Hunting Rifle: Anyone Else Have No Desire for a Silencer?

Two observations:

The suppressed shooter moved back more than the braked shooter.

The suppressed rifle had more "crack" to it than the brake rifle did.

I bet if I got out my dB meter the suppressed video would be louder.:)
I am really glad I did not respond to this when I was in my truck, and I had time to get to the hotel room and read your second response to QuietTexan.

In the VIDEOS, you are not off base by saying the suppressed 6CM seemed louder than the braked .300NMI. Because the mic can only pick up so much volume.

But in all reality, we ALL should know that a suppressed 6CM is going to be much quieter than a braked .300NMI.

As for recoil, again, you are somewhat correct in your observation of the VIDEOS. I can assure you, the suppressed 6CM has far less recoil than the 5 port braked .300NMI. But, the lady shooting the .300NMI was loading the bipod quite heavily as directed, and it was her 5th shot behind the rifle. While the guy shooting the 6CM was literally barely touching the rifle.

QuietTexan's post on sound is very informative by the way.
 
TL;DR - yes, you are correct that it sounds that way in the video, but it's not that way in person because of lots of stuff. Onwards....

This is actually an issue in the compression coding of the audio on the video. The supersonic crack from the suppressed rifle is more pronounced because the braked rifle is already limiting out across more frequency ranges. The mic can only pick up a maximum amount of sound pressure, and the codecs applied to the raw file will limit frequencies to maximum amplitudes very aggressively to compress the data.

The supersonic crack of the 300 Norma is at least the same if not louder than the 6mm Creedmoor, but it's buried in the overall noise signature in a way a video camera can't record. You are 100% correct in that there is apparently a louder sound in the suppressed video, but that's not what happens if you're physically present.

View attachment 318726

The video does not let you hear all the sound that happens above and below the threshold. In person, this is a range of sound pressure that you could tell a difference between it and something lower. No sound can actually exceed 192 dB SPL because of lots of reasons, one limit is that the vacuum side of the wave can't go any lower than a certain point, the other is that sound waves will exert pressure on objects at a certain level and you won't perceive more loudness but will actually absorb it. That's the point were sound pressure will physically compress or potentially tear the tympanic membranes in your ears. That's why ears and noses bleed when bombs go off - the pressure wave is absorbed by fluids in the skin/membranes and capillaries rupture. Sound and shock waves are two different magnitudes of the same concept.

If you watched the Rittenhouse trial, a large part of the videography expert testimony was about how the visual frames from the camera and the audio don't sync when you break the file down because of the codec used during recording. Reduced down, it's because sound has to be perceived over time while an image can be frozen. You can't stretch sound out as easily as pulling up a single frame of video because the frequencies will be distorted as you stretch the timeframe of the audio. Software would have to interpolate sound data that isn't there to make it line up, and anything that could be described as "making something up" is NOT something you want used in a courtroom (not that that prosecutor would have failed any harder even if he had said that 🤦‍♂️). Long story, there's no way to exactly place gunshots in a slowed down video, so it's not clear and incontrovertible evidence against self defense. My point - if the encoding software compressed the audio, there's no way to retrieve an uncompressed sample of the data meaning you can't identify the exact moment certain audible events happen if they happen above or below the compression threshold. In the unsuppressed video, there's no way to pull out the uncompressed data and do an accurate comparison of the data.

A gunshot video is very similar to recording a drummer in a studio - it's difficult to measure amplitude of the input frequencies with a small microphone relatively far away from the noise source, so you have to use as big a mic as close as practical to the source. You don't record a drum set with a single mic over head, you have to mic each drum individually to pick up the lower frequencies. Cymbals you can mic overhead because the higher range frequencies propagate better. If you want to capture high resolution audio data of a gun shot, a cell phone 15 feet away isn't going to get you any information to make a meaningful comparison.

Isn't it cool how our senses straight up lie to us?
Good stuff there Tex
 
Some may disagree but I've seen it and what I witnessed was less report when a rifle was suppressed. These were 308 Win shot outdoors but under an overhang. The over hang really magnifies the report. Another benefit on a can could/ would be added velocity. I've been thinking of building a 26-28" barrel long range rifle in the same cartridge of my 22" barrel handy rifle. Maybe adding a can would kill two birds with one stone.
 
I'm not talking about shooting at a typical/common flat range. A lot of people have access to other places or private ranges to shoot where you are typically shooting by yourself or next to other people shooting suppressed rifles. Regardless, even while wearing ear pro suppressors have a major benefit to the shooter. There's pretty much no concussion. You can lose your hearing a couple different ways but constantly being exposed to concussive over pressure is one of them. Most flat ranges have a roof overhead. That exacerbates the issue. It makes a difference when you shoot 50-100 rounds in a setting.

