Do you regret getting your suppressor?

ID_Matt

WKR
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
1,345
Location
Southern ID
If it makes you feel better I think any suppressor is better than none. Even 90s tech.

Luckily I got my tracker for a steal that was too good to pass up. Always wanted an ultra 7 and when I finally got one the gemtech sits in the safe. Wish it was on a trust so I could loan it out to hunting buddies and not have to worry about them cracking one off
Same thing. Got a tracker because I didn't want to spend an extra couple hundred bucks several years ago. Now I have thunderbeast and sico omega. The tracker sits on my varmint gun that never gets shot.
 

Lawnboi

WKR
Joined
Mar 2, 2012
Messages
7,693
Location
North Central Wi
Same thing. Got a tracker because I didn't want to spend an extra couple hundred bucks several years ago. Now I have thunderbeast and sico omega. The tracker sits on my varmint gun that never gets shot.
I can’t complain too much. I only paid like $265 or something for the tracker when they were dumping them at gander mountain.

I can’t even use it on my varmint gun because you can’t shoot more than 10 times before your supposed to let it cool.

Still any suppressor is better than none
 

Antares

WKR
Joined
Jan 13, 2021
Messages
1,724
Location
Alaska
I can’t complain too much. I only paid like $265 or something for the tracker when they were dumping them at gander mountain.

I can’t even use it on my varmint gun because you can’t shoot more than 10 times before your supposed to let it cool.

Still any suppressor is better than none

Jeez, yeah I wouldn’t really care if I got it for that price, but I think I paid closer to $600 for mine.
 

ID_Matt

WKR
Joined
May 16, 2017
Messages
1,345
Location
Southern ID
I can’t complain too much. I only paid like $265 or something for the tracker when they were dumping them at gander mountain.

I can’t even use it on my varmint gun because you can’t shoot more than 10 times before your supposed to let it cool.

Still any suppressor is better than none
I think I paid $500. It is fairly evident that it is a cheaper suppressor. Looking at the inside baffles compared to the higher quality ones is eye opening. Definitely notice a fair bit more recoil and noise on the tracker compared to the others.
 

Sled

WKR
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
2,148
Location
Utah
From everything I have read they are not hearing safe, I think that is a popular misconception when it comes to suppressors on center fire rifles.

If you take your measurement at the shooters ear, it will be lower. It's not like your at a rock concert for hours. The shot is quick and done. Now if you're running a machine gun that could be problematic. You'd likely burn up the can before you had permanent hearing damage though.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,230
If you take your measurement at the shooters ear, it will be lower. It's not like your at a rock concert for hours. The shot is quick and done. Now if you're running a machine gun that could be problematic. You'd likely burn up the can before you had permanent hearing damage though.
Nerve damage and hearing damage are two different things. One shot 18 years ago gave me tinitus in my left ear. Even suppressed rifles cause hearing damage. 🤷🏻‍♂️ I am just saying if you are buying it to protect your hearing, its a waste of money since you still need to wear hearing protection.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,230
That is incorrect. There are plenty of true hearing safe for infrequent noises (hunting), and a few totally hearing safe cans on the market for bolt guns. Most of what is “knowledge” about cans comes from the AR world. Port noise/port pop is a thing with them that makes them hard to be truly hearing safe. Nothing to do with bolt guns.
I would love to see some evidence of this. Any studies you can point me to?
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,230
I think the duration of exposure matters. One shot at 130db is probably not bad, being exposed to 130db without hearing protection for hours like working in a factory would be worse.
It does, but at 130db, the exposure for hearing damage is less than 1 sec.
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Messages
413
Hearing loss is related to dab and duration. That is why the OSHA guidelines make sense. I believe it is around 85dB for a time weighted average of 8 hours. For every 5db increase the exposure should be half the duration. So it’s basically an 8 hour weighted equivalent.

That said, tinnitus is a result of the hearing loss. The blast can cause irreparable damage to cochlear hair cells. This can be mechanical and biochemical. This typically causes high frequency loss. It is complicated because there is also a temporary threshold shift. I am pulling stuff out of my arse as I did an ENT residency but I mainly do cancer surgery now and have not kept up on my auditory physiology.

I am not sure why someone would argue that a suppressed sound would not be considered hearing protection. Ear muffs are doing the same thing, lowering the sound pressure level at the ear. I believe the threshold for safety with pulses is around 140dB in adults and 120 in children. I often wear hearing protection with suprasonic loads even with a suppressor when target shooting but I am shooting more than a round or two. For hunting game it should be “safe” depending on your firearm and suppressor.

My $0.02


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

WRO

WKR
Joined
Nov 6, 2013
Messages
2,946
Location
Idaho
Absolutely the best firearm related purchase I’ve ever made. As stated above adds some length but totally worth it. The first day I shot mine last month I immediately started a new cookie jar to save for a second one

+100


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
2,230
Hearing loss is related to dab and duration. That is why the OSHA guidelines make sense. I believe it is around 85dB for a time weighted average of 8 hours. For every 5db increase the exposure should be half the duration. So it’s basically an 8 hour weighted equivalent.

