Unknown suppressors OG testing

[Q_Sertorius]

The sound barrier is a thing too.

Even if you had a magic suppressor that dropped muzzle created noise to 0, I’d still think most of us would want to use ear pro due to the sonic crack of the bullet two feet from the shooters face. That’s loud enough in itself.

So, you are saying you would wear hearing protection while hunting? Even with a suppressor?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[5811]

This is why you send a can in to be tested by pewscience. All of this.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

I'm pretty sure that would only be dbA at shooters ear. 132-133 db (not dbA) at Shooters ear is 9" can type performance at TBAC silencer summit while a number of 5-6" cans achieved sub 134 dbA at shooters ear.

Post #75 in this thread says 132 dbA.

Post #131 in this thread, Form says 132-133 db.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[wind gypsy]

Post #75 in this thread says 132 dbA.

Post #131 in this thread, Form says 132-133 db.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

Yeah, just looking at TBAC results, theres a 6-10 db difference between db and dbA results depending on the can. I'm not sure which is the arbiter of "hearing safe" truth, db or dbA.

 

[SteveAndTheCrigBoys]

Post #75 in this thread says 132 dbA.

Post #131 in this thread, Form says 132-133 db.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

It's just a "lazy" typing sort of thing. Someone confirmed at one point all the decibel metrics posted were dBA.

TBAC Ultra 7 - Summit Data - 136.2 SE dB, 130.34 SE dBA
TBAC Ultra 7 - Unknown Data - 130ish, which would imply dBA

It’s been posted before.


Same exact rifle, ammo, 60 seconds apart-
View attachment 883968


Rev 9 (they are on rev 30 something, and it is about 1 dB less).

View attachment 883969

 

[nm.otter]

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-weighting

because decades of field experience have shown a good correlation between the A scale and occupational deafness in the frequency range of human speech, this scale is employed in multiple jurisdictions to evaluate the risks of occupational deafness and other auditory problems related to signals or speech intelligibility in noisy environments.

An unweighted measurement will be far more influenced by low frequency energy.

 

[Hurley88]

Whoa…I didn’t mean to kick off this age-old debate. To clarify, I never expected the gun to be quiet. I was just hoping it wouldn’t be too disconcerting for my admittedly sensitive ears (tinnitus). Jury is still out on that until season rolls around btw.

Yes, that is precisely the point. This is a hunting can. It should be “hearing safe” for one or two shots taken unsuppressed. If my ears are ringing… then it’s doing damage. Now, it’s not doing as much damage as an unsuppressed shot, but it’s still damage. If the rifle still makes my ears ring with one shot with the can on it, why am I spending $1000 (plus $150 threading costs, $200 tax stamp, $100 sales tax, $100 Silencer Shop fees, etc.) and adding weight and length to the rifle? I can take a single unsuppressed shot in the field 3-4 times a year and be not much worse off.

It sounds like you’re thinking “hearing safe” is defined as “won’t ring my bell”. Anything above 125 db can cause temporary pain, OSHA (and a couple other entities) have simply defined momentary exposure to 140db as the threshold at which permanent hearing loss occurs. Those same entities establish the threshold at 80db for prolonged exposure (8hrs IIRC) as doing the same thing.

If the can still makes your ears ring with one shot, no you can’t take an unsuppressed shot 3-4 times a year and be not much worse off. You’ll be measurably worse off. Heck I have tinnitus from doing exactly that. Wish I had a suppressor 20yrs ago.

As to why spend all that money…there’s more than just the hearing safety aspect (which again is very real). You don’t ruin a drainage as badly when in a group, you have more opportunity to shoot at an animal, you can choose to still use earpro or just take a quick shot, you can wrap it in vet wrap & tell everyone you’re an ‘operator’…tons of reasons.

 

[omicron1792]

Whoa…I didn’t mean to kick off this age-old debate. To clarify, I never expected the gun to be quiet. I was just hoping it wouldn’t be too disconcerting for my admittedly sensitive ears (tinnitus). Jury is still out on that until season rolls around btw.


It sounds like you’re thinking “hearing safe” is defined as “won’t ring my bell”. Anything above 125 db can cause temporary pain, OSHA (and a couple other entities) have simply defined momentary exposure to 140db as the threshold at which permanent hearing loss occurs. Those same entities establish the threshold at 80db for prolonged exposure (8hrs IIRC) as doing the same thing.

