Suppressors as quiet as possible, ar-15 supressor

[Clayman]

And yes, according to proper sound tests, the Sandman-S is right at 140-141 DB at the shooter's ear in a 16" 5.56. So, yeah, I'd say it's hearing safe.

The only proper sound testing is https://pewscience.com/

Hearing damage is a cumulative effect.

5.56 has not yet been evaluated by Jay but I can make a pretty educated guess that the Sandman S will not be 140 db at the ear with an AR. It's over 140 db of pressure at the shooters ear on a 20" 308 bolt gun. His ranking for that is 32.3. You need to be a member to get at ear db numbers which by themselves are actually pretty meaningless. His suppression rating takes everything into account. Impulse, pressure, duration, frequency and in ear response. You can have suppressors that have a higher db but different tone that excites the ear less than one with a lower db but a tone that excites the ear more.

I would suggest reading through this.

https://pewscience.com/silencer-sound-standard

If you are shooting a lot of rounds without ears on a 20" bolt gun with the sandman s you are going to damage your hearing.

I'm not sure where people got the idea that 140 is "hearing safe".


https://www.asha.org/public/hearing/loud-noise-dangers/

Dangerous and Safe Noise Levels​

The noise chart below lists average decibel levels for everyday sounds around you.

Painful impulse noise—Not safe for any period of time

150 dBP = fireworks at 3 feet, firecracker, shotgun

140 dBP = firearms

Painful steady noise—Not safe for any period of time

130 dBA = jackhammer

120 dBA = jet plane takeoff, siren, pneumatic drill

Extremely loud—Dangerous to hearing; wear earplugs or earmuffs

112 dBA = maximum output of some MP3 players, rock concert, chainsaw

106 dBA = gas leaf blower, snow blower

100 dBA = tractor, listening with earphones

94 dBA = hair dryer, kitchen blender, food processor

Very loud—Dangerous to hearing; wear earplugs or earmuffs

91 dBA = subway, passing motorcycle, gas mower

 

[Clayman]

I have severe tinnitus, and my Dead Air Sandman-S cans on my 14.5" 5.56 with supersonic 55gr ammo is hearing-safe (without ear pro) inside a wooden shooting building.

It most definitely isn't, don't do that. It sounds like you have some pretty serious hearing damage already. Just because it's no longer making your ears ring doesn't mean it's not damaging them further. They're your ears you can do what you want but unless you are hunting or just taking a few shots I'd seriously encourage ear pro on that platform.

 

[FuhQ]

140 dB is definitely not considered hearing safe in some industries.

It is the firearms industry... Look it up.

 

[deersniper]

Keep damaging your hearing. Hopefully others learn. I’ve shot a pile of 22 and suppressed 556/762/65. And my ears payed the price. Hearing loss is cumulative. Even tho the damage is very small with each shot, it adds up.


Let’s start another debate. Inner ear ear protection doesn’t do enough to stop damage. You need over ear muffs because your ear lobes carry the sound to the cilia

 

[kthomas]

It is the firearms industry... Look it up.

And in other industries 140 dB requires double hearing protection.

 

[FuhQ]

And in other industries 140 dB requires double hearing protection.

Ok, but nobody is still explaining to me why 140 is the “hearing safe” firearms standard, but it’s not.

 

[srt-4_uk]

Ok, but nobody is still explaining to me why 140 is the “hearing safe” firearms standard, but it’s not.

Who made that standard?

 

[FuhQ]

Who made that standard?

Pretty sure the US Army, but I’m surprised you didn’t know that…

 

[deersniper]

Ok, but nobody is still explaining to me why 140 is the “hearing safe” firearms standard, but it’s not.

that “standard” is from the suppressor manufacturing Cabal. To sell more silencers

 

[srt-4_uk]

Pretty sure the US Army, but I’m surprised you didn’t know that…

Please copy/paste the paragraph from the Army manual where it says that 140db doesn't require hearing protection and that it is safe for unprotected ears. I am unfamiliar with Army manuals though. I do know that when Air Force manuals are written, we are held to MIL-STD-1474E, MIL-STD-1472H, AFMAN 91-203 standards so there must be something service/firearm specific.

 

[Clayman]

Ok, but nobody is still explaining to me why 140 is the “hearing safe” firearms standard, but it’s not.

It's an old rudimentary osha standard.

