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:

PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by TOOL1075 »

Hey everyone. Big announcement today! :mrgreen:

Intro

Today, PEW Science is proud to announce the launch of three major silencer industry innovations; the Silencer Sound Standard, the Suppression Rating, and Sound Signature Reviews!

Over the past decade, consumers have demanded accurate and dependable information on how "hearing safe" a silencer will be on a certain host firearm. PEW Science answered the call. The new Standard and Suppression Rating finally arms consumers with meaningful metrics from a reliable, independent source.

Using one number to compare every silencer on every host firearm to each other, the Suppression Rating provides the best real estimate of comfortable use with unprotected ears for a silencer paired with a specific host.

The Silencer Sound Standard contains six parts, culminating with the most accurate and meaningful silencer test reports ever shown to the public. These Sound Signature Reviews are the first and only reviews of their kind. Only from PEW Science.⁣⁣⁣

PEW Science did this for all of you!

I would like to thank all of you for your patience over the past year of development. This has been over a decade in the making; we have really gone where nobody in the firearm industry has gone before; we developed our own hardware and software tools to make this Standard a reality. PEW Science has named this technology PEW-SOFT. There wasn't (and still isn't) any commercially available system that meets our requirements. We innovated by creating PEW-SOFT and continuous R&D is part of our mandate. Our innovation has not stopped with the creation of this system, Standard, and Rating.

I am honored, elated, and proud to say, unequivocally, we are now leading the industry in independent sound signature testing for small arms. These innovations are for the industry, and for you; the consumer.

Come Check it Out!

Professionally Engineered Weaponeering. We are pushing the industry forward, one test at a time. The Standard is now live, along with the first Sound Signature Review using PEW-SOFT data! Visit https://pewscience.com for more details. There's a lot of information on the website. Trust me when I say you're gonna want to take a look :)

Bonus: there's a new episode of The Jay Situation podcast - tune in to hear more about all this! Long overdue, but hey, I was busy!

Thanks

Special thanks to Rugged, Dead Air, Energetic Armament, YHM, SilencerCo, Discreet Ballistics, CGS, Pulsar, Black Collar Arms, The Firearm Blog, The Truth About Guns, Silencer Shop, Will at Magpul, and everyone else who has supported and believed in PEW Science from the beginning. Extra special thanks to my girlfriend; the most patient, understanding, and wonderful woman in the world.
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 »

We've released three reviews so far, folks. Hope you folks are enjoying it.

More coming soon!
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 »

We just released a very detailed Sound Signature Review on the Q Trash Panda.

This review highlights some performance traits of the silencer that are often talked about but never explained analytically.

I hope you folks enjoy! Here's a direct link to our review page: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
SILENCERSTUDENT
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:46 pm

Re: PEW Science Announces the Silencer Sound Standard!

Post by SILENCERSTUDENT »

Thanks!
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 »

SILENCERSTUDENT wrote: Sat May 02, 2020 10:54 pm Thanks!
Yes sir!

More data released today!
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 »

more released - we're up to Review 6.7 now: the review of the Rugged Obsidian 45 on the HK P30L 9mm pistol.

Here is a direct link to our review page:

https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 »

We're up to 6.9 now!

Review 6.8 takes a look at the classic SWR Trident-9 on the modern HK P30L.

We also published a members-only Research Supplement (6.9) in which in-depth human hearing data is examined and compared for the previous CGS MOD9 FS (6.6), Rugged Obsidian 45 (6.7), and SWR Trident-9 (6.8) reviews. This is part of our ongoing cutting-edge small arms sound research.

Folks who have shot the Trident probably have an opinion about "tone" - we explore that in the research.

Here is a direct link to our review page:

https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.10 - today, we continue to evaluate supersonic .308 suppression. This review features the SilencerCo Omega 300 on an 18-inch .308 bolt action rifle. We tested it with the ASR mount, 3-port brake, and flat end-cap.

This is a very prolific silencer. Its performance and mounting system are always popular topics of discussion.⠀

I hope you enjoy our objective evaluation of the Omega. In addition to actual human hearing damage potential, our cutting-edge data and analysis shows backpressure in a bolt gun test.

