooter’s ear when compared to a silencer such as the CASH 9K. This is a consequence of the lower flow rate (higher back pressure) of the long configuration of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD.
PEW Science Research Note 5: The early-time shock load occurring during Shot 4 and Shot 6, previously discussed above, is plainly visible in Figure 3 and Figure 4. PEW Science postulates that the so-called modified tilting-barrel Browning action present in many modern semiautomatic handguns is susceptible to this phenomenon due to its locking resistance early in the displacement-time kinematic cycle. PEW Science further postulates that this phenomenon may be more prevalent during the use of pistol silencers exhibiting relatively higher early-time flow restriction (back pressure). It is also interesting to note that Shot 4 was the loudest to the shooter in this test, excluding FRP. To bystanders, Shot 5 was the quietest of the first five shots.
PEW Science Research Note 6: The FRP from the Ti-RANT 9M-HD on this host weapon, to the shooter, is significant. The hearing damage risk potential to the shooter may approach well over twice the severity during the first shot, relative to a subsequent shot in the string, in accordance with PEW Science inner ear response analysis.
The performance of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD on a pistol, at the shooter’s ear, is driven by both muzzle signature and ejection port signature. Due to its low early time flow rate (higher back pressure), changing it to its short configuration by removing the front section changes the signature balance. This is demonstrated in the following section.
6.118.2 AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short) Sound Signature Test Results
A summary of the principal Silencer Sound Standard performance metrics of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD in its short configuration is shown in Table 2. The data acquired 1.0 m (39.4 in) left of the muzzle is available for viewing to all. As stated in Section 6.118.1, this is a members-only review and includes pressure and impulse waveforms measured at the shooter’s ear. PEW Science thanks you for your support; further testing, research, and development of PEW-SOFT and the Silencer Sound Standard is made possible by members like you!
Table 2. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) Sound Metric Summary
6.118.2.1 SOUND SIGNATURES AT THE MUZZLE
Real sound pressure histories from a 5-shot test acquired with PEW-SOFT™ are shown below. The waveforms are not averaged, decimated, or filtered. The data acquisition rate used in all PEW Science testing is 1.0 MS/s (1 MHz). The peaks, shape, and time phasing (when the peaks occur in relation to absolute time and to each other) of these raw waveforms are the most accurate of any firearm silencer testing publicly available. PEW-SOFT data is acquired by PEW Science independent testing; the industry leader in silencer sound research. For more information, please consult the Silencer Sound Standard.
The primary sound signature pressure histories for all 6 shots with the Ti-RANT 9M-HD in its short configuration are shown in Figure 5a. The sound signatures of Shot 1 and Shot 2 are shown in a smaller time window in Figure 5b. The real sound impulse (momentum transfer potential) histories from the same 6-shot test are shown in Figure 6a. In Figure 6b, a shorter timescale is shown comparing the impulse of Shot 1 to that of Shot 2, Shot 4, and Shot 6.
Fig 5a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 5b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 6a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature
Fig 6b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature
As occurred in the test of the long configuration, the FRP measured at the muzzle in the short configuration is evident in both pressure space (Figure 5) and impulse space (Figure 6). The relative severity of FRP in the Ti-RANT 9M-HD’s short configuration is reduced from that of its long configuration. However, the FRP is still noticeable to bystanders and is over 80% more severe than subsequent shots, on average.
Again, the overall shape of the impulse waveforms measured at the muzzle, from shot-to-shot, are extremely consistent, highlighting the silencer’s overall sound performance consistency at the muzzle after the FRP, as well as the relative consistency of the tested semiautomatic firearm configuration.
PEW Science Research Note 7: Note the significantly different signatures measured with the short configuration of the silencer, compared with that of the long configuration:
Major jetting is immediately produced in early time (Fig 5b). This is a consequence of higher gross flow rate facilitated by fewer baffles.
Secondary jetting immediately follows (Fig 5b); again, due to less flow restriction.
More rapid rise to peak positive phase impulse is observed (Fig 6a).
