• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Do you use ear pro when running a can with supersonic ammo?

Do you use ear pro when running a can with supersonic ammo?


  • Total voters
    99

Steel+Killer

Killing one steel plate at a time!
Full Member
Minuteman
  • May 27, 2014
    3,758
    9,708
    49
    32.75259713494653, -79.87485679548313
    With subsonic ammo you don't need ear pro IMO, but I was wondering if most people still use ear pro with supersonic ammo.

    I was shooting my 300 Win Mag and 6.5 CM at some steel targets with regular supersonic ammo with my Nomad L and I didn't use any ear pro for a few shots and I felt like it was hearing safe or maybe right at the threshold. I was loving the "report" from hitting the steel targets. I am kind of new to suppressers and wow they make shooting so much more enjoyable.

    Just gauging what other people do.
     
    Yes, because most cans aren’t really hearing-safe, anything you can do to make it quieter means less chance of developing a flinch, and if you use active ear pro you can still hear the steel.
    That said, I will shoot suppressed without ear pro if I have to, and it’s nice, but I do know better.
     
    I wear hearing protection while using a suppressor with the exception of hunting. For 1 of 2 shots I won’t bother putting ear plugs in during hunting.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: lash and sgtsmmiii
    I wear hearing protection while using a suppressor with the exception of hunting. For 1 of 2 shots I won’t bother putting ear plugs in during hunting.
    Yeah, I have never used ear plugs while hunting. When shooting at game it's almost like you don't hear or feel the recoil......at least for me anyway.

    Next time I go out I am going to bring my decibel meter just to see what the difference is.
     
    I shoot 300 win mag through a nomad L. The decibel charts put it at hearing safe for 2-5 exposures but it’s not safe for more than that. Can easily take a hunting shot with no ear pro but it’s not recommended for a range day
     
    Nope. Doesn't bother me at all. If it's an all suppressed squad or I'm shooting by myself no ears.

    What people say/claim is hearing safe and what really is more dependent on the person, their history, how their ears function, ect.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FuhQ
    Nope. Doesn't bother me at all. If it's an all suppressed squad or I'm shooting by myself no ears.

    What people say/claim is hearing safe and what really is more dependent on the person, their history, how their ears function, ect.

    Hearing safe is actually something supported by science and has decibel levels and exposure durations. While it may not hurt everyone the recommendations are not arbitrary BS.
     
    Always use ear pro, I always shoot suppressed too, so I can use my electronic in ear pro. I have a few of them but haven't yet taken the leap to fitted ones but I can't stand muffs. If it's all suppressed, in ear pro is enough, if there is a braked rifle near me, I put on muffs and figure out a way to not have a freaking brake near me.
     
    Hearing safe is actually something supported by science and has decibel levels and exposure durations. While it may not hurt everyone the recommendations are not arbitrary BS.
    Oohhhh Science. You mean like when they take 100,000 people and sample across everyone to find an average. Than let industry and people with vested Interests in the results provide their input and feedback. Or the fact there has not been any real , high sample size testing with controls over a long enough time frame to make a definitive determination.

    There is no definitive number. What's hearing safe for you and what's hearing safe for me are very likely not the same.

    They are like apple OS....people who are too dumb and simple to handle a real OS need something catered to the lowest common denominator.

    I type this as I'm sitting on a range with a set of $2500 custom in ears in.
     
    Always use ear pro, I always shoot suppressed too, so I can use my electronic in ear pro. I have a few of them but haven't yet taken the leap to fitted ones but I can't stand muffs. If it's all suppressed, in ear pro is enough, if there is a braked rifle near me, I put on muffs and figure out a way to not have a freaking brake near me.
    This is the way.

    You don't recover from hearing loss and damage is cumulative.
     
    I usually double up with plugs and muffs on the range even when shooting suppressed. Suppressed 22 and hunting suppressed is about the only time I won't have ear pro on.

    I had a 9mm AR carbine go off out a battery when I was shooting suppressed and didn't have ear pro on it was really painful so after that plugs and muffs.

