Is the difference in sound reduction between standard and compact silencers more pronounced with short barrels? Specifically I’m wondering if an Ultra 9 would be substantially quieter than an Ultra 7 in a 16” 308 bolt gun.
Suppressors Short barrel performance
- Thread starter Guns&WhiteWater
- Start date
I think the relationship is more or less linear, and if not perfectly linear, probably not detectable to most ears. Only you can decide though. If you want max quiet, buy the 9(or a U338, Nomad L/LT, Hyperion, etc.), period. If you dont mind sacrificing some sound performance for handiness, go 7 or shorter. One of my favorite rifles is a 16.5” 6.5x47L with an Ultra 5. Ive screwed a bunch of much larger/quieter cans onto it to mess around, but it kills the handiness for me.
Thanks bud. Yeah that’s the dilemma. Handiness vs quieter. How much quieter would be the determining factor. This would be shot without ear pro while hunting. I’m going back and forth on my next can.
How many shots do you expect to take? If you’re shooting more than you’re walking, then U9, but if we’re talking big game then U7 or even U5. I’m indecisive so I just split the baby and went U7, but I hope to shoot some comps next year. If it was only big game hunting, I think I could’ve been good with the shorty.
What’s your existing can?
Without hearing them, its just a guess. Im fortunate to have a bunch of cans and various mounting solutions to
mix and match. For hunting with standard cartridges, ultra 5 all day long. TBAC just posted gen2 ultra numbers in this forum tonight. Most people think they're giving too much up with the 5, and skip it. They aren't cheap after all. I think they're unmatched in size, weight, and sound. The U7 is the Goldilocks for a reason though.
Without hearing them, its just a guess. Im fortunate to have a bunch of cans and various mounting solutions to
mix and match. For hunting with standard cartridges, ultra 5 all day long. TBAC just posted gen2 ultra numbers in this forum tonight. Most people think they're giving too much up with the 5, and skip it. They aren't cheap after all. I think they're unmatched in size, weight, and sound. The U7 is the Goldilocks for a reason though.
Current can is an Ultra 7. My hesitation with the Ultra 5 would be not enough suppression with a short barreled 308. Was not sure if the decibel reduction was linear as the barrel got shorter. If it wasn’t then I’d opt for the 9. But that 5 is slick. Decisions.
Not many shots fired while hunting, usually just one.
Not many shots fired while hunting, usually just one.
Get the CGS Helios QD Ti. You get almost tbac ultra 9 performance at the ear but it's only 6.5". It's 11.5 oz in direct thread form.
https://pewscience.com/rankings
There are also shorter fatter cans like the dominus. It is an option.
To answer your original question. I don’t think an ultra 9 will give you a noticeable difference at the ear to warrant picking one up for a short 308.
So honestly i just think it varies from certain setups to different cans and designs. We have a 30CB9 at 9”, a hybrid at 7ish, omega at 6.5”, and a resonator K at like 4.8. I have a surefire FA762SS in jail that’s 10.5 also but that’s a different discussion due to OTB.
I had a 18.5” 6.5x47 for an extended amount of time that i ran the hybrid on and it was fine. My brother runs my 30cb9 on his 20” 308 and it’s also pleasant to shoot. My cousin also has a resonator k he runs on his 20” 308 and it sounds incredible. I was shocked truthfully last we hunted together. I’ve been considering trying it on my 7SS but i run the hybrid on it currently and it just does really well all things considering.
I think if you’re running a short action cartridge on a standard bolt face an ultra 5, resonator k, or any 5” can will suite you quite well and still be more than bearable. However if you intend to use a small volume can like that on a magnum is where i think you’ll have some decently loud results.
Thanks for the input. These decisions would be so much easier to make if it wasn’t a nearly year long wait to receive one. I have a Dominus in jail that I expect to have in hand by next summer. This is a ridiculous amount of time to wait to be able to test and determine the next silencer purchase. I was leaning towards the Ultra 9 for my hunting carbine but you guys have made a good case for the 5.
