MP22 Compact thread adapters

[hoc9sw]

I just want to make sure we're on the same page here. To me it sounds like you're saying the EWK thread protector shakes off the EWK thread adapter (i.e. when shooting un-suppressed).

FYI, I'm not surprised anything works itself loose. I have a Gemtech adapter on my M&P .22 FS, coupled with a Spectre II, and I have to tighten the suppressor down after every magazine. Gotta love that...

Correct interpretation.
That little protector ring made a bee-line for the hot area of the range. Caught it just in time, or it would have been a late return to retrieve it after the range went cold for the night.

And yes, I just out of too much caution, checked the suppressor after the first mag. Yup, loose.

There are days that I learn more here than I came looking for. And it always seems to cost money. It would be better if it went to new guns, though.

 

[WilliamG]

Correct interpretation.
That little protector ring made a bee-line for the hot area of the range. Caught it just in time, or it would have been a late return to retrieve it after the range went cold for the night.

And yes, I just out of too much caution, checked the suppressor after the first mag. Yup, loose.

There are days that I learn more here than I came looking for. And it always seems to cost money. It would be better if it went to new guns, though.

Yep, I hear you. I've only been into this whole thing a few years, and it's truly amazing how things that should work so simply - simply don't!

FYI, I pulled out my .22 Compact (with EWK) and .22 FS (with Gemtech), and the EWK thread protector isn't super snug (I haven't shot with it yet, or my new M&P .22 Compact I've had for many, many months now). I then looked at my .22 FS with the Gemtech adapter. There's no apparent difference between the two, except the Gemtech on the FS has seen quite a few rounds through it, so the threads are a little more... gummy. I suspect the same will happen with the EWK on the .22 Compact. Shoot it some more, let some carbon build up on the threads, and it will probably remain more snug.

As to the can working loose, all I can suggest is a little blue loctite or some teflon tape. It's annoying, that's for sure. When I get around to shooting the .22 Compact, I'll have to see if the can works loose there, too. For now, out of habit I just tighten the can after every 10 rounds or so.

 

[hoc9sw]

You guys have shamed me into heading out this week for a proper caliper. I'm going to do the exercise, and get in touch with EWK if the numbers don't work.

I'm a customer service guy, and in my world, that which doesn't work right, well, it doesn't work right. But at the same time, building things includes infinite opportunity to screw up.

I came from a world where you were signed out with a weapon, and it worked. You field stripped it after use, and there was always someone there to reprimand you if it wasn't clean enough. When it stopped working, you swapped it out if you were in garrison, or got inventive in the field. I'm too old and grumpy to be inventive, so the various CS lines hear from me. But once I'm in your camp, you have to work hard to get rid of me.

 

[rimshaker]

SilencerCo says that it's supposed to index off the front of the barrel because that's what S&W told them. But then you're left with the option of damaging the threads, or risking a baffle strike because the adapter wasn't screwed on tight enough.

What the heck, seriously? Whoever said that at S&W probably didn't even know the differences with indexing. Anything that has to be torqued down with tools should be indexing on the barrel shoulder, not the fragile muzzle.

Frankly i'm kinda shocked Silencerco's adapter indexes like that. Maybe they didn't have a choice from a legal standpoint. I got lucky and ordered an adapter from Stalking Rhino (SRI) last year. It's very well made, has the flared design, indexes off the shoulder, and properly engages the internal Sparrow/Spectre/thread protector o-rings to a snug fit.

Last I heard over at NFAtalk in december, SRI was planning on doing another production run of the m&p22C adapters but still haven't gotten around to it yet. Think i may pick up another one seeing how all the other adapters have panned out.

 

[hoc9sw]

I will admit a minor defeat. I went looking for a proper digital caliper, and found that the tool cost more that the part, so I passed. My monthly meds are going up (cancer seems to be a lucrative business), so $50 for a one-time use seems extreme.

But for reality - the EWK thread protector, no matter how I crank it down, works loose (used when Sparrow is not mounted) constantly. I've decided it is pointless, and take it off while shooting without Sparrow.

 

[Ghostmaker]

I will admit a minor defeat. I went looking for a proper digital caliper, and found that the tool cost more that the part, so I passed. My monthly meds are going up (cancer seems to be a lucrative business), so $50 for a one-time use seems extreme.