    I have hearing damage from the last 20 years in construction so I'm trying to keep what I have.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Baron85
    Nope. Doesn't bother me at all. If it's an all suppressed squad or I'm shooting by myself no ears.

    What people say/claim is hearing safe and what really is more dependent on the person, their history, how their ears function, ect.

    Tell me more about hearing damage being dependent on how "someone's ears function" please. I'm always keen to learn from SMEs. You're clearly an audiologist so hit me with that knowledge daddy.
     
    Hearing loss is a real thing.

    It is measurable and frequent exposure to noise, however large or small, is a contributing factor to it all. There are 3 categories of hearing loss: sensorineural, conductive, and mixed loss.

    Formal audiologic assessments are standardized and measurable among ALL humans. There is no "differing" factors outside of anatomic obstructions (a person born without a right ear or a large cerumen/earwax impact, for example). Formal tests include pure tone, air and bone conduction, speech audiometry, and impedance audiometry. Other things like stapedial reflex testing is also done but a little more involved. In my setting, I perform a Weber and Rinne test since I am not an ear specialist and this allows me to distinguish between conduction or sensorineural hearing loss very rapidly.

    The down and dirty is: hearing loss is measurable and protection of hearing is absolutely necessary, regardless of use of suppressors. Repeat exposure leads to incredible changes in hearing. One shot here or there may be okay, but it only takes ONE shot to change your life forever.

    I shoot suppressed 99% of the time AND I wear hearing protection.

    Let me put it this way: There is a large link between hearing loss and early dementia and cognitive decline. No amount of suppressor is worth going senile before I absolutely have to. Early illness leads to a burden on my family and those around me. Not worth it.
     
    Last edited:
    AHAAH sound dosing is real and does exist. There is actually a substantial body of knowledge derived from significant study on the subject. Just because some abject retard on the Internet is unaware doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
     
    Depends on the area where you shoot. In a wide open field/range, no. In a more enclosed setting where the sound comes back at you, then yes. And also depends on the suppressor too.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: vinniedelpino
    I use ear-pro when I'm not even shooting. I wear my walkers when I mow the lawn. There is no bonus to not using ear-pro aside from maybe comfort (headsets can put pressure on glasses and eye-pro that can be uncomfortable over long periods of time).
     
    I only shoot suppressed these days (other than shotguns, revolvers, and some nostalgic guns I inherited, of course).

    The only suppressed gun I run earpro with is my AK... It's so ridiculously overgassed (they all are by design) that the port pop is as loud as the muzzle DB's, but it's right at your ear, so it's extremely uncomfortable to shoot without muffs or plugs...At least one in your right ear. Other than that, I don't wear any earpro with mine, if we're all shooting suppressed at the range. The only time I wear earpro (other than with the AK) is when other people are shooting non-suppressed at the range.
     
    Last edited:
    Ear pro always, every time without exception. That includes when I shoot suppressed. Double ear pro when shooting unsuppressed, always.

    Tinnitus is worse than hearing loss, as many of us are well aware. I am not taking a chance on making it worse for anything or anyone.
     
    I wear it with the AR’s. Bolts I don’t. Let’s keep in mind the caliber/barrel length and can will determine lots of the results on the shooters ear.

    On 20” 308’s my TBAC ultra 9 is noticeably quieter than my SilencerCo 36M
     
    Oohhhh Science. You mean like when they take 100,000 people and sample across everyone to find an average. Than let industry and people with vested Interests in the results provide their input and feedback. Or the fact there has not been any real , high sample size testing with controls over a long enough time frame to make a definitive determination.

    There is no definitive number. What's hearing safe for you and what's hearing safe for me are very likely not the same.

    They are like apple OS....people who are too dumb and simple to handle a real OS need something catered to the lowest common denominator.

