u/Comstock_Support

TL;DR:

The Rico 309 is a great combination of excellent sound performance and low backpressure.

Transparency note:

The Rico 309 was sent to us by Exigent at no cost.  Otherwise we don’t have any business or financial relationship.

Test method:

We went out to the range and shot a bunch of rounds through the Rico 309, Mojave 9, and PTR Vent 2 back to back multiple times.  We stood in the same spots and took notes after each one for gassiness and sound.  Considering I don’t have Jay’s fancy sound metering equipment, I think this is a decent way to compare them.

All of this was done outdoors with a light breeze and away from reflecting surfaces.  You may have different results in other environments.

Host:

The host is my Warscorp 9.  The following parts have been changed out from the factory configuration:

• 9mm Plan-B brake
• 4.5” Ballistic Advantage EPC barrel
• Kynshot RB5000HP
• 2 spacer weights
• Tubb flatwire spring
• A5 length tube

We used AAC 147gr FMJ for all of our shooting.  We also had 150gr Syntech, but it didn't cycle reliably.

Suppressors Overview:

All weight and length values are given with no mount.

Suppressor	MSRP	Material	Weight (list)	Weight (actual)	Length
Exigent Rico 309	$875	Titanium	9.0 oz	9.2 oz	7.25”
DA Mojave 9 (L)	$1,099	Titanium	5.5 oz*	5.8 oz	6.50”
PTR Vent 2	$1,339	Titanium	8.9 oz	8.3 oz	7.50”

The Rico 309 was weighed before shooting.  The Mojave 9 and Vent 2 have an unknown number of rounds through them and have never been cleaned.

*Note: Dead Air doesn't officially give the weight of the Mojave without any mounting parts, so this figure is the listed weight minus the piston assembly (4.1 oz).

All of the suppressors were run with their respective titanium Plan-B adapters: HUB, P-Series, and Alpha.

Weight, size, and general handling:

The Rico and Vent are very much full size suppressors, but due to the relatively light weight, are comfortable on the end of the gun and don’t significantly affect handling.

The Mojave was noticeably shorter and lighter than the Rico and Vent.  It also has the ability to be run in short configuration which gets it down to 4.1 oz and 4.75” long.

Sound Performance:

The Rico 309 was the quietest of the three suppressors tested.  It had minimal FRP and was impressively quiet overall.  Much of the total noise came from the mechanical sound of the action.  As a bystander, it was easy to make out the “thump” of the bullets hitting the dirt berm which is always fun.

We also put a few rounds of subsonic 300BLK through the Rico on my new Bear Creek bolt action upper.  Same as with 9mm, it was very quiet and had minimal FRP.  We didn’t shoot the other suppressors on this upper since it wasn’t running well.

All four of us there agreed that the Mojave was the loudest overall.  Unlike the Rico, it had noticeable first round pop.  However, this isn’t to say the Mojave is a “loud” suppressor as much as the other cans are just super quiet.

The Vent 2 was a little quieter than the Mojave 9, but not quite as good as the Rico.  It also had low FRP.

Backpressure:

The Rico 309 had the lowest backpressure of the three suppressors tested today.  Even though we could see gas coming out of the ejection port, it felt minimally gassy as the shooter.  Blowback actions are inherently somewhat gassy, so I consider this to be a great result.

In long configuration, the Mojave has what I would describe as “low to medium” backpressure.  It’s not zero, and during longer strings of fire you can definitely feel it a bit.  It’s still low enough I think most people won’t be bothered.  It has less backpressure in short configuration, but we didn’t run it like that for this test.

Backpressure for the Vent 2 was a little higher than the Rico, but lower than the Mojave.  When it was newer it felt like it was sandblasting me with little bits of titanium, but this has mostly subsided.

Overall Opinion and Suggested Use Cases:

We were all very impressed by the Rico 309.  It checks all of the main boxes of being reasonably lightweight, low backpressure, and sounding great.  I also really appreciate that it has full size wrench flats which makes it very easy to install mounting parts.  With an MSRP of $875, I think this is an excellent value for a full size PCC/subgun suppressor.  The only case I wouldn’t recommend this is if you specifically wanted something very compact.

