TFB REVIEW: Delta P Design Brevis II Ultra Silencer

Would you like to know what the future of silencer design looks like? Take a long look at the Brevis II Ultra, a six ounce 5.56mm centerfire rifle suppressor. It represents what we may later regard as one of the biggest breakthroughs firearms development in recent history.

Sounds pretty dramatic, doesn’t it? What if I told you that the designers of that same silencer are striving to make a similar model that will weigh close to a standard flash hider and can handle a barrel length of seven and a half inches? That’s what I thought.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s backup a bit and talk about the Brevis II Ultra.



Delta P Design @TFB

First off, a small disclosure – I bought the Brevis II. As you may know, manufacturers provide TFB with guns and products to review on a test and evaluation basis. After the review period, firearms are returned to the factory. Not this review; the Brevis marks the first purchase I have made from a TFB evaluation, which might give you a small clue as to the direction of this write-up.

Delta P Designs Brevis II Ultra

Delta P Design @TFB

The Delta P team is a fairly secretive bunch. Obviously with a product as progressive as the Brevis, I had a lot of questions, and many of them still remain unanswered. So why all the secrecy?

For one, this company is living on the very edge of silencer manufacturing technology and have invested a huge amount into design, research and testing to get to a commercially viable product. I also got the idea that Delta P may be providing products to ‘specialized teams’ (my own conclusion). So I didn’t push back – too much – when I got “I’m not ready to comment on that yet” responses from Vice President David Strong.

Delta P Designs Brevis II Ultra

Delta P Design @TFB

So, although I really wanted to see pictures of a Brevis being made, the internal baffle structure and other technical details, I realize that for the protection of Delta P’s intellectual property, some things are going to remain a mystery. Of course, Strong reminded me that anyone can buy a Brevis and cut it open. (Please don’t – that’s just sad.)


Delta P Designs Brevis II Ultra

Delta P Design @TFB

The Delta P Design Brevis II Ultra is not machined, turned, or otherwise constructed by traditional methods. This silencer is made of 100% Titanium by a process called Additive Manufacturing (you may know it better as 3-D printing). There are no separate pieces, no baffles, no end caps and no welds . The Brevis is a single piece of un-worked material which leads in part to a dramatic weight savings and increased strength.

The team who invented the Brevis had very specific goals in mind, and strangely enough, suppression wasn’t one of them. Sure, it suppresses just fine, but more importantly it is short, light and reduces flash right up there with the best flash hiders currently available. Delta P wanted to make the Brevis Ultra virtually disappears on the end of a users barrel. And it does.

How light is the Brevis? Using 5.56 cartridges as a tangible comparison, we balanced out the silencer with somewhere between nine and ten rounds. Shockingly light.

With most rifle silencers, all you really hope for is that it’s not too long and not too heavy. Not with the Brevis. My guess is that I could blindfold you, hand you an MK18 and have you guess by weight and feel whether or not that rifle had an OEM flash hider or a Brevis Ultra – and you couldn’t tell the difference.



  • Brevis (Inconnel) – $1,386.00
  • Ultra (Titanium) – $1,491.00


Delta P Designs Brevis II Ultra

Delta P Design @TFB

This part is easy – as long as your barrel is threaded properly to the correct pitch, just spin on the Brevis and lightly torque it down to specifications.

Quick detach fans might be disappointed at first, but the Brevis is designed to be installed and forgotten. And remember, there are no moving parts loosen or fail.

Delta P Designs Brevis II Ultra

Delta P Design @TFB



Delta P Design @TFB

I had planned on having some “special friends” bring a proper sound meter by for a proper decibel test but our schedules didn’t match up. So my friend and local dealer, Mark Cook from MAC Tactical was nice enough to stop in with plenty of rifles and silencers for a head to head comparison.

As with any centerfire rifle suppressor, the Brevis is not “hearing safe”. As such, you will never hear me suggest shooting suppressed rifles without some sort of hearing protection. However, for the comparison tests, I did remove my foam plugs for some of the shooting to get a raw feel for the blast reduction.

Here’s the subjective results: the Brevis was quieter than the AAC Mini 4 but louder than the Sig Sauer 7.62QD. How’s that for hard science?


Delta P Design @TFB

While the Brevis Ultra II wasn’t the quietest silencer I’ve had heard, it wasn’t the loudest either. I would describe the experience without hearing protection as being just on the edge of painful. But for a supersonic 5.56 round on a 10.3″ barrel, the reduction was more than acceptable.

The one observation I had that was the most interesting was that the sound reduction didn’t change much when using the Brevis on a longer barrel. Typically, longer barrels give the propellants more time to burn, reducing the blast further than their SBR kin. I wasn’t able to detect a significant change in suppression going from a 10.3″ barrel and a 17.3″ barrel.

Note: The SiCo flash hider weighs almost as much as the entire Brevis silencer.

Also, my MicroMOA adjustable gas block is tuned for the SilencerCo Saker 762  that is normally attached to this rifle. After the first shot with the Brevis, I noticed that I had to increase the gas flow for proper cycling. This is an indication that the Brevis does not force as much gas back down into the system and towards the shooter (sometimes referred to as back pressure).

Note: The SiCo flash hider weighs almost as much as the entire Brevis silencer.