If you're worried about losing 100-150 yards of terminal performance from a shorter barrel, you need to decide how relevant that is to you. My 16-22" suppressed rifles and their respective chamberings all maintain adequate expansion velocity from 750-1200 yards…if I'm going to attempt a shot at an animal at those distances I've already thought about that and selected the appropriate rifle for the hunt/task. Most small/medium capacity cartridges are still more capable than most shooters, especially the ones that lack experience in their application. Larger capacity, even more so. It wasn't long ago that people thought it took magic to make kills beyond 400 yards, even with something like a 300 win mag. A .243 Winchester and even .223 Remington can do that with ease.

Also, something like a shorter barreled 300 win mag doesn't burn out faster than a long barreled 300 win mag. Barrel life is about case capacity, cartridge design, and caliber. If you're worried about that, choose a different cartridge. Doesn't change the benefit of adding a suppressor whatsoever.
If you take a 300 mag and shorten the barrel to18 or 20 inches it won't have any more preformance than a 30-06 with a 24 or 26 inch barrel. If you have a 30-06 you should be able to get at least 2500 rounds out of the barrel before you set it back , with a 300 win mag you get 1000 rnds. If you go to some 1000 yd matches you will see some rifles loose their supersonic speed and the bullets will come through the target sideways if they hit it and never near the middle. at one of the last matches a person shooting a ar10 in 308 couldn't stay supersonic but a fellow next to him with a m1-a could it was felt by us that the reason was probably the 20 inch barrel on the ar10. If you see a palma shooter their barrels are almost always 30 inches long and they get close to 3000fps from the 155's. Ther is no chance that 18 inch barrels can compete in fps with 26 inch barrels and more time in flight is more time for the wind to affect your bullet
 
If I can, I will always hunt with a suppressor. Other deer in the vicinity just looking around like *** happened when the deer I just shot drops. They don't run like they do without the suppressor.
 
some one said it is a matter of personal preference to have a suppressor and I totally agree with this it is a free country . Its hard to say what shot noise affects a deer my grandson shot his first buck this year, a nice 3x3 and it stood right their and let him shoot twice at it didn't move at all with the first shot missing he was very cooperative. at our highpower range I can remember 3 or 4 times having a cease fire during a match so someone could chase the deer off the range so have a good time with your suppressor but its hard to say deer won't be offended by less noise
 
If you take a 300 mag and shorten the barrel to18 or 20 inches it won't have any more preformance than a 30-06 with a 24 or 26 inch barrel. If you have a 30-06 you should be able to get at least 2500 rounds out of the barrel before you set it back , with a 300 win mag you get 1000 rnds. If you go to some 1000 yd matches you will see some rifles loose their supersonic speed and the bullets will come through the target sideways if they hit it and never near the middle. at one of the last matches a person shooting a ar10 in 308 couldn't stay supersonic but a fellow next to him with a m1-a could it was felt by us that the reason was probably the 20 inch barrel on the ar10. If you see a palma shooter their barrels are almost always 30 inches long and they get close to 3000fps from the 155's. Ther is no chance that 18 inch barrels can compete in fps with 26 inch barrels and more time in flight is more time for the wind to affect your bullet
A 300 win mag w/ an 18" barrel will still be pushing a 190-230gr bullet 200fps faster than a 24" 30-06. While barrel life is shorter, very few people ever shoot enough to wear out a 300 Win Mag or 30-06 barrel, let alone 2 or 3. Like you said, it's all about personal preference though. Same with choosing your cartridge for engaging targets at 1000 yards. Personally, I'm not choosing a .308 Winchester to shoot 1000.
 
A 300 win mag w/ an 18" barrel will still be pushing a 190-230gr bullet 200fps faster than a 24" 30-06. While barrel life is shorter, very few people ever shoot enough to wear out a 300 Win Mag or 30-06 barrel, let alone 2 or 3. Like you said, it's all about personal preference though. Same with choosing your cartridge for engaging targets at 1000 yards. Personally, I'm not choosing a .308 Winchester to shoot 1000.
Exactly. I'd rather have a magnum with a 22" barrel than a 308 with a 28" barrel.
 
A 300 win mag w/ an 18" barrel will still be pushing a 190-230gr bullet 200fps faster than a 24" 30-06. While barrel life is shorter, very few people ever shoot enough to wear out a 300 Win Mag or 30-06 barrel, let alone 2 or 3. Like you said, it's all about personal preference though. Same with choosing your cartridge for engaging targets at 1000 yards. Personally, I'm not choosing a .308 Winchester to shoot 10T
 
There is a site called rifle shooter.com and the person does excellent work testing things just like this, he took a 300wm and tested the velocity with a 24.5 inch barrel at 2892 fps then cut the barre;l off an inch at a time until he had it down to 16 inches at 18 inches he was at 2696 fps which is 30-06 velocity he did an excellent test and I have no reason to dispute his test. please read it for yourself it is nicely done .I know a lot of competitors who shoot at 1000 yds and 1000rnds goes way faster than you hope for a typical match can be 60 or 80 shots and no person can learn how bullets are affected by the wind in even 5 or 6 matches each day is different so the people I know have gone through many barrels including me
 

Recent Posts

Top