is there a list anywhere listing cans rated by DB?

[Ring]

im pretty sure there used to be one here, but im sure its way out of date by now..

any other pages out there?

[Bendersquint]

im pretty sure there used to be one here, but im sure its way out of date by now..

any other pages out there?

NFATalk.org has a pretty comprehensive testing database I would look there. Its free too.

[mpallett]

im pretty sure there used to be one here, but im sure its way out of date by now..

any other pages out there?

You have NO IDEA how much of a PITA it was to compile that.

[a_canadian]

Any chance of a link to that comparison? I searched quite a bit on NFATalk and couldn't find such a list. It does sound like a monumental task... one worth sharing as much as possible I should think.

[Bendersquint]

Any chance of a link to that comparison? I searched quite a bit on NFATalk and couldn't find such a list. It does sound like a monumental task... one worth sharing as much as possible I should think.

Its in the forum called "Official Sound Test Data".

[doubloon]

silencerresearch.com still has some data posted as well.

A lot of it is for cans that aren't sold anymore but some cans tested way back when are still top performers today

[a_canadian]

Its in the forum called "Official Sound Test Data".

Oops, silly me. Had been using Google to search nfatalk as I usually do with forums, as phpbb internal search engines are mostly terrible. Didn't realise one had to be a member to browse. Easily seen now. And I get why the reluctance to post such charts here... considering the warning in the thread. Ouch. Heck of a resource! Thanks!

[silencertalk]

You really want to use the same ammo for each test. You really also want velocity data as it makes a big difference on sound. You shouldn't just compare one test with one from another source and expect it to mean anything. But yet numbers are seductive so it is easy to do.

[John Titsworth]

You really want to use the same ammo for each test. You really also want velocity data as it makes a big difference on sound. You shouldn't just compare one test with one from another source and expect it to mean anything. But yet numbers are seductive so it is easy to do.

This.

I spent many years as an independent silencer tester. It was interesting work, but after testing 80+% of the silencers that were then available and seeing the inherent problems with the currently accepted MIL STD, I stopped doing it. This site started with silencer testing and eventually stopped. I started testing in 2006 and quit in 2010. Silencer forum started testing in 2010 and eventually quit. NFA Talk started testing sometime (not sure when) and they still test every now and then. Its a thankless job and when done correctly its very time consuming and expensive and somebody always comes along and asks you to test this host with that ammo with suppressor X and Y and let them know the results. So we are now back to companies doing testing and releasing results. Company X releases the newest and best thing and boasts 40dB of reduction and Company Y will release a 44dB silencer the next month.

What I learned about sound reduction data from all the data and the years of testing:

22LR suppressors on a pistol should never be longer than 5.5" and when shot dry not a single shot should register above 120dB. Putting water, gel or grease in a full sized 22LR suppressor shows a weak design and should be avoided.
95% of 22LR suppressors on a rifle sound great with subsonic ammo even if they meter 6dB louder than the "quietest."
22LR is the only caliber that can be considered "Hollywood Quiet". Only the best suppressors qualify.

9MM handgun suppressors that meter under 126dB dry with subsonic ammunition are quality suppressors. There is no need for one to be any longer than about 8".
9MM can be "Hollywood Quiet" and is the only military or police cartridge in use today that you can shoot dry and expect people not to recognize the sound as a gunshot.

As for the rest....well you can just about forget it being REALLY QUIET. At least dry. I have measured a lot of 45ACP silencers wet that were awesome. 45 silencers are just not that good unless they are wet. You see, there is a magic number that you have to get below in order to achieve real sound reduction in a centerfire pistol silencers. That number is 130dB and you have to get BELOW this number for every shot DRY; nobody makes one that will. This is for silencers averaging roughly 9". Thats a pretty long silencer too.

Centerfire rifle silencers are no better. Not even huge ones. I have never seen a muzzle mounted 5.56MM suppressor that will meter under 130dB with M855 ball. Most 7.62MM muzzle mounted silencers are lucky to get under 140dB. Even 135dB for these silencers still seems very loud to the shooter and bystanders. This is not even to mention the sound the supersonic projectile makes ripping through the air (which a muzzle silencer cannot control anyway). All that being said, I would never want to shoot any weapon without a suppressor. Even being "LOUD" they still make the shooting experience far more pleasant than without.

