OSS Releases New HELIX 5.56 and 7.62 Suppressors

Operators Suppressors Systems LLC, commonly known as OSS, has announced the release of their two latest entries to their HELIX line of cans, the HX 556 and HX 762. The new cans are direct-mount self-tightening featuring OSS’s “Flow-Through” technologies. The HELIX series is full-auto rated.

OSS’ cans are known for their baffle-free designs. Instead, the cans redirect gases across multiple layers of helical grooves, slowing them down versus the standard baffle-style containment-only operation. To accomplish this, more materials are needed, which has typically made OSS suppressors significantly heavier than the competition.

The new HELIX offerings take advantage of new materials including stainless steel, cobalt, and titanium to bring their weight down. The HX 556 clocks in at 20.8 ounces (6.8″ long) and its bigger brother HX 762 is a veritable lightweight for its caliber at 22.3 ounces (7.6″ long). Sound reduction is 32-34 dB for the HX 556 and ~30 dB for the HX 762.

Like OSS’ other offerings, the Flow-Through architecture has a significant impact on weapon’s function, especially in direct impingement firearms. By not using baffles, the suppressors keep additional back-pressure to a minimum. I have personally shot them and can attest that the common gas cloud in an impingement gun is nearly identical to an unsuppressed weapon.

Retail for the HX 556 is clocked at $1385 and the HX 762 at $1495. Both are available now through OSS’ dealer network.





Nathan S

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • iksnilol

    Sooo ridicilously heavy, very long and standard noise suppression?

    Yeah.. I don’t think it is ITAR stopping me from buying one of these.

    • MikeSmith13807

      If weight, length, and meter performance are your priorities then look elsewhere. If no gas in your face, no increase in bolt speed and chamber fouling, and a much cooler suppressor (exterior temperature) matters to you, then you have nowhere else to look.

      • iksnilol

        Gas is solved by adjusting the gas/buffer.

        Primarily the gas.

        Though I digress, I primarily use bolt actions.

        • MikeSmith13807

          If you are going to try to remember to adjust the gas every time you take a suppressor on and off (which requires you changing the gas block on a DI gun) you still are only controlling what cycles the action and not doing anything about what goes back down the barrel…

          • iksnilol

            Well, I am weird in the sense that if I have a suppressed gun I only shoot it suppressed. Where I am there’s no restriction on suppressors so having multiple ones is completely normal.

            Weird, right?

            Also, adjustable gas blocks are a thing. I really doubt an individuals mental capacity if they’ve got a problem turning an umbraco key to let in more/less gas on a rifle

          • MikeSmith13807

            Naw, that’s not weird–I agree with that as much as budget allows. 🙂

            But this design was mainly targeted at DI systems–the founder/inventor was in US special forces and was very unhappy with his experience using the equipment they had available at the time, which led him on his journey of many years to design something better. Most gun owners are going to want to move a suppressor between various rifles. If you put an adjustable gas block on your AR, and your handguard covers it and doesn’t have any provisions for switching the gas, how are you going to be switching back and forth easily?

          • iksnilol

            Well, I done reckon you either git a handguard with a hole in it, or you make one.

      • BaconLovingInfidel

        If no gas in your face, no increase in bolt speed and chamber fouling, and a much cooler suppressor (exterior temperature) matters more to you than effective sound suppression, then you have nowhere else to look.

        • MikeSmith13807

          BaconLovingInfidel, did you even watch MAC’s video where he actually tests it with a meter?

          • Rob

            The interesting thing is that Dead air actually prioritizes sounds at the shooter in their products. I did not expect to see such a big difference during testing.

          • Drew Coleman

            MAC was also using the gemtech bolt carrier that vents more gas than normal through the holes in the BCG.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            Was he? What a terrible “test”!

    • Rob

      “Ridiculously’ is not a fair quantifier. Compared to the m4-2000 it is .18 inches longer and 2.2oz heavier for the HX556. The HX was only .5oz heavier than the Sandman-L it was compared too and it is actually 1.3 inches shorter.

      It has some very real advantages that accompany those gains that can make the juice worth the squeeze for many people and organizations.; advantages that would not translate to your experience with a bolt action rifle.

      OSS has had an uphill battle but their tech is maturing. I am sure that there are people who were laughing at them three years ago that are now taking them rather seriously. Military customers included.

      I am in no way an OSS fan boy. I still think they have a ways to go and I would describe myself as cautiously optimistic regarding the technology’s future. Even if it isn’t OSS that finally delivers a 100% finished solution.

      • iksnilol

        I am laughing at them with good reason. An adjustable gas block is cheaper and easier (and better in regards to recoil and weapon wear) than a fancy suppressor.

        Now ridicilously heavy is a fair quantifier in my book. The suppressor I am looking at buying is only 300 or so grams, adds only 10 cm length (4 inches) past the muzzle and is at worst just as durable (most likely it is more durable, especially considering it is titanium) and… HILARIOUSLY enough, it’s actually cheaper.

        I digress, American suppressors are awkward is all I will say.

        • Rob

          Which Ti suppressor that weighs 300 grams is full auto rated for 7.62 or 5.56? I am curious. Also how well do you think a four inch can would meter on those hosts?

          An adjustable gas block will not do everything that an OSS can will. It may lower the rate of fire but you will still have a lot of blowback coming back into the chamber.

          If you want a can for a Bolt gun, a light weight Ti can will work very well. That is not the customer OSS cans are built for.

          • iksnilol

            Meters well, because it is 4 inches past the muzzle, in both directions. That is also a concept y’all over the pond have yet to grasp. Worst case scenario it is just as “bad” as the OSS (which is highly doubtful).

