Was Suppressor Worth It??

[jonny rotton]

almost a year and a half ago i ordered a larue suurg II. well, i finallly have it now all done. it reduced the db level from 122 to 119. why did i do this?? what do i gain?? maybe someone could explain why i needed a suppressed 6.5 g.

[Double Naught Spy]

almost a year and a half ago i ordered a larue suurg II. well, i finallly have it now all done. it reduced the db level from 122 to 119. why did i do this?? what do i gain?? maybe someone could explain why i needed a suppressed 6.5 g.

I think you must have mistyped? I don't know of any unsuppressed Grendel rifles that will produce only 122 dbs. If you typed accurately, then you might want to recheck the calibration on your sound level meter, be sure that it can handle short duration sounds, and/or check your testing methods.

[LRRPF52]

With an unsuppressed Grendel, depending on barrel length, you will be somewhere in the 150-175db+ region (175db is more common with brakes) at shooter's ear.

122db would be the reading 10yd away from the muzzle with a really phenomenal can.

[Bigs28]

Ignoring your readings, have you stood back and listened to it being shot with and without the suppressor? Obviously with hearing pro on but what kind of difference did you hear?

[jonny rotton]

those numbers are the ones my friend wrote down. i will question him when i can.

[Klem]

I agree, there's no way an unsupressed high-power centrefire starts at 122db. A Grendel will be higher around 170db.

If you're going to talk to your friend ask him what device he is using. The upper limit of the device may be 120db and he is simply getting the max reading. Or it is a device that samples sound a number of times per second and it is missing the peak sound between samples. How far away, and where is it positioned from the gun (behind, to the side, in front)? All this detail is important.

[dl126]

Maybe old news to you guys.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ_BgeG0P1o

[rabiddawg]

After watching dns’ videos, and seeing hogs scatter on the shot I knew I had no use for a suppressor. I wear my hearing protection every shot no matter where I am.

[Randy99CL]

After watching dns’ videos, and seeing hogs scatter on the shot I knew I had no use for a suppressor. I wear my hearing protection every shot no matter where I am.

Lone Star Boars had a video a year or so ago where he shot with sub-sonic (300BO?) and a suppressor and the hogs ran at the sound of a bullet nailing one of their buddies. You could hear it too, kind of a slap.

[Double Naught Spy]

Lone Star Boars had a video a year or so ago where he shot with sub-sonic (300BO?) and a suppressor and the hogs ran at the sound of a bullet nailing one of their buddies. You could hear it too, kind of a slap.

This has been shown in a lot of subsonic hunting vids. The sound of the impact is actually quite loud, particularly if you are close to it and it startles the hogs. However, it isn't just the sound of the impact. It can also be the sound of the bullet tearing through the air such that even with a miss, a subsonic and suppressed shot will cause the hogs to run.

After watching dns’ videos, and seeing hogs scatter on the shot I knew I had no use for a suppressor. I wear my hearing protection every shot no matter where I am.

I still wear hearing protection while using a suppressor. The suppressor reducing the sound of the discharge, but does nothing for the sonic crack. Combined, the two can be pretty loud, 130-140 db (usually for centerfire rifles with decent suppressors)...to somebody that still has their hearing.

[HuntTXhogs]

those numbers are the ones my friend wrote down. i will question him when i can.

[LRRPF52]

The biggest value a suppressor brings is eliminating the muzzle blast of an unsuppressed firearm, because muzzle blast distracts from maintaining a good sight picture.

It just makes the shooting experience more pleasant and focused for the shooter.

[snarkscarbine]

In addition to LRRPF52's comment, the CDC did a study relatively recently that found that the only effective way to actually protect hearing with prolonged/repeated exposure to firearms was to use a silencer. Reducing the blast overpressure shockwave does far more than using ear protection can, even plugs+muffs. That's the biggest advantage to me. When I trotted that out to my wife, it was a no-brainer; I needed to get some silencers so that I could still hear some day when we're old.

[Klem]

In addition to LRRPF52's comment, the CDC did a study relatively recently that found that the only effective way to actually protect hearing with prolonged/repeated exposure to firearms was to use a silencer. Reducing the blast overpressure shockwave does far more than using ear protection can, even plugs+muffs. That's the biggest advantage to me. When I trotted that out to my wife, it was a no-brainer; I needed to get some silencers so that I could still hear some day when we're old.

Snarks,

Do you have a link to that study? Not arguing with you, just curious.

[just_john]

snarks, and if the logic worked in your house, then maybe.....