Delta P Design @TFB

All things considered, the Brevis II is very close to what I would consider to be my idea of a “perfect” short barreled rifle suppressor. To understand my rationale, you have to remember that a centerfire rifle can never be made “Hollywood Quiet” with a silencer. So if ultimate suppression is not the goal, the focus should be on limiting the weight and any added length to the barrel. Add in “Best In Class” flash suppression and the Brevis makes for an impressive piece of kit.


As I like to explain in all my reviews, managing your requirements and expectations is the key to making solid equipment purchases. And I think that this is especially true when someone is considering a Delta P suppressor. If you want the quietest rifle suppressor, a quick detach system or have a limited budget, I’d hold off on a Brevis for now. On the other hand, if you are looking for a silencer that suppresses relatively well, has excellent flash reduction all with a minimal length and weight footprint – your can has arrived.


  • Not super quiet
  • Expensive


  • Direct thread only


  • Lightweight
  • Short length
  • One piece construction (no parts to fail)

Fast forward five years and I picture every shooter owning at least one silencer, firearm or gun part that is constructed using additive manufacturing. Delta P Design has a big head start in the suppressor industry and as they refine their techniques and lower costs their market share will accelerate. I have no doubt that they have some products in development that are going to blow minds.


Delta P Design @TFB



Delta P Design, Inc.
PO Box 245
Walterville, OR 97489

Delta P Design on Facebook


Special Thanks:

MAC Tactical


LE – Science – OSINT.
On a mission to make all of my guns as quiet as possible.
Twitter: @gunboxready
Instagram: @tfb_pete


  • yodamiles

    Been waiting so long for a review. I would say that this is one of the most underrated and innovative suppressor out there. For a shorter length, it seems to offer better dB reduction than surefire mini and other compact suppressor.

  • pun&gun

    How do you maintain it?

    • tts

      Yeah what happens when it gets clogged with fouling and lead shavings.

      Just eyeballing it the only thing that comes to mind is to dump it in a bucket of solvents and flush it periodically to get as much out as possible.

      • Bdub

        How often do you clean out your car’s muffler? Or any other centerfire suppressor?

        Pro tip: you don’t. It’s only .22lr cans that require this.

        • tts

          Muffler is a totally different use scenario but I get your point.

          I’m still skeptical that it won’t have any long term fouling issues.

          • JSmath

            Your skepticism is poorly founded when people have been using other non-serviceable (one piece, welded) 556/308/etc (intermediate and up) cans for decades without soaking/flushing them.

    • IshTheBuddha

      I was wondering that also. Possibly soak it in solvent and then drain it?

    • Pete – TFB Writer

      Rifle cans little almost no maintenance or cleaning.

    • SGT Fish

      its designed to be installed on the rifle just lie a flash hider (not taken off constantly) and the instructions say to clean the barrel as normal with the can still attatched. and as Pete said, no cleaning is necessary on centerfire rifle suppressors. they dont clog up with lead like pistol and rimfire cans do, but im sure you cn soak it if you want to

    • iksnilol

      Pour some solvent in it and flush out any deposits?

      Doubt it is necessary tho, the high pressure and cleanliness of centerfire ammo wouldn’t really let anything hang on.

  • b0x3r0ck

    I’m waiting on someone to made a suppressor with 3d ceramic resin.

    • So you can watch it explode?

    • You’d need to register it as a Destructive Device in addition to registering it as a Silencer, and nobody’s going to spend $400 for that when they could just as easily spend half as much to stick a hand grenade to the end of the barrel with duct tape and pull the pin.

  • Pete – TFB Writer

    The weight of the Brevis Ultra is six ounces. Corrected in the post.

  • Tierlieb

    Looking forward to hear how long this thing lasts. Additive manufacturing usually involves some easily melted carrier material (Shapeway uses bronze, pretty sure these guys used something more appropriate for their purpose), which is not ideal in something that has to resist high temperatures.

    Of course in a rational world, throwing away a silencer after a few thousand rounds should not be much of a problem. Most can be made cheaply. It’s just the weird American law getting in the way.

    Anyway, a great step forward. And rather brave to build a “good enough” silencer with a different design goal than most.

    • derpmaster

      I’d guess it’s laser sintered. They use that process for lots of crazy aerospace parts, as titanium is very difficult to machine traditionally.

    • Alex Waits

      The article indicates they are made of titanium and Inconel

    • iksnilol

      “after a few thousand rounds”?

      I assume then you just throw out your car muffler after a few thousand miles as well?

      • Goody

        It was dirty, so yeah

        • iksnilol

          Damn consumerism is all I will say.

      • VieteranGunsmith

        I don’t know about yours, but my car muffler does not emit lead projectiles, and isn’t regulated by the federal government, which makes your point an apples vs oranges deal.

        A car muffler does not handle the kind of pressures that a suppressor does, nor does a suppressor handle the huge volume of gases that a muffler does.

        • iksnilol

          My point is; you don’t buy cheap barrels because you can just replace them. So I don’t see the point in buying dozens of cheap suppressors over the years to only have to replace them after a couple of thousand rounds. It adds up to be more expensive than buying a quality suppressor from the get go.

