-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Shooting 6mm ARC through a 6.5mm or 6mm Suppressor?
- Thread starter phlukefenny
- Start date
Oh yeah!
Another "I want this specific item and don't want to hear anything otherwise, what do y'all think".
Post #4 only mentions the caliber of cans he decided on buying, I was asking if he landed on anything specific.
You would have to ask him but it's obvious from his post. He made a decision, signed off, and moved on
I fell in love with them while attending Cr2 Shooting Solutions Mountain Rifle Course.
I stated this in a previous mention; I fell in love with the KGM suppressors while attending Cr2 Shooting Solution's Mountain Rifle Course. I got to use it for the course on my 6.5 comp rifle and I was super impressed. The can did an awesome job of mitigating recoil and lowering the noise level to a comfortable level.
How many suppressors do you have experience using?
LOL no. Man this made me laugh so hard. I was in the wilderness without internet for a while.
I hear you brother. We're all in the wilderness...alone, naked, afraid... just trying to make our way and survive.
A few, not a ton. I have used mostly 30 cal suppressors on friends rifles and borrowed them on my rifle to test out. I found that the KGM brand suppressors work great for my purposes since I only want moderate change in sound while still having precision rifle control of some sort. I use a muzzle break most of the time on my 6.5. I want to have a suppressor dedicated for my 6 ARC mostly but I feel like a 6.5 can would still be good overall.
As for all the peeps that are wondering if I bought a can yet... I have not, still shopping. Just got back from the wilderness so I will probably buy soon.
I love that most of you still say that a 30 cal can is the way to go. Since most of you say this, are you able to provide data that shows how much of a difference it makes? This thread has good stuff. love it gents!
Oh you want data?!! You're gonna get data son. More than you care to look at....
what is a "moderate" change in sound? No offense but I read that as "I prioritize recoil reduction over actual suppression". You can do that with a muzzle brake without paying the NFA tax and waiting around.
Because muzzle brakes come with the huge trade-off of increased concussion to the shooter.
Perhaps what the OP is trying to convey is the appreciation of the sound and concussion mitigating properties of a suppressor, along with recoil mitigation.
IMO, the mitigation of concussion provided by a suppressor is the most important function, followed by dB and other properties. Personally, I'm not too concerned if a suppressor "only" reduces the sound of something like a 6.5 Creedmoor to the mid 140's in dBs. In fact, one of my current favorite suppressor is my Abel Biscuit, which does an excellent job reducing concussion and having a great recoil impulse (more similar to a muzzle brake) - though if you were to just focus on the dB reduction, on paper it may not look like an exceptional suppressor.
That's what it sounds like he's looking for. Something like what I use my Abel Co Biscuit for, which is incredibly more pleasant to shoot than a muzzle brake, yet still very "driveable".
@kthomas said it just how I was going to say it. Yes you are correct that i prioritize recoil over suppression but I still want concussion mitigation and some reduced overall sound at the shooters ear/head. While I was at the Mountain Rifle Course, everyone was suppressed except for 1 guy... I have a hilarious video of the guy shooting his un-suppressed 7.62 HK DMR for the first time with the course lead in the background looking like... "who brought this guy without the suppressor..." Was a great time, but I will admit that having everyone (almost) suppressed, even just a little bit, made a world of difference with each person shooting over 200 rounds that weekend. I left the course super happy with no concussion feeling. Meanwhile... At military courses shooting over 120 rounds a person in one day for the M107 (aka .50 anti material rifle), my head felt like absolute sh*t.
What are you using to objectively measure the concussion reduction, to decide on what you're buying?
I see recoil impulse and pressure as a measurement on pewscience, but the crowd here seems to prefer to discredit that source.
I agree with you, in that concussion reduction is a big part of it, I just dont really know if either of the above metrics speak to that specific element or not.
I will say that shooting my 6.5 with my CGS Hyperion makes it incredibly light in both recoil impulse and "concussive" force, but Ive never had an issue with that in my rifles to begin with. I have let friends shoot some of my gear, with brakes on it and felt differently as a bystander, to be frank, if Im paying for the gear, Im prioritizing what it does for me, not others nearby.
I'm not. As far as I know, there is no objective measurement for concussion reduction, at least one that's available to consumers.
However, I'm not looking for the most concussion mitigation when I suppressor shop. Any suppressor, as long as it's somewhat appropriately sized for the cartridge, will adequately mitigate concussion. I'm not so much interested in max dB reduction - I'm still wearing ear pro. I look for cans that are built precisely for precision use, mounting options, backpressure, etc.
A suppressor that may "only" suppressor to the mid 140's dB is still great to shoot. It will mitigate concussion very well. And if it has the characteristics I like, I will pick it over a suppressor that suppresses to say 138 dB.
