Suppressor Opinion: Meh, It’s Ok

thinhorn_AK

"DADDY"
Joined
Jul 2, 2016
Messages
10,204
Location
Alaska
I’m with the OP, hunted with cans for a few years and it didn’t make any difference other than I carried more weight and still killed the same game one and done.

I much prefer just running a brake as the rifle is shorter and better balanced and recoil reduction is better. I save the cans for the range but for serious hunting it’s entirely unnecessary.
Glad to know it’s not needed when I do a “serious” hunt.
 

Lemhi

FNG
Joined
Jul 13, 2023
Messages
68
So if you hunt with a can you're not "seriously" hunting? Brakes suck, IME.
I’ll clarify. Where I hunt there is a serious amount of illegal UTV use. Often times I have hiked 5-6 miles to be confronted with an illegal UTV/4-wheeler.

Nothing gives me more joy than hiking past the lazy hunters that don’t follow the rules and smoking a big buck while they watch through their spotting scope from their ill gotten position on the mountain.

There is no greater joy than making all the noise I can while harvesting an animal just to spite the fuckers that illegally wheel into areas not patrolled by fish and feather.

Nothing against hunting with a can it’s just not for me. I hike too far and work too hard to carry the extra weight/length and it’s never been detrimental to my success while hunting. On the other hand it has provided massive enjoyment whilst adhering to the law while others do not. OTC Idaho tags are the shits.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2019
Messages
1,013
For hunting, where there is only 1-2 shots max on a trip, a short rifle with no can or brake is light and not bad on the ears.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say every audiologist in the world would disagree with that statement. We know the decibel numbers which cause instant hearing damage (140+ db) and we know bare muzzles are over that and braked muzzles are worse.

1) adds weight to the muzzle and changes the balance of the rifle.

2) adds length to the rifle and can make it not as maneuverable/compact
Cut the barrel back by at least a few inches and you'll lose some/all of the added weight and most of the added length.

3) reduces blast and some recoil but on a light kicker like 6.5 Creedmoor, it wasn’t bad to begin with.
And yet animals seem to react so much differently to the reduced concussion/noise of suppressed shots.

It seems like you're running into the two tradeoffs (length/weight) that everyone who has ever even looked at a suppressor with their eyes can see. None of this is earthshattering and seems like you're a victim of unrealistic expectations.
 

Anschutz

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Mar 19, 2017
Messages
227
Location
Fairbanks, AK
My head did just explode lol. While I think the points you mention are fair and to each their own, absolutely. But I also disagree with "For hunting, where there is only 1-2 shots max on a trip, a short rifle with no can or brake is light and not bad on the ears". That is not true in the slightest, because the ringing you hear after 1-2 shots is permanent hearing damage. If you had a decent can on for those 1 or 2 shots, it would be greatly lessened.
You're wrong. My tenitus just acts up after shooting an animal. There is no correlation to further hearing loss. Sarcasm for those without a detector.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
808
Location
Central Oregon
I’m about to explode some heads when I say after owning a suppressor since October and hunting with it, it’s kinda cool but has its drawbacks on a hunting rifle.

1) adds weight to the muzzle and changes the balance of the rifle.

2) adds length to the rifle and can make it not as maneuverable/compact

3) reduces blast and some recoil but on a light kicker like 6.5 Creedmoor, it wasn’t bad to begin with.

4) Expensive

I own 1 Tikka CTRs and 1 Tikka UPR 20” barrels (308 and 6.5 Creedmoor) and for hunting rifles, they are great in their stock configuration. For hunting, where there is only 1-2 shots max on a trip, a short rifle with no can or brake is light and not bad on the ears.

So I’m actually going to say, I’ll keep the can for now but I see it more useful at extended range sessions vs hunting.

For a pure hunting rifle, I don’t see the tremendous value that others find with a can.
I’m building a 6.8 Western w/suppressor. It will be the rifle my 9 yo will eventually hunt with
 

Binz17

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Messages
132
I live in IL, so I can't own one. Maybe some day I'll get to see what the hype is all about. My ears would thank me.
 

wyosam

WKR
Joined
Aug 5, 2019
Messages
945
Bare muzzle for me. I bought a can a few years ago, ended up moving to another state while it was in jail. While I was waiting I spent some time at the range with other’s suppressed rifles, as well as a nomad just like the one I bought on my primary hunting rifle. Had buyer’s remorse before ATF ever cashed the check. Still have never jumped through the required hoops to get it to me in my new state. Probably never will. Noise reduction was nice, but I’d still use hearing protection. Didn’t care for the balance even on a rifle with an 18” barrel and a 6” ti can. Hated the way it felt on my rifle (22” barrel, standard nomad). I like the finished length on my rifle, I’m sure as hell not cutting 6” off it to keep it there with a can. I don’t even order threaded barrels any more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
4,904
Location
oregon coast
I don’t own one, but plan on putting them on all of my rifles (even the serious hunting ones😏) in the very near future