The blast baffle of the Rico measured about 1.7” deep which is pretty generous for a 9mm suppressor.  It’s been added to our fitment tool.

As much as I love the Mojave 9, I have to say it’s generally outclassed by the Rico for PCC use.  However, it makes a lot of sense for handguns (the platform it’s intended for), and situations where you’re ok trading some sound performance for reduced length and weight. In some ways it can be thought of as a flexible halfway point between the Shiv (tiny, low sound suppression) and the Rico 309 (long, very high sound suppression).  

The Vent 2 isn’t a bad suppressor, but in my opinion it’s overpriced for what it is.  It’s a ~$460 premium over the Rico 309 without offering better performance or additional features.  I was also disappointed to find that their “PIP” tech is only actually used in the endcap and not the inside of the suppressor.  

I’m not entirely sure why, but I still have issues with little flakes of what I think is titanium coming out of the can.  This gets into the threads of the adapter and muzzle device and has to be cleaned out regularly which is pretty inconvenient.  It’s been shot and flushed out with water several times, so this might be a permanent thing.

Even ignoring PTR’s patent trolling and lawsuits, I just don’t see much of a reason to get the Vent.

Future Testing and Reviews:

Recently we did a bunch of flash testing of 11 rifle suppressors.  That’ll get posted at some point here.  We’re also getting an Infinity 762 and 556k to review.  

Have a great weekend!

 - Nathan Comstock

TL;DR:

The Rico 309 is a great combination of excellent sound performance and low backpressure.

Transparency note:

The Rico 309 was sent to us by Exigent at no cost.  Otherwise we don’t have any business or financial relationship.

Test method:

We went out to the range and shot a bunch of rounds through the Rico 309, Mojave 9, and PTR Vent 2 back to back multiple times.  We stood in the same spots and took notes after each one for gassiness and sound.  Considering I don’t have Jay’s fancy sound metering equipment, I think this is a decent way to compare them.

All of this was done outdoors with a light breeze and away from reflecting surfaces.  You may have different results in other environments.

Host:

The host is my Warscorp 9.  The following parts have been changed out from the factory configuration:

• 9mm Plan-B brake
• 4.5” Ballistic Advantage EPC barrel
• Kynshot RB5000HP
• 2 spacer weights
• Tubb flatwire spring
• A5 length tube

We used AAC 147gr FMJ for all of our shooting.  We also had 150gr Syntech, but it didn't cycle reliably.

Suppressors Overview:

All weight and length values are given with no mount.

Suppressor	MSRP	Material	Weight (list)	Weight (actual)	Length
Exigent Rico 309	$875	Titanium	9.0 oz	9.2 oz	7.25”
DA Mojave 9 (L)	$1,099	Titanium	5.5 oz*	5.8 oz	6.50”
PTR Vent 2	$1,339	Titanium	8.9 oz	8.3 oz	7.50”

The Rico 309 was weighed before shooting.  The Mojave 9 and Vent 2 have an unknown number of rounds through them and have never been cleaned.

*Note: Dead Air doesn't officially give the weight of the Mojave without any mounting parts, so this figure is the listed weight minus the piston assembly (4.1 oz).

All of the suppressors were run with their respective titanium Plan-B adapters: HUB, P-Series, and Alpha.

Weight, size, and general handling:

The Rico and Vent are very much full size suppressors, but due to the relatively light weight, are comfortable on the end of the gun and don’t significantly affect handling.

The Mojave was noticeably shorter and lighter than the Rico and Vent.  It also has the ability to be run in short configuration which gets it down to 4.1 oz and 4.75” long.

Sound Performance:

The Rico 309 was the quietest of the three suppressors tested.  It had minimal FRP and was impressively quiet overall.  Much of the total noise came from the mechanical sound of the action.  As a bystander, it was easy to make out the “thump” of the bullets hitting the dirt berm which is always fun.

We also put a few rounds of subsonic 300BLK through the Rico on my new Bear Creek bolt action upper.  Same as with 9mm, it was very quiet and had minimal FRP.  We didn’t shoot the other suppressors on this upper since it wasn’t running well.

All four of us there agreed that the Mojave was the loudest overall.  Unlike the Rico, it had noticeable first round pop.  However, this isn’t to say the Mojave is a “loud” suppressor as much as the other cans are just super quiet.