          Also, to explain my analogy: both are non-vital consumable items that greatly increase the user comfort of the machine in question. So just like you don’t get the cheapest muffler that you then have to change out after a small amount of distance, you don’t get a bottom bin suppressor that has to be replaced quickly as well.

  • Beardedrambler

    Xray anyone?

    • Blake

      You saw that it’s made of titanium right? If you x-rayed it you would see the exact same thing your naked eyes can except in black and white.

      • noob

        Depends on the intensity of the X-rays. Everything is translucent if you throw enough energy at it. Like holding a flashlight to your hand in the dark.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        Don’t be pedantic, MRI shoots right through titanium just like anything else. And X-ray CT can absolutely see through titanium (requires a lot of power for a really short time)

      • Toxie

        TI isn’t much more difficult to X-ray with modern digital X-ray units.

  • Mud

    ” I also got the idea that Delta P may be providing products to ‘specialized teams’ (my own conclusion). ”

    Statements like this are so much Bovine Scatology. We have been at war continuously for 16 years now. No one except prepubescent boys are impressed by a product used by “super secret squirrels,” least of all industry and lifestyle people. Reading statements like this are akin to broken glass or nails drawn against a chalkboard and frankly I expect better from this blog.

    Having said all that. This device appears to be a $1200 muzzle break (not quiet) by any type of measure based on your review. I’m glad someone has been able to finally dethrone Knight’s Armament for most overpriced muzzle brake.

    • Pete – TFB Writer

      First off, I wasn’t trying to impress anyone with black ops or call of duty lingo. That was my honest conclusion from a couple of conversations I had with Delta P, without putting words into their mouth. I suppose you expect companies to divulge sensitive information about .mil/.gov procurement and for me to turn around and put it in print for the world to see?

      I expect better than emotional assumptions from a commenter on our blog.

      Second, show me a muzzle brake that suppresses as well as a short can on an SBR? 5.56 is going to be loud on 10.3″ barrels. Period.

      Did you even read the review? Suppression is secondary to weight and length for the Brevis.

      • CommonSense23

        And what were you trying to imply by saying that they were buying them. The “specilized teams” most people assume you are referring to have it as part of their mission sets of testing equipment. Thats why one is called Development Group and the other was rocking the name CAG for a while.

        • Pete – TFB Writer

          That’s what I was implying, but I wasn’t using it as a tidbit to impress anyone. Just an observation

          • Nicks87

            Pete, you are not wrong saying “specialized teams”. Police emergency response teams (SWAT) have been requesting lighter, shorter, more efficient cans for a long time now. There is definitely a market for this product with them if not for the DoD guys so I wouldn’t be surprised if a few depts. picked some up for testing.

          • I wouldn’t be surprised if some haven’t already requested them.

    • iksnilol

      You mean muzzle brake? It grates my ears when people type/say break
      ‘stead of brake.

      Also, a brake makes the gun louder, this makes it quieter.

      • VieteranGunsmith

        I see that misnomer all the time – and unfortunately it has become as ubiquitous as “CLIP”. I’ve seen a lot of so-called informed people call a muzzle device that redirects the blast force a, “break”, and it is annoying, isn’t it? I attribute the error in some cases to spell check software that is known for causing all kinds of somewhat inaccurate references, and he did get it correct on the second instance… I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt.

    • VieteranGunsmith

      Hey, your criticism would be better received if your terminology was accurate – it’s a muzzle brake – not a break. You did get it right the second time, so I am attributing the first to spell check gone awry. Words matter to some of us, as conservative as we may be. (Just giving you some jazz, man).

      I have to agree the prices for all suppressors are out of control – that is what happens when BATFE regulations are involved in the production and private ownership of things. Look at what they have done to Class III firearms prices. Perhaps we may see an end to the regulation of suppressors and a sane level of costs with the coming administration. I certainly hope that this makes it into the agenda while they are busily undoing the executive orders and one party laws that are consuming so much of the public’s attention now.

  • rjackparis

    …wait so whats the reduction?

    i mean it’s called a silencer.

    • SGT Fish

      very surpisingly quiet. especiallyy when the gun doesnt even look suppressed with the right handguard

    • Richie F

      Their original press release said 133dB was the signature for the 5.56 model

  • VanDiemensLand

    “One piece construction (no parts to fail)” – actually, one part to fail, then you’re f@#$ed. Just saying.

    • Pete – TFB Writer


      • noob

        At that size, if it had a QD mount and you had a mountain of cash, you could just carry a spare one in your pocket.

        • JSmath

          Why would you carry one in your pocket if it has a QD mount machined in? 😉

    • Gary Kirk

      Pretty much, even if this thing stands up.. One bad round, bad thread, any of numerous accidents that could possibly happen, and you’re out $1400.. No thanks, appreciate the ingenuity, but prefer my suppressors to be at least somewhat repairable..

      • Salty

        Weeeeell, being shorter prob changes the “run out” error? Bad threads mean more on longer cans basically. And they probably didn’t go super small on the acual baffle hole, to mitigate that problem. Or one would hope

      • SGT Fish

        one bad round, and your whole gun can be gone, though you might save some trigger parts and a buffer spring if the blow up isn’t too bad. I don’t understand the logic of “I want a weaker design so its easier to unf**k just in case I f**k it up”

      • RocketScientist

        I’m just now researching my first purchase of a can, so honest question here… but do suppressors not come with warranties? I would assume if your suppressor shat the bed, especially because if it was threaded improperly from the factory, wouldn’t you have recourse with the manufacturer?