I can't speak to those two specifically but between a Nomad and Nomad L or Hyperion K and Hyperion there is a noticeable difference. The Helios QD Ti fits between the Hyperion K and Hyperion as far as sound reduction is concerned. It's a great hunting can.
Last edited:
I would say Ultra 5 hands down based on your situation. You could always put the dominus on if shooting more volume, but the ultra 5 on that shorter barrel will be much handier in the woods.
Worth repeating. I love my Ultra 5 on a short action shorty barrel and wouldn’t have it any other way, because I actually use my rifles in places other than a range.
Don’t waste your time splitting hairs on a decibel here or there.
Nobody said the nomad ti or the helios wouldn't work. I like the ultra 5 a bunch. And ya, adding weight and length affects handiness.
I didnt say they did but I'm surprised to see the answers, technically adding anything does but the question was is there a difference and the answer is absolutely. So I guess it's up to your use case. I'd rather add 1.8 oz and 1.5" (ultra 5 ii dt vs Nomad ti dt) for a substantially quieter set up.
A substantially quieter setup would be ideal when I’m sitting side-by-side in a stand with my wife, who also hunts with a 16” 308, but handiness is a higher priority when I’m hunting solo. It’s the guessing what an acceptable sound reduction would be with these short barrels that is causing me to question my decision. I wish I could try out a few of these cans before buying. Seems like an opportunity somewhere there.
Did you see the test tbac just posted in this section of all the gen 2 ultras? The helios does look nice. Way outside the OP’s budget though. Never really cared for the nomad. The one I had was steel, so I cant speak for the Ti.
Yes, adding weight and length to a rifle affects its "handiness".
Yes, reducing silencer length/volume, increasing uncorking pressure, and bringing the muzzle closer to the shooter's ear all tend to increase the perceived loudness of the firearm (although note that the effects of backpressure on semi-autos may complicate this relationship).
Next up - the sky is blue and water is wet.
How each person balances these tradeoffs is going to be a personal matter. Regardless of the chosen combination, you'll still end up with at least 30 db of reduction vs. a naked muzzle. Various hearing safety standards notwithstanding, that's a fuckton better than the dumb shit many of us have done with an unsuppressed .30-06 in the field when we were young, dumb, and indestructible.
Would I blast away at the range with an Ultra 5 and no earpro? Er, probably not. Would I prefer one of those on a 18" barrel to shooting an unsuppressed rifle with a 22-24" barrel in the typical hunting scenario? Double fuck-yeah.
Yes, reducing silencer length/volume, increasing uncorking pressure, and bringing the muzzle closer to the shooter's ear all tend to increase the perceived loudness of the firearm (although note that the effects of backpressure on semi-autos may complicate this relationship).
Next up - the sky is blue and water is wet.
How each person balances these tradeoffs is going to be a personal matter. Regardless of the chosen combination, you'll still end up with at least 30 db of reduction vs. a naked muzzle. Various hearing safety standards notwithstanding, that's a fuckton better than the dumb shit many of us have done with an unsuppressed .30-06 in the field when we were young, dumb, and indestructible.
Would I blast away at the range with an Ultra 5 and no earpro? Er, probably not. Would I prefer one of those on a 18" barrel to shooting an unsuppressed rifle with a 22-24" barrel in the typical hunting scenario? Double fuck-yeah.
The Nomad Ti is 6.5" and 9.6oz, the Ultra 5 is 5" and 7.8 oz with direct thread. The Nomad ti will be much quieter. Is the ultra 7 too cumbersome or were you looking for even more suppression? I'm somewhat confused now, it seems you came in looking for a can with more suppression but have been recommended one that would be noticeably louder. If you are looking for more suppression and get a 5 I can only think you'd be disappointed.