Early impulse accumulation occurs later in the shot string (Fig 6b). This occurs due to the phenomenon discussed in Research Note 1, but presents differently due to the silencer’s length. The early-time flow rate has not significantly changed from the long configuration. The entirety of the first baffle module and piston assembly is identical. Therefore, so are the early-time shock dynamics in the weapon system. The K-Baffle stack does not possess alternate gas paths that change early time behavior upon removing distal restriction. The flow dynamics in that time regime are constant.
PEW Science Research Note 8: Both early time flow parameters (alpha) and gross flow parameters (Omega) influence weapon behavior. An examination of the influence of changing Omega while keeping alpha constant; the change in configuration from long to short configuration of the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD, is presented in the following section, for PEW Science Members.
6.118.2.2 SOUND SIGNATURES AT SHOOTER’S EAR
Real sound pressure histories from the same 6-shot test acquired with PEW-SOFT at the shooter’s ear are shown below. Again, the waveforms are not averaged, decimated, or filtered. The data acquisition rate used in all PEW Science testing is 1.0 MS/s (1 MHz).
The primary sound signature pressure histories at the ear for all 6 shots with the Ti-RANT 9M-HD in its short configuration are shown in Figure 7a. A zoomed-in timescale is displayed in Figure 7b, in the region of peak sound pressure. The real sound impulse (momentum transfer potential) histories at the ear from the same 6-shot test are shown in Figure 8.
Figure 7a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Pressure Signature
Figure 7b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Pressure Signature
Figure 8a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 8b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD (Short Configuration) subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signature
Immediately, it is apparent that the gross flow rate (Omega parameter) change has influenced the signature at the shooter’s ear. The duration of positive impulse is lower with the short configuration that with the long configuration (reference Fig 8a, above, and Fig 4a in the preceding test).
Nonetheless, unfavorable consequences remain. As described in the previous section, by varying Omega and keeping alpha constant, the early-time shock dynamics remain constant. Therefore, the same unfavorable breech pressure leaks present; again in Shot 4 and in Shot 6. Pressure stagnation is a hallmark of K-baffle behavior and even with baffle removal from the distal end to drop gross flow restriction, early time system behavior does not drastically change.
PEW Science Research Note 9: The consequences of dropping Omega on this particular weapon system, while keeping alpha constant, on the gross signature to the shooter, is identical hearing damage risk potential with the two silencer configurations. The AAC Ti-RANT 9-HD presents the same hearing damage risk potential to the shooter on a semiautomatic pistol, in the free field, regardless if it is used in the “long” or “short” configuration. The average Suppression Rating at the shooter’s ear, for all intents and purposes, is identical.
PEW Science Research Note 10: It may be important to read Research Note 9, again. The Suppression Rating at the shooter’s ear, on a centerfire pistol, when you change a restrictive silencer from the “long” configuration to the “short” configuration, may not appreciably change. This is an extremely important concept to understand. This does not mean that the overall signature of the weapon system is identical. It means that the hearing damage risk to the shooter is almost identical, in the free field.
It is very important to note that what you, as a human, hear is a function of every pressure source propagating through the atmosphere that reaches your pressure sensors (your ears). In early time, the risk to your ear is highest. In late time, after the primary combustion events have vented, there are signature components that may propagate downrange, adjacent to your location, and even back toward you upon reflecting from objects such as tree lines, automobiles, or structures. Those late time signature components can give a subjective impression to the operator that may induce a perception of “loudness.” Loudness, as defined in the Silencer Sound Standard, is objective hearing damage risk potential.
Factors that may increase the actual objective loudness (the risk to you, the operator) of using a system with a lower muzzle Suppression Rating despite the same or higher shooter’s ear Suppression Rating include shooting the suppressed weapon system:
Indoors.
In a vehicle.
Next to a building.