Take a look at the data and see for yourself. I think you will find it meaningful.

Thank you to SilencerCo R&D and Marketing for taking the time to discuss these test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with PEW Science.

Check out pewscience.com for the Suppression Rating.

As always, here's a direct link to our review page: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.11 - today, we continue to evaluate supersonic .308 suppression. This review features the Sandman-S on an 18-inch .308 bolt action rifle. We tested it with the Keymount Flash Hider.

We recently talked about back pressure. So what better way to continue that discussion than with the Sandman-S? This silencer is intended to reduce back pressure.⠀⠀

So, does it offer reduced back pressure? It does. How much sound suppression does it give up to do so? Well, it gives up more than the Trash Panda, for example. I hope you enjoy our objective evaluation that answers these questions, definitively.⠀

Take a look at the data and see for yourself. I think you will find it meaningful.

Thank you to Dead Air for taking the time to discuss these test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with PEW Science.

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

Here is a direct link https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.12 - more .30 silencer data for you today. This review features the Rugged Radiant on an 18-inch .308 bolt action rifle. We tested it with the tiny M2 muzzle brake.

This silencer got pretty popular, quickly. Heck, I bought one myself very early on (the one in the picture it my personal unit).

It's light, modular, durable, and pretty. But how does it perform? What about sound? How does it compare to the Trash Panda? Other silencers? What about back pressure?

Well, we just added a pretty big feature to this review. In Section 6.12.3, there are objective back pressure comparisons, along with objective Suppression Rating comparisons.

Take a look at the data. I think you will find it meaningful - we are pleased to provide something we don't think you've ever seen before.

Thank you, as always, to Rugged for taking the time to discuss these test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with PEW Science.

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

Here is a direct link https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.13 - a .30 silencer intended for 5.56mm? Or is it the other way around? This review features the CGS Helios QD. We tested it with both the solid and vented end-caps in the direct-thread configuration.

This is a supersonic .308 test. We have actually tested this silencer several times. Its performance is extremely interesting. This silencer is for machine guns, and when you put it on bolt action .308, it's performance is impressive.⠀It surprised me.

The main silencer body is constructed from 718 Inconel using additive manufacturing (DMLS 3D printing); the internal baffle geometry is fully integrated with the silencer body and the silencer possesses linked coaxial internal flow path geometry that is utilized differently based upon end-cap selection.

The amount of data contained within this review is significant. Back pressure information is included.

Take a look at the data. I think you will find it meaningful.

Thank you to CGS for always taking the time to discuss test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with with PEW Science.

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

Check out https://pewscience.com for the Suppression Rating.
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 6.15 - More .30 rifle suppressor data for you today - low back pressure silencer this time; the Dead Air Sandman-K.

The results of this test did somewhat surprise me. According to the data, the Sandman-K is able to offer more suppression than the Rugged Radiant in its short configuration and the CGS Helios in its vented configuration, and also offer lower back pressure than both those two silencers.

It is important to note that all three of those configurations listed have low back pressure, so the back pressure difference might not be meaningful in practicality. However, the difference being measurable is very interesting!

Thank you to Dead Air for always taking the time to discuss test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with with PEW Science.

Also released today is Research Supplement 6.14. This one took some work. We examine very detailed human inner-ear response (tone, etc) when comparing the Omega 300, Sandman-S, and Radiant in its long configuration. Three-way action for you this morning. This is a Members-Only Research Supplement, but I wanted to announce it to everyone.

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

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

Hi everyone!

PEW Science has completed its quest to build the standard 300BLK bolt-gun test host. The mini Fix, prior to me assembling it under instruction from the actual design engineers of the gun, is shown in its exploded view in the photo on the podcast episode page below. I also built a .308 Fix. The engineering that went into these guns is impressive.

To come to that conclusion, I spent a full day with Q's engineering team and 3 days with Kevin. I did his Q&A** podcast and an hour before I left for the airport on Sunday, he did my podcast. So here it is :)

Episode 23 of The Jay Situation Podcast is out now at https://pewscience.com/podcast and all major providers.

