Do you regret getting your suppressor?

[ElPollo]

My regret is not getting one sooner. I was never a suppressor guy. Thought they weren’t needed etc. finally got one and I’m sad I didn’t do it a long time ago. Simply for the fact it’s so much quieter to shoot. Easier on the ears

My tinnitus seconds your regret.

 

[metroplex]

I finally got my first can last month and have a bunch more waiting for Form 4 approval.

This first can is a pistol can that can be disassembled for cleaning. It did fairly well to cut down on 9mm sound, not thst 9mm is that loud of a cartridge. Recoil reduction wasn't that noticeable.

However. It makes the guns run so much dirtier and the can itself gets absolutely filthy. I still have to wear hearing protection because no one else at the range is running a can or of they are. It's only a handful. The guys with 308 or 3006 still run those loud.

Im kind of regretting buying the other suppressors. The only rifle I have that really should get one is the 300 win Mag, but even then I hear the recoil reduction from a suppressor isn't as good as a dedicated brake. And this 300 Win Mag kicks fairly hard because it is light. My shoulder always gets black and blue bruised after 20 rounds.

I am not sure I'd like the fully welded cans with all the gunk inside that stay there. I usually like to clean everything after each range session

 

[Tyler Holderby]

I've had one for 2+ years and can't bring myself to use it on a hunting rig. The recoil is more severe than a break, it added 6.5" additional lenght, 13 additional ounces, still a touch loud to my ears. I wanted to love it and I personally just don't. If I could do it over, I would go with a bigger suppressor, 8 or 9" to soak it up.

 

[metroplex]

I've had one for 2+ years and can't bring myself to use it on a hunting rig. The recoil is more severe than a break, it added 6.5" additional lenght, 13 additional ounces, still a touch loud to my ears. I wanted to love it and I personally just don't. If I could do it over, I would go with a bigger suppressor, 8 or 9" to soak it up.

I think PRB did a test of a bunch of brakes and a TBAC Ultra 9 for recoil reduction. That 9 inch can didn't cut down recoil much at all compared to something like an APA or Precision Armament. Everyone kept telling me that a can will cut down on recoil and concussion etc.... Honestly I felt it was overrated. Hopefully once my rifle cans come in I may feel differently, but I don't have high hopes.

 

[CMP70306]

If a person is hunting from a blind, off a machine (ATV/UTV, truck, boat, etc), or walking very short distances……then, yes, a suppressor is worth considering.

I’ve walked several miles in a day on drives here in the woods of PA, with the exception of a couple tight spots pushing through some pine thickets I’ve never really noticed the extra length or weight. I did however noticed I wasn’t deaf when I shot my bear 4 times with a 6.5 PRC.

So you still have to wear hearing protection to prevent hearing loss with a can, correct? I just don’t see the point if I have to wear hearing protection either way. Just run a brake and use hearing protection. Save you some weight and barrel length.

The bones in your face can only suppress sounds by about 40 decibels so even with the best hearing protection that 180 decibel braked rifle is still sending 140 decibels to your ear drums compared to the 90 decibels a suppressed rifle with ear pro would send.

I finally got my first can last month and have a bunch more waiting for Form 4 approval.

This first can is a pistol can that can be disassembled for cleaning. It did fairly well to cut down on 9mm sound, not thst 9mm is that loud of a cartridge. Recoil reduction wasn't that noticeable.

However. It makes the guns run so much dirtier and the can itself gets absolutely filthy. I still have to wear hearing protection because no one else at the range is running a can or of they are. It's only a handful. The guys with 308 or 3006 still run those loud.

Im kind of regretting buying the other suppressors. The only rifle I have that really should get one is the 300 win Mag, but even then I hear the recoil reduction from a suppressor isn't as good as a dedicated brake. And this 300 Win Mag kicks fairly hard because it is light. My shoulder always gets black and blue bruised after 20 rounds.

I am not sure I'd like the fully welded cans with all the gunk inside that stay there. I usually like to clean everything after each range session

My brother shoots a .300 Win Mag with a Nomad L with the E Brake that weighs around 10 pounds. Recoil is significantly reduced compared to the bare muzzle to the point he doesn’t shoot without it. I would 100% rather shoot a good suppressor over a good brake as the can is significantly more pleasant.