So when it comes to "fretting over the numbers" and centerfire pistol silencers and centerfire rifle silencers, they are many other factors to consider. I won't get into that here, but based on dB reduction only the above is a pretty good buyers guide.

[Catskinner]

"Centerfire rifle silencers are no better. Not even huge ones. I have never seen a muzzle mounted 5.56MM suppressor that will meter under 130dB with M855 ball. Most 7.62MM muzzle mounted silencers are lucky to get under 140dB. Even 135dB for these silencers still seems very loud to the shooter and bystanders. This is not even to mention the sound the supersonic projectile makes ripping through the air (which a muzzle silencer cannot control anyway). All that being said, I would never want to shoot any weapon without a suppressor. Even being "LOUD" they still make the shooting"


This is key. I think most folks just want to shoot and not have ear protection all the time. And then just the enjoyment of not bothering everyone in the area when you want to shoot. I will never understand why these are not sold anywhere over the counter, and this is another example of gov. making life way more difficult for folks. Why do we allow this to happen? I need to relax this morning, I'm really tired up about freedom this am for some reason.

[rimshaker]

This is key. I think most folks just want to shoot and not have ear protection all the time. And then just the enjoyment of not bothering everyone in the area when you want to shoot. I will never understand why these are not sold anywhere over the counter, and this is another example of gov. making life way more difficult for folks. Why do we allow this to happen? I need to relax this morning, I'm really tired up about freedom this am for some reason.

Think of it this way. At the end of the day, we still get to own NFA toys in this country as private citizens. Some gov't regulation and a little inconvenience is the small price we pay for that freedom.

I actually would not want to live in a place with no regulations, zero gov't, and everyone has a free-for-all mentality.

[doubloon]

...
I actually would not want to live in a place with no regulations, zero gov't, and everyone has a free-for-all mentality.

The Great Experiment, The Great Republic Experiment, The Constitutional Republic, was founded on the idea of personal liberty and to a large degree self governance.

Please don't ridicule the desire to protect personal freedoms by reducing the idea to the absurdity of "zero gov't".

As far as "Some gov't regulation and a little inconvenience is the small price we pay for that freedom." goes, I don't see the logic in giving up freedom to pay for freedom.

[Historian]

You really want to use the same ammo for each test. You really also want velocity data as it makes a big difference on sound. You shouldn't just compare one test with one from another source and expect it to mean anything. But yet numbers are seductive so it is easy to do.

This.

I spent many years as an independent silencer tester. It was interesting work, but after testing 80+% of the silencers that were then available and seeing the inherent problems with the currently accepted MIL STD, I stopped doing it. This site started with silencer testing and eventually stopped. I started testing in 2006 and quit in 2010. Silencer forum started testing in 2010 and eventually quit. NFA Talk started testing sometime (not sure when) and they still test every now and then. Its a thankless job and when done correctly its very time consuming and expensive and somebody always comes along and asks you to test this host with that ammo with suppressor X and Y and let them know the results. So we are now back to companies doing testing and releasing results. Company X releases the newest and best thing and boasts 40dB of reduction and Company Y will release a 44dB silencer the next month.

What I learned about sound reduction data from all the data and the years of testing:

22LR suppressors on a pistol should never be longer than 5.5" and when shot dry not a single shot should register above 120dB. Putting water, gel or grease in a full sized 22LR suppressor shows a weak design and should be avoided.
95% of 22LR suppressors on a rifle sound great with subsonic ammo even if they meter 6dB louder than the "quietest."
22LR is the only caliber that can be considered "Hollywood Quiet". Only the best suppressors qualify.

9MM handgun suppressors that meter under 126dB dry with subsonic ammunition are quality suppressors. There is no need for one to be any longer than about 8".
9MM can be "Hollywood Quiet" and is the only military or police cartridge in use today that you can shoot dry and expect people not to recognize the sound as a gunshot.

As for the rest....well you can just about forget it being REALLY QUIET. At least dry. I have measured a lot of 45ACP silencers wet that were awesome. 45 silencers are just not that good unless they are wet. You see, there is a magic number that you have to get below in order to achieve real sound reduction in a centerfire pistol silencers. That number is 130dB and you have to get BELOW this number for every shot DRY; nobody makes one that will. This is for silencers averaging roughly 9". Thats a pretty long silencer too.

