Do you regret getting your suppressor?

[Formidilosus]

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.

Ok. How do you get “hearing safe”- whatever that means to you, without a suppressor?

 

[JohnJohnson]

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.

You need to wear it on the range but we've already established you absolutely do not need to while hunting, at least with my suppressor and with most 7+ inch suppressors. Saying otherwise is just objectively false.

 

[Bluefish]

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.

To keep this on a technical level, ear plugs give about 30 db of protection, muffs 25 ish, silencer 30, plugs and muffs 40-50. Hearing protection is not all equal. Poorly worn foam plugs are 15db or so of protection. There have been plenty of studies to show this is true.
As to why a silencer, let’s do a comparison, if we start with a 165 db rifle, plugs get you to 135 db or about the same as a silencer with no protection. Plugs and muffs get you to 115. if we start with the same rifle, but with a silencer, now the starting level is 135. add simple plugs and you are now down to 105. That’s a huge difference in how many shots you can be exposed to in a day and stay under your daily noise dose. I am too lazy to look it up, but if I remember right, 135 is maybe 10 shots a day, 105 would be 500+. Now, thats a standard center fire rifle, If you look at a 50 bmg, it’s 180-185, so at best you are 130-135 range. a braked rifle is probably in the low 170’s, making it so simple plugs are not hearing safe and on the low end a 22 cal bolt rifle is just over 140db.

based On current understanding, 140db is the threshold for instant damage. Get below 140 and it becomes a dose issue, time and noise level. Gun shots are fast events, .0035-.005 seconds per. The lower you get the exposure level the more shots are “safe” per day. Lower is always better and a suppressor gives you a much lower starting point that a naked barrel or braked rifle.

 

[wesfromky]

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

9mm pistols don't seem to suppress nearly as well as other platforms, esp with supersonic ammo. Something like an mp5 with subs is where you really can tell a difference.

From everything that I read when I was researching my first ones, you don't really need to clean the center fire cans unless you put a lot of dirty ammo through it. Basically, each time you shoot, it blasts out as much gunk as it leaves. That is from the dead air guys. Rimfire is different though, so those need to be cleanable.

I will also say that the difference in suppression between a semiauto and a bolt is huge in my experience. And, yes, you can get most hunting rifles down to hearing safe for a few shots with the right can. Ear pro for range sessions for sure, but in the field, they aren't really needed with the right setup.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

we've already established you absolutely do not need to while hunting

Have we tho?

 

[OKHunter84]

I love my suppressors. I especially love playing around with sub sonic rounds and rimfire. That is where you really notice a huge difference.

The only major con, in my opinion, is that you really need to set your rifles up for being suppressed as far as hunting goes. If you have a 24" barrel on your hunting rifle and throw a suppressor on it, then it really makes it carry differently. It will throw the balance of your rifle off. You kinda end up feeling like your carrying a javelin around the mountains.

The only other con is that if you zero your rifle with a can then you would have to rezero or only shoot with the suppressor mounted.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Have we tho?

View attachment 566051

I tend to pay more attention to shooters' ear numbers since when I fire a rifle, my ear is not a couple feet to the left of the muzzle. But if that's how you shoot then yes those mil-spec test numbers are informative. If that's the case though I'm a bit curious how you can aim the rifle if your head is all the way by the muzzle. For us "behind the gun" shooters our ears are safe in hunting situations. But hey lucky for us TBAC gives us both of those numbers!

https://thunderbeastarms.com/products/ultra-9

 

[Happy Antelope]

I have never used a suppressor. I was set on getting one, but now I am really questioning the cost. Are they really worth the money? What advantages do they offer other then reduced noise? Do any of you guys regret spending the money on one?

Best money ever spent, Can't imagine shooting without one.

 

[justin davis]

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.

You have used suppressors extensively? But your so against them?


I’ll take shooting with a suppressor over a non suppressed rifle any day. It’s a game changer for me. I also enjoy the impacts it has on animals with hunting. I saw my wife shoot a deer this year and there were bull elk feeding nearby. The elk didn’t even raise their head after she shot the buck

 

[PredatorSlayer]

You have used suppressors extensively? But your so against them?


I’ll take shooting with a suppressor over a non suppressed rifle any day. It’s a game changer for me. I also enjoy the impacts it has on animals with hunting. I saw my wife shoot a deer this year and there were bull elk feeding nearby. The elk didn’t even raise their head after she shot the buck

I am not against them. I don’t think they provide enough value to offset the weight and length penalty. Just my opinion, nobody has to agree with it.