The Vent 2 was a little quieter than the Mojave 9, but not quite as good as the Rico.  It also had low FRP.

Backpressure:

The Rico 309 had the lowest backpressure of the three suppressors tested today.  Even though we could see gas coming out of the ejection port, it felt minimally gassy as the shooter.  Blowback actions are inherently somewhat gassy, so I consider this to be a great result.

In long configuration, the Mojave has what I would describe as “low to medium” backpressure.  It’s not zero, and during longer strings of fire you can definitely feel it a bit.  It’s still low enough I think most people won’t be bothered.  It has less backpressure in short configuration, but we didn’t run it like that for this test.

Backpressure for the Vent 2 was a little higher than the Rico, but lower than the Mojave.  When it was newer it felt like it was sandblasting me with little bits of titanium, but this has mostly subsided.

Overall Opinion and Suggested Use Cases:

We were all very impressed by the Rico 309.  It checks all of the main boxes of being reasonably lightweight, low backpressure, and sounding great.  I also really appreciate that it has full size wrench flats which makes it very easy to install mounting parts.  With an MSRP of $875, I think this is an excellent value for a full size PCC/subgun suppressor.  The only case I wouldn’t recommend this is if you specifically wanted something very compact.

The blast baffle of the Rico measured about 1.7” deep which is pretty generous for a 9mm suppressor.  It’s been added to our fitment tool.

As much as I love the Mojave 9, I have to say it’s generally outclassed by the Rico for PCC use.  However, it makes a lot of sense for handguns (the platform it’s intended for), and situations where you’re ok trading some sound performance for reduced length and weight. In some ways it can be thought of as a flexible halfway point between the Shiv (tiny, low sound suppression) and the Rico 309 (long, very high sound suppression).  

The Vent 2 isn’t a bad suppressor, but in my opinion it’s overpriced for what it is.  It’s a ~$460 premium over the Rico 309 without offering better performance or additional features.  I was also disappointed to find that their “PIP” tech is only actually used in the endcap and not the inside of the suppressor.  

I’m not entirely sure why, but I still have issues with little flakes of what I think is titanium coming out of the can.  This gets into the threads of the adapter and muzzle device and has to be cleaned out regularly which is pretty inconvenient.  It’s been shot and flushed out with water several times, so this might be a permanent thing.

Even ignoring PTR’s patent trolling and lawsuits, I just don’t see much of a reason to get the Vent.

Future Testing and Reviews:

Recently we did a bunch of flash testing of 11 rifle suppressors.  That’ll get posted at some point here.  We’re also getting an Infinity 762 and 556k to review.  

Have a great weekend!

 - Nathan Comstock

One request we’ve had is for a muzzle device like our recessed micro brake, but in flash hider form.  We’re still testing a few different design options to maximize performance, but we’re expecting the first production batches to be out later this summer.

We also have a new Plan-B adapter for use with printed form 1 cans. I'm not a lawyer, but from discussions I believe these could be engraved as the "suppressor" part of the can.

Thanks for the support, and have a great rest of your Mother’s Day!

 - Nathan Comstock

I have a few things to share today!

First, we have two new Plan-B adapters.  The first is threaded 1.422-28 for some Gemtech and other legacy suppressors.  Like the 1.422-24 version, these are in the titanium LPA style which makes them very lightweight and compact.

The second is a special 1 1/2-8 adapter for use with 3D printed Form 1 suppressors.  The extended forward portion allows for robust mounting into the suppressor, and fully encloses our compact and micro muzzle devices to minimize wear in the blast chamber area.

One request we’ve had is for a muzzle device like our recessed micro brake, but in flash hider form.  We’re still testing a few different design options to maximize performance, but we’re expecting the first production batches to be out later this summer.

Thanks for the support, and have a great rest of your Mother’s Day!

 - Nathan Comstock

TL;DR:

The Dead Air RXD 22 TI is a quiet and low backpressure rimfire suppressor with a unique QD system.

Transparency note:

I do not have any business or financial relationship with Dead Air.

Included mounting hardware:

The RXD 22 TI uses a proprietary QD mounting system. It can be thought of as a smaller Plan-B system with a taper to seal off ahead of the relatively fine right hand threads. One muzzle device is included with the suppressor, and more can be purchased separately.