Google Play: https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?apn=com.g ... -mu-pod-16
Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0c ... m1hdD1yc3M
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the ... 1456441262
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4mRIeWzj1bV7QHr78ZlwCk
Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=397667&refid=stpr
TuneIn: https://tunein.com/podcasts/Sports--Rec ... -p1222723/
Direct RSS Link: http://thejaysituation.squarespace.com/ ... format=rss

Today's topics:⠀

1. Introduction – my visit to Q and the Fix build(s).

2. Kevin talks about Q’s focus and evolution.

3. Q’s processes, engineering, and innovation – my impressions.

4. 300BLK testing – and the new host!

5. Kevin talks about 300BLK commercialization and we talk about the technology.

6. Industry politics and separating fact from fiction.

7. The Fix origins and the Q Engineering Team.

8. Industry talk about legacy – examples of H&K and KAC.

9. Practicality.

10. Questions I ask Kevin (interview style; several cool topics!)

As always, thank you so much for listening, folks! By the way, Q is the real deal. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
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 6.16 - .30 silencer data continues! This review features the Rugged Razor on a 20-inch .308 bolt action rifle. We tested it with the R3 Flash Hider.

This is an interesting silencer from Rugged - it's not modular, it's one of the more compact silencers in its category, and actually competitive on weight when you use the lighter M2 brake; that allows its system weight with the M2 to be the same as the Sandman-K system from Dead Air. Interesting silencer.

We know it's durable. But how does it perform? What about sound? How does it compare to the Trash Panda? Other silencers? What about back pressure? The back pressure is lower than many silencers, and it is compared to some other "low back pressure" silencers in the review to give you a feel for that.

Take a look at the data. I think you will find it meaningful - we are pleased to provide data for this silencer nobody has had before.

Thank you, as always, to Rugged for taking the time to discuss these test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with PEW Science.

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

Check out https://pewscience.com for the Suppression Rating.
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 6.19 - Today we move into the test results for full-size .30 rifle suppressor data - the first in the group is the Dead Air Sandman-Ti.

How does it suppress sound signature? These are the big boys. Just how quiet can supersonic .308 be?

Thank you to Todd at Dead Air for always taking the time to discuss test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with with PEW Science.

Also released today is the free Intermediate Results Summary 6.18 for the compact to mid-size .30 silencers. This contains a lot of data for you, in one place. For free. This represents a direct contribution of PEW Science member-funded research to the state of practice.⠀

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

Here is a direct link to our reviews: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.20 - Today we continue with test results for full-size .30 rifle silencers - this data is for the Q Thunder Chicken.

This silencer has some very interesting performance parameters. One of the most interesting things I noted when analyzing the data was the early time gas jetting (which was expected) - but it was incredibly interesting to see how due to the silencer's length, significant back pressure was still generated. In other words, the early-time behavior is similar to the Trash Panda, but later in time, they differ significantly. Check it out and see for yourself. It seems like common sense, but seeing it in data-space is important I think.

Thank you to Q for always taking the time to discuss test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with with PEW Science.

Also released today is a member's only Research Supplement 6.21 which examines, in depth, the tone, first-round pop, and average sound signatures of the Thunder Chicken, Helios, and Sandman-Ti, in a direct comparison. This represents a direct contribution of PEW Science member-funded research to the state of practice.⠀

Check out https://pewscience.com

Here is a direct link to our reviews: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.22 - Today we continue with test results for full-size .30 rifle silencers - this data is for the Rugged Surge, in both its long and short configurations.

Back pressure data for this silencer is exciting, because it agrees completely with what we know about the silencers from Rugged; that is, the relationship of back pressure between the long and short configurations of this silencer, and the Radiant, the Razor, etc, are very well known. Now they have been quantified in pure impulse data space. Check it out and see for yourself.

Thank you to Rugged for being one of the companies open to this type of independent testing and actually having dialog with PEW Science about objective testing in accordance with The Silencer Sound Standard.

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

Here is a direct link to our reviews: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.23 - the final silencer in the Sandman series. Today we examine the test results for the Dead Air Sandman-L.

How does it compare to the Sandman-Ti? What do you give up? What do you gain? Is it significant? How does it stack up to other full size .30 rifle silencers?⠀

One of the really interesting things noted in the data is that the Sandman-L is slightly louder than the Sandman-Ti. It is postulated this is due to the lower internal volume of the L, as it must use the Keymount muzzle device, whereas the Ti is a direct-thread model.