The Nomad LT is 8.4" and 12.6 oz. It's the second quietest suppressor at the ear tested by pewscience on 20" 308. Only losing (barely) to the Hyperion that is 1.1" longer and a couple oz heavier. It's the quietest at the muzzle / to bystanders ie your wife next to you.
From tbac's video it is the quietest of all tested.
If you want more suppression I would highly recommend the Nomad LT. It's shorter than the can you were originally thinking of getting and it's essentially the quietest can you can purchase.
You're free to go with whatever you want. I'd try to find someone with an ultra 5 to listen to if you go that route. A 16" 308 with a short can is still loud imo. Obviously other people don't mind. 1.5" and 1.8oz isn't enough savings for me to go with a ultra 5 or similar over a Nomad ti for example.
The Helios qd ti is 2 oz heavier than the Nomad Ti but will be quieter.
Yes the difference between suppressors is more pronounced on shorter barrels imo.
On a 24" 6.5 creedmoor according to their single peak numbers taken in a barn, the difference at the shooter's ear is 5 db from ultra 5 to 7 and again 5db from ultra 7 to 9.
Once again, you all need to get a life if you really think an inch or a decibel either way makes any difference in the real world.
The Ultra 7 isn’t too cumbersome, but of course an Ultra 5 would be even less so. The U7 is perfect for the rifle I bought it for, a 24” 6.5x47. And it goes on four other rifles and is a great “do all” can. So I purchased another can (a Dominus) to share the load as well as to allow both me and my wife to shoot suppressed together. This was also purchased as a “do all” can. They will be swapped around continuously. But with the second can on the way, I now want to start buying dedicated silencers for specific firearms, starting with my current hunting rifle (16” 308).The Nomad Ti is 6.5" and 9.6oz, the Ultra 5 is 5" and 7.8 oz with direct thread. The Nomad ti will be much quieter. Is the ultra 7 too cumbersome or were you looking for even more suppression? I'm somewhat confused now, it seems you came in looking for a can with more suppression but have been recommended one that would be noticeably louder. If you are looking for more suppression and get a 5 I can only think you'd be disappointed.
The Nomad LT is 8.4" and 12.6 oz. It's the second quietest suppressor at the ear tested by pewscience on 20" 308. Only losing (barely) to the Hyperion that is 1.1" longer and a couple oz heavier. It's the quietest at the muzzle / to bystanders ie your wife next to you.
From tbac's video it is the quietest of all tested.
If you want more suppression I would highly recommend the Nomad LT. It's shorter than the can you were originally thinking of getting and it's essentially the quietest can you can purchase.
You're free to go with whatever you want. I'd try to find someone with an ultra 5 to listen to if you go that route. A 16" 308 with a short can is still loud imo. Obviously other people don't mind. 1.5" and 1.8oz isn't enough savings for me to go with a ultra 5 or similar over a Nomad ti for example.
The Helios qd ti is 2 oz heavier than the Nomad Ti but will be quieter.
Yes the difference between suppressors is more pronounced on shorter barrels imo.
On a 24" 6.5 creedmoor according to their single peak numbers taken in a barn, the difference at the shooter's ear is 5 db from ultra 5 to 7 and again 5db from ultra 7 to 9.
So my question was are the suppression levels closer or further apart between longer or shorter models of cans with short barreled rifles? If they were very close to each other (closer than a few decibels or so like on the longer barrels I see tested) then I’d go with another Ultra 7, or even an Ultra 5 to maintain the handiness. But if the Ultra 9 (or others like the Nomad or Hyperion you mentioned) was a great deal quieter on a short barrel then I’d opt for the longer can. The report with my U7 is still pretty stout on the 16” rifle when shooting in the woods. So it’s a matter of degrees of suppression that I’m weighing against a slight loss of handiness, and it’s a blind call for me without hearing one for myself. I’m sure I’m overthinking it. I appreciate all feedback.
That is a HUGE difference.
Remember, the dB scale is logarithmic. That means an increase of 3dB is twice as loud.
