To brake or not to brake... that is the question.

[PredatorSlayer]

Please show where instant hearing loss happens at 110db. That’s about as loud as most people have their TV and radio set at.

And if so, then the only possible way to get hearing safe is suppressed, with plugs and muffs. There would be absolutely no way to get an unsuppressed rifle to hearing safe no matter how much ear pro you wore.

“Keep in mind that exposure to sounds higher than 110 decibels can cause instantaneous hearing loss.”

Department of Defense Hearing Center of Excellence.

I know you are a huge proponent of suppressors. I don’t see the point…i think they offer very little benefit other than some people think they look cool. My biggest point is they don’t make it hearing safe. You still have to wear hearing protection if you don’t want to risk damaging your hearing. So if you have to wear hearing protection anyway, why not save some weight and take advantage of a shorter rifle.

 

[Bluefish]

“Keep in mind that exposure to sounds higher than 110 decibels can cause instantaneous hearing loss.”

Department of Defense Hearing Center of Excellence.

I know you are a huge proponent of suppressors. I don’t see the point…i think they offer very little benefit other than some people think they look cool. My biggest point is they don’t make it hearing safe. You still have to wear hearing protection if you don’t want to risk damaging your hearing. So if you have to wear hearing protection anyway, why not save some weight and take advantage of a shorter rifle.

Now if you say we have to be under 110db, which is not correct for impulse noise, you have to use a suppressor to get under that level With a high power rifle. At 160+, even 50db of double protection won’t get you under 110.
i believe the 115 do exposure limit is 15 min. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.95

 

[Formidilosus]

“Keep in mind that exposure to sounds higher than 110 decibels can cause instantaneous hearing loss.”

Department of Defense Hearing Center of Excellence.

No, that is constant levels for an extended period of time. It doe snot apply to extremely short duration impact noises such as gunfire.

I know you are a huge proponent of suppressors. I don’t see the point…i think they offer very little benefit other than some people think they look cool.
My biggest point is they don’t make it hearing safe.

That is factually not true. Not trying to be rude here- but my take from what you post is that you are trying to convince yourself that suppressors don’t work. 100% factually true= suppressors that reduce db to mid 130’s is hearing safe for infrequent shots such as when hunting.

You still have to wear hearing protection if you don’t want to risk damaging your hearing. So if you have to wear hearing protection anyway, why not save some weight and take advantage of a shorter rifle.

You are arguing against your own point. If sounds above 110dbs cause damage, then there is absolutely no way to reduce unsuppressed centerfire gunshots to a safe level using ear protection.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search - 20031787 - Firearms and hearing protection.

In most cases, noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) develops slowly and is not recognized until it has an impact on one's ability to communicate. An exception to the rule occurs when hearing loss results from exposure to impulsive noise, such as from the recreational hunting and shooting that...

www.cdc.gov

Occupational Noise Exposure - Standards | Occupational Safety and Health Administration

www.osha.gov

these are two I could find quickly. For steady state noise (duration of more than 1 min), yes 120db would be damaging. For impulse noise the accepted limit is 140db. Note that some individuals will see damage at slightly less than 140db and I have read tests where individuals had observable damage between 135 and 140. The same test had individuals who could handle slightly more without damage.

if 120db impulse noise causes instant damage every shooter would be doing damage on every shot with a high power rifle If not wearing double protection. Most rifles are 160+ at the ear, thus you would need a minimum of 40 db of protection to get under 120. that requires plugs and muffs as no single protector tests that well. With a brake, you wouldn’t be able to get under 120 even with double protection.

What Noises Cause Hearing Loss? | NCEH | CDC

Noise is a significant source of hearing loss, but you can protect your hearing. An important first step is to understand how noise causes hearing loss.

www.cdc.gov

Now if you say we have to be under 110db, which is not correct for impulse noise, you have to use a suppressor to get under that level With a high power rifle. At 160+, even 50db of double protection won’t get you under 110.
i believe the 115 do exposure limit is 15 min. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.95

Search “db for instant hearing loss”. I read the OSHA regs and requirements. Seems to me the most common consensus is at 120 db instant hearing loss can occur.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

100% factually true= suppressors that reduce db to mid 130’s is hearing safe for infrequent shots such as when hunting.