Thank you to Todd Magee at Dead Air for always taking the time to discuss test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with with PEW Science.

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

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

This review concludes the PEW Science evaluation of the Dead Air Sandman series on the 20-inch barrel bolt action host weapon platform with supersonic 7.62x51mm ammunition. Future Research Supplements and other comparative articles will provide further analysis of the Sandman data presented, to date. See Sound Signature Reviews 6.11, 6.15, and 6.19 for data on the Sandman-S, Sandman-K, and Sandman-Ti, respectively.
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 6.24 - important data release; today we examine the high fidelity test results for the ULTRA 9 from Thunder Beast Arms Corporation.

There's something special about this silencer; the test data indicates novel performance parameters.⠀

The silencer is advertised to have “very little to ‘no’ first round pop” which is independently verified in this PEW Science Sound Signature Review.

The verification of this phenomenon takes much more than a simple analysis of peak sound pressure. The data examination was comprehensive. PEW Science is incredibly pleased to be able to showcase the performance of the ULTRA 9 in a way never seen before.

Thank you to Kurtis Palu, one of the engineers at Thunder Beast Arms Corporation, for taking the time to discuss test results and The Silencer Sound Standard with with PEW Science.

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

Here is a direct link to our reviews: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.25 - Shifting gears! Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the Energetic Armament VOX S, this time with subsonic 300 BLK out of an 8-inch barrel (the Q mini FIX bolt-action platform).

The Discreet Ballistics 190gr subsonic target load was used in this test.⠀

This is the first time the Suppression Rating is demonstrated for a silencer on a different cartridge (supersonic .308 with the VOX in Review 6.3, in contrast with subsonic 300 BLK with the VOX in today's review).

The performance of silencers with subsonic intermediate rifle cartridges is different than with supersonic cartridges. Also, the differences between product performance across the industry can be significant. For example, the Thunder Beast ULTRA 9 in the previous review actually achieves a slightly higher Suppression Rating at the shooter’s ear with supersonic .308 than the VOX S does with subsonic 300 BLK ammunition. This suppression performance differential is significant.

Thank you to Karl and the rest of the guys at Energetic Armament for being great sports as the VOX S is the subject of the first publicly member-funded 300 BLK publication by PEW Science, in accordance with The Silencer Sound Standard.

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

Here is a direct link to our reviews: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews
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 6.26 - Back to .308 for the time being! Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the Surefire SOCOM762-RC2 with supersonic 7.62x51mm ammunition.

This review contains a lot of data.

Two tests are shown. Both the WARCOMP and SOCOM 3-Prong Flash Hider mounts were tested, with strikingly different results.

As an aside - check out the backpressure performance of this silencer. It's incredible, actually, for a silencer of its length and sound performance. A true outlier.⠀

PEW Science was fortunate to be able to test the exact same silencer, twice, with both the WARCOMP and SOCOM 3-Prong Flash Hider. The highly irregular performance of the silencer with the WARCOMP mount at the shooter’s position was troubling, and PEW Science discussed the results with Surefire.

Caution - PEW Science recommends against the use of the WARCOMP for sustained suppressed operation for the reasons noted in the review. We recommend the non-ported mounts to mitigate significant gas leakage at the mount interface.

Thank you to Andrew and Barry at Surefire for not only taking the time to discuss these results with PEW Science, but offering to assist us after our first test by supplying a flash hider for the next test and even alignment rods to make sure our test host was squared away! Thank you so much for being receptive to our efforts to test the RC2 in accordance with The Silencer Sound Standard.

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

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

The stuff PEW Science is learning about back pressure is interesting.

The internal porting in the baffle stack is a purposeful Surefire design attribute, and apparently it works. I thought the silencer would be louder. I think if the mount didn't carbon lock, I would buy one. Maybe.
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 6.27 and 6.28 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for two silencers. First, the CGS Hyperion. Second, the CGS Hyperion K. Both reviews contain test results using these silencers with supersonic 7.62x51mm ammunition.