        • Sure they all have warranties

        • Tanis

          Whether or not they have warranties is an issue, but bigger one at the moment is- in case the tube needs to be replaced, you’re in for another year of waiting as it’ll have to be form 3’ed and form 4’ed back to you, for another $200 + related expenses.

    • SGT Fish

      only with user error. this thing wont fail otherwise

      • Tom Currie

        The notion of “No User Serviceable Parts Inside” being plastered on the case of every new piece of anything mechanical is certainly the current trend — but a one-piece absolutely not-maintainable suppressor strikes me as an awfully iffy piece of long-term equipment.

        The concept would be absolutely great for those customers who don’t need tax stamps and who pay for the whole thing with OPM (other people’s money) where the entire unit is a “non-maintainable controlled item” (government speak for disposable but you’d better bring it back or account for what happened)

        • SGT Fish

          well I believe the intent was to design it for military service. And No one complains that their barrel is one piece, or anything else. you have to look at the suppressor as part of the gun, not a another whole unit. would you rather add one part to your weapon system, or twelve?

    • Core

      Yeah I agree, and it’s pricey..Rant on.. I’ll wait until they bring the price down to Earth. When the hearing act goes into play I’ll make my own out of titanium and set it up specifically for my loads and loadout. I don’t see why a suppressor that can’t drop the sound down to reasonable levels with subsonic ammo costs anywhere near $600. Rip off. I used better stainless suppressors 20 years ago, that were smaller and quieter than the ones available today. Rant off.

      • iksnilol

        Somehow I done wager that additive sintering is a bit too expensive for your garage.

        • Core

          I know people. 😉 And point being, the diy suppressor market has in recent years exploded. Folks are offering bodies, custom baffles, and components at reasonable prices. If the hearing act goes through we can all turn suppresors into a craft and build them to suit our needs. And you don’t need an AS machine. You can design your baffles in a simulator and use a 3D printer to construct the baffles and use a sand displacement mold to pour your alloy into. It’s how the knuckle heads used to pour custom titanium pistons, except they never had the 3D printers. There’s more than one way to skin a cat.

          • iksnilol

            Eh, casting titanium doesn’t sound durable.

            Castings are never as durable as all the other options. That’s why Rugers are heavier than they need to be. Since they need additional material to compensate for being cast.

          • Core

            Yeah. I would machine it.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            Have you ever machined titanium or Inconel? These materials are well known for being extremely hard to work and for being super tough. This particular suppressor doesn’t have what you could call baffles – it is a one piece construction if you read the article. Because of these complexities I don’t think many DIY shops could replicate the end product. This is still out of reach of many professional machine shops since EDM, water jet and laser cutting are the most effective methods of working these alloys. The material is itself expensive, and the tooling to produce it more so. You can bet that the 3D printer used in making something like this is also out of reach of the DIY crowd. You need to produce these on an industrial scale to make them profitable and that is where the adage “it’s the economy, stupid” comes into play – no insult intended.

          • iksnilol

            Uh, it does have baffles, it’s just that they are a part of the tube.

            Goodness gracious… I need a drink after reading that.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            This is a single unit construction fused together in a monolithic finished piece – baffles as in the conventional manner of manufacture of suppressors are not an accurate term. There are structures in this device that act as baffles but they cannot be removed as a separate part of the entire device. You can look at it any way you like, but they are integral to the structure and not a conventional set of baffles, which is what makes this so unique and interesting.

          • iksnilol

            Okaay, pulling the big guns here: A dictionary:

            Baffle as a noun:

            “a device used to restrain the flow of a fluid, gas, etc. or to prevent the spreading of sound or light in a particular direction.”

            So just because it is a part of the outer tube does not mean it isn’t a baffle. But yeah, the suppressor is a monolithic structure and that’s what makes it a bit unusual (and extra durable).

          • VieteranGunsmith

            I’m glad we have a mutual understanding. Cheers!

          • iksnilol

            That we do… why’d we argue again?


    • Does homeowner’s insurance cover firearm accessories?

  • Z

    Additive manufacturing with metal alloys. Is only possible with direct laser or electron beam welding. The process is as follows. Either powder or extremely thin wire is deposited on to the build surface. Then the beam is passed over the material welding the first layer. This process is repeated welding layer on top of layer. The amount of layers needed to reach even a short length can be very large. Some 3d printed objects have over a hundred layer per inch. The flaws inherent in this manufacturing are extreme poracity similar to metal foam. As well as the inability to use complex alloys ( read complex alloys as strong durable high performance alloys) . Because of the differences in melting point between the element components of complex alloys. Not to mention what thermal expansion does to a welded substrate. With the grain running a thousand different ways. As you may have already guessed as engineer. I consider this nearly the worst possible process to create a component. To withstand highly reactive vaporized copper and incandescent gas. As any component screwed to the muzzle of a firearm is!

    • MikeSmith13807

      So basically these guys should have just talked to you and saved themselves a bunch of money and years of R&D? Or maybe you don’t know as much as you think you do? *shoulder shrug*

    • JumpIf NotZero

      Came to write pretty much this.