The mounting interface is built into the suppressor, so you don’t need a separate adapter.

Barrel -> muzzle device -> suppressor

Test method:

We went out to the range and shot a bunch of rounds through the RXD 22 TI and CGS Hydra back to back multiple times. We stood in the same spots and took notes after each one for gassiness and sound. Considering I don’t have Jay’s fancy sound metering equipment, I think this is a decent way to compare them.

All of this was done outdoors with a light breeze and away from reflecting surfaces. You may have different results in other environments.

Host:

The host was my Taurus TX22 Competition. No modifications have been made to the pistol other than the Holosun optic.

Cost, weight, and size:

Suppressor	MSRP	Material	Weight (list)	Weight (actual)	Length
RXD 22 TI	$499	Titanium	5.6 oz	6.2 oz	5.6"
CGS Hydra AL	$299	Aluminum	3.5 oz	3.2 oz	5.6"

Both suppressors were weighed after shooting. The RXD weight includes the muzzle device.

RXD 22 TI vs CGS Hydra AL:

For all of the various suppressors I’ve collected, the Hydra AL is my only other rimfire can. But don’t worry, it’s well loved! Since there’s only two suppressors here, I’m going to compare them directly.

As far as sound, the RXD 22 TI was definitely quieter. It wasn’t a huge difference, and the bullets were starting to push supersonic, but it was noticeable. I imagine with proper subs the difference would widen. Although I always wear hearing protection, I would consider both to be “hearing safe” for shorter range trips.

I’ve seen mixed opinions of the value of reduced backpressure on rimfire suppressors. Based on shooting both of these, I would say it is valuable on automatic hosts. The Hydra had a noticeable amount of blowback and left bits of carbon on my face and shooting glasses. Conversely, the RXD 22 TI had very minimal blowback and was much more pleasant overall.

The QD system is interesting. According to the Dead Air engineers, it captures some lead out of the bore which reduces deposits in the suppressor. Although it's neat, I’m not entirely sure how useful this system is since I’ve never really had issues with regular direct threaded rimfire cans coming loose. I’ll need to use it more to see if the functionality ends up growing on me. If not I’ll just Rocksett the muzzle device into the can.

Even though the RXD is $200 more than the Hydra (at MSRP), I think it’s worth it for the reduced backpressure alone. This isn’t an issue on a bolt gun, but on a semi auto host like the TX22 it makes for a significantly better shooting experience to not have debris spit back in your face.

Cleaning:

The RXD 22 TI has a removable outer sleeve which gives you some access to the internals, but the central core does not come apart. Cleaning is probably simplest with a sonic cleaner and/or cleaning solution. But since it’s titanium you can clean it basically however you want.

Just a quick safety note, Breakthrough suppressor cleaner is far more hazardous than their advertising makes it out to be. Once it’s been used and has picked up lead and other contaminants, it needs to be disposed of as hazardous waste. Also, regular nitrile gloves don’t provide good protection, look for butyl rubber of Silver Shield 4H. To be honest it doesn't seem any safer than The Dip…

Future reviews:

I picked up a Bear Creek bolt action 300BLK upper. At some point I’ll make a post about that and a comparison of it with low, medium, and high backpressure suppressors.

Have a great weekend!

- Nathan Comstock

TL;DR:

The Dead Air RXD 22 TI is a quiet and low backpressure rimfire suppressor with a unique QD system.

Transparency note:

I do not have any business or financial relationship with Dead Air.

Included mounting hardware:

The RXD 22 TI uses a proprietary QD mounting system. It can be thought of as a smaller Plan-B system with a taper to seal off ahead of the relatively fine right hand threads. One muzzle device is included with the suppressor, and more can be purchased separately.

The mounting interface is built into the suppressor, so you don’t need a separate adapter.

Barrel -> muzzle device -> suppressor

Test method:

We went out to the range and shot a bunch of rounds through the RXD 22 TI and CGS Hydra back to back multiple times. We stood in the same spots and took notes after each one for gassiness and sound. Considering I don’t have Jay’s fancy sound metering equipment, I think this is a decent way to compare them.