Big data release. A lot for you to digest. Not only do these two reviews highlight extreme performance outliers in the current market, they also contain the first private PEW Science test data ever released to the public. ⠀

The performance of the Hyperion is... ridiculous. The performance of the Hyperion K may be considered equally ridiculous, but for different reasons. You're gonna want to check out the data.⠀

Pay particular attention to the signature amplitude of the Hyperion. For the Hyperion K, note the combination of Suppression Rating and backpressure. For both silencers, note the weight and construction. There's a lot to digest, like I said.

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 companies like CGS are too.⠀

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

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

I anticipate significant questions. Reach out any time.
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 6.29 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the Q Half Nelson in the subsonic flow regime. The test host used is the Q mini FIX; a 300 BLK bolt-action weapon with an 8-inch barrel.

The performance of the Q rifle silencers is interesting; they can exhibit relatively high flow rate, depending on their length, and their volumetric parameters result in elevated subsonic performance.

Performance on subsonic 300 BLK is compared with that of the VOX S, which was the subject of previous Sound Signature Review 6.25. The supersonic 7.62x51mm performance of the Half Nelson is very similar to that of the Trash Panda. Of interesting note is that the extra baffle of the Half Nelson does not significantly influence its supersonic 7.62x51mm performance when compared to that of the Trash Panda.

Thank you to Kevin, Adam, and the whole team at Q for always supporting the mission of PEW Science and believing in my efforts to make The Silencer Sound Standard a reality, from the beginning.

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

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

The performance of Q rifle silencers in the subsonic flow regime is high.
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 6.30 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the YHM Resonator K in the subsonic flow regime. The test host used is the Q mini FIX; a 300 BLK bolt-action weapon with an 8-inch barrel.

Discreet Ballistics 190gr subsonic target ammunition was used in the test. The included YHM Phantom Q.D. adapter was used with the YHM muzzle brake shown in the photo.

This is a very compact silencer. Often times, users choose to use compact silencers to save weight, size footprint, and even to achieve an aesthetically pleasing weapon system. It is important to understand the limitations of certain silencer designs in different exterior dimensional envelopes. This silencer may be significantly louder to users than other compact to midsize silencers on the same platform.

Supersonic flow regime testing with the Resonator K and the 7.62x51mm cartridge has also been performed and is the subject of a future publication.

Thank you to the whole team at YHM for taking the time to discuss these test results with PEW Science and 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 the YHM Resonator K subsonic 300 BLK Sound Signature Review: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... fix-300blk
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 6.31 - Today we examine the high fidelity test results for the SilencerCo Harvester 300 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 Harvester 300 was released before the Omega 300. It is smaller diameter and longer.

So... How does an anchor brake influence what you, the shooter, experience? Spoiler alert - the anchor brake reduces the at-ear Suppression Rating; it makes the system louder to the shooter and this conclusion is supported with very detailed data in the member version of the review. SilencerCo R&D also confirmed PEW Science findings. PEW Science does not recommend the use of so-called anchor brakes for applications in which the shooter is primarily concerned with at-ear sound signature suppression on a bolt action rifle platform. SilencerCo concurs.

Back pressure research is still on-going; I added some more language to help the reader better understand the phenomenon. Note that the back pressure metric computed for the Harvester indicates a slightly lower back pressure potential that the Omega 300; this was also confirmed with SilencerCo R&D.

The anchor brake is not "user serviceable" - if I owned a Harvester 300 and I wanted it to be quieter, I would figure out a way to remove the anchor brake and replace it with a flat cap. The anchor brake does have some recoil reduction benefits that increase with cartridge pressure, and PRS shooter do note that, but if sound reduction at the ear is your primary goal, simply removing the anchor brake and using a flat cap would increased the at-ear Suppression Rating (and therefore the overall composite Suppression Rating) immediately. These statements are not endorsed by SilencerCo and you do this at your own risk.

Thank you to the head of SilencerCo R&D for taking the time to discuss these test results with PEW Science and 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: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature-reviews

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

Harvester 300 Sound Test Results: https://pewscience.com/sound-signature- ... savage-308
https://pewscience.com
PEW Science
Professionally Engineered Weaponeering
Post Reply