      There is ZERO possibility that “which leads in part to a dramatic weight savings and increased strength.” is true here. Increased over other sintered designs – idk maybe.

      Increased strength over the same design in billet or forged or basically anything but sintered – no way.

      Anyone who’s commenting how this is cool but wouldn’t want MIM parts in their gun is making a funny. MIM is stronger than DMLS typically. They’re both sintered, MIM is just compressed and “fused” as a whole, where DMLS is fused one tiny section at a time.

      • Pete – TFB Writer

        There are no absolutes. So ditch the ZERO.

        And you missed the point about the “increased strength”. There are no welds to fail, no seams no fitted parts.

        • Ian Osborn

          It depends on the alloy used and any post processing done, but additive titanium alloys are between high strength low alloy steels and mid grade stainless steels in terms of yield.

          Additive manufacturing of any alloy really just putting down really small weld beads. So you are going to get materials that are as strong as welds. Welds are just about always weaker than “standard” steels or other alloys. Ti is notoriously difficult to weld. Sintering is fundamentally different than additive.

          The only thing that will make this weight less is they combined parts and don’t have redundant wall thickness. The cost of which is no replaceable parts.

          So it’s just about as close to “zero” a chance of being stronger than standard Ti as you can get.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            It’s not welding. It is produced by fusing the metal under high pressure and high temperature, and you can bet the entire product is heat treated to achieve sufficient materials strength to contain sustained gunfire. By the way, the best gun barrel steels are not the hardest, (strongest alloy), it is tough to allow it to recover from repeated pressurizations and heatings and still retain sufficient strength and durability to be safe. Strength is a toughness or resiliency measure in the application of gun barrels.

        • Bdub

          That doesn’t make this failure-proof, but that it fails in other ways. I’d love to see some destructive tests to see what kind of effects a few thousand rounds from a carbine has on these things.

          I support Delta P in their designs, and sincerely wish them the greatest success in pushing the boundaries of firearms manufacturing… but you’re kinda outside your lane when you start arguing material properties with mechanical engineers.

          • Pete – TFB Writer

            I make no claims regarding my non-existent engineering skill or the Brevis being “failure proof”.

            My point was about using welds to join two pieces of metal, not that additive manufacturing isn’t just one big weld.

          • SGT Fish

            you realize this suppressor was designed by actual engineers, with degrees, not just joe bob with an SOT in his garage. they are the real deal and wouldn’t waste their time and money on making an inferior product. they also state that the can will outlast your barrel

          • Bdub

            If you know that to be a fact, great, but it’s not something I typically take for granted.

          • SGT Fish

            although I enjoy the look of their gen 1 cans (looked like a redbull can) they switched to this one piece design because it is better. this company isn’t just trying to be different as we see often, they are actually making a better product. And yes I have met one of the engineers behind this product

          • iksnilol

            Well, just ’cause you’re an engineer doesn’t mean you know about all processes.

        • Tom Currie

          You say “there are no welds to fail” but what everyone who knows engineering has been telling you is that the entire thing is one big weld.

          • Pete – TFB Writer

            I get it. But isn’t there a benefit to being one big weld vs using a weld to join two other pieces of metal?

          • JumpIf NotZero


            You also wrote above it has no seams…. another way to explain this is it’s one big seam.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            It’s a fused metal product – no visible seams because the particles are fused by laser under 1,000 PSI. Check the SAAMI specs for how much pressure is present at the muzzle of your firearms.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            Exactly this. Although I do kind of enjoy being educated on a topic then being told I’m wrong by “official” people… because it just reinforces to me that the next time they say something on a topic I don’t know about – I should just remain skeptical.

            (Glenn-Mann Amneisa Effect)

            There is straight up zero percent chance this is stronger than an equivalent design with almost any other metal process.

            DLMS and similar are REALLY GOOD for proof of concept prototypes – NOT for sale pressure vessels!

          • Pete – TFB Writer

            How can you be so certain about materials and techniques used by a company you have no affiliation with?

            You’re saying a company’s entire product line isn’t suitable for its application.

            You need to qualify your absolutes.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            I’m confident because Its plain as day.

            It’s this “weird” combination of being in the prototyping industry, understanding the techniques, having a concept of physics and metallurgy. Just like the other people here who are correctly pointing out this is not a great silencer process.

            There are ZERO additive mfg processing that will result in even close to similar organized molecular structure relative to billet, casting, forging, even MIM or other pressure cast sintered metal techniques. There is no alignment in atoms or crystalline array what-so-ever.

            It’s science, and common sense.

            This process is for prototyping, and making complex plugs for investment casting. Not for pressure vessels.

          • Sand

            I am an R&D engineer with a leaning towards optimization for manufacturing, and I can tell you that as much as design engineers always want the “best” process, or demand that you make something in a way that they understand, that is rarely ever optimized. In this case, they seem to have optimized for weight, which additive manufacturing is particularly good for, since one can create structures that would be impossible to machine.

            Also, as a prototyping guy, you should understand that sometimes you just have to try something to see if it will work. If nothing else, sometimes you have to just have to build one to prove that it WILL blow up. Hopefully not in a customer’s face, but I would hope that they have tested adequately.