All of this was done outdoors with a light breeze and away from reflecting surfaces. You may have different results in other environments.

Host:

The host was my Taurus TX22 Competition. No modifications have been made to the pistol other than the Holosun optic.

Cost, weight, and size:

Suppressor	MSRP	Material	Weight (list)	Weight (actual)	Length
RXD 22 TI	$499	Titanium	5.6 oz	6.2 oz	5.6"
CGS Hydra AL	$299	Aluminum	3.5 oz	3.2 oz	5.6"

Both suppressors were weighed after shooting. The RXD weight includes the muzzle device.

RXD 22 TI vs CGS Hydra AL

For all of the various suppressors I’ve collected, the Hydra AL is my only other rimfire can. But don’t worry, it’s well loved! Since there’s only two suppressors here, I’m going to compare them directly.

As far as sound, the RXD 22 TI was definitely quieter. It wasn’t a huge difference, and the bullets were starting to push supersonic, but it was noticeable. I imagine with proper subs the difference would widen. Although I always wear hearing protection, I would consider both to be “hearing safe” for shorter range trips.

I’ve seen mixed opinions of the value of reduced backpressure on rimfire suppressors. Based on shooting both of these, I would say it is valuable on automatic hosts. The Hydra had a noticeable amount of blowback and left bits of carbon on my face and shooting glasses. Conversely, the RXD 22 TI had very minimal blowback and was much more pleasant overall.

The QD system is interesting. According to the Dead Air engineers, it captures some lead out of the bore which reduces deposits in the suppressor. Although it's neat, I’m not entirely sure how useful this system is since I’ve never really had issues with regular direct threaded rimfire cans coming loose. I’ll need to use it more to see if the functionality ends up growing on me. If not I’ll just Rocksett the muzzle device into the can.

Even though the RXD is $200 more than the Hydra (at MSRP), I think it’s worth it for the reduced backpressure alone. This isn’t an issue on a bolt gun, but on a semi auto host like the TX22 it makes for a significantly better shooting experience to not have debris spit back in your face.

Cleaning:

The RXD 22 TI has a removable outer sleeve which gives you some access to the internals, but the central core does not come apart. Cleaning is probably simplest with a sonic cleaner and/or cleaning solution. But since it’s titanium you can clean it basically however you want.

Just a quick safety note, Breakthrough suppressor cleaner is far more hazardous than their advertising makes it out to be. Once it’s been used and has picked up lead and other contaminants, it needs to be disposed of as hazardous waste. Also, regular nitrile gloves don’t provide good protection, look for butyl rubber of Silver Shield 4H. To be honest it doesn't seem any safer than The Dip…

Future reviews:

I picked up a Bear Creek bolt action 300BLK upper. At some point I’ll make a post about that and a comparison of it with low, medium, and high backpressure suppressors.

Have a great weekend!

- Nathan Comstock

TL;DR:

The Tisha offers excellent sound performance with very low backpressure in a short, if unconventional package.

Transparency note:

I have no business or financial relationship with SAW.

Warranty:

I ordered this as part of the original blem batch earlier this year.  The suppressor I received didn’t appear to have any cracks, but SAW offered to replace it anyway just to be safe.  The process was carried out professionally and reasonably quickly.  At this point all of their suppressors reportedly get heat treated after printing to relieve internal stresses, so the cracking shouldn’t be an issue going forward.

Included mounting hardware:

The Tisha comes with a Plan-B compatible muzzle brake and HUB adapter.  I didn’t use these for three main reasons:

• The brake is directional and needs to be shimmed/timed
• The HUB adapter does not have wrench flats
• They’re very heavy, coming in at 5.1 oz combined.  This is comically heavy for a Plan-B system, and is very noticeable when the suppressor itself is only 8.8 oz.

Test method:

We went out to the range and shot a bunch of rounds through each of the suppressors listed below back to back multiple times.  We stood in the same spots and took notes after each one for gassiness and sound.  Considering I don’t have Jay’s fancy sound metering equipment, I think this is a decent way to compare them.

All of this was done outdoors with a light breeze and away from reflecting surfaces.  You may have different results in other environments.