If the can still makes your ears ring with one shot, no you can’t take an unsuppressed shot 3-4 times a year and be not much worse off. You’ll be measurably worse off. Heck I have tinnitus from doing exactly that. Wish I had a suppressor 20yrs ago.

As to why spend all that money…there’s more than just the hearing safety aspect (which again is very real). You don’t ruin a drainage as badly when in a group, you have more opportunity to shoot at an animal, you can choose to still use earpro or just take a quick shot, you can wrap it in vet wrap & tell everyone you’re an ‘operator’…tons of reasons.

Right. But the comparison isn’t really an OG vs unsuppressed right? It’s OG vs other suppressors.

IMO only, we have gotten a little carried away with the other benefits of a can being as important as the sound suppression. That is a suppressors main job. It has to do that well first. All the other stuff then comes into play if and when that primary job, good sound suppression, is taken care of.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Whoa…I didn’t mean to kick off this age-old debate. To clarify, I never expected the gun to be quiet. I was just hoping it wouldn’t be too disconcerting for my admittedly sensitive ears (tinnitus). Jury is still out on that until season rolls around btw.


It sounds like you’re thinking “hearing safe” is defined as “won’t ring my bell”. Anything above 125 db can cause temporary pain, OSHA (and a couple other entities) have simply defined momentary exposure to 140db as the threshold at which permanent hearing loss occurs. Those same entities establish the threshold at 80db for prolonged exposure (8hrs IIRC) as doing the same thing.

If the can still makes your ears ring with one shot, no you can’t take an unsuppressed shot 3-4 times a year and be not much worse off. You’ll be measurably worse off. Heck I have tinnitus from doing exactly that. Wish I had a suppressor 20yrs ago.

As to why spend all that money…there’s more than just the hearing safety aspect (which again is very real). You don’t ruin a drainage as badly when in a group, you have more opportunity to shoot at an animal, you can choose to still use earpro or just take a quick shot, you can wrap it in vet wrap & tell everyone you’re an ‘operator’…tons of reasons.

It is entirely possible that I am thinking about this wrong. That’s happened before (and will no doubt happen again). I have been equating experiencing tinnitus with incurring permanent hearing loss, but apparently that isn’t the case.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Bluefish]

The 140db threshold is what is accepted for instant damage and even then some people will experience damage at that level or below. Hearing damage is affected by factors we can’t control. Ear canal shape, genetics all play a role.

Once below 140db, damage is based on dose, ie time and level of exposure. Thus the 8 hr 80db dose per osha. For gunshots it’s approximately 10 shots at 130, 100 at 120, 1000 at 110. Even at those levels I think 50% will still have some damage. That should show us that we should use double protection, ie either plugs and muffs for bare muzzles or silencer and some sort of protection for range use.

The thing is we all do many loud activities, bars, sporting events, restaurants, live music that can all exceed the dose limits. This means we are getting damage in our daily lives and it adds up. Shooting just speeds up the damage without proper protection.

 

[sndmn11]

So, you are saying you would wear hearing protection while hunting? Even with a suppressor?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

Absolutely. It takes $1.50 investment and 30 seconds to pop some ear plugs in. I wear my seat belt despite multiple air bags being in my vehicle, there's no reason protecting your hearing isn't best done with multiple layers of safety.

I also don't drive recklessly. These hunting scenarios aren't life or death, HsLd, or sound shot worthy. Even if one is walking around pieing every thicket or approaching every ridge aiming at things in order to identify them, there's those moments beforehand of, "oh I might shoot my supersonic firearm up ahead" cue to protect your ears.

 

[Hurley88]

IMO only, we have gotten a little carried away with the other benefits of a can being as important as the sound suppression. That is a suppressors main job. It has to do that well first. All the other stuff then comes into play if and when that primary job, good sound suppression, is taken care of.

I agree; but 133 db to shooter’s ear and only adding 4” to the muzzle with a lower tone…I considered that matter settled. Giving up a little in suppression for shorter length & balance. Apologies if I was skipping past the main thrust of the comparisons.