But for reality - the EWK thread protector, no matter how I crank it down, works loose (used when Sparrow is not mounted) constantly. I've decided it is pointless, and take it off while shooting without Sparrow.

I have two sets of Calipers. One is a dial caliper and the other digital. The digital one was something like $12 on Ebay. The plastic ones are surprisingly accurate and run less.

On the thread protector, I currently have a SilencerCo brand thread protector. No problems yet.

 

[sdl74]

What the heck, seriously? Whoever said that at S&W probably didn't even know the differences with indexing. Anything that has to be torqued down with tools should be indexing on the barrel shoulder, not the fragile muzzle.

I was surprised as well. This is what SilencerCo told me:

"We designed the the adapter from the specs that Smith & Wesson provided us; these specs called for the adapter to index off the muzzle of the barrel and not the shoulder."

As I said earlier, their adapter would be perfect if it was just a few hundredths of an inch longer so it would index off the shoulder. But it started damaging the threads at the muzzle when I tightened it down, and it wasn't even torqued very much - certainly not enough for me to feel comfortable attaching a suppressor on there. They could have indexed it off the muzzle without it also damaging the threads, but there's an internal taper at the end that makes contact with the threads first.

So now my plan is to wait until SRI makes more adapters.

 

[ejjeff]

Ordered my adaptor from EWK yesterday and it arrived today! Have not shot with it yet but it appears well made. No thread problems. First thoughts are outstanding service and product. Time will tell.

 

[strobro32]

Suppressors with threaded mounts need to be checked every mag. That is the rule.

My SRI/ Sparrow combo does not work loose. Matt is in the suppressor making business. He is very good at what he does. If SRI makes another run of M&P22C adapters, I will buy another. I am very happy with mine and I would recommend them.

 

[hoc9sw]

I checked with SRI. They are out of stock, and may do another run later this year. So out of luck on that one for the time being.

 

[ewk_stuff]

Unfortunately with so much going on, I don't follow here that closely, so hence my late reply here about the EWK Arms adapters...

I'm attaching a picture of the MP22C Sparrow version of the adapters-as you can see, at least in my opinion as a machinist, I don't consider these "ragged" threads. The length of the threads, from the shoulder is according the to the .318" Silencerco spec, so the threads should not have hit your o-ring as hoc9sw noted.

You have to keep in mind that transitioning from a flat to threads, even with a chamfer (as are on my adapters) there is going to be a sharp area using 60 degree V threads.

I hold the fit on the ID threads where it attaches on the barrel to a pretty tight fit to keep run-out down, so small pieces of dirt may stop it and it will need cleaned, but usually is not a problem. I think it is very much worthwhile tradeoff as compared to making the threads looser so it will go on easier.

The adapter is made to Silencerco thread specs-but somewhere along the line they must have changed the drawing-the one I have specs out the o-ring area at .436" +0/-.003. The drawing on their website now is saying .440" +0/-.002. I would be interested in hearing some feedback here-I don't have a Sparrow can, but I am hearing things both ways regarding the pros and cons of the fit...apparently Silencerco though it was better to make it a hair tighter...thoughts?

I have gotten feedback both ways about the thread protectors-some say they have no problem with them coming loose, and others do. I am planning on offering o-ring thread protectors in the future, but they will be at higher cost.

 

[garystl]

I have the EWK adaptor recently installed on my compact. The thread protector is a little loose and one with an o-ring would be an improvement. I wonder if making a protector with an insert like an elastic stop nut has would be feasible?

 

[cjt50]

I have the EWK adaptor on my compact as well;

The thread protector is very loose, but I replaced it with a Silencerco one (has O-ring) and it's staying on there for the most part.

When I'm shooting with the Sparrow attached, I do find I have to tighten after every 5th shot. I would be happy with every 10th shot (magazine capacity)

I like the hex key for tighten the adaptor to the pistol and had no problems what so every. Thanks for stopping by and grabbing feedback!

 

[sdl74]

I'm attaching a picture of the MP22C Sparrow version of the adapters-as you can see, at least in my opinion as a machinist, I don't consider these "ragged" threads. The length of the threads, from the shoulder is according the to the .318" Silencerco spec, so the threads should not have hit your o-ring as hoc9sw noted.