 

[Gobbler36]

No I refuse to ever shoot without one

 

[MaraviaDave]

I’ve walked several miles in a day on drives here in the woods of PA

Exactly my point…..You’re not walking very far, with most likely, a very lightweight day pack on relatively flat ground. In your case it really doesn’t matter. My post was intended for mountain hunters.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I think PRB did a test of a bunch of brakes and a TBAC Ultra 9 for recoil reduction. That 9 inch can didn't cut down recoil much at all compared to something like an APA or Precision Armament. Everyone kept telling me that a can will cut down on recoil and concussion etc.... Honestly I felt it was overrated. Hopefully once my rifle cans come in I may feel differently, but I don't have high hopes.

I think you're focusing on the wrong parts of a gunshot and what can make shooting unpleasant. The suppressor does completely eliminate the concussion of the shot. What's left is the supersonic crack which can be loud though. The absence of the concussion does change your shooting experience a lot.

As far as the recoil reduction I'll link the thing you're referring to below. So there's a couple different measurements going on and you seem to be caught up on the Average % Reduction and the % Reduction In Overall Momentum. Suppressors are not even in the same stratosphere as muzzle brakes when it comes to reducing the overall momentum of a shot. However, if you look at its Peak Force Reduction it isn't that far off of the brakes. If you go to the section at the top labeled How To Read The Results you'll see a bit of a description of how you should interpret them. There's no set system for what makes recoil unpleasant but I personally fall more into the Peak Force camp when it comes to what does it. The suppressor smooths out the recoil impulse and instead of a sharp kick it instead turns into more of a shove. For me at least that (and the absence of concussion) makes my shooting experience much more pleasant. Even if the total overall momentum reduction isn't as high as a brake, and I've used very aggressive muzzle brakes before I got my suppressors.

Muzzle Brakes: Recoil Results for 308 & 300 Magnum

This post summarizes the results for the recoil tests ran on 20+ muzzle brakes using two 30 caliber ...

precisionrifleblog.com

 

[metroplex]

I think you're focusing on the wrong parts of a gunshot and what can make shooting unpleasant. The suppressor does completely eliminate the concussion of the shot. What's left is the supersonic crack which can be loud though. The absence of the concussion does change your shooting experience a lot.

As far as the recoil reduction I'll link the thing you're referring to below. So there's a couple different measurements going on and you seem to be caught up on the Average % Reduction and the % Reduction In Overall Momentum. Suppressors are not even in the same stratosphere as muzzle brakes when it comes to reducing the overall momentum of a shot. However, if you look at its Peak Force Reduction it isn't that far off of the brakes. If you go to the section at the top labeled How To Read The Results you'll see a bit of a description of how you should interpret them. There's no set system for what makes recoil unpleasant but I personally fall more into the Peak Force camp when it comes to what does it. The suppressor smooths out the recoil impulse and instead of a sharp kick it instead turns into more of a shove. For me at least that (and the absence of concussion) makes my shooting experience much more pleasant. Even if the total overall momentum reduction isn't as high as a brake, and I've used very aggressive muzzle brakes before I got my suppressors.

Muzzle Brakes: Recoil Results for 308 & 300 Magnum

This post summarizes the results for the recoil tests ran on 20+ muzzle brakes using two 30 caliber ...

precisionrifleblog.com

That's an interesting point. Each time I shoot my 7lb 300WM bolt gun it feels like someone punched me in the face and shoulder at the same time. But I did run the APA Little B and thought it was decent for reducing the recoil. I think when I saw that web page I felt if the TBAC Ultra 9 wasn't as good as the Little B then it may not be worthwhile

 

[JohnJohnson]

That's an interesting point. Each time I shoot my 7lb 300WM bolt gun it feels like someone punched me in the face and shoulder at the same time. But I did run the APA Little B and thought it was decent for reducing the recoil. I think when I saw that web page I felt if the TBAC Ultra 9 wasn't as good as the Little B then it may not be worthwhile

I've used an APA before but I found the concussion to be horrific. For muzzle brakes my favorite by far was the Insite Arms Heathen since it reduced a lot of recoil but was much better at not directing the concussion back at the shooter. My suppressors are a far better shooting experience than either of those, for me at least.

 

[Chad717]

Following

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I’ve walked several miles in a day on drives here in the woods of PA, with the exception of a couple tight spots pushing through some pine thickets I’ve never really noticed the extra length or weight. I did however noticed I wasn’t deaf when I shot my bear 4 times with a 6.5 PRC.


The bones in your face can only suppress sounds by about 40 decibels so even with the best hearing protection that 180 decibel braked rifle is still sending 140 decibels to your ear drums compared to the 90 decibels a suppressed rifle with ear pro would send.