I 100% get comparing it to other cans to make sure. Can answer how much suppression is given up, whether the tone really moves the needle, whether the balance is really affected much, etc.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Absolutely. It takes $1.50 investment and 30 seconds to pop some ear plugs in. I wear my seat belt despite multiple air bags being in my vehicle, there's no reason protecting your hearing isn't best done with multiple layers of safety.

I also don't drive recklessly. These hunting scenarios aren't life or death, HsLd, or sound shot worthy. Even if one is walking around pieing every thicket or approaching every ridge aiming at things in order to identify them, there's those moments beforehand of, "oh I might shoot my supersonic firearm up ahead" cue to protect your ears.

Yeah, I’m not wearing hearing protection while hunting. It would have to be in all the time. I can have a fleeting opportunity at a deer from literally the moment I leave the house until I am back inside it. And if I am going to have hearing protection in, then I don’t need to spend $1500 on a suppressor.

The whole point of the suppressor is that for a limited exposure - one shot in X amount of time (at least an hour)- it makes most rifles hearing safe (below 140 dbA). You spend the money so that you can take that one shot while hunting and still hear the other sounds around you without incurring the risk of permanent hearing loss.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Ryan Avery]

Always wear hearing protection when shooting firearms—it's just common sense.

Sound perception varies significantly from person to person. With hearing protection on, my wife, who has sensitive ears, tells me that the Scythe is much louder than the Ultra 7, the AB 8 stack, and the OG on our 6UMs. However, she says they all sound the same on my 6CM, except for the AB, which she finds much quieter..

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Right. But the comparison isn’t really an OG vs unsuppressed right? It’s OG vs other suppressors.

IMO only, we have gotten a little carried away with the other benefits of a can being as important as the sound suppression. That is a suppressors main job. It has to do that well first. All the other stuff then comes into play if and when that primary job, good sound suppression, is taken care of.

Absolutely. If the can doesn’t suppress the sound as well as other comparable alternatives, it’s not worth having when compared to the alternatives.

It’s like the podcast about the S2H-designed hunting apparel. The guys made it very clear that their design philosophy was it doesn’t matter if the puffy coat has the right number of pockets if it doesn’t keep you warm.

My dissatisfaction stems from misunderstanding what the experience when firing would be and what the experience “means.” I equated “hearing safe” with “not making my ears ring for one shot.” Apparently I can experience tinnitus for one shot without incurring permanent hearing loss (probably).


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Ryan Avery]

Yeah, I’m not wearing hearing protection while hunting. It would have to be in all the time. I can have a fleeting opportunity at a deer from literally the moment I leave the house until I am back inside it. And if I am going to have hearing protection in, then I don’t need to spend $1500 on a suppressor.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

You need a rifle/suppressor setup under 120 dB if your goal is to avoid hearing damage. Good luck.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

You need a rifle/suppressor setup under 120 dB if your goal is to avoid hearing damage. Good luck.

120 db? Or 120 dbA? For one shot? And where is this standard coming from?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Ryan Avery]

120 db? Or 120 dbA? For one shot? And where is this standard coming from?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

DBAAA

Google it

 

[nighthawkf-117]

Not sure if it's in any way related, but awhile back I recall Proof Research having to tell people not to put a Warcomp on Proof barrels because they get stuck...this is wayback memory so it may not be accurate at all, but IIRC, it's a machinist-level bit of knowledge about thread style. Not thread pitch, but the actual cut. Apparently there are 3 styles of cut for any pitch, and if the two are too close between how the muzzle device and the barrel are threaded, they'll seize up after you get them on. Apparently it's not the same as galling, either. Any machinists or gunsmiths out there who know anything about this?

I think you are referring to the 3 classes of thread fits. For internal threads they are 1b, 2b and 3b. 2b is by far the most common and other fits are not commonly used outside of high precision (3b) or fast assembly (1b). I don’t think this is causing the binding issue.
3d printed threads will always corse on at least some level. The nature of the manufacturing means they can never be as smooth as cut or formed threads. If I were designing this suppressor I would size the 3d printed threads to be slightly undersized, then run a tap through them post sintering to achieve the final size. @Unknown Suppressors is this something you do or are the threads straight from the printer?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

DBAAA

Google it

So, is the OG “hearing safe” or not?


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”