C'mon, do you really not see the burrs in the picture you posted? The picture isn't that high resolution but I can still see burrs at the front and back of the threads on some of those adapters. If you post a higher resolution version of that picture, I'll point out exactly what I'm talking about so we're on the same page. But the adapter I got from you also had burrs on the inside threads, and it wouldn't screw on the barrel all the way without either removing the burrs somehow or forcing it.

The adapter is made to Silencerco thread specs-but somewhere along the line they must have changed the drawing-the one I have specs out the o-ring area at .436" +0/-.003. The drawing on their website now is saying .440" +0/-.002. I would be interested in hearing some feedback here-I don't have a Sparrow can, but I am hearing things both ways regarding the pros and cons of the fit...apparently Silencerco though it was better to make it a hair tighter...thoughts?

If SilencerCo changed their specs and you didn't, then your adapters are not made to SilencerCo specs. I threaded a suppressor onto your adapter and SilencerCo's adapter, and there's a big difference in how snug the fit is. I would have been ok removing the burrs on your adapter and using it, if it weren't for how loose the suppressor fit because your adapter's o-ring engagement was undersized. If you bring your adapters into spec, I'd be happy to buy another one and give it a shot. It would be awesome if you could clean up the threads while you're at it too, but the deal-breaker for me was the o-ring engagement being too loose.

 

[rimshaker]

The adapter is made to Silencerco thread specs-but somewhere along the line they must have changed the drawing-the one I have specs out the o-ring area at .436" +0/-.003. The drawing on their website now is saying .440" +0/-.002. I would be interested in hearing some feedback here-I don't have a Sparrow can, but I am hearing things both ways regarding the pros and cons of the fit...apparently Silencerco though it was better to make it a hair tighter...thoughts?

The old .436" drawing title was for the Sparrow only at the time. The new .440" drawing is updated for Sparrow/Spectre/Warlock since they all have the o-ring feature. The slight .004" increase results in a firmer contact/grip with the o-ring.

 

[KevGuillot]

If the EWK adapter is updated to the current specs ill buy one. it indexes off the shoulder right?

 

[ewk_stuff]

According to Silencerco, the old thread spec can be used with "without a problem" attaching a picture of what they said...

Kev, the EWK thread adapters bottom against the barrel shoulder.

Thanks for the feedback!

 

[sdl74]

According to Silencerco, the old thread spec can be used with "without a problem" attaching a picture of what they said...

Kev, the EWK thread adapters bottom against the barrel shoulder.

Thanks for the feedback!

From the email you posted:
"I don't have an exact date when the change was made but the change happened to give a better o-ring engagement"

From a few posts up:

I have the EWK adaptor on my compact as well;

The thread protector is very loose, but I replaced it with a Silencerco one (has O-ring) and it's staying on there for the most part.

When I'm shooting with the Sparrow attached, I do find I have to tighten after every 5th shot. I would be happy with every 10th shot (magazine capacity)

When I use SilencerCo adapters on other guns I don't have to tighten my Sparrow after every 5th shot. That's the whole point of the o-ring engagement, and why I was disappointed that the o-ring engagement on your adapter is undersized. But if you update your adapter to SilencerCo's latest specs, I'd buy one from you.

Will you be updating your adapter to SilencerCo's latest specs?

 

[ewk_stuff]

Yes, they will be updated to the newest specs, but I am not sure about scrapping the ones I have in inventory with what Silencerco said. Get in touch with me, and I can get one of the updated ones to you when they are ready.

 

[JAMMAN]

I run a machine shop and make a similar adapter though it is for a motorcycle oil filter conversion.

I have to stick up for EWK on the thread burr issues. It isn't impossible to make it burr free but requires manual deburring or tumbling with extremely small stones for a precise amount of time (to retain fit accuracy). Result is if you truly want an adapter like this burr free it would cost twice what he is charging and need to be done manually under high power magnification.

I personally would pay the reasonable price and put it under magnifiers and deburr it. The burrs shown in his pics are about average for that type of thread, probably single pointed with a coated carbide insert in a CNC. Even ground threads produce somewhat of a burr on entry and exit.

C'mon, do you really not see the burrs in the picture you posted? The picture isn't that high resolution but I can still see burrs at the front and back of the threads on some of those adapters. If you post a higher resolution version of that picture, I'll point out exactly what I'm talking about so we're on the same page. But the adapter I got from you also had burrs on the inside threads, and it wouldn't screw on the barrel all the way without either removing the burrs somehow or forcing it.