Supressed or not

[WanderingGoatie]

Sometimes I feel like the suppressor guys are like CrossFiters, vegans, and Sherman wildcat shooters……..

So, people that go through an increased level of effort, with a long term goal of overall improved level of satisfaction. I think that fits silencer use perfectly.

 

[yorke-1]

So, people that go through an increased level of effort, with a long term goal of overall improved level of satisfaction. I think that fits silencer use perfectly.

That wouldn't be an inaccurate interpretation of my comment.

I had two suppressors back around 2009-2012 or so, an FA762 and an FA338. They were a fun novelty at best. The noise reduction was good, but I still wouldn't consider the rifles hearing "safe" with supersonic ammunition. Recoil reduction was OK, but not as effective as a quality muzzle brake. I consider 22" to be a long barrel on a hunting gun, so adding 6" or more to an 18-20" barrel is excessive.

I didn't see a worthwhile return on my investment. I hunt with a guy who runs suppressors on all of his comp guns, and the first thing he does every hunting season is take that paperweight off the end of his barrel so he can actually move around in the woods.

 

[blvette75]

I am a very new hunter. So far I have shot in competitions. I am a big proponent of shooting suppressed because I really like my ears and reduces recoil. I would assume it would even make more sense shooting with a can when hunting, otherwise I will have to wear ear plugs all day. I realise that adding a can increases weight and length. But I guess that is cost/inconvenience of doing business.

I have been told by more experienced hunters that shooting supressed is unnecessary and even a bad idea. Unnecessary because I would be shooting outdoors and the adrenaline is going to protect my hearing. I have even been told that I would not even realise the gun going off because of the adrenaline. I have also been told that because hunting rifles have lighter barrels, a suppressor will cause unpredictable barrel harmonics and would not make consistent POI shifts.

I am looking to shoot 700 to 1000 yards and mostly deer/elk size animals. Do you have any experience about these points?

Being an older guy now, I would say shoot suppressed if you can. I will get the suppressor when I am able, but the hearing loss definitely is a pain. As I got older could afford better toys but did not invest in a suppressor. Hindsight doesn't really help in my case as the damage is done.

 

[Txcowboy50]

I just ordered a Banish Backcountry ( will be on website Nov.1) It is 1.5 "od, 5.5 inches long and weighs only 7.8 ounces, 6 baffles fully welded. It is suppose to be a little louder than the banish30 but still hearing safe. I am thinking it will be great for hunting.

 

[Bigdog425]

I am a very new hunter. So far I have shot in competitions. I am a big proponent of shooting suppressed because I really like my ears and reduces recoil. I would assume it would even make more sense shooting with a can when hunting, otherwise I will have to wear ear plugs all day. I realise that adding a can increases weight and length. But I guess that is cost/inconvenience of doing business.

I have been told by more experienced hunters that shooting supressed is unnecessary and even a bad idea. Unnecessary because I would be shooting outdoors and the adrenaline is going to protect my hearing. I have even been told that I would not even realise the gun going off because of the adrenaline. I have also been told that because hunting rifles have lighter barrels, a suppressor will cause unpredictable barrel harmonics and would not make consistent POI shifts.

I am looking to shoot 700 to 1000 yards and mostly deer/elk size animals. Do you have any experience about these poin

Own several suppressors and I most frequently use on small calibers when plinking on private land…public ranges require hearing protection so not an advantage.

For stand hunting, I can see the benefit as allows one to not wear or have to put in/on hearing protection. However most of my hunting is out west where we hike long distances to spot and stalk. I am always looking to reduce weight in that scenario so don't use suppressor. Time permitting I will put on hearing protection before shooting but sometimes not possible.

 

[Bigdog425]

PS: while I know this is LRH site, I hope we all get as close as practically possible when hunting. Preparing and practicing for potential long shots, but making most ethical shot possible, not backing up or passing on low/no risk chances to get closer.
Cheers and best of luck to all this season

 

[lancetkenyon]

I run certain rifles with certain cans.

Ultra 9 .308:
24" 6 CM
26" 25SST
I will run my 26" .300WM when it is done

Ultra 7 6.5mm:
26" 25CM (heavy)
26" 25CM (light)
22" 6.5SLR
26" 6.5SS

Dominus .308":
20" 6.5SS
24" .260AI
24" 7SS

I will be ordering an Ultra 5 6.5mm early next year. It will take the place on my lightweight 25CM and 6.5SLR.

 

[Panhandlin Pat]

The best thing I've found about suppressors is being able to spot clients/buddies impacts on game. Even with hearing pro I still blink or flinch enough watching through binos to miss the impact. The worst part about them is after using one, they seem to multiply.

 

[WildRose]

I am a very new hunter. So far I have shot in competitions. I am a big proponent of shooting suppressed because I really like my ears and reduces recoil. I would assume it would even make more sense shooting with a can when hunting, otherwise I will have to wear ear plugs all day. I realise that adding a can increases weight and length. But I guess that is cost/inconvenience of doing business.

