PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

General silencer discussion. If you want to talk about a specific silenced rifle or pistol, it is best to do that in the rifle or pistol section for that brand.

All NFA laws apply.

Moderators: mpallett, mr fixit, bakerjw, renegade

User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

Review 6.32 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the YHM Resonator K in the supersonic flow regime with 7.62x51mm ammunition. The test host used is the Savage Model 10 bolt-action rifle with a 20-inch barrel.

The silencer was previously tested by PEW Science on subsonic 300 BLK.

So... how does the performance differ? Well, it drops of course, but by how much? Well, it beats the Sandman-K. Pretty interesting conclusion - you'll have to see for yourself. Definitely interesting for such a small silencer.

I added some comparisons of the subsonic 300 BLK and supersonic .308 muzzle waveforms from this silencer to help put things in perspective; PEW Science members see some very interesting ear waveforms. 300 BLK first round pop is a crazy thing.

Speaking of first round pop -

Member Research Supplement 6.33 was also released today. FRP shoot-out. 8 compact and mid-size silencers go to battle on supersonic .308. Who comes out on top when that first shot counts? We explore in-depth human ear response from each silencer. Thanks to our members for making this type of research possible.

Thank you, as always, to the whole team at YHM for being receptive to silencer evaluation in accordance with The Silencer Sound Standard.

Check out https://pewscience.com for the Suppression Rating.

Here is a direct link to our reviews and research: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews

Check out the new Rankings Tool in Section 7 of the Silencer Sound Standard: https://pewscience.com/rankings

Resonator K .308 Sound Test Results: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... savage-308
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
User avatar
renegade
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 4547
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 9:19 am
Location: Texas

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by renegade »

What equipment are you using for measurement? I could not find that on website.
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

renegade wrote: Sun Jan 24, 2021 3:55 pm What equipment are you using for measurement? I could not find that on website.
Hi sir! Hope you are doing well. I use PEW-SOFT which is a custom-built data acquisition system created by me. I sample at 1 MS/s (1 MHz).
Last edited by TOOL1075 on Thu Feb 04, 2021 7:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

Reviews 6.34 and 6.35 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the Richmond Tactical RT30Ti in both the the supersonic and subsonic flow regimes. The test hosts used are the Savage Model 10 bolt-action rifle with a 20-inch barrel and the Q mini Fix with an 8-inch barrel.

Interesting silencer. It's sort of the "in between" diameter for a rifle silencer right now; it's 1.61" OD, so in-between the 1.5" and 1.75" stuff we see a lot. It's relatively light weight, titanium, tubeless, a lot of baffles, the back pressure is lower than I would have thought, and it can use a wipe too. A lot going on with this silencer that made it interesting to evaluate.

The photo shows the taper mount on which I tested the silencer - they also make other versions of the silencer that can take the "universal" 1.375" x 24 tpi mounts.

From a new(er) company, it was cool to see a silencer with varied characteristics like this.

Thank you to Richmond Tactical for trusting PEW Science to perform this work and for supporting the overall mission of PEW Science and The Silencer Sound Standard.⠀

Check out https://pewscience.com/ for the Suppression Rating.

Here is a direct link to our reviews and research: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews

Check out the new Rankings Tool in Section 7 of the Silencer Sound Standard: https://pewscience.com/rankings

RT30Ti .308 Sound Test Results: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... savage-308

RT30Ti 300BLK Sound Test Results: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... fix-300blk
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
User avatar
renegade
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 4547
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 9:19 am
Location: Texas

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by renegade »

TOOL1075 wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 7:55 am
renegade wrote: Sun Jan 24, 2021 3:55 pm What equipment are you using for measurement? I could not find that on website.
Hi sir! Hope you are doing well. I use PEW-SOFT which is a custom-built data acquisition system created by me. I sample at 1 MS/s (1 MHz).
I meant hardware, mics, etc.
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

renegade wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 8:17 am
TOOL1075 wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 7:55 am
renegade wrote: Sun Jan 24, 2021 3:55 pm What equipment are you using for measurement? I could not find that on website.
Hi sir! Hope you are doing well. I use PEW-SOFT which is a custom-built data acquisition system created by me. I sample at 1 MS/s (1 MHz).
I meant hardware, mics, etc.
The system is custom hardware I configured for testing.
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

Review 6.36 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the Griffin Armament Explorr 300 (also known as the Explorr EX3) in the supersonic flow regime. The test host used is the Savage Model 10 bolt-action rifle with a 20-inch barrel.

This is a relatively small and light tubeless steel rifle silencer, and it was tested with the taper mount brake shown. For how compact the silencer is, the sound suppression performance is relatively typical.

Research update included:

During the analysis of the test data, impulse rise-time for this silencer was noted to be relatively fast. In the current research, this phenomenon is typically only noted in silencers exhibiting relatively low "back pressure," or flow restriction. Not having any anecdotal feedback or semiautomatic host weapon data for this silencer, I found it prudent to investigate this further and also investigate some of the anomalies noted in other reviews, with regard to the current back pressure metric hypothesis.

A comprehensive review of all impulse waveforms from all published supersonic rifle tests was performed and a data reduction was conducted, followed by the investigation of another waveform parameter. The preliminary back pressure metric has now been revised to Rev.2.

The Explorr EX3 does have relatively low back pressure, but I postulate that the revision to the methodology captures it more accurately.

For revision context, a dedicated section of the review on back pressure research is included, in addition to a Rugged Rifle silencer back pressure case study. Comparisons of Rev.1 and Rev.2 versions of the metric are shown.