 

[wesfromky]

Have we tho?

View attachment 566051

Pew Science has some much more real world relevant data.

Suppressor Sound Rankings — PEW Science

What is the quietest silencer for your suppressed firearm? The quietest suppressor for your use case is listed on this page with detailed links to the Silencer Sound Standard test data. PEW Science test data with PEW-SOFT is the most accurate suppressor test data available.

pewscience.com

 

[justin davis]

I am not against them. I don’t think they provide enough value to offset the weight and length penalty. Just my opinion, nobody has to agree with it.

Gotcha. Yea the thunderbeast is impressive to me. When that sound of a shot is quieter than the dry fire noise

 

[OKHunter84]

I am not against them. I don’t think they provide enough value to offset the weight and length penalty. Just my opinion, nobody has to agree with it.

a cheap way to get into one is to order a kit and do a form 1. I did this for a little mess around rimfire and it's a blast. Got my stamp in a month.

 

[CMP70306]

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.

Hearing Loss Through Bone Conduction

If a patient wears earmuffs in combination with custom made earplugs, can you still get hearing loss through bone conduction (through the skull) when shooting a variety of guns? What is the rate of attenuation from external noise to the cochlea through bone conduction?

www.audiologyonline.com

There is some info for you, even if you completely block the sound from entering your ears your skull will only reduce the sound by 40 or so decibels. Depending on the cartridge you can still get hearing damage from it even if you block 100% of the noise going to your ears.

 

[Loo.wii]

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

Your a bit misguided.

Rifle rated cans self clean.

My 300 winmag shoots like a 6.5 when suppressed.

As for the still having to wear ear pro factor.
Go to a plot of public land.

 

[Cameron.25]

a cheap way to get into one is to order a kit and do a form 1. I did this for a little mess around rimfire and it's a blast. Got my stamp in a month.

You can't do the form 1 suppressor kits sold as solvent traps anymore far as I know. I think you can still manufacture your own without a kit tho

 

[MaraviaDave]

From my perspective, the people who rabidly love suppressors and seem to get uptight during suppressor pros/cons discussions, are the ones who’ve had them for less than 5 years, or are in the process of getting their first can. Everyone else has figured out that they’re a tool that have their place. Specifically, low recoiling, high round count training rifles. While muzzle brakes are best for high recoiling, low round count, hunting rifles.

 

[OKHunter84]

You can't do the form 1 suppressor kits sold as solvent traps anymore far as I know. I think you can still manufacture your own without a kit tho

From my perspective, the people who rabidly love suppressors and seem to get uptight during suppressor pros/cons discussions, are the ones who’ve had them for less than 5 years, or are in the process of getting their first can. Everyone else has figured out that they’re a tool that have their place. Specifically, low recoiling, high round count training rifles. While muzzle brakes are best for high recoiling, low round count, hunting rifles.

I didn't know that about the traps now. I did mine five years ago.

I disagree about the muzzle brake on hunting rifles. I think they're unnecessary. I've had some hard recoiling rifles that sucked to shoot and I wouldn't even notice the recoil when I was shooting at an animal. Pretty sure I sustained hearing damage from a cousins braked 257 WeatherBy while we were hunting and I definitely noticed that!

 

[ResearchinStuff]

While muzzle brakes are best for high recoiling, low round count, hunting rifles.

I think what you're noticing is that a vocal contingent of guys here are moving away from that type of rifle, and using a low recoil suppressed trainer for hunting.

 

[isocyanate]

I’m certain that I have hearing damage from shooting a braked rifle in prs comps for a few years. Used the good orange foamies and know how to fit them. It’s just too loud, and got me over about 5k rounds. Muffs over plugs seems to be a requirement for high volume braked shooting.

So I think the notion that a centerfire can is irrelevant since you need ear pro anyway is a little misguided. If a braked rifle is around 180-185 and my plugs take 27 off that I’m still accumulating damage. Add muffs for 50 total off, and I can still accumulate damage with enough dose.

I’m guessing my ultra 9 gets my 308 down to 130. It’s lower in tbac’s lit, but mines a shorty so whatever. It barks a little under a metal roof. Anyway, you can do the math and I can never shoot centerfire without a can again, which is my plan.