            Not being big on metallurgy, it is difficult for me to comment intelligently (let’s assume that I have been so far…) on your concerns about crystal lattice and grain structure, but my father works with compression sintered biomedical components and my father in-law specializes in materials science, and what I have been talked at about (especially during the holidays) leads me to believe that there do exist sintering processes that develop superior strength and fracture toughness to traditionally processed alloys. It is possible that these processes are still essentially “academic” or only in the lab, but it would not surprise me if someone had developed some sort of post SLS heat treatment that could drastically improve the mechanical properties of the component.

            Really, my point is that it is way to easy to dismiss something innovative out of hand because it is on or over the ragged edge of what we believe to be possible; I have done it myself and been proven wrong. I’m not going to run out and buy one of these myself (also, I live in a gun-hostile state that does not approve of such things), but I’m curious to see how it turns out. Like it or not, product development does not end when the first unit ships, it is a continuous process.

            Apologies for the rambling post. Hopefully it gets my point across without getting lost in the woods.

          • JumpIf NotZero


            They are using a 3D prototyping method to sell a complete product. I fully support prototypes being made this way, it’s awesome. As a finished part, heh, no.

            Sintered metal can be strong when it’s under immense compression and heat. That combined with impact could get you a similar effect to forging where you are slamming the atoms to be all lined up.

            This silencer above, is not that. At all.

          • Sand

            I suppose it’s my youthful optimism talking, but I’m not so quick to dismiss their process (though I imagine that they will have difficulties with manufacturing in volume). Still, I would not be the first in line to buy one.

            That being said, I completely understand where you are coming from. I deal with the consequences of uninformed decisions every day, and I don’t want to be on either end of the transaction. I’ll align my expectations with your greater experience while hoping for a miracle.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            This is not sintered metal – it is fused metal. There have been many things in aerospace industry that have been made by this process and it is extremely strong and durable. I think you are mixing your understanding with fact and producing your favorite flavor of word salad instead of investigating the process which you clearly do not understand.
            This isn’t MIM and it isn’t sintering, it is fusing materials on a nanoscale level under extreme pressure and laser temperature sources, producing a material which is otherwise very difficult to machine. It isn’t cast from molten alloys, and it isn’t traditional 3D printing using a polymer or weaker metal substrate/armature/carrier. It is made from one material and done under extreme pressure and temperature.
            Forging is blacksmithing. This is metallurgical manipulation of the material into a finished and durable product.

          • Pete – TFB Writer

            Thank you.

          • VieteranGunsmith

            Glad to help.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            For what? He couldn’t be more wrong and seems to have no idea what these process are.

            But I love that with no knowledge of the topic you are eager to believe the person who is telling you what you want to hear.

          • Pete – TFB Writer

            So respond. Prove it all wrong. Everyone should listen to you, not him?

            Trolls don’t belong here. Constant negativity doesn’t belong here. Consider these facts when crafting future responses in any TFB posting.

          • No apology needed it was well thought out.

          • Sand

            I am a mechanical engineer, and though I admittedly do not have any specialized knowledge of welding, I was both told by professionals and taught in school (third year, if I recall correctly) that the weld is rarely the weak point in a welded joint, if executed properly. The weak point is typically the zone of transition between the substrate and the weld, and the weld can in fact be stronger than the substrate itself. Unfortunately I don’t have any citations, so you will have to my memory’s word for it.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            True, welds can be “stronger” than the base material… If you want to ignore they’re extremely brittle compared to the base material and yes, it’s the transition that has been heated to lose or alter it’s temper is weaker. This is why you would weld annealed then heat treat to remove and equalize stresses.

            Calling this thing “one big weld, so it’s strong” is very incorrect. The truth is closer to saying that each layer is strong, but that each layer is weakly bonded to the previous.

            One big weld, no.

            One big seam, yes.

        • Stephen Paraski

          GM has been using ‘Powdered Metal Connecting Rods” on it’s LS series engines for over a decade. The large end is “cracked” instead of cut. Iconel has been used for decades as rocket nozzles and exhaust valve stems.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            100% different process. Does not apply here. You are talking sintered metal that is compression fused. This is not that, at all.

    • Kathy

      They are able to direct metal laser sinter these suppressors from actual Inconel and titanium. It’s my understanding that the Ultra version is not 100% titanium as implied in this article, but is actually Inconel for the threads + mount section and blast baffle area then titanium for the rest. The standard version is 100% Inconel. They’re rated for down to a 7.5″ barrel on 5.56, which is shorter than most, and are full auto rated. You may have doubts about their strength, but Delta P sure doesn’t. And I’ve personally seen a Brevis II with over 10k rounds through it that showed almost no degradation from new at all (the bore hole in the blast baffle showed very minor erosion…I don’t think the diameter had opened up yet, but the edges were rough and there was some slight bevel to it). I believe them to be absolutely solid.

      • iksnilol

        Regarding the 10k rounds suppressor, what barrel length was that, and was it rapid fire?

        • Kathy

          I was told it was shot primarily on a select-fire M4 that was used for demo purposes. That was a Delta P gun that they’ve been using for years for demonstrations. It had been on pistols with 7.5″ barrels and a couple guns in-between, but the vast majority of the rounds were on the 14.5″ M4 setup and most of those shooting full auto. There’s also a Sheriff’s Deputy local to me who has had one since the original Brevis was brand spanking new and claims to have closer to 15k rounds through his, but I haven’t personally seen the suppressor.