Most silencers previously tested by PEW Science maintain their place on the relative back pressure scale. However, there are some outliers, such as the Hyperion K and Surefire SOCOM762-RC2. When considering the additional waveform parameter, these two silencers have a higher relative back pressure metric than previously computed. These two silencers still have relatively low back pressure, but not as low as previously computed by the Rev.1 methodology. The Suppression Rating is completely decoupled from back pressure and not influenced by the revised preliminary back pressure metric.

Thank you to Griffin Armament for being open to testing and R&D by PEW Science in accordance with the overall mission of PEW Science and The Silencer Sound Standard.

Thank you all for your interest in my continued research into characterizing suppressed small arms!

Check out https://pewscience.com for the Suppression Rating.

Here is a direct link to our reviews and research: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews

Check out the new Rankings Tool in Section 7 of the Silencer Sound Standard: https://pewscience.com/rankings

Explorr EX3 .308 Sound Test Results: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... savage-308
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

Review 6.37 - Today we again examine the high fidelity test results for the the CGS Hyperion; this time using the 6.5 Creedmoor cartridge. The review examines test results using this silencer with supersonic 130gr 6.5 CM ammunition from a 22-inch barrel.

The performance of the Hyperion is... again... ridiculous.

Pay particular attention to the signature amplitude of the Hyperion. On this weapon platform, the Suppression Rating at the shooter's ear is quieter than many silencers achieve with a subsonic 300 BLK bolt gun and even less severe to the ear than many compact semi-automatic suppressed .22LR pistols. This is not normal. The performance is highly atypical. The barrel length is long, which does contribute to this. However, the performance of the silencer is still atypical.

I included a section comparing 20-in .308 to 22-in 6.5 CM. Another thing to think about is the use of the muzzle adapter(s) with the Hyperion vs. pure direct thread. The influence of this variable is the subject of ongoing PEW Science Research. I address this in the review.

Thank you to everyone at CGS for trusting PEW Science to perform this work and supporting the overall mission of PEW Science and The Silencer Sound Standard. We are here to innovate and foster the innovation of others.

Check out https://pewscience.com/ for the Suppression Rating

Here is a direct link to our reviews and research: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews

Hyperion 6.5 CM Sound Test Results: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... rgeon-65cm
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

The forum had a hiccup! Because of that, I was not able to post updates for you folks.

So, here is a list of things published since the forum software had a glitch. There is quiet a lot of new data since then!

PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.38 - the Energetic Armament VOX S with subsonic 300 BLK, but with wipes! This type of data has never been published before, in the history of small arms. https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... fix-300blk

PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.39 - the Sig Sauer SRD762Ti-QD with subsonic 300 BLK. Very quiet silencer in this flow regime! https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... fix-300blk

PEW Science Public Research Supplement 6.40 - the PEW Science Omega Back Pressure Metric (Public Article). This is a big deal, I think, and worth looking at if you are interested in mass flow rate and flow restriction (back pressure) of silencers. https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... ure-metric

PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.41 - the OSS HX-QD 762 with supersonic .308. Extremely low back pressure (high mass flow rate silencer). The Omega metric shows it, and the data is undeniable. It is amazing that this silencer works, at all, and it is clear that it does actually work in the supersonic flow regime. https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... savage-308

PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.43 - the Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) with supersonic .308. This is the first iteration of the Nomad-30. This should give you lower bound data for its performance. https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... savage-308

PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.44 - the Dead Air Nomad-Ti with supersonic .308. This is the latest iteration of the Nomad. This should give you upper bound data for its performance. https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... savage-308

PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.45 - the OSS HX-QD 762 with subsonic 300 BLK. High mass flow rate, and different method of sound suppression than many silencers - a very inefficient subsonic silencer, as a result. https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... fix-300blk

and finally, today:

PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.46 - the Surefire SOCOM762-RC2 with subsonic 300 BLK. Low back pressure (not as low as the OSS, but still relatively low). How does it deal with subsonic flow, as a result? Are the conventional features of its baffle stack enough to help subsonic performance? Looks like.... yes. Not stellar, but it does exhibit somewhat balanced performance. https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... fix-300blk

I hope this helps folks understand true sound signature suppression performance of silencers.

Check out the new Rankings Tool in Section 7 of the Silencer Sound Standard: https://pewscience.com/rankings

Hope you are all doing well!
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
Matt in TN
Silent Operator
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 9:11 am

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by Matt in TN »

Great stuff - thanks for sharing!
22: http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=138952
30: http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156481
9: http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=696697
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

Matt in TN wrote: Mon Jun 28, 2021 2:00 pm Great stuff - thanks for sharing!
You are most welcome, sir!
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
GeorgeWashinCan
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:06 am

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by GeorgeWashinCan »

Those cans you tested are great and all. But i think im speaking for just about everybody when i ask " what about my White Trash Tactical 7.5". When are we gonna be getting those numbers?
User avatar
TOOL1075
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 6:47 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

GeorgeWashinCan wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:12 am Those cans you tested are great and all. But i think im speaking for just about everybody when i ask " what about my White Trash Tactical 7.5". When are we gonna be getting those numbers?
Haven't been here in a while - sorry for my extreme tardiness in getting back to you.

Form 1 silencers, while of interest, are in significantly less demand than Form 4 silencers. I think that I will eventually test and analyze some of those silencers, but right now, Form 4 is taking priority. And, I think we are learning quite a lot.

We are now up to Sound Signature Review 6.62 - the SilencerCo Omega 9K with subsonic 300 BLK: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... fix-300blk

Also - there has been a lot of AR15 (MK18, 5.56x45mm) testing too!

The Rankings section has been updated: https://pewscience.com/rankings
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
adamcooper
New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2023 12:36 am

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by adamcooper »

That sound great :mrgreen:
Post Reply