I have been told by more experienced hunters that shooting supressed is unnecessary and even a bad idea. Unnecessary because I would be shooting outdoors and the adrenaline is going to protect my hearing. I have even been told that I would not even realise the gun going off because of the adrenaline. I have also been told that because hunting rifles have lighter barrels, a suppressor will cause unpredictable barrel harmonics and would not make consistent POI shifts.

I am looking to shoot 700 to 1000 yards and mostly deer/elk size animals. Do you have any experience about these points?

If you're willing to give the federal gov't that information there's absolutely no reason to shoot without a suppressor today other than perhaps when hunting in extremely heavy brush.

I wanted to check all three on the list but that was not an option. I have several suppressors in other countries where owning them is no big deal and the way the ATF cases are working out right now I'll probably at least have one to hunt with here in Texas soon and hopefully in the next year or so nation wide.

Save your ears, they don't grow back.

 

[akmtnhnt]

I would like to get a suppressor, but which one of my rifles would I put it on? My perfect suppressor would be usable on all my rifles. I would work on everything from .224 on up to my .358. I don't have a .375 (yet). I talked to a manufacturer about making a universal can with interchangeable "guts" so it would be efficient for all calibers. He was not receptive to the idea at all. He gave me a song and dance about the ATF would consider every caliber a separate unit and it would be illegal. I disagree, but I'm not a lawyer. I still think that it would be a viable option to alleviate having to have multiple license's.

There's a couple 46 cal "universal cans" like the bushwacker 46, silencerco 46 that are rated from 22lr to 458wm and everything in between. Lapuas norma etc.
The efficiency loss of shooting smaller through it isn't that great, but if you care get a bunch of cans.

 

[FEENIX]

The damage done from a rifle report WILL occur whether you realize it or not even on a single shot. It is true that it doesn't seem as loud outdoors in the moment of a hunt but damage IS occurring with the 170 decibel report. A brake is excellent at recoil reduction but the vibration of the report has also been shown to cause damage to the inner ear. I have 5 suppressors and enjoy the "change" in recoil impulse that they provide. It feels like it is spread out over a slightly longer time frame and less of a sharp impulse on my rifles. Basically if you don't shoot suppressed you need to have ear pro on the hunt. I actually use both suppressors and electronic ear pro, but I also value my ears and have no desire for tinnitus and damage.

Do what you all feel is best for you but from a medical perspective you are damaging your ears every time you shoot unprotected.

And yes……I am a doctor.

You are correct, Sir. I spent the first 10 years of my USAF career in aircraft (F-4s and A-10s) exposed long in high noise levels, often 10+ hours, and learned to protect my hearing - no damage. Unfortunately, some people think they only need hearing protection while shooting firearms. I am one of those who use hearing protection when operating high-noise generating household items, i.e., mower, snow blower, table/chain saw, etc.

 

[Leaf Litter]

I think cans are cool for the range, but you'll never convince me that I need one, especially for hunting. The $200 tax bill sucks, no question, but not as much as the $800 price tag for a $80 chunk of metal.

On top of being an absolute rip-off, they add 8+ girthy inches and a ton of weight to a rifle that I want to carry under trees, over mountains and through thick brush.

 

[WildRose]

I think cans are cool for the range, but you'll never convince me that I need one, especially for hunting. The $200 tax bill sucks, no question, but not as much as the $800 price tag for a $80 chunk of metal.

On top of being an absolute rip-off, they add 8+ girthy inches and a ton of weight to a rifle that I want to carry under trees, over mountains and through thick brush.

For many years I felt the same. Now I have an 80% loss in the right ear and 70% in the left.

 

[WanderingGoatie]

I think cans are cool for the range, but you'll never convince me that I need one, especially for hunting. The $200 tax bill sucks, no question, but not as much as the $800 price tag for a $80 chunk of metal.

On top of being an absolute rip-off, they add 8+ girthy inches and a ton of weight to a rifle that I want to carry under trees, over mountains and through thick brush.

I promise my 350 legend suppressed AR is a far superior "brush gun" for most deer hunting distances. I also practice with it a bunch more than I ever did with my lever 45-70. 350 legend practice ammo is about the only reasonably priced and in stock rounds I can consistently find in recent history. It's also just a ***** cat compared to most other "deer rifle" calibers.

I think there's a few ladies in this world that would call my latest suppressor at 1.375" diameter, 8" long, and 10 Oz……..

Just average. Hardly girthy.

If I were mountain hunting with base camp 8 miles in with 4K ft in elevation change, I might not bring my suppressor. Then again, I shoot better with it. My confidence would be better with it on. A person could also just take a good BM before the hike and man up on the extra 5 Oz of weight. Tough to say.