10 dB, but otherwise yes. 5 dB is a substantial difference.
It may be technically, but the ear doesn't perceive it that way. 3 db is about the smallest increment most can detect, and why nobody would characterize the u7 as anything but slightly louder than the u9.
It depends on the volume and tone.
My Dad is very hard of hearing. He has 1 can that he thinks is quiet, but it's not. It's just loud in his deaf range.
My younger ears tell me my can and several of his others are quieter, but he swears they're louder because they have a deeper tone outside of his damaged range.
All the arguing in here. Just need to find a shop that will let you demo before you buy. I know ours will, but they only demo what they have in stock, and that hasn't been much lately.
I'd be careful about applying various audible noise rules-of-thumb to suppressors. Yeah, 3lb may be the generally-accepted threshold of perceivable difference for continuous tones in the normal range (say, 60-85 db), and it may take a 10 db difference to create a perceived doubling/halving of volume in that same scenario, but when we get to impulse sounds that at near/at/beyond the threshold of hearing damage, then I would not be so certain. (Please let me know if studies exist that demonstrate otherwise, as I'd love to further dig into this.)
The whole "tone" thing is perhaps a bit of a misnomer as well. I'm thinking that some of this perception does indeed come from frequency (or rather, rise time) aspects of the sound signature, but there is also a component of what people perceive as "tone" that is simply a matter of inner-ear response to an excessive amount of energy transfer. An impulse may have a relatively slow rise time, but if the area under the curve is large enough, it may indeed sound rather sharp to the observer. Now, that would also tend to be associated with relatively high peak pressures and thus should be measurable with standard peak-and-hold meters, but we're not talking about smoothly-shaped sinusoidal curves. I've also see measurements that show ratification events in the pressure curve (that is, "negative" pressure when referenced to standard atmospheric pressure), and it's possible that some ears do not perceive that in a favorable manner.
The pressure vs. time characteristic of these systems are complicated, and then we throw biological and psychological elements into the mix. Complicated stuff. I like it.
The whole "tone" thing is perhaps a bit of a misnomer as well. I'm thinking that some of this perception does indeed come from frequency (or rather, rise time) aspects of the sound signature, but there is also a component of what people perceive as "tone" that is simply a matter of inner-ear response to an excessive amount of energy transfer. An impulse may have a relatively slow rise time, but if the area under the curve is large enough, it may indeed sound rather sharp to the observer. Now, that would also tend to be associated with relatively high peak pressures and thus should be measurable with standard peak-and-hold meters, but we're not talking about smoothly-shaped sinusoidal curves. I've also see measurements that show ratification events in the pressure curve (that is, "negative" pressure when referenced to standard atmospheric pressure), and it's possible that some ears do not perceive that in a favorable manner.
The pressure vs. time characteristic of these systems are complicated, and then we throw biological and psychological elements into the mix. Complicated stuff. I like it.
If less than 3 decibels is hardly noticeable, then the gen 2 Ultra 5 starts looking better. It’s only 2 decibels louder at the shooters ear than my first gen Ultra 7 on a 20” 308, according to the TBAC website. (133dB vs 131dB) As long as the spread was linear then the gen 2 Ultra 5 sounds like the way to go.
On shorter barrels the gap between suppressors is more noticeable. If you think the 7 is stout the 5 will be noticeably louder. You don't lose 2" of suppressor and have nearly the same performance. Not only are you losing baffles but the bullet exit is now 2" closer to your ear as well.
Single peak data can also be extremely misleading. It's not a good indicator of true hearing damage potential. There is a lot more going on with a gunshot than just a single peak reading taken.
If you want the Ultra light weight short set up, go for it. As others have stated it will be significantly better than unsuppressed. It will definitely be even more stout to not only you but your wife if she is in close proximity though.
Similar threads
Suppressors 9mm Carbine Can??
Gunsmithing 1/2x28 for .243/6mm???