My first will be on my next build, turning my 308 into an 18” 6creed for my daughter… it will be of huge benefit there, and she won’t have to worry about the extra weight for a few years, since I’ll always be packing it for her

Next one will be on my wife’s 6.5creed(I also pack her rifle) then I’ll get one for my primary rifle

Less recoil the better, and brakes are not ideal for the ladies, because I want to be able to communicate with them while they are behind the rifle, and things like tracking a bear in really thick country may require a quick shot and the ability to communicate is extremely important, and a braked rifle sucks in that context

Of course nothing is perfect, but I want all of our rifles suppressed, for many reasons. I have no issue chopping a barrel, it’s for a good cause

Reducing recoil and slowing down the recoil impulse as well as a reduction in noise is worth the downfalls to me, especially for my wife and daughter.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2021
Messages
810
giphy.gif
 

JjamesIII

WKR
Joined
Jan 3, 2022
Messages
358
Location
Ohio
I’m about to explode some heads when I say after owning a suppressor since October and hunting with it, it’s kinda cool but has its drawbacks on a hunting rifle.

1) adds weight to the muzzle and changes the balance of the rifle.

2) adds length to the rifle and can make it not as maneuverable/compact

3) reduces blast and some recoil but on a light kicker like 6.5 Creedmoor, it wasn’t bad to begin with.

4) Expensive

I own 1 Tikka CTRs and 1 Tikka UPR 20” barrels (308 and 6.5 Creedmoor) and for hunting rifles, they are great in their stock configuration. For hunting, where there is only 1-2 shots max on a trip, a short rifle with no can or brake is light and not bad on the ears.

So I’m actually going to say, I’ll keep the can for now but I see it more useful at extended range sessions vs hunting.

For a pure hunting rifle, I don’t see the tremendous value that others find with a can.
They are a much better option than a muzzle break for hunting. I’ll shoot a couple of shots hunting in a season without ear pro on a bare barrel. I did that exactly two times with muzzle breaks over the years and will never do that again! I felt like I was in the beach assault scene of Saving Private Ryan.
Hunting with ear pro sucks, even with the electronic ones.
 

MT_Wyatt

WKR
Joined
Aug 20, 2014
Messages
1,899
Location
Montana
I walked away after my first experience using one in the field quite amazed. The way deer just don’t immediately spook after a shot is seriously nice, as is not fussing with ear pro. I’m all in on the can, but did have my rifle done with a 20” barrel knowing that. I’d go 18” now after carrying it all season with a suppressor.
 

Reburn

Mayhem Contributor
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
2,838
Location
Central Texas
Last edited:

Bluefish

WKR
Joined
Jan 5, 2023
Messages
405
I was underwhelmed the first time i took my suppressed rifle to the range. Yes, it’s quieter and less recoil, but not as much as I expected. Then I tried subsonic, that’s amazingly quiet. helped the guy I hunt with sight in his braked rifle, no comparison to suppressed. I will make the changes needed to deal with the extra weight and length as it makes the experience more pleasant. I do hunt with hearing protection as my tinnitus is already bad enough.
 

CMP70306

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Mar 3, 2023
Messages
210
Partly yes. I also hunt from tree stands.

Man, you’d think hunters for the past 300 years were plain miserable until they started hunter suppressed.

Hey I’m not saying I won’t hunt with the suppressor, I guess it just blow me away like some folks.

I hunt from tree stands as well as putting on drives through thick brush and going forward I won’t buy a rifle that doesn’t accept a can. After almost spending a week deaf in one ear at 21 due to a 30-06 not knowing if my hearing was ever going to return I decided to get a suppressor to save what’s left of my hearing.

I have shot almost exclusively suppressed for the past 6 years and now plan my rifles around putting suppressors on them.

IMG_8218.jpeg
 
Joined
May 6, 2018
Messages
8,723
Location
Shenandoah Valley
Wasn't the OP also the guy that was on snipers hide making fun of rokslide and the 223 thread while calling us dumb?

It's possible, however if nobody linked it I wouldn't have seen it.


Thinking it got linked tho, cause something about it is coming back to me.




It's official tho, cans cut your manhood. Just like trucks, rifles should be unmuffled. Loud and proud, 'merica.
 
Top