This is the same phenomenon that presents when shooting a high flow rate centerfire rifle silencer on a reciprocating semiautomatic or automatic rifle. Reference the test report of the HUXWRX FLOW 556K (6.83) and FLOW 762 Ti (6.114). Even if not indoors or adjacent to reflecting surfaces, late time signatures propagated from lower muzzle suppression rating systems will influence shooter perception in late time. This does not influence the shooter’s ear Suppression Rating because it does not increase the hearing damage risk potential to the shooter in the free field.
This concludes the examination of the Ti-RANT 9M-HD test results. The following is a generational comparison of the silencer with legacy models.
6.118.3 AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD, 9M, and 9 Generational Performance Case Study
The AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD is preceded in development, design, and distribution by two legacy models; the AAC Ti-RANT 9M (2017) and the original AAC Ti-RANT 9 (circa 2009). At the time of distribution, the original Ti-RANT 9 was colloquially referred to as the “quietest 9mm centerfire pistol silencer” available. The publication of this case study in the Silencer Sound Standard research pedigree, by PEW Science, is intended to recognize the historical significance of the Ti-RANT 9 family of silencers and to provide a state-of-the-art performance evaluation of the models on a modern host firearm.
To compliment the summarized metrics presented in Table 1 and Table 2, the performance metrics for the legacy Ti-RANT 9 silencers are presented in Table 3. This is a members-only case study and includes pressure and impulse waveforms measured at the muzzle and shooter’s ear for all legacy Ti-RANT 9 configurations on this host weapon; it is the most comprehensive Ti-RANT 9 dataset available, worldwide. PEW Science thanks you for your support.
Table 3. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy) and Ti-RANT 9 (Legacy, Original) Sound Metric Summary
6.118.3.1 Legacy models - SOUND SIGNATURES AT THE MUZZLE
Complete measured waveform histories, at the muzzle (bystander location) are presented below, with commentary.
Fig 9a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Long Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 9b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Long Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 9 presents muzzle signatures of the long configuration of the legacy Ti-RANT 9M in both pressure and impulse space. The current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD is 2.2 ounces heavier than the Ti-RANT 9M and the silencers use different pistons. Both of these differences influence signature. Overall, the legacy Ti-RANT 9M is slightly louder than the newer 9M-HD, but the 9M-HD has slightly more severe FRP than the legacy Ti-RANT 9M.
Fig 10a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Short Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 10b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Short Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 10 presents muzzle signatures of the short configuration of the legacy Ti-RANT 9M in both pressure and impulse space. Mass and piston geometry play an even larger role when comparing the short configuration performance of the new modular variant and the legacy variant. The short 9M-HD is outperformed at the muzzle by the legacy short 9M.
Fig 11a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Original) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 11b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Original) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 11 presents muzzle signatures of the original legacy Ti-RANT 9 in both pressure and impulse space. The legacy Ti-RANT 9 slightly exceeds the average performance of the legacy 9M. The new 9M-HD, on average, is quieter than both, to bystanders. However, the FRP performance of the original legacy Ti-RANT 9 at the muzzle is superior to both modular silencers, both in relative severity to subsequent shots and in absolute suppression.
6.118.3.2 LEGACY models - SOUND SIGNATURES AT THE ear
Complete measured waveform histories, at the ear (shooter location) are presented below, with commentary.
Fig 12a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Long Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 12b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Long Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 12 presents shooter’s ear signatures of the long configuration of the legacy Ti-RANT 9M in both pressure and impulse space. At the shooter’s ear, the opposite performance comparison is made. The newer 9M-HD is slightly quieter on average (but still has more severe FRP) than the legacy Ti-RANT 9M.
Fig 13a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Short Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 13b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Short Configuration) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 13 presents ear signatures of the short configuration of the legacy Ti-RANT 9M in both pressure and impulse space. Again, the performance flips. The short 9M-HD slightly outperforms the legacy short 9M at the shooter’s ear.
Fig 14a. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Original) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Pressure Signature
Fig 14b. AAC Ti-RANT 9M (Legacy, Original) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signature
Figure 14 presents muzzle signatures of the original legacy Ti-RANT 9 in both pressure and impulse space. The legacy Ti-RANT 9 is the lowest performer at the shooter’s ear of the full size configurations, overall. The FRP performance, to the shooter, is similar to that of the newest generation 9M-HD. It is interesting to note that the best FRP signature of any configuration, to the shooter, was measured to be from the legacy 9M in the long configuration (almost tied with that of the short configuration of the 9M-HD).