            Is 3d printed (I know, I know, *groan*) and costs the equivalent of 650 USD. It’s made here in Norway. Called “Tronrud TE Titan”. Whether it is FA rated I don’t know nor do I care but for what it is worth: They fired 100 rounds in rapid succession outta a 30-06 Mauser with one on it and it was none worse for the wear. They’ve got the video on their facebook page. They work just fine on competition AR-10s.

            They call the material Grade 5 titanium for what it is worth.

          • Stan Darsh

            The Delta P Designs “BREVIS II” is only 94mmx51mm and 210g for the 5.56 model and 140mmx51mm and 280g for 7.62 Nato and all models are full auto rated. Unfortunately, they cost as much as this ridiculous OSS suppressor.

        • MikeSmith13807

          iksnilol, obviously you don’t know as much as you think you know because an adjustable gas block does nothing to prevent gas from coming back down the barrel and into your face.

          • iksnilol

            Yeah they do. Suppressor increases amount of gas cycling action. Reduce that and you get less surplus gas in your face.

            ARs specifically you need a different chargong handle since gas escapes there. And I’d reckon a heavier buffer would help. Tho I don’t use ARs. I prefer pistons, easier suppressor adjustability + used to ’em.

          • MikeSmith13807

            I’ll modify my statement a little bit–I shouldn’t have said something so absolute. What I meant was that an adjustable gas block may help reduce the extra gas cycling the action (which would also get in your face), but that’s only part of the problem. A lot of the extra gas in the face is coming back down the barrel, and the adjustable gas block doesn’t help with that.

          • iksnilol

            That you’re correct in, but that issue is mainly a problem with the AR due to some opening around the charging handle and whatnot (on AKs a slightly loose dust cover produces the same effect).

            Though there is a forward assist vent hole which helps a lot (supposedly) and folks to seal around the charging handle with silicone and that helps as well.

          • MikeSmith13807

            If you watch a video of somebody firing a suppressed AR there is a cloud of gas that comes out of the ejection port each time the bolt cycles. No attempts at sealing are going to address that.

        • SD

          A soldier in the field doesn’t have the time or the luxury of adjusting gas for every temperature range and/or altitude. Get a brain.

          • iksnilol

            Asoldier in the field also doesn’t whine about alittle gas to the face, either especially considering that those dust goggles aren’t for decor.

    • Flounder

      Did you watch the video? I could swear was made for you, based solely on your comment.

      • iksnilol

        Well, I don’t need their video to tell me it is twice as heavy as the suppressor I am looking at buying. Or that it is twice as long past the muzzle… or that it is super expensive and ITAR restricted for me. And that it doesn’t suppress any better.

        Oh sure, “waah, mah backblast”, yeah that’d be an issue if there was no way to adjust the gas on the rifle.

        • MikeSmith13807

          Wait–if you have found a hearing safe 7.62 suppressor that’s under 4″, I’d love to hear about it because I’ve never seen it and I’ve been looking for years!

          • iksnilol

            Tronrud Titan, cant get it in the US tho. And I never said it was under 4″, just that it didn’t extend past the muzzle more than 4 inches.

          • Stan Darsh

            The BREVIS II 5.56 is only 3.7″ long and 7.5 oz. The 7.62Nato version is 5.5″ long and 10 oz. Both are full-auto rated.

          • MikeSmith13807

            Yes, the Brevis is pretty cool–hoping somebody will do an in-depth test with it soon!

  • AC97

    Ugh, that price tag…

  • Quest

    I find the technology good but …589gramm… without me.

  • JumpIf NotZero

    It’s time SHOT Show, so that means OSS “press releases” (ad buys).

    Funny how none of their claims are A/B tested with industry leading cans. And other than right now no one sees or hears from them.

    • AndyHasky

      Did you watch the MAC youtube video where he does a sound test with it and a sandman L with two different rifles (piston and DI), then he says it’s ok because OSS said it wouldn’t make a difference anyways? That is pretty funny.

      • Drew Coleman

        Yeah I can’t believe that. He claims the purpose wasn’t to compare them, but how can you A) present the video that way without making it clear and B) call it a full test when you used two different guns?

        • AndyHasky

          It is at best extremely lazy or at worse intentionally misleading of MAC to do it the way.

        • UnrealMoniker

          What? He kept calling it a comparison in the video

          • Drew Coleman

            I specifically asked him in a comment on the video and he claimed that he wasn’t comparing them.

    • MikeSmith13807

      Actually, OSS has published plenty of A/B comparisons with what I’m guessing is a Surefire product (they label it “industry leading competitor” or something like that). But I’m sure you don’t care what OSS says, regardless of the fact that if they were putting out false info they would be ripe pickings for a lawsuit…

      MAC said himself in the YouTube comments that this was just a preliminary video and he didn’t have the mount to put the OSS on both guns, but he is going to be doing a lot more testing soon.

  • Intern randy

    Hmmm…looks like the Tswg prototype cans are released to market…

  • Toxie

    So poor MAC testing methodology again…they should have used the *same* rifle to test both of the cans. I like his channel but man alive they make quite a few flawed comparisons.

    • Drew Coleman

      It looks to me like he was trying to skew the results as heavily in favor of OSS as possible.

    • MikeSmith13807

      He explained himself at least 30 times in the YouTube comments… but since you obviously didn’t see it, I’ll enlighten you–he didn’t have the right mount to run the OSS on both guns. He said it was just a preliminary video with much more to come soon..

  • UnrealMoniker

    That MAC video was an advertisement disguised as a review and “comparison”. Of course the piston gun is going to have less gas blowback than the impingement gun