Silent Destroyer: Reimagining the DeLisle Commando Carbine

This suppressed carbine is lot #1079 in the upcoming April 2019 Morphy’s auction.

Tom Denall’s “Silent Destroyer” (originally built on surplus Sanish “Destroyer” carbines) is a Ruger 77/44 bolt action rifle with a large integral suppressor. Chambered for the .44 Magnum cartridge, it allows the use of a heavy bullet to maximize ballistic potential while remaining subsonic, prevents mechanical action noise by being a bolt action system, and feeds from 3-round detachable box magazines. This particular example has been fitted with a light and small Burris Fastfire red dot optic, and makes for a handy and extremely quiet carbine. Like the DeLisle, but without all of that system’s flaws! 

13 Comments

    • Yes, hunting/pest-control. Some of the ORIGINAL PURPOSES of the firearms suppressor. I’m glad I decided to read up more on why the suppressor was invented, and most of it was for noise-control for a utilitarian/sporting event. Nothing to do with assassinating stuck-up stuffed-shirt politicians with monocles.

      • As one book I have says, the original idea was to be able to shoot rats in the hen-house without adversely affecting egg production.

        My father was a police officer in the 1930s and 40s, and one of the jobs on the department that nobody wanted was pest control at the city dump. (Today, it’s still in the same place, but they call it a landfill.)

        He used a .22 Winchester pump-action rifle with a Maxim pattern suppressor for the job, because the previous officer who was on the detail used his .38 service revolver and scared the living daylights out of people along the nearest street about 300 yards away.

        The difference was the previous officer was assigned the detail as punishment for having screwed up rather spectacularly. My father and his partner volunteered for the detail because it gave them a chance for target practice with the department paying for the ammunition.

        cheers

        eon

  1. The Ruger 77/44 magazine holds 4, not 3 rounds, and the magazine is not difficult to remove if you use the right drill.

  2. De Lisle “flaws”? Evidence? Take the point that only 17 pre-prods and around 129 production models were made, and that the conversion was mechanically tricky. But where is the evidence that it had significant flaws?

  3. Concerning the ejection flaws of the De Lisle the first is that to eject successfully the centre of gavity of the case must be over the side of the action before the extractor lets go of the case rim. The gun works after a fashion because the jumping up of the next round when the bolt clears the magazine throws the fired case out of the action. The correct solution would be to use a sprung plunger ejector ( as M16). This is not possible with the No 1 bolt head.
    Maybe the designers wanted the case left in the action so that it could be taken out manually without leaving it on the ground as evidence

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. Silent Destroyer: Reimagining the DeLisle Commando Carbine – Surplused

Leave a Reply to Jim Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.


*