Are OTB suppressors worth it?

[alexnelon]

Edit: If this were a true statement, then arguing over 3 dB at the 130dB mark would be fruitless anyway — as no suppressor would be good enough alone for a shot, and all decent suppressors would be good enough when combined with ear plugs. In other words, all of these suppressors would be functionally equivalent given a range of 3dB, and it goes back to being a silly debate.

This is 100% correct, it is not a good use of anyone's time to worry about the difference between 127dB and 132dB, much less argue.

Like I've said before, it's like arguing whether the safe threshold for driving your car into a brick wall with no seat belt is 70 or 85 mph. Seems like a big difference until you realize the actual number is probably more like 15 mph, but we can't know for sure because we can't intentionally harm people to find out.

The aggregate study I linked above is showing that basically every major study done on firearms-related NIHL was wrong and the results are generally invalid.

The International Journal of Audiology (iirc, it's been a while) published a study out of Taiwan back in like 2010 that did a 10-year study on police officers using double ear pro and well over half of them had significant, measurable hearing loss after just 2 weeks, which got worse and worse for the 10 years they tracked it. Using plugs AND muffs.

 

[Bluefish]

Lower is still better because your comments are not considering degree of damage.

I don’t think anyone disagrees that lower is better. There are just functional limits of how quiet you can get a can and still make it usable. An AR platform is a good example. The platform itself is right about 140 db from port pop, action noise, so a 120 db can really doesn’t matter.

 

[glock233]

I don’t think anyone disagrees that lower is better. There are just functional limits of how quiet you can get a can and still make it usable. An AR platform is a good example. The platform itself is right about 140 db from port pop, action noise, so a 120 db can really doesn’t matter.

Yeah. But the reality is many users are going to use it with ear plugs most of the time. Then practices without earpro. Then hunt without earpro. Getting the DB as low as possible preserves your hearing. We might hit the lower limit at a certain weight/cost, but that’s the can you want.

ARs are never hearing safe. So it’s an outlier.

 

[JoeK]

I have the OG 6.5, OGL, and Airlock nano and 6.5. The Airlocks absolutely heat up faster. On the same rifle, the mirage is notable on the Airlock after 4-5 shots. Double that for the OG 6.5, and actually a ton for the OGL.

The Airlocks’ novel feature is creating extreme turbulence in a small package. It’s really eating that pressure, and doing so with a really low weight of materials. There are significant trade offs when you do that. And it’s getting hot fast. It requires slow firing and bolt action only. The good news is that’s all they’re marketing / verifying it for, and all I’m using it for.

The OG is more rugged in the sense it can take higher pressures and more speed in firing. More material. Obviously less internal turbulence.

Overall they’re really close peers. Airlock is just doing more pushing the limits of size and weight at the cost of heat.

This is also my experience so far. I have the ZG7, OG65, and a nano. The airlock suppression acheived for size and weight is awesome, and the cost/drawback comes in fast heatup to noticeable mirage. even through the LSwild cover on a 6.5CM or .243 the ZG7 gets mirage shimmering in just a few shots. It was 100+temp when I was shooting with glock233 at the recent AZ meetup and about that hot also a week later at my home "range". Without really making a concerted effort to analyze and compare in detail the mirage was th e biggest functional difference to me.

Both the Airlock and the OG6.5 cans sound really good. I can tell the difference in the sound profile, it's obviously a different TYPE of sound signature, but both are very pleasant. So far just a few hundred rounds in I think I prefer the sound of the OTB even though the ZG7 may well be measurably quieter in dB. I know I prefer the heat signature of the OG65, compared to the Airlock anyways.

comparing the OG65 to my old KGM R30T, a titanium can but pretty sure it's machined and welded baffles and 16oz all in with the proprietary muzzle device to mount. the OG does heat up faster, but obviously the size and weight of the OG65 are FAR superior to the KGM. I'd have to shoot them on the same day again to compare the sounds. so far the OG65 is the frontrunner to the happy place for me considering all the factors.

Be very interesting when the OG6 comes through to compare with the nano. Nano seemed just barely louder than the R30T on my 223. like barely louder. at over 12oz lighter and about 3 inches shorter too.

 

[Kooziehiker]

I'm probably not near as suppressor smart as many here, but I love the feel, look, and performance of my AB 8. To my ears at least, a 3db difference is easily discernable.

View attachment 1044021

nice looking set up. I'm ordering an AB6 for my 18" 6.5CM glad to see so many positive experiences.