Centerfire rifle silencers are no better. Not even huge ones. I have never seen a muzzle mounted 5.56MM suppressor that will meter under 130dB with M855 ball. Most 7.62MM muzzle mounted silencers are lucky to get under 140dB. Even 135dB for these silencers still seems very loud to the shooter and bystanders. This is not even to mention the sound the supersonic projectile makes ripping through the air (which a muzzle silencer cannot control anyway). All that being said, I would never want to shoot any weapon without a suppressor. Even being "LOUD" they still make the shooting experience far more pleasant than without.

So when it comes to "fretting over the numbers" and centerfire pistol silencers and centerfire rifle silencers, they are many other factors to consider. I won't get into that here, but based on dB reduction only the above is a pretty good buyers guide.

John, you deserve recognition for the great service you gave the community with your testing.

I was surprised at your dictum " ...22LR suppressors on a pistol should never be longer than 5.5"

Please expand on how this was derived from your research.

Do the parameters of diameter, size of expansion chamber/filling, K's v. disks v. cones not count?

There have been special builds of .22 with 1" I.D., 9" long, 3" long expansion chamber with an insert of
rolled #16 bronze mesh cylinder, and 6" of K's which recorded quieter than any of the present day
excellent commercials.

And of course there is my favorite 'Gold Standard' YouTube longer than 5":
<< http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GbjXvH7xJA >>

Any amplification would be most appreciated.


Best.

[John Titsworth]

You really want to use the same ammo for each test. You really also want velocity data as it makes a big difference on sound. You shouldn't just compare one test with one from another source and expect it to mean anything. But yet numbers are seductive so it is easy to do.

This.

I spent many years as an independent silencer tester. It was interesting work, but after testing 80+% of the silencers that were then available and seeing the inherent problems with the currently accepted MIL STD, I stopped doing it. This site started with silencer testing and eventually stopped. I started testing in 2006 and quit in 2010. Silencer forum started testing in 2010 and eventually quit. NFA Talk started testing sometime (not sure when) and they still test every now and then. Its a thankless job and when done correctly its very time consuming and expensive and somebody always comes along and asks you to test this host with that ammo with suppressor X and Y and let them know the results. So we are now back to companies doing testing and releasing results. Company X releases the newest and best thing and boasts 40dB of reduction and Company Y will release a 44dB silencer the next month.

What I learned about sound reduction data from all the data and the years of testing:

22LR suppressors on a pistol should never be longer than 5.5" and when shot dry not a single shot should register above 120dB. Putting water, gel or grease in a full sized 22LR suppressor shows a weak design and should be avoided.
95% of 22LR suppressors on a rifle sound great with subsonic ammo even if they meter 6dB louder than the "quietest."
22LR is the only caliber that can be considered "Hollywood Quiet". Only the best suppressors qualify.

9MM handgun suppressors that meter under 126dB dry with subsonic ammunition are quality suppressors. There is no need for one to be any longer than about 8".
9MM can be "Hollywood Quiet" and is the only military or police cartridge in use today that you can shoot dry and expect people not to recognize the sound as a gunshot.

As for the rest....well you can just about forget it being REALLY QUIET. At least dry. I have measured a lot of 45ACP silencers wet that were awesome. 45 silencers are just not that good unless they are wet. You see, there is a magic number that you have to get below in order to achieve real sound reduction in a centerfire pistol silencers. That number is 130dB and you have to get BELOW this number for every shot DRY; nobody makes one that will. This is for silencers averaging roughly 9". Thats a pretty long silencer too.

Centerfire rifle silencers are no better. Not even huge ones. I have never seen a muzzle mounted 5.56MM suppressor that will meter under 130dB with M855 ball. Most 7.62MM muzzle mounted silencers are lucky to get under 140dB. Even 135dB for these silencers still seems very loud to the shooter and bystanders. This is not even to mention the sound the supersonic projectile makes ripping through the air (which a muzzle silencer cannot control anyway). All that being said, I would never want to shoot any weapon without a suppressor. Even being "LOUD" they still make the shooting experience far more pleasant than without.