Host:

The host is my heavily tuned 12.5 mid-length rifle with 55gr PMC X-TAC.  It has an AGB, KAK down vent BCG, and A5 buffer system.  This is about as good as I can achieve for gas mitigation.  

Since I’m running a SS on a shorter barrel with the titanium Tisha, I used the compact Plan-B brake to protect the suppressor.

Cost, weight, and size:

Suppressor	MSRP	Material	Weight (list)	Weight (actual)	Length
SAW Tisha	$1,199	Titanium	10.5 oz	8.8 oz	4.18”
CAT WB	$1,190	Inconel	13.9 oz	15.7 oz	5.45”
RBD Rhodie 6	$895	Inconel	15.0 oz	15.3 oz	5.50"

SAW Tisha:

Much like the Shiv, one of the first things I noticed about the Tisha is that it doesn't feel like much on the end of the gun.  It’s definitely there, but it doesn't significantly affect handling of the rifle which is very nice.  Note that the Inconel version will be significantly heavier, probably in the 16 to 17 oz range.

Sound suppression is excellent.  While I don’t recommend shooting any 5.56 without earpro, the Tisha is among the quietest rifle suppressors I’ve shot and very pleasant overall.  It was noticeably quieter than the WB.  The Pew Science report covers this in detail.

Backpressure is also top tier.  It’s probably tied with my Velos 762 for lowest gas/blowback and isn’t an issue at all even with rapid/SS fire.  

I covered the Rhodie, WB, and some other cans in more detail in my previous post.

SAW doesn't share this info, but the blast baffle depth on my Tisha measured 1.52” deep.  This has been added to our fitment checker along with a bunch of other suppressors.

It doesn't bother me, but the Cerakote isn’t great.  It was already slightly chipped in a couple spots when I got it.  

Another random thing I noticed is it looks like there’s little slivers of metal getting pushed out of some of the venting slots (see second image).  I don’t think this is a problem, but it caught my attention.

The Tisha offers a fantastic blend of great sound performance, very low backpressure, and a minimal footprint.  If combined with our recessed micro brake and recessed adapter (RPA), it adds less than 3.5” to the end of the muzzle which is unheard of for a high performing system.

Tisha vs Rhodie:

I’ve had a lot of people ask about the Tisha vs the Rhodie.

The Rhodie to me is just slightly quieter than the Tisha. I know some people are going to have a hard time believing this, but we shot them back to back about 10 times in a row and the Rhodie sounded just a little better with a lower pitch.

The Tisha has slightly lower backpressure than the Rhodie. During longer strings of rapid/SS fire, the Rhodie would start to gas stack a bit towards the end while the Tisha had basically none. I still consider the Rhodie to have low backpressure overall.

As far as weight and size, the Tisha is ~25% shorter (4.18” vs 5.50”), but would likely be a little heavier in the same material.

With an MSRP of $304 less ($895 vs $1,199), the Rhodie is a better value.

This is subjective, but on most hosts I think the Rhodie looks nicer. The Tisha is kind of goofy looking. But it would be fitting on AKs and some other non-AR hosts.

Availability seems to be somewhat limited for both which is pretty common for these types of suppressors.

There’s certain use cases where I would learn towards one over the other, but in general I would say you can go for either and will have good results. They’re both top performers.

Future reviews:

I’m writing a review on the Dead Air RXD 22 TI. It seems like there’s not a lot of info on it, and I’ve seen some questions about it.

I also picked up a Bear Creek bolt action 300BLK upper. At some point I’ll make a post about that and a comparison of low, medium, and high backpressure suppressors on it.

Have a great weekend!

- Nathan Comstock

TL;DR:

The Tisha offers excellent sound performance with very low backpressure in a short, if unconventional package.

Transparency note:

I have no business or financial relationship with SAW.

Warranty:

I ordered this as part of the original blem batch earlier this year.  The suppressor I received didn’t appear to have any cracks, but SAW offered to replace it anyway just to be safe.  The process was carried out professionally and reasonably quickly.  At this point all of their suppressors reportedly get heat treated after printing to relieve internal stresses, so the cracking shouldn’t be an issue going forward.