    I type this as I'm sitting on a range with a set of $2500 custom in ears in.
    Yeah, you're spot on champ...... Never been any science put into hearing loss, the causes / levels / frequency etc Industrial deafness just goes on by being ignored by the world.
    Then you double down with the shit written above, you might as well say there is no specific level of blood pressure that is unheathy.... it's all dependant!😂
    Literally some of the worst advice you have ever given that could have someone suffer serious consequences.
     
    Hearing loss is a real thing.

    It is measurable and frequent exposure to noise, however large or small, is a contributing factor to it all. There are 3 categories of hearing loss: sensorineural, conductive, and mixed loss.

    Formal audiologic assessments are standardized and measurable among ALL humans. There is no "differing" factors outside of anatomic obstructions (a person born without a right ear or a large cerumen/earwax impact, for example). Formal tests include pure tone, air and bone conduction, speech audiometry, and impedance audiometry. Other things like stapedial reflex testing is also done but a little more involved. In my setting, I perform a Weber and Rinne test since I am not an ear specialist and this allows me to distinguish between conduction or sensorineural hearing loss very rapidly.

    The down and dirty is: hearing loss is measurable and protection of hearing is absolutely necessary, regardless of use of suppressors. Repeat exposure leads to incredible changes in hearing. One shot here or there may be okay, but it only takes ONE shot to change your life forever.

    I shoot suppressed 99% of the time AND I wear hearing protection.

    Let me put it this way: There is a large link between hearing loss and early dementia and cognitive decline. No amount of suppressor is worth going senile before I absolutely have to. Early illness leads to a burden on my family and those around me. Not worth it.
    WHAT?
     
    • Haha
    Reactions: NiteQwill
    Yeah, you're spot on champ...... Never been any science put into hearing loss, the causes / levels / frequency etc Industrial deafness just goes on by being ignored by the world.
    Then you double down with the shit written above, you might as well say there is no specific level of blood pressure that is unheathy.... it's all dependant!😂
    Literally some of the worst advice you have ever given that could have someone suffer serious consequences.
    This is where we divert from those who understand how "science" works and those who blindly follow the word of others because of a bunch of bullshit letters after their name.

    How do averages work? Do you think maybe the advice that is given, caters to the low end of the spectrum to encompass everyone? Do you think any state/gov agencies may be really liberal with their numbers to exert as much control over the populace? I mean its not like NIH or OSHA has ever had an unreasonable requirement or standard before right?

    Not everyone ears or brain are the same. Someone like me, should be deaf. I have been around so many gunshots, explosions, loud industrial noise, ect that according to the experts, I should at the very least have severe hearing damage. In the last 15 years I have been tested 5 times for hearing acuity/loss. Once for a Flight Physical for OCS, Once when getting hired by boarder protection, Once to get custom in ears, 2 more times to get custom in ears.

    Grew up shooting guns. Worked from 14 through college as a sporting clays trapper. Never wore ears when I worked or shot. Did not start wearing hearing protection until I started competing. Hundreds of thousands of unmitigated shotgun blasts. Then I joined the army, where other than basic trainig, never wore hearing protection. Didnt even have it in Iraq, despite a ton of fireights and getting IED's almost half a dozen times. According to everyone I should be almost deaf. Fast forward years later where I shoot about 10k rounds a year with regular In ears (that dont have enough protection according to the hearing nazis) and am around hundreds of thousands of braked shots every year. Almost zero detectable hearing loss.

    So yea, my advice may be bad if you have little bitch ears. Advice is not a one size fits all. Some people have stronger/more resilant system and do not need as much protection. Some do. My theory is some peoples response systems are better at protecting itself.

    You do realize that there are people who live with hypertension until they are 90? Doesn't mean its good, but that is how sample sizing works. Thats why its called a Risk Factor and not a Death Sentance. The only one double downing on stupidity is you.
     
    I mostly shoot with double ear pro. If I'm the only one at the range and shooting suppressed (rare) or if everyone at the range is shooting suppressed (never happens) I'll skip the ear plugs and use only my active muffs. The only thing I shoot without ear pro is a suppressed 22, and even then I usually end up wearing ear pro because of others at the range.