Suppressors Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

[Jeepocabra]

Is a good quality suppressor equal to using earplugs?

Most better cans have about 30 db of sound reduction. Most earplugs are rated at around 30db of noise reduction. By this it would seem that a decent can should be as comfortable to shoot as wearing earplugs. I don't have much experience with suppressors but I do have a little. It seems fairly true that the sound reduction is similar. Yet most say that shooting centerfire supersonic cartridges with a can is borderline uncomfortable or worse. And most shooters are comfortable with just earplugs.

 

[MidwestPX]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

No, not equal to using ear protection. You should use ear protection even when shooting suppressed.

 

[Bacarrat]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

Depends on what your shooting environment is. If you are shooting in a open field, then with a sound suppressor, it's not uncomfortable at all shooting with a suppressor on. If you are shooting in a enclosed area, like a crowded 100 yard line with cover and berms to reflect sound back at you, it could get loud at time. And the type of gun will also make a difference on how "loud" a suppressor is.

 

[yote_slayer31]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

Its best to protect your hearing at any rate. Once its gone, its gone.

 

[jakhamr81]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

Don't forget subsonic versus supersonic. If you can bring the level of the noise down bellow the OSHA safe level you should be fine. To do that, you will be restricted to firing rounds that are traveling at less than +/-1,050 fps.

 

[RollingThunder51]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

If your question is "is there really a reason to buy a suppressor if I can comfortably shoot with hearing protection?" then I would answer as follows:

There is no simularity between shooting with muffs and plugs and shooting with a can. They are distinctly different, especially after decades of heavy shooting. IMO, the reasons are as follows:

1. Unsupressed supersonic projectiles create accoustical shockwaves that come back on the shooter, especially with heavy calibers, that is not present when shooting suppressed. When shooting plugged and muffed, damage occurs by sound moving through ones jawbone to the ears. After decades of shooting heavy caliber, with doubles (muff & plugs), significant damage will still occur. With suppression and single plugs, hearing damage risk is minimal to insignificant. In .22 caliber, properly built rifle units require no plugs at all. One cannot underestimate what a relief this is, especially over the long term. IF you can shoot with a can and hearing protection.

2. Some feel there is a significant reduction in felt recoil with a can. I do. This is not present with plugs/muffs.

3. Shooting in the company of others. A can provides some degree of added sound safety for those around you.

4. Home defense. Suppression is the only way to go. How to get tinnitus instantly: Grab a pistol and bang away in a small room. Auditory exclusion is a myth, a fundamentla misunderstanding of the physiology of hearing. There is absolutely no basis of fact behind it. If your banking on this, your deaf.

5. Neighbors, suppression is the only way to go.

6. Some cans provide improved accuracy.

By the way OSHA standards are a sad joke. Acceptable OSHA levels, when translated to suppressor, would allow for sonds levels that are exactly the same as a jack hammer going off 14" from your ears. It is not just about dBs....its about duration, frequency and number of episodes through time. Protecting yourself to OSHA standards in regard to firearms will insure significant hearing loss over time.

 

[Conqueror]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

^^^FWIW the OSHA stadards do take into account the duration of the sound exposure and the frequency of exposures. 140dB is the limit for impulse noise like gunshots and explosions, the decibel limit for longer-duration sounds like a jackhammer or a jet engine are much lower.

That said, I have been telling people for a long time that there's no such thing as a "hearing-safe" suppressed supersonic rifle cartridge. The supersonic bullet makes flight noise in excess of 160dd, and even a 136dB suppressor will still damage your hearing almost as fast as one that's 141dB.

 

[RollingThunder51]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

Different "duration"..not the number of times the sound is heard at any given pressure level (repitition)...but rather the "duration" of each pressure peak. Big difference! A .308, a .30-06 and a .300 Winmag all have the same peak pressure, but vastly different duration periods at peak. OSHA says they all sound the same as per dB peak pressure readings...they do not.

I agree with all else you have said. There is no ear safe suppressor out there for SS projectiles except those that are integral gas tapping.

 

[HPLLC]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

Most ear plugs are more efficient in reducing louder and higher pitched sounds, so a 30DB set might do 40+DB reduction of the noise gunfire is creating.

I would say a 30DB suppressor mounted to a 20" bolt gun, will probably be comparable to a set of 20DB ear protectors.

On an ar15, a 32DB can might be comparable to 16 or 18 DB ear protectors. That has something to do with at the ear noise being about 138 probably.

I can fire ten rounds with a 32DB 5.56 suppressor without ringing ears, but I also feel pressure and the noise isn't quiet to my ears.

Is it awesome to shoot an M4 with no ear protection without ringing ears? Absolutely. It's also cool to lower the environmental noise produced by a weapon.

 

[flyrodder]

Re: Suppresser vs Ear Plugs

I've never had much luck with earplugs fitting well, and much prefer shooting suppressed. My suppressed bolt action 308s are comfortable without any hearing protection, but my M-forgery is pretty loud, primarily due to the buffer clang next to your ear. Obviously, you still get the supersonic crack, but you get that with a 22 lr, too.