Included mounting hardware:

The Tisha comes with a Plan-B compatible muzzle brake and HUB adapter.  I didn’t use these for three main reasons:

• The brake is directional and needs to be shimmed/timed
• The HUB adapter does not have wrench flats
• They’re very heavy, coming in at 5.1 oz combined.  This is comically heavy for a Plan-B system, and is very noticeable when the suppressor itself is only 8.8 oz.

Test method:

We went out to the range and shot a bunch of rounds through each of the suppressors listed below back to back multiple times.  We stood in the same spots and took notes after each one for gassiness and sound.  Considering I don’t have Jay’s fancy sound metering equipment, I think this is a decent way to compare them.

All of this was done outdoors with a light breeze and away from reflecting surfaces.  You may have different results in other environments.

Host:

The host is my heavily tuned 12.5 mid-length rifle with 55gr PMC X-TAC.  It has an AGB, KAK down vent BCG, and A5 buffer system.  This is about as good as I can achieve for gas mitigation.  

Since I’m running a SS on a shorter barrel with the titanium Tisha, I used the compact Plan-B brake to protect the suppressor.

Cost, weight, and size:

Suppressor	MSRP	Material	Weight (list)	Weight (actual)	Length
SAW Tisha	$1,199	Titanium	10.5 oz	8.8 oz	4.18”
CAT WB	$1,190	Inconel	13.9 oz	15.7 oz	5.45”
RBD Rhodie 6	$895	Inconel	15.0 oz	15.3 oz	5.50”

SAW Tisha:

Much like the Shiv, one of the first things I noticed about the Tisha is that it doesn't feel like much on the end of the gun.  It’s definitely there, but it doesn't significantly affect handling of the rifle which is very nice.  Note that the Inconel version will be significantly heavier, probably in the 16 to 17 oz range.

Sound suppression is excellent.  While I don’t recommend shooting any 5.56 without earpro, the Tisha is among the quietest rifle suppressors I’ve shot and very pleasant overall.  It was noticeably quieter than the WB.  The Pew Science report covers this in detail.

Backpressure is also top tier.  It’s probably tied with my Velos 762 for lowest gas/blowback and isn’t an issue at all even with rapid/SS fire.  

I covered the Rhodie, WB, and some other cans in more detail in my previous post.

SAW doesn't share this info, but the blast baffle depth on my Tisha measured 1.52” deep.  This has been added to our fitment checker along with a bunch of other suppressors.

It doesn't bother me, but the Cerakote isn’t great.  It was already slightly chipped in a couple spots when I got it.  

Another random thing I noticed is it looks like there’s little slivers of metal getting pushed out of some of the venting slots (see second image).  I don’t think this is a problem, but it caught my attention.

The Tisha offers a fantastic blend of great sound performance, very low backpressure, and a minimal footprint.  If combined with our recessed micro brake and recessed adapter (RPA), it adds less than 3.5” to the end of the muzzle which is unheard of for a high performing system.

Tisha vs Rhodie:

I’ve had a lot of people ask about the Tisha vs the Rhodie.

The Rhodie to me is just slightly quieter than the Tisha. I know some people are going to have a hard time believing this, but we shot them back to back about 10 times in a row and the Rhodie sounded just a little better with a lower pitch.

The Tisha has slightly lower backpressure than the Rhodie. During longer strings of rapid/SS fire, the Rhodie would start to gas stack a bit towards the end while the Tisha had basically none. I still consider the Rhodie to have low backpressure overall.

As far as weight and size, the Tisha is ~25% shorter (4.18” vs 5.50”), but would likely be a little heavier in the same material.

With an MSRP of $304 less ($895 vs $1,199), the Rhodie is a better value.

This is subjective, but on most hosts I think the Rhodie looks nicer. The Tisha is kind of goofy looking. But it would be fitting on AKs and some other non-AR hosts.

Availability seems to be somewhat limited for both which is pretty common for these types of suppressors.

There’s certain use cases where I would learn towards one over the other, but in general I would say you can go for either and will have good results. They’re both top performers.

Future reviews:

I’m writing a review on the Dead Air RXD 22 TI. It seems like there’s not a lot of info on it, and I’ve seen some questions about it.

I also picked up a Bear Creek bolt action 300BLK upper. At some point I’ll make a post about that and a comparison of low, medium, and high backpressure suppressors on it.

Have a great weekend!

- Nathan Comstock