My brother shoots a .300 Win Mag with a Nomad L with the E Brake that weighs around 10 pounds. Recoil is significantly reduced compared to the bare muzzle to the point he doesn’t shoot without it. I would 100% rather shoot a good suppressor over a good brake as the can is significantly more pleasant.

But either way you still need to wear ear pro. So my point was, if you have to wear ear pro to save your hearing either way, why not save inches and weight. If all you hunt is flat land, probably doesn’t matter, but if you hunt out west in steep country, its a big deal. BTW - your argument about bones and hearing damage is one of the dumbest I have heard on the subject.

 

[JohnJohnson]

But either way you still need to wear ear pro. So my point was, if you have to wear ear pro to save your hearing either way, why not save inches and weight. If all you hunt is flat land, probably doesn’t matter, but if you hunt out west in steep country, its a big deal. BTW - your argument about bones and hearing damage is one of the dumbest I have heard on the subject.

You have to wear ear pro at the range, yes. I don't use ear pro while hunting with my suppressors though. As far as the facial bones thing I don't know where his numbers necessarily came from but a few years back there was a fair bit of discussion about concussive hearing loss when the owner of Accurate Ordnance wrote this article. I'll let you draw your own conclusions but it's not exactly just made up out of thin air.

Don’t Go Deaf — Understand Risks of Concussive Hearing Loss « Daily Bulletin

Did you know you can damage your hearing even if you are wearing the best hearing protection available? Well, have you ever heard of concussion (or concussive) hearing loss? There is no amount of anything you can put in or over your ears to protect you from concussion loss.

bulletin.accurateshooter.com

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I don't use ear pro while hunting with my suppressors though.

Then you are putting your hearing at risk…that is my point.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Then you are putting your hearing at risk…that is my point.

Why would that be your point when my suppressor reduces the gunshot to 121db at shooter's ear? I don't get the basis for your point at all now. Do you have any facts or numbers at all that back it up?

 

[metroplex]

I thought I read somewhere the bolt closing on an AR15 (as an example) was something like 100 dB. That sharp crack hurts my ear in an indoor environment. I cannot fathom or want to hear 120 dB without hearing pro, no matter what OSHA might claim is safe. I'd still wear hearing protection even with suppressors.

I am however, interested in reducing that recoil and concussion from my 300 Win Mag. But I also want the most precision possible, and maybe durability of the can. I saw how my pistol can gain 0.1 oz after 250 or so rounds. One of the suppressor OEMs/designers said once a suppressor gains 1 oz, or about 2500-3000 rounds (which matches what I saw personally with my 9mm CCI/WWB ammo), it needs to be cleaned. So how do I effectively clean these sealed/welded Titanium rifle cans aside from sending them back?

I do have some nice 3M Peltor TEP-300s, EEP-100s, as well as Peltor Tactical electronic earmuffs. They are about 30 dB NRR with the Skull Screw tips, and I can hear a branch cracking behind me (as well as all of the BS conversations going on at the range) but it filters out gunfire. I don't mind wearing the TEP-300 or EEP-100 because they are ear buds basically and offer no compromise in having a quiet conversation.

 

[justin davis]

But either way you still need to wear ear pro. So my point was, if you have to wear ear pro to save your hearing either way, why not save inches and weight. If all you hunt is flat land, probably doesn’t matter, but if you hunt out west in steep country, its a big deal. BTW - your argument about bones and hearing damage is one of the dumbest I have heard on the subject.

My suppressor quiets it down enough to where you don’t need to wear ear pro. Sure if nice for hunting. And I’ll take the small weight and length penalty for the benefits

 

[PredatorSlayer]

My suppressor quiets it down enough to where you don’t need to wear ear pro. Sure if nice for hunting. And I’ll take the small weight and length penalty for the benefits

Thats a misconception- if you don’t want any hearing damage, you will still need to wear ear pro, even with a supressor.

 

[Formidilosus]

Thats a misconception- if you don’t want any hearing damage, you will still need to wear ear pro, even with a supressor.

You are generally pretty objective in other subjects. Why are you so unobjective with suppressors?

 

[PredatorSlayer]

You are generally pretty objective in other subjects. Why are you so unobjective with suppressors?

Man, I have researched the heck out of them, Used them extensively…I also have tinnitus in my left ear from shooting so much. I think they look cool, but if I have to wear ear pro to protect my hearing even with a suppressor, I really don’t get the point. I don’t think they always provide as much value as some people think…thats it.