"The OSHA limit for impulsive or impact noise is also 140 dB peak sound pressure level. This limit is independent of the duration of the noise impulse. There is no OSHA limit for number of exposures to impulsive or impact noise. Impulsive or impact noise must be integrated into the measurement of continuous noise exposure, however."

It's used as a marketing tactic by suppressor manufacturers. If they can claim or show <140 on an outdated meter they can say their suppressor is hearing safe. If a company used real db numbers and said their can isn't hearing safe other companies would jump all over it.

Just know that pewscience is truth, pewscience is the way.

Hearing damage is dose dependant and cumulative.

Wear ear pro.

 

[CaptNemo]

I've heard a lot of suppressors over the years and the quietest I've heard on a 223 AR using supersonic ammo is still an Allen Engineering AEM-5. Very impressive for an older can.

I have an AEM 5 that I bought for my Mk12 Mod 0 Clone. I put it on my M4gery carbine and I turned my X-Caliber Tikka barrel to fit it.
It's an impressive can for as long as they have been around and "the experts" say that a reflex design doesn't work that well.

 

[Colorado S14]

I use an TBAC Ultra 7 on my gas gun, I still use ear pro but it is not bad to shoot without. I do not think it is "hearing safe" over a range day, not so much from the muzzle but all the commotion going on under your head on a semi.

 

[Clayman]

Ok, but nobody is still explaining to me why 140 is the “hearing safe” firearms standard, but it’s not.

Also the term hearing safe in this instance is extremely disingenuous. Even if the can truly is 139 db with a tone that doesn't increase damage that might be "safe" for a few rounds but since hearing damage is dose dependant it's pretty disingenuous to make that blanket statement. This doesn't even take into account things like frp.

Even if that 140db was the accurate threshold for everyone's ears why subjugate yourself to the absolute edge of the instant hearing damage threshold.

Wear ear pro and encourage others to do so. Utilize pewscience and base your hearing protection on the rankings.

 

[kthomas]

Ok, but nobody is still explaining to me why 140 is the “hearing safe” firearms standard, but it’s not.

I'm not aware of this industry wide "standard" of 140 dB being hearing safe in the firearms industry.

 

[TBACRAY]

This is very very quiet. Low 130s shooters ear on a 10.3'' is pretty dam good.


This video shows how important controlling the gas is for shooters ear numbers.

 

[FuhQ]

that “standard” is from the suppressor manufacturing Cabal. To sell more silencers

Oh man, no way! You mean Big Cans is now involved in this? Man, I sure hope the Illumigunny is not behind this plot to destroy everyone's hearing! Scary shit man...I better go make a new tinfoil hat...

 

[FuhQ]

Please copy/paste the paragraph from the Army manual where it says that 140db doesn't require hearing protection and that it is safe for unprotected ears. I am unfamiliar with Army manuals though. I do know that when Air Force manuals are written, we are held to MIL-STD-1474E, MIL-STD-1472H, AFMAN 91-203 standards so there must be something service/firearm specific.

Excuse me, unlike you bunch of clowns, I'll actually admit when I am wrong, and correct myself... It was OSHA that set the standard of 140 DB as "hearing safe".

Occupational noise exposure limits | Occupational Safety and Health Administration

www.osha.gov

The OSHA limit for impulsive or impact noise is also 140 dB peak sound pressure level. This limit is independent of the duration of the noise impulse. There is no OSHA limit for number of exposures to impulsive or impact noise.

 

[kthomas]

Excuse me, unlike you bunch of clowns, I'll actually admit when I am wrong, and correct myself... It was OSHA that set the standard of 140 DB as "hearing safe".

Occupational noise exposure limits | Occupational Safety and Health Administration

www.osha.gov

Your ears, do what you want. I couldn't care less if some stranger on the internet gets tinnitus.

Once you lose your hearing, its gone. How you treat your ears is up to you. But if you want to go that route, I would spend a bit more time researching hearing loss damage, and how it may occur with impulse noises.

 

[CountryShooter]

Everyone's ears are their own. I developed mild tinnitus from suppressed .22LR. Thousands of rounds. Really tens of thousands. Hearing damage is cumulative. OSHA says 85db can be harmful long term. I only shoot with hearing protection, suppressed or not. Your hearing, YMMV.

OSHA Ear Protection Requirements (Standards for Hearing Safety )

Always follow the OSHA hearing protection requirements to safeguard against workplace hearing loss.

www.creativesafetysupply.com

 

[srt-4_uk]

Excuse me, unlike you bunch of clowns, I'll actually admit when I am wrong, and correct myself... It was OSHA that set the standard of 140 DB as "hearing safe".