6.118.3.3 LEGACY MODELS - SOUND SIGNATURE comparisons
The following plots display the same impulse data that was presented in the preceding section, but overlaid for all models in all configurations. Therefore, there are five waveforms on each plot:
Figure 15: FRP comparisons at muzzle and ear.
Figure 16: Shot 2 comparisons at muzzle and ear.
Figure 17: Shot 4 comparisons at muzzle and ear.
Both peak amplitudes and positive phase durations should be noted. These plots are presented without further commentary. A future PEW Science Member research supplement will compare these signatures in detail, along with detailed FRP comparisons at the muzzle and ear. PEW Science thanks you for your support!
Fig 15a. AAC Ti-RANT 9 (All Generations and Configurations) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signatures - Shot 1
Fig 15b. AAC Ti-RANT 9 (All Generations and Configurations) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signatures - Shot 1
Fig 16a. AAC Ti-RANT 9 (All Generations and Configurations) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signatures - Shot 2
Fig 16b. AAC Ti-RANT 9 (All Generations and Configurations) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signatures - Shot 2
Fig 17a. AAC Ti-RANT 9 (All Generations and Configurations) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Muzzle Sound Impulse Signatures - Shot 4
Fig 17b. AAC Ti-RANT 9 (All Generations and Configurations) Subsonic 9x19mm HK P30L Semiautomatic Pistol Ear Sound Impulse Signatures - Shot 4
The following section presents overall comparisons on the HK P30L semiautomatic pistol.
6.118.4 Suppression Rating Comparison (Subsonic 9x19mm from the HK P30L)
Figure 18 presents a comparison of the PEW Science Suppression Rating of all models and variants of the the AAC Ti-RANT 9 with other silencers on the full-size HK P30L semiautomatic pistol using subsonic Speer Lawman 147gr 9mm ammunition.
Figure 18. Suppression Rating Comparisons of the AAC Ti-RANT 9 Series with the HUXWRX CA$H 9K, Resilient Suppressors RSP, Rugged Obsidian 45, CGS MOD9 FS, and SWR Trident-9 on the HK P30L, Using PEW-SOFT 9x19mm Subsonic Test Data and PEW Science Analysis
Readers may immediately note the performance delta at the shooter’s ear between the Resilient Suppressors RSP (6.87) and the HUXWRX CASH 9K (6.96), and the other silencers shown. This is largely due to early time shock propagation and gross flow rate. Both the CASH 9K and RSP are able to manage shock phase and gas phase dynamics favorably for autoloading systems.
PEW Science Research Note 11: Due to the highly restrictive K-baffle implementation in the Ti-RANT 9 series of silencers, removal of the front module has limited effectiveness to improve flow restriction. As previously described in Research Note 7, when using the short configurations of Ti-RANT 9M-HD and 9M silencers, the early-time flow rate has not significantly changed from the long configuration. The entirety of the first baffle module and piston assembly is identical. Therefore, so are the early-time shock dynamics in the weapon system. The K-Baffle stack does not possess alternate gas paths that change early time behavior upon removing distal restriction. The flow dynamics in that time regime are constant.
The following three Research Notes are conclusions from the PEW Science Members-only Case Study and not present in the public review. They are repeated here for Member convenience when examining the bar chart in Figure 18.
PEW Science Research Note 12: The current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD is 2.2 ounces heavier than the Ti-RANT 9M and the silencers use different pistons. Both of these differences influence signature. Overall, the long legacy Ti-RANT 9M is slightly louder than the newer long 9M-HD, but the long 9M-HD has slightly more severe FRP than the legacy long Ti-RANT 9M. At the shooter’s ear, the opposite performance comparison holds true. The newer long 9M-HD is slightly quieter on average (but still has more severe FRP) than the legacy long Ti-RANT 9M.
