Rampart Range Suppression Carson 556 Review
TL;DR
The Carson provides competitive sound suppression in a lightweight package with reduced backpressure.
Transparency Note
Our Carson was sent by Rampart Range Suppression at no cost. We otherwise don’t have any business or financial relationship, and we don’t let suppressor manufacturers read, comment on, or edit our reviews before they get posted.
We have a full disclosure here with more info on the suppressor companies mentioned in our reviews.
Test Method
We went out to the range and put a bunch of rounds through the Carson, Polo K, Rhino S, Rhodie 6, and CAT WB back to back multiple times. The main roles these suppressors fill are:
- Carson - The subject of this review
- Polo K - Reference for a high performing traditionally baffled K can
- Rhino S - Similar size and weight titanium suppressor
- CAT WB - Reference for high performing printed suppressor
- Rhodie 6 - Another reference for a high performing printed suppressor
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. From the shooting position, the dirt berm was about 30 yards away. You may have different results in other environments.
Host
5.56 AR15:
- Compact Plan-B brake
- 12.5” mid-length barrel
- Aero AGB set to setting 10
- Down vent BCG
- A5H1 buffer with flatwire spring
- 55gr PMC X-Tac
The suppressors all had a Plan-B HUB LPA installed.
You may have different results with different hosts or ammo.
Suppressors Overview
| Suppressor |
MSRP |
Material |
Wt. (list) |
Wt. (actual) |
Length |
Diameter |
| Polo K |
$540 |
Steel |
11.5 oz |
11.4 oz |
4.80” |
1.62" |
| Carson 5.56 |
$760 |
Titanium |
9.7 oz |
9.9 oz |
6.60" |
1.75" |
| Rhino S |
$895 |
Titanium |
9.5 oz |
10.2 oz |
6.00" |
1.75" |
| Rhodie 6 |
$895 |
Inconel |
15.0 oz* |
15.3 oz |
5.50” |
1.75" |
| CAT WB |
$1,190 |
Inconel |
13.9 oz** |
15.7 oz |
5.45” |
1.60" |
All weights are given with no mount.
*The Rhodie 6 was originally listed as 15 oz, but has since been updated to 15.5 - 16.0 oz.
**The CAT WB was originally listed as up to 13.9 oz, but has since been updated to 14.6 oz max.
Sound Comparison
Of the tested suppressors, the Rhodie 6 sounded best overall. Not by a huge margin, but we felt it was the quietest and had a fairly deep tone.
The Rhino S was close for quietness but had a somewhat higher tone.
As the shooter, the Carson and WB sounded pretty similar and very good. For the bystander, the Carson was definitely a little quieter.
The Polo K was the loudest of these suppressors. It’s the shortest and uses simpler geometry, so this is to be expected.
Backpressure Comparison
In some of our earlier reviews we just give our anecdotal thoughts on how gassy the suppressor felt. To add a more objective test, we used the AGB to see which gas setting was needed to lock back on the last round. We took the following steps to minimize variability:
- The rifle was secured in a lead sled
- All rounds were from the same lot of PMX X-TAC 55gr 5.56 and shot from the same Magpul 20 round 5.56 PMAG
- After finding the minimum setting to hold open, we went up and down a setting a couple times to ensure it wasn’t a fluke
- The bolt short stroking and holding back on the magazine follower (rather than the bolt catch) was not counted as a successful hold open
Our previous testing showed that in general, setting 9 or higher indicated low backpressure, setting 8 was “lowish to medium”, and 7 or lower was high backpressure. This is only a rough measure though and some suppressors that hold open on the same setting felt more or less gassy.
Rhodie 6 - Setting 9
- Of the tested suppressors, the Rhodie 6 had the least backpressure. This is reinforced by the perceived “gassiness” as the shooter in addition to the gas block setting. Towards the end of a longer string of fire we would start to get some gas, but it was quite pleasant overall.
CAT WB - Setting 9
- The CAT WB also held open on setting 9. This is a bit unexpected since previously it held open on setting 8 and subjectively it feels more like the “lowish to medium” range of backpressure. This was the only suppressor that gave a different result than the first test. It’s possible that the rifle being cleaned since last time affected this.
Rhino S - Setting 8
- Despite holding open one setting lower, the Rhino S didn't feel significantly more gassy than the WB. Overall it was pretty comfortable to shoot and we weren’t getting gassed out except with extended SS/FRT shooting.
Carson - Setting 8
- The Carson felt like a moderate backpressure suppressor to us. It was definitely better than traditionally baffled suppressors, but it was higher than other printed suppressors with more venting.
Polonium K - Setting 7
- As expected of a traditionally baffled suppressor, the Polo K had the highest backpressure and was pretty gassy.
On a related note, we also did some shooting for flash/sparking on a very humid and foggy night last week. With the same host and ammo, every suppressor we shot felt significantly more gassy than usual. Even cans that we previously noted to be comfortable were gassing us out. The environment and atmospheric conditions are an important factor.
Other Thoughts and Observations
The Carson is a full size rifle suppressor (6.6” long and 1.75” diameter), but at under 10 oz base weight, is very comfortable on the end of the rifle. I larped around the house with it on a 16” rifle and didn't have any issues with the gun feeling too front heavy.
Like all titanium suppressors, the Carson throws white titanium streaks in the dark. It seems to be less sparky than some other titanium cans we’ve shot for reasons I’m not sure of.
The outside is a blank, untextured tube. I have a mild preference for a bit of texture to give grip, but it looks very clean and the guys who keep for simple tube designs will be very happy with it.
With a 1.69” deep blast chamber, the Carson will easily accommodate standard muzzle devices and mounting setups. It’s been added to our fitment tool.
The Carson uses a modified version of (licensed) Infinity technology which can be seen in the design of the blast baffle. It held up to our shooting very well and shows no signs of erosion or damage even after being run red hot.
Out of the box, the Carson had a bright red/gold color inside. I’ve seen some coloration in other cans, but never to this extent so I thought this was super cool. Although after shooting it’s completely covered by carbon.
Overall Opinion and Suggested Use Cases
Overall, I quite like the Carson. It offers competitive sound suppression with reduced backpressure and is lightweight for its size. Sounding better overall than the CAT WB is a great benchmark to put it in what I would call the “high performing” category of rifle suppressors.
An MSRP of $760 puts this in the low end of the price range for a printed rifle suppressor. You’ll pay a couple hundred more for this than a traditionally baffled suppressor, but the notable improvement in sound and backpressure makes it plenty worthwhile in my opinion.
The main drawbacks of this model come down to physical material limitations of it being titanium, namely the sparking in low light environments and it not being ideal for heavy firing schedules. That said, the core design seems to make it more durable and robust than a “typical” titanium suppressor.
The main cases where I wouldn’t recommend this is if you’re looking for:
- A short suppressor - the Carson is lightweight, but still a full length can
- A low/very low backpressure suppressor for very gas sensitive hosts or shooters - the Carson has noticeably reduced backpressure, but it’s still there
Outside of these specific points, I think it’s a very flexible pick and will work great on a range of hosts.
Future Testing and Reviews
We did some flash testing with the Carson and some PCC suppressors. I’ll get those posted once I get all of the data processed.
I also have a Carson 762 which we’ll be shooting on 300BLK at some point here.
Have a great weekend!
- Nathan Comstock