Occupational noise exposure limits | Occupational Safety and Health Administration

www.osha.gov

You're coming in real hot for no reason. What I was pointing out is no entity will ever say XX Db is "hearing safe". As everyone else pointed out, number of pulses and duration is what contribute most to hearing loss. 140db is just the treshold where OSHA doesn't care about number of pulses or duration because it's considered instant damage.

All we were trying to say is, it's likely you are comfortable shooting without plugs because you already have hearing loss.

 

[FuhQ]

You're coming in real hot for no reason. What I was pointing out is no entity will ever say XX Db is "hearing safe". As everyone else pointed out, number of pulses and duration is what contribute most to hearing loss. 140db is just the treshold where OSHA doesn't care about number of pulses or duration because it's considered instant damage.

All we were trying to say is, it's likely you are comfortable shooting without plugs because you already have hearing loss.

Well, when you make a comment, and then get attacked by multiple people all at once, over and over again, it gets pretty fucking irritating. So, yeah... Comin in hot was warranted. Want respectful conversation, show respect. Act ignorant... Well... I'm not above getting down on that level.

I'm well aware I have hearing loss...And tinnitus. That being said, I also can still hear pretty decent and am very sensitive to higher-pitch sounds. I can hear animals moving in the woods, that other people can't hear. But hearing some things up close at normal speaking volume can be a bit hit-or-miss. Luckily the Sandman-S has a very nice low tone to it. Very thumpy, and not high-pitched cracking like some cans.

 

[Joeg26er]

This is very very quiet. Low 130s shooters ear on a 10.3'' is pretty dam good.


This video shows how important controlling the gas is for shooters ear numbers.

Thats with a reduced gas port

" Seekins PDW, 10.3" AR upper with a .058 gas port shooting M193 and MK 318"

 

[clcustom1911]

No. It can have acceptable accuracy and a 60-77 grain bullet is a big step up over a 40 grainer


I run a 338 ultra on a 20” ar and it is crazy quiet.

opsinc 12th model on a 16” is pretty quiet too. OpsInc/aem5 cans tone is pretty hard to beat.

Yeah AEM5 is the quietest can I have ever heard. It might not be the lowest on decibels, but the tone you get is very easy on the ears. I was shocked the first time I shot it without ear pro just to see what it was like. The supersonic crack of the bullet far exceeds the reports of the muzzle blast.

I ❤ mine

 

[E. Bryant]

Well, when you make a comment, and then get attacked by multiple people all at once, over and over again, it gets pretty fucking irritating. So, yeah... Comin in hot was warranted. Want respectful conversation, show respect. Act ignorant... Well... I'm not above getting down on that level.

I'm well aware I have hearing loss...And tinnitus. That being said, I also can still hear pretty decent and am very sensitive to higher-pitch sounds. I can hear animals moving in the woods, that other people can't hear. But hearing some things up close at normal speaking volume can be a bit hit-or-miss. Luckily the Sandman-S has a very nice low tone to it. Very thumpy, and not high-pitched cracking like some cans.

The combination of: 1) coming in hot; 2) having little experience in the subject matter; and 3) being partially or completely wrong is a good way to piss off the audience, no matter what attacked you or how right you think you may be. If you're looking for true enlightenment and/or expert status instead of just defending your first position, learn to argue properly.

What we know nowadays is the following:

• There is more to gunshot noise than just peak amplitude. Attack rate and area under the curve (total energy) also matters. The use of non-technical terms like "tone" hints at the fact that there is something missing from peak measurements.
• Some of the equipment used to measure gunshot noise is too slow to capture the true amplitude of peaks. For "pure" (sinusoidal) sound, the Nyquist sampling theorem says that 40kHz should be sufficient - but gunshot noise is far from a pure sinusoid. I don't think that the 1MHz rate spec'd by Pew is necessary, but I'm sure Jay would argue differently and he knows more than I.
• The industry standard of using A-weighting is probably not correct for impulse noise, but that argument has been going on since before I was born and so we're probably not going to end it in this thread.
• Noise damage is cumulative, subject to individual variation, and affected by the listener's anticipation of the noise. This means that there is can be a substantial difference in damage between a single shot while hunting and a surprise moment at the range where someone lights off a round before you get your ear pro in place (the so called "warned response", which involves a muscular contraction and so this varies with fatigue, age, and a host of other variables).
• Individual risk profiles apply. Quite a few people here may be quite satisfied with a particular arbitrary limit for their own hearing, but they probably wouldn't for their kids' ears (this person included). And there is certainly a variation in the perceived threshold of damage. Repeated exposure can result in an increase of this perceived threshold of damage that does not correspond to a shift in the actual threshold. The result is that damage is occurring without being aware of it, which should be of obvious concern.
• There are different types of hearing damage. Tinnitus is not the same as, say, frequency loss. And the damage that may occur from broadband impulse noise may be different that that which occurs when exposed to longer periods of exposure to specific frequencies at lower levels.