PEW Science Research Note 13: Mass and piston geometry play an even larger role when comparing the short configuration performance of the new modular variant and the legacy variant. The short 9M-HD is outperformed at the muzzle by the legacy short 9M. Again, the performance flips. The short 9M-HD slightly outperforms the legacy short 9M at the shooter’s ear.
PEW Science Research Note 14: The legacy Ti-RANT 9 slightly exceeds the average performance of the legacy 9M. The new 9M-HD, on average, is quieter than both, to bystanders. However, the FRP performance of the original legacy Ti-RANT 9 at the muzzle is superior to both modular silencers, both in relative severity to subsequent shots and in absolute suppression. The legacy Ti-RANT 9 is the lowest performer at the shooter’s ear of the full size configurations, overall. The FRP performance, to the shooter, is similar to that of the newest generation 9M-HD. It is interesting to note that the best FRP signature of any configuration, to the shooter, was measured to be from the legacy 9M in the long configuration (almost tied with that of the short configuration of the 9M-HD).
The public conclusions follow:
PEW Science Research Note 15: There are two primary performance conclusions that can be drawn regarding the performance of the Ti-RANT 9 family of silencers on a full size centerfire 9mm combat handgun, from the above data:
The baffle design is highly efficient in both restricting flow and doing so with timing such that weapon kinematics are not unreasonably influenced to exacerbate severe adverse conditions at the shooter’s location. The shooter’s ear Suppression Rating, of all models and configurations, is relatively high when compared to other high performance full size pistol silencers such as the CGS MOD9 FS (6.6), and the SWR Trident-9 (6.8).
The Suppression Rating at the shooter’s ear, on a centerfire pistol, when you change a restrictive silencer from the “long” configuration to the “short” configuration, does not appreciably change, in general. This is an extremely important concept to understand. This does not mean that the overall signature of the weapon system is identical. It means that the hearing damage risk to the shooter is almost identical, in the free field. The PEW Science Member version of this review contains further discussion of this phenomenon.
The long configuration of the Rugged Obsidian 45 (6.7), is for all intents and purposes, a system that generates almost identical signature severity to the shooter and to bystanders on this weapon system, as the original legacy AAC Ti-RANT 9. The Obsidian 45 is much larger and heavier than the original Ti-RANT 9, but the performance comparison is valid, nonetheless. The Rugged Obsidian 45 exhibits a relatively high flow rate when used on 9mm host weapons due to over-bore. But, early-time gas dynamics still do not appreciably change when reconfiguring the Obsidian 45 to its short version. Reference the research note, above.
The signature to which the shooter’s ear is subjected is a function of both ejection port and muzzle signature. When the silencer’s endcap is in closer proximity to the shooter, the severity is increased. The coalescing of the ejection port overpressure with the primary muzzle blast exacerbates the severity of the signature at the shooter’s head position. It is not ejection port signature, alone, that dictates the signature measured at the shooter’s head position.
6.118.5 Review Summary: AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD, 9M, and 9 Generational Performance on the HK P30L Full-Size Semiautomatic Pistol - PEW Science Case Study
When paired with the HK P30L full-size semiautomatic pistol and fired with Speer Lawman 147gr ammunition in its long configuration, the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD achieved a Suppression Rating™ of 54.9 in PEW Science testing. In its short configuration with the same host weapon and the same ammunition, the Ti-RANT 9M-HD achieved a Suppression Rating of 43.2. As with all weapon systems, the user is encouraged to examine both muzzle and ear Suppression Ratings.
The legacy AAC Ti-RANT 9M and Ti-RANT 9 models achieved Suppression Ratings of 53.8, 42.6, and 53.9, respectively.
PEW Science Subjective Opinion:
The AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD is preceded in development, design, and distribution by two legacy models; the AAC Ti-RANT 9M (2017) and the original AAC Ti-RANT 9 (circa 2009). At the time of distribution, the original Ti-RANT 9 was colloquially referred to as the “quietest 9mm centerfire pistol silencer” available. The publication of this case study in the Silencer Sound Standard research pedigree, by PEW Science, is intended to recognize the historical significance of the Ti-RANT 9 family of silencers and to provide a state-of-the-art performance evaluation of the models on a modern host firearm.