That said, tinnitus is a result of the hearing loss. The blast can cause irreparable damage to cochlear hair cells. This can be mechanical and biochemical. This typically causes high frequency loss. It is complicated because there is also a temporary threshold shift. I am pulling stuff out of my arse as I did an ENT residency but I mainly do cancer surgery now and have not kept up on my auditory physiology.

I am not sure why someone would argue that a suppressed sound would not be considered hearing protection. Ear muffs are doing the same thing, lowering the sound pressure level at the ear. I believe the threshold for safety with pulses is around 140dB in adults and 120 in children. I often wear hearing protection with suprasonic loads even with a suppressor when target shooting but I am shooting more than a round or two. For hunting game it should be “safe” depending on your firearm and suppressor.

My $0.02


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I am arguing it doesn’t suppress the sound enough to avoid hearing damage. Definitely not to the extent ear plugs or muffs do.
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Messages
413
I am arguing it doesn’t suppress the sound enough to avoid hearing damage. Definitely not to the extent ear plugs or muffs do.

Roger that. I think based on dB reduction ratings, they are very similar if the suppressor can reduce the dB at the ear to under 140 dB. Plugs only lower by 15-30. My very expensive defendear digital hearing protection has a noise reduction rating of 26. Not trying to argue but I think quality suppressors do a good job. That said, I still wear my hearing protection while using a suppressor for ranger time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Sled

WKR
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
2,148
Location
Utah
Nerve damage and hearing damage are two different things. One shot 18 years ago gave me tinitus in my left ear. Even suppressed rifles cause hearing damage. 🤷🏻‍♂️ I am just saying if you are buying it to protect your hearing, its a waste of money since you still need to wear hearing protection.

My other post in this thread clearly states I use the suppressor for the reduction in concussive effects. Other benefits listed in this thread are less spooked game, more likely to get a follow up shot, reduction to recoil and reduction of decibels to the shooters ear. Its a fact that 130db is less damaging than 150db over the same duration and frequency.

It sounds like suppressors aren't for you and that's fine. You're free to make your own choices and have your own opinions. I use both inner and outer ear protection when I shoot artillery. When I use explosives I stick my fingers in my ears. If I could put a suppressor on a howitzer I would.
 

plentycoupe

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
250
Didn’t read all the replies. I love mine as I don’t mind taking the shot if I don’t have ear plugs. It’s amazing compared to a muzzle break yet reduces recoil the same.

What I will do different…but a short barreled rifle(18-20”) that has the ballistics I want to the yardage Inwant to kill game. Carrying a loooong rifle can be a pain in the ass in thick country.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Messages
352
Location
Alaska
If the weight of a suppressor limits what you can do, you should probably hit the gym or get into a different hobby.

I mean seriously, most of them weigh less than a pound.
Considering you ordered your first suppressor in March of 2021, received it in 2022, it’s a hard to believe you’ve gained much experience. I recognize your excited about them. Which must be why you’ve ordered a couple more. Good for you.

However, your lack of experience should cause you to hesitate before making snarky comments to someone who’s been shooting suppressed for over 17 years (as I mentioned in the post you quoted) and has lots of experience with cans on gas guns, training rifles and precision hunting rifles.

From my experience, it seems the most enthusiastic suppressor supporters are those that have owned them for less than 5 years. With time, the pros and cons of suppressors become more clear and the rabid, cult-like obsession, seems to moderate.

As I mentioned earlier…

Suppressors are great for high volume, low recoil training rifles

Muzzle brakes are great for low volume, high recoil hunting rifles

I’ll also add…

Suppressors are great for gas guns that will be used for fighting at night, especially if your adversary is also wearing NODs. Along with being used when fighting around vehicles and structures.

Enjoy your journey, as you begin using your new suppressors. No doubt you’ll learn a lot along the way.
 

thinhorn_AK

"DADDY"
Joined
Jul 2, 2016
Messages
10,341
Location
Alaska
Considering you ordered your first suppressor in March of 2021, received it in 2022, it’s a hard to believe you’ve gained much experience. I recognize your excited about them. Which must be why you’ve ordered a couple more. Good for you.

However, your lack of experience should cause you to hesitate before making snarky comments to someone who’s been shooting suppressed for over 17 years (as I mentioned in the post you quoted) and has lots of experience with cans on gas guns, training rifles and precision hunting rifles.

From my experience, it seems the most enthusiastic suppressor supporters are those that have owned them for less than 5 years. With time, the pros and cons of suppressors become more clear and the rabid, cult-like obsession, seems to moderate.

As I mentioned earlier…

Suppressors are great for high volume, low recoil training rifles

Muzzle brakes are great for low volume, high recoil hunting rifles

I’ll also add…

Suppressors are great for gas guns that will be used for fighting at night, especially if your adversary is also wearing NODs. Along with being used when fighting around vehicles and structures.

Enjoy your journey, as you begin using your new suppressors. No doubt you’ll learn a lot along the way.
Blah blah blah. Dosent take years of experience to know that something that weighs less than 12 ounces shouldn’t be a problem to take on a hike. The one being snarky here is you.
 
Top