Show me a legit source that says that. This is the point in the conversation Last time where you left and never got back to me. DoD may be wrong. You asked me where I got it and I told you. Several sources are saying that 120db instant hearing damage can occur. I have yet to see where 130’s is hearing safe. You keep telling people that and give no legit source to back it up. I am not trying to be rude either, but 130’s being hearing safe contradicts everything I am seeing.

 

[Formidilosus]

What Noises Cause Hearing Loss? | NCEH | CDC

Noise is a significant source of hearing loss, but you can protect your hearing. An important first step is to understand how noise causes hearing loss.

www.cdc.gov

Search “db for instant hearing loss”. I read the OSHA regs and requirements. Seems to me the most common consensus is at 120 db instant hearing loss can occur.

How are you getting a centerfire rifle to less than 120db?

 

[Formidilosus]

Show me a legit source that says that. This is the point in the conversation Last time where you left and never got back to me. DoD may be wrong. You asked me where I got it and I told you. Several sources are saying that 120db instant hearing damage can occur. I have yet to see where 130’s is hearing safe. You keep telling people that and give no legit source to back it up. I am not trying to be rude either, but 130’s being hearing safe contradicts everything I am seeing.

That’s because what you are reading is for extended exposure. As well, any noise above 85’ish DB’s can be harmful depending on duration.

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/98-126/pdfs/98-126.pdf

130-140 db do not exceed more than 1 sec.








There is no combination of ear pro that will get common centerfire gunshots to 115db without a suppressor. So if you are worried and convinced that you have to get sounds below 115db than a suppressor and ear pro is the only way.

 

[Bluefish]

What Noises Cause Hearing Loss? | NCEH | CDC

Noise is a significant source of hearing loss, but you can protect your hearing. An important first step is to understand how noise causes hearing loss.

www.cdc.gov

Search “db for instant hearing loss”. I read the OSHA regs and requirements. Seems to me the most common consensus is at 120 db instant hearing loss can occur.

Search under impulse noise, then see what you get. Steady state and impulse noise are different. They require different meters to even measure the spl. I have spent a lot of time researching this and tested hearing protection with noise cannons. worked at a company that made custom hearing protection. you should also research ipil testing which is a better metric to use for how hearing protection works for loud impulse noise.

it’s been a while since I did all this, so I don’t have all the links to the white papers anymore. Honestly there was a lot less research than I expected on the subject. Some is quite barbaric, turns out the best analog ear to humans is a cat. Guess how they checked the ears for damage? At the time (10+ years) I was doing the research i don’t believe a sound meter existed to even measure impulse noise. You had to use a data recorder with a high db microphone and then go back and calculate the Noise level. Now everyone just buys an impulse meter.

 

[SouthPaw]

I personally do not hunt with a brake or magnums, but a question for those of you hunting with braked magnums:

Given the need for double ear pro to not sustain permanent heaing damage with a 165dB+ rifle, do you actually pack both muffs and plugs? Do you just give up on any quick opportunity because it takes time to properly secure plugs and then also deploy the muffs, or do you have a quick strategy? Or just say "F it, it's only a shot or 4?"

 

[Bluefish]

Show me a legit source that says that. This is the point in the conversation Last time where you left and never got back to me. DoD may be wrong. You asked me where I got it and I told you. Several sources are saying that 120db instant hearing damage can occur. I have yet to see where 130’s is hearing safe. You keep telling people that and give no legit source to back it up. I am not trying to be rude either, but 130’s being hearing safe contradicts everything I am seeing.

Did you even read the link I posted from niosh? It says the limit is 140. Below that it’s a dose measurement if it’s safe. So 1 shot at 135 is safe, 20 shots, not safe. It also includes the formula to determine how many shots.

 

[Bluefish]

I personally do not hunt with a brake or magnums, but a question for those of you hunting with braked magnums:

Given the need for double ear pro to not sustain permanent heaing damage with a 165dB+ rifle, do you actually pack both muffs and plugs? Do you just give up on any quick opportunity because it takes time to properly secure plugs and then also deploy the muffs, or do you have a quick strategy? Or just say "F it, it's only a shot or 4?"




Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

Honestly, just electronic plugs which get the spl close to 140, but I have two silencers in jail for next year. I don’t notice a temporary shift, so if there is damage it’s less than a night at the bars.

 

[RedSnow]

No brake. I'd look into a Linear comp that will help direct some of that sound away from you.

 

[Thinkingman]

Please show where instant hearing loss happens at 110db. That’s about as loud as most people have their TV and radio set at.

And if so, then the only possible way to get hearing safe is suppressed, with plugs and muffs. There would be absolutely no way to get an unsuppressed rifle to hearing safe no matter how much ear pro you wore.

There is no way my TV is 110db.

 

[gbflyer]

Huh?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UTJL]

+1 for no muzzle brake. It’s not fun to be 36 and already have hearing loss due to 4 shots from a muzzle brake without ear pro.

 

[KenLee]

+1 for no muzzle brake. It’s not fun to be 36 and already have hearing loss due to 4 shots from a muzzle brake without ear pro.

Took me 3.
25 years ago.
Brakes on new rifles go back in the box.
Aftermarket brakes on used guns I buy get thrown away.

 

[f16jack]

Guys.

This has been a great discussion. I'm glad that everyone has been respectful and has supported their position with actual science.
Here's what I've learned from this thread:

1. Single hearing protection can reduce noise by up to 30 dB.

2. Double hearing protection only increases this dB reduction by 5 dB, to 35 dB reduction.

3. A silencer, in the peak freq of a rifle shot, can reduce by 38 dB. This takes a level of 158 down to 120.

4. A muzzle brake increases noise by as much as 14 dB. This takes a level of 158 up to 172 dB. Single hearing protection, worn properly, can reduce this to 142 dB. Double reduces it to 137 dB.

5. Sustained noise (> 1 minute) above 120 dB can cause hearing damage.

6. Impulse noise > 140dB can cause hearing damage.

7. Conclusions.
a) If you choose to use a muzzle break, you may need double hearing protection. Everyone else at the range next to you needs it also. For you to have it and inflict hearing loss on others would be unethical (assault, reckless endangerment, actually).
b) if you choose to use a suppressor at the range you should wear hearing protection due to multiple impulses. While hunting hearing protection is not needed (unless you need a box of shells to drop your elk).

Your choice. Some folks like brakes. No prob, protect your hearing and the hearing of folks around you. Some folks like suppressors. They make the rifle a little heavier and front heavy, but that's a choice. The suppressor does reduce or eliminate hearing damage.

 

[Unckebob]

An Area 419 brake is going to cost you $200+ after tax. That money is better spent on the Tax Stamp for a suppressor.

While a suppressor won't tame the recoil as much as a brake, it reduces the blast which makes it easier to spot impacts and get off a second shot if necessary.

BTW - I always wear double hearing protection at the range because of the risk of others using muzzle brakes.

 

[Bluefish]

F16jack, great summary. The only thing I would change is double protection can offer up to 50db of protection. There is a good test done by the Fort Collins police dept. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2002-0131-2898.pdf

the one thing not touched on yet, is that hearing protection varies greatly depending on how it worn. Tests show most people don’t wear it correctly and only get around 15db on average from foam ear plugs. This is with a plug that can test to 30+ when used correctly. I have verified this on myself with testing. Fully inserted 30+, pulled out 1/4” and protection drops significantly. Honestly a suppressor does so much more to protect our hearing it’s criminal that we can’t just go down to the store and buy one.

 

[5811]

I spent most of Saturday at a fairly busy range. When I see an un-broke (braked?) rifle, it's an anomaly, not the other way around. I think everyone should double ear pro at a rifle or pistol range. I think calling "assault" by way of a rifle with a brake is a bit much. Having said that, everyone has their line. Mine is an SBR at an indoor range. Ill just leave if someone is shooting one of those.

While I agree the exposure of noise to others can be excessive, it seems to be less so on the shooter. So, im curious, is that "up to 14db increase" measured at the shooter or next to the shooter? Just in regards to that hunting shot when I'm all alone.

I like brakes, but they are loud. Some of the data in this thread has been eye opening. I was thinking about dipping my toe in the NFA waters, but now I think I'm definitely going to.