The current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD is heavier than the legacy Ti-RANT 9M and the original legacy non-modular Ti-RANT 9. Whereas the entirety of the baffles in the first section the Ti-RANT 9M-HD are stainless steel, only the blast baffle is stainless steel in the legacy models. The remainder of the legacy model baffles are aluminum. Furthermore, the Ti-RANT 9M-HD uses its own pistons that are compatible with the AAC Ti-RANT 45. The Ti-RANT 9M and Ti-RANT 9 pistons may not be used with the current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD.
A significant historical factor is that only the current generation Ti-RANT 9M-HD and legacy Ti-RANT 9M are modular. The original legacy Ti-RANT 9 is non-modular. In addition to signature differences, this difference in construction results in the original non-modular version being approximately 1/8-inch shorter than the modular versions.
Many of the above gross differences between the silencers influence the sound signature to both bystanders and the shooter when using a semiautomatic pistol. Pistol system mass, length, construction, and piston configuration all contribute to the holistic signature of the weapon system.
There are two primary performance conclusions that can be drawn regarding the performance of the Ti-RANT 9 family of silencers on a full size centerfire 9mm combat handgun, from this case study:
First, the baffle design is highly efficient in both restricting flow and doing so with timing such that weapon kinematics are not unreasonably influenced to exacerbate severe adverse conditions at the shooter’s location. The shooter’s ear Suppression Rating, of all models and configurations, is relatively high when compared to other high performance full size pistol silencers such as the CGS MOD9 FS and the SWR Trident-9.
Secondly, the Suppression Rating at the shooter’s ear, on a centerfire pistol, when you change a restrictive silencer from the “long” configuration to the “short” configuration, does not appreciably change, in general. This is an extremely important concept to understand. This does not mean that the overall signature of the weapon system is identical. It means that the hearing damage risk to the shooter is almost identical, in the free field. The PEW Science Member version of this review contains further discussion of this phenomenon.
When the AAC Ti-RANT 9 was initially released, it was one of the highest performing pistol silencers available on the market. That commonly accepted conclusion holds true, today, at least in the current Silencer Sound Standard research pedigree, to date. The AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD is, overall, the quietest Ti-RANT 9 variant. However, there are nuanced performance traits, such as FRP signature, that still make the original legacy Ti-RANT 9 shine relative to the rest of the variants, today.
This case study was performed using a modern centerfire combat handgun with full powered subsonic ammunition, per the Silencer Sound Standard pedigree. Submachine gun performance of the AAC Ti-RANT 9M-HD, using the AAC TRIAD 3-lug mount, will be examined by PEW Science in a future publication. The increased number of stainless steel baffles in the updated 9M-HD are a welcome addition to users wishing to subject the silencer to severe firing schedules on such weapon systems. Although the original Ti-RANT 9 did contain a steel blast baffle, it is not only the blast baffle in a centerfire pistol silencer that may erode from unburnt powder residue and combustion products on short barrel weapon platforms. PEW Science encourages users to contact the manufacturer of the silencer for firing schedule and cartridge use / barrel length restriction guidance.
In this review, all AAC Ti-RANT 9 variant performance metrics depend upon suppressing a full-size combat handgun firing a full-power subsonic centerfire pistol cartridge. This type of evaluation provides a potential upper-bound for typical real handgun silencer performance due to the barrel length and action dynamics of the host weapon. PEW Science encourages the reader to carefully consider action dynamics, barrel lengths, and other characteristics in the selection of centerfire pistol silencer hosts.
The hearing damage potential of centerfire pistol use is significant. PEW Science encourages the reader to consider the Suppression Rating when deciding on an appropriate silencer and host weapon combination for their desired use. Note that the presence of nearby reflecting surfaces, as well as ammunition choice, can influence the sound signature to which both the shooter and bystanders are subjected.