So when it comes to "fretting over the numbers" and centerfire pistol silencers and centerfire rifle silencers, they are many other factors to consider. I won't get into that here, but based on dB reduction only the above is a pretty good buyers guide.

John, you deserve recognition for the great service you gave the community with your testing.

I was surprised at your dictum " ...22LR suppressors on a pistol should never be longer than 5.5"

Please expand on how this was derived from your research.

Do the parameters of diameter, size of expansion chamber/filling, K's v. disks v. cones not count?

There have been special builds of .22 with 1" I.D., 9" long, 3" long expansion chamber with an insert of
rolled #16 bronze mesh cylinder, and 6" of K's which recorded quieter than any of the present day
excellent commercials.

And of course there is my favorite 'Gold Standard' YouTube longer than 5":
<< http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GbjXvH7xJA >>

Any amplification would be most appreciated.


Best.

I'll be glad to explain it. On a full sized screw on 22 suppressor, there is no need to produce a silencer with length in excess of 5.5" UNLESS...The stack is not efficient thereby warranting additional length and weight. Mitigating FRP with water or gel should be left to smaller suppressors that need medium. The technology of suppressors has exceeded the day of the need for a 6" system to achieve quality sound reduction. If a muzzle mounted rimfire silencer needs water, gel or grease to kill FRP, then the stack is not good at doing its job. If you have to use an ablative medium to reduce FRP or remove it then you should be paid back with a shorter, lighter suppressor system, not be penalized by having to add it and deal with excessive length and weight for the same end result.

As for the special builds...a 9" suppressor with 6 inches of K baffles and wire mess is nothing more than an absolute joke, built by someone who knows nothing about suppressor technology. Quieter than what present day commercials? I tested the Norrell 19" suppressor system way back when and its still the quietest suppressor out there for an integral 10/22. It meters at action noise and it uses M baffles and spacers as the stack. It can be cleaned and there are examples still in use with hundreds of thousands of rounds through them.

Basically, who wants a 6+ inch silencer that is heavy and too long when you can achieve the same result with a shorter, lighter product (as long as the price is comparable)?

Hope this helps

[mpallett]

" ...22LR suppressors on a pistol should never be longer than 5.5"

I guess the Spectre and the Spectre II suck then

[John Titsworth]

" ...22LR suppressors on a pistol should never be longer than 5.5"

I guess the Spectre and the Spectre II suck then

The Spectre is no longer made and the Spectre II doesn't suck at all! Its just too long. And what's up with that rear end cap? Pure ugly and serves no purpose. Does it still use the Omega patented baffle? Doesn't seem to have the patent number on the tubes on the pictures I have seen.

[continuity]

Fight...fight!!!!

Check out " NFAtalk.com" for a generalized understanding.

Titsworth... go suck on an egg.

[doubloon]

...
I guess the Spectre and the Spectre II suck then

As the owner of more than one of these I can say, without a doubt, they absolutely do.

They suck the noise right out of every shot.

[a_canadian]

Fugly rear cap too!

[a_canadian]

(Dang thumbs. Duplicated a stupid post.)

[John Titsworth]

Fight...fight!!!!

Check out " NFAtalk.com" for a generalized understanding.

Titsworth... go suck on an egg.

LOL! How long is that can there in your profile picture numb nuts?

[mpallett]

Fight...fight!!!!

Check out " NFAtalk.com" for a generalized understanding.

Titsworth... go suck on an egg.

LOL! How long is that can there in your profile picture numb nuts?

Now now ... be calm folks. John and I hugged it out long ago ...

[Historian]

Fight...fight!!!!

Check out " NFAtalk.com" for a generalized understanding.

Titsworth... go suck on an egg.

LOL! How long is that can there in your profile picture numb nuts?

John, I am shocked, shocked that you used the N-word.

Though admittedly it is a great word to hurl at stupid drivers on the highway.

Thank you for supplying your reasoning for why you arrived at the 5.5" size.

Best.

[continuity]

...LOL! How long is that can there in your profile picture numb nuts?

Hey now, that's my very first suppressor. It's a period correct reproduction of a 2 stage "hush puppy (?)" for the MAC. Right down to the eyelets in the 1st stage. Manufactured by an Ohio company.

Numb nuts? Whoa... sounds like the 80 year old that was being probated. "Get away from me you dirty numb nuts copper". Too funny.