          • iksnilol

            Ah, then it is in pretty good condition. Reassures me that a laser sintered titanium suppressor is a good choice. Especially consdiering I will use it on a bolt action with a somewhat long barrel.

        • Belt fed gun—-

  • Harry’s Holsters

    I’ve loved this concept since I first saw it. I’ve never fired a suppressed 5.56 supersonic that is comfortable to fire without ear pro. I’m not married so I enjoy my hearing and always wear ear when shooting anything but a suppressed 22.

    This would be more interesting if they changed the design around a little to bring the cost down. If they used stainless and increased the weight I still think they’d have a good seller if they would get it under $800.

  • MikeSmith13807

    Pete, this is an awesome product and truly the future– all user reports I’ve seen have been very positive. Please get it on a meter ASAP to shut these guys up! 🙂

    Guys, a 2″ diameter gives you a lot of interior volume. Delta P has done a lot of R&D. Their goal is for you to put it on, never take it off, and have it outlast the barrel.

  • noob
    • Tassiebush


      • Koolhed

        “Are you supressing me?”

    • KestrelBike

      I need less Dbs for my earhole!

  • Sasquatch

    Now I need a forearm that covers it up and then I will have infinity ninja bucks!

    • DW

      Young one you so foolish. Senior ninjas adds on a blast shroud and only then cover them all with a forearm, and THEN put on AFG in the very front.

  • Wolfgar

    Looking forward to more up dates, this could be ground breaking if it all holds water. Just the ticket for hunting. Anyone who has accidentally shot an unsurpressed 16″ AR without hearing protection can appreciate the potential of such a device.

  • JSmath

    The real reason it’s so small is that additive machining is still extremely expensive and slow. Give it 5 years and a bit of commercial success and we’ll very likely see one twice the size with some exceptional performance.

  • Squirreltakular

    Please post an update as soon as you can get some time with a sound meter.

  • IdahoMan

    What kind of out-of-their-minds, irrational Lunatics would pay these kind of prices?

    • Sand

      The US government.

  • Tassiebush

    What’s the go with cleaning the thing?

    • iksnilol

      I assume you don’t clean it, the high pressure of centerfire ammo probably flushes out things so that you can’t clog it up.

      Worst case scenario you fill it with solvent and flush out anything caught inside.

      • Tassiebush

        Yeah that makes sense. The crud would not be able to exceed a certain level before it starts to plateau. I really like the idea of this. Just put it on and forget about it!

  • iksnilol

    We also have them in Norway, they cost a bit more than a third of the price for the Delta P. Though it is larger but it only extends 10 cm.

    EDIT: is it legal to export silencers out of NZ?

    • I don’t think so—not to the US anyway. Guns and the answer is yes.

      • iksnilol

        Oh, I know you can’t get anything to the US (ITAR messes up so much, I mean, I am even willing to pay the exorbitant price for a SiCo Sparrow just to have one, but alas I cannot).

        Because suppressors are unregulated in Norway (they’re a non-vital part, just like a stock or sling) so import should be easy peasy, but export outta NZ? I’ve no clue sadly.

        • Nigel

          I’ve shipped a few suppressors from NZ to europe. It’s a particularly onerous process 🙂
          Walk in to gunstore and buy a suppressor of your choice.
          Walk to Post Office
          Buy packaging and address it
          Pay at the counter

          No regulations here that I am aware of in terms of exporting. Suppressors are viewed as health and safety items, you don’t even need a license to own, buy, or manufacturer them. A nation of only 4 million people, but offhand I can think of about 20 companies/individuals who build them. .22 rimfire ones start at around $ 30 USD with a decent one around $60

          • iksnilol

            Not bad, I was just wondering if there’d be trouble if the package went through a country where suppressors are more controlled.

            I know that Norway isn’t the problem (and I now learnt that NZ isn’t either), but what about in between?

          • Nigel

            I’ve sent two to the UK, one to France, and one to Germany with no issues. Added “Sound moderator” to the customs forms. But yes I guess there is always the chance of it being stopped in transit.

          • iksnilol

            Thanks again, I will look into it. I wonder how much shipping costs though 😛

        • Mike Crews

          Yes it is sad to say Hollywood made silencers illegal in the US. I was trained to kill just as silently with a knife. But I have to wear muffs at the range impacting safety of all. I Pray the hearing protection act gets passed.
          Speaking of dumb A$$ laws SBS and SBR what the hell were these politicians thinking ? The reason those restrictions were made was to keep someone from concealing such a gun have they heard of a coat ?but 308 and 223 pistols are ok ? There is NO LOGIC HERE.

          • iksnilol

            I agree. The SBR/SBS laws would make sense if pistols were banned as well.

            But banning short rifles/shotguns for being concealable makes no sense if pistols (who are like super concealable) are legal.

    • Ken Rountree

      Yes. NZ exports suppressors as they are completely unrestricted. Any 3 year old with a wad of cash can buy one.

      • iksnilol

        Soooooo… I could just buy one in NZ and have it mailed to me in Norway?

        How’d that work? No paperwork at all?

        • Ken Rountree

          I think so – get in touch with ODL and see what they can do for you.