Like everything involving human biology, this is complex stuff that is rarely reduced to a single number. And as a related side note - in my experience, referring to OSHA guidelines is rarely the right way to win an argument. Many of their standards are antiquated and representative of not an attempt to establish The Truth but rather just an arbitrary number that can be enforced. It's like referencing speed limits on public roads when attempting to establish the performance limits of a car and driver under a particular set of circumstances - definitely not the right way to find the answer in most cases.

 

[E. Bryant]

Some additional reading that may be of interest to those wanting to do a deep dive:

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA573840.pdf

https://www.arl.army.mil/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ahaah-MIL-STD-1474E-Final-15Apr2015.pdf

Definitely not a simple topic.

 

[paco ramirez]

CGS touts their Helios qd as the quietest out there and I have seen a few solid review of them but have no first hand experience. Lots of friends rave about their DA Sandmans. Out of my collection Omega 30 has been to top performer.

No we don't.

But everyone I've seen with Sandman Ss and Surefire 556RC2s do say the Helios QD is much quieter on their various hosts. On 20" 308 a Helios QD is very nearly as quiet as a TBAC Ultra 9 on the same host despite the Helios QD being almost 2" shorter in length. It's quieter than most 7.62 rifle silencers that've been tested so far.

The only proper sound testing is https://pewscience.com/

Hearing damage is a cumulative effect.

I would suggest reading through this.

https://pewscience.com/silencer-sound-standard

This is the only correct answer.

 

[jeffpatton00]

My Silencer Central Banish 30 multi-cal is due any day now, and I can't wait to see how that performs.

 

[GlockandRoll]

I've done a fair amount of testing with Mk12 configuration-type rifles using Mk262 Mod1 with different mufflers on the same day, with the same ammo, on the same rifle, and honestly... you just aren't going to make that rig very quiet at the shooter's ear. Regardless of what the meter says a few feet from the silencer's end-cap. Personally, I think one of the best 5.56 cans ever made is the one I run, that being the AAC SPR/M4. I'll put it against anything out there for the Mk12 as it relates to accuracy, POI shift/repeatability, and SPL (at the shooters ear)

 

[Clayman]

Something people need to keep in mind is the host is just as important as the suppressor.

If you have an AR with long dwell time, is over gassed, etc you are going to have more port noise. You could have the quietest suppressor but if the host isn't good it won't matter.

If you have a short dwell length, use an enhanced bcg such as the lmt (even better with vltor A5) or surefire obc that have altered cam paths that delay unlocking dropping chamber pressure, utilize an adjustable gas block, custom gas port size or a brt eztune gas tube you will have a much better, less gassy and quieter system.

 

[SilencerCentral]

Hey @jeffpatton00 - Let us know what you think once you get it!

 

[liminalState]

Well, when you make a comment, and then get attacked by multiple people all at once, over and over again, it gets pretty fucking irritating. So, yeah... Comin in hot was warranted. Want respectful conversation, show respect. Act ignorant... Well... I'm not above getting down on that level.

I'm well aware I have hearing loss...And tinnitus. That being said, I also can still hear pretty decent and am very sensitive to higher-pitch sounds. I can hear animals moving in the woods, that other people can't hear. But hearing some things up close at normal speaking volume can be a bit hit-or-miss. Luckily the Sandman-S has a very nice low tone to it. Very thumpy, and not high-pitched cracking like some cans.

Actually many people tried to help you out - respectively - and you got defensive about a standard that apparently NO ONE but you is aware of. If you keep referencing a standard that no one is aware of and don't reference said standard after numerous, authoritative posts that state hearing damage occurs above 70db, you get what you deserve. Don't validate your hearing on a message board with a bunch of salty old dudes, go see your ear doc.