  • A.WChuck

    Why didn’t they make a longer version as well for those who want less noise and are not as concerned about weight?

  • Mark Chavendish

    Oceania Defence of NZ has been producing affordable sintered cans for some time. They had a can that looked damn near identical to this without the increased material on the side for the branding 5 or 6 years back. They have since moved back to more common lengths and diameters. To my knowledge they’re producing the only sintered ratchet/qb mount can on the market.

  • Bdub

    Where’s the pics of the brake afterwards? How much erosion did it experience? It’s great that it survived 10,000 rounds without a catastrophic failure, but how well is it still performing after all that?

    Inquiring minds want to know!

  • Dave D

    Surprised by a lot of the negativity in the discussion here. Brevis cans are specialty products that do not meet everyone’s needs. If you’re looking for the most sound suppression, then a short light weight can is not for you. If you care more about maneuverability and weight, then the Brevis deserves a look.

    Brevis has been on my radar long before this review and I must admit that my last 5.56 can was not a Brevis. I ended up buying a short light can with less sound suppression than most 5.56 cans. It is a trade off. Went with a “traditional” K-style can with QD mount.

    Didn’t go with the Brevis because I wasn’t ready for a dedicated can. While Brevis can be moved from rifle to rifle, I believe the beauty of the Brevis is that you attach it and forget about it. My QD mount probably only weights slightly less than the Delta P review here. That is very appealing to me.

    Now lets pass the HPA and the Brevis will be looking even better to me.

  • That would be nice to see him be more open minded. I don’t understand how someone could be so sure without an extensive background in that specialized area.

    • VieteranGunsmith

      The world is full of overconfident and authoritarian critics. Wait and see what happens in the next Congress with the Democrats… I’m sure they will all be voicing their opinions loudly within camera and microphone range, and the media will be there to cover it and add their two cents of opinion with them (bridging the gap between news and editorial commentary has become commonplace to the point you can’t accept their words at face value).
      Nothing new ever penetrates a closed mind, and a closed mind is the usual source of the bulk of critical commentary. Not always, but it is commonly so. So many self acclaimed experts…

  • Spartikis

    I was fortunate enough to pick up one of the test versions of this suppressor when they were working on reducing the weight from 7.5 to 6 oz. It is extremely short and almost unbelievably light weight, the perfect suppressor for an SBR. The price is high but you’re not buying any ordinary suppressor, its in an entirely different category by itself. Its like being upset that a Ferrari costs more than a minivan…

    • Pete – TFB Writer

      Awesome. I appreciate you coming by.

  • mig1nc

    I would like to see the Brevis II 7.62 tested on a 9″ .300Blk SBR or pistol. It’s a tad longer and heavier, but blackout suppresses better, so there’s that.

  • roguetechie

    And or electron beams…

    Plus at least 2 more other techniques which are less common.

    And this is just straight up additive manufacturing technology, once you add in hybrid additive and subtractive manufacturing it gets even more diverse!

  • Z

    There was some disagreement to my post. So this is my response. First I appreciate us having this discussion. The people reading it will be better informed. I am pro additive manufacturing as well as standard manufacturing methods. So let’s have a deeper look. Using a forging method. I can bring the material up to a single stable critical temperature. Forged it quickly holding nearly the same temperature. Then cool the part. Per the best method for the type of part. This method results in a very good even grain structure. Aligned with the structure of the part. Machining from billet has it own advantages. The material can be held at nearly room temperature. While machining is being done. This results in a extremely even grain. With virtually no stress applied to the material. Both these methods transfer very well into heat-treatment. For even carbide distribution, and small dense grain. Can any of the current additive methods match the quality of these methods? For critical parts. Okay is simply not sufficient. If your cellphone breaks. Buy another one. If the wheel studs on your car. Fail while driving on the interstate. That’s a much more serious issue. Likely resulting in at least a trip to the hospital. Would it matter to you if only 1% of the model suffered such failure’s. Parts intended to be used permanently mounted on combat rifle. Also do not have this luxury. The two way range is not that forgiving.

  • Goody

    In New Zealand the suppressor market is completely unregulated and prices start at $40. If (more like when) the hearing act goes through these big ticket companies will be in for a shake up… Silencerco is smart getting into integral designs.

  • David

    As soon as I saw the surface finish I knew it was sintered. Very cool to see and I’m sure they are taking advantage of the DMLS process to create some very unique internal geometry.

    The downside is that DMLS is not a cheap process to use and I’m sure that’s a big factor in the cost of this suppressor.

  • VieteranGunsmith

    The Saturn V rocket nozzles to be precise – the largest ever produced – you can cover a Fiat 500 with one and the V had five of them. I would like to know how much that set us back… There are a few on the floor of the Atlantic, perhaps they should be salvaged to make suppressors out of them?

  • VieteranGunsmith

    As you wish, Cuato… 😉

  • Wow!

    I don’t see anything revolutionary here. Increase the diameter of the can and you get more volume to work with, so of course it is going to be quieter than a can with less diameter and louder than a can with same or larger diameter and longer. Sintering is the new stuff to get more complex shapes but ultimately you are going to run out of room to do the job, and the more complex shape you make, the more volume you use up in baffle material. That said, hopefully they got something planned to really make this product stand out on it’s own in the future.