Suppressed vs. Non - Suppressed

W

wisey113

Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter
Sep 10, 2014
135
36
Denver, CO
#1
May be a stupid question, but this is meant to be the place to ask, so here goes...

I recently worked up my first load for my precision rifle, and did so without a suppressor. Every now and again I do like to shoot suppressed, so my question is, will shooting suppressed affect my load? Or should it still maintain the same characteristics, BC, etc... In case it helps, its a Silencerco Saker 7.62 and the load is 175 SMK using 43.7g of Varget. Caliber is .308

Cheers,

Jamie
 
#2
If anything it should make it better,

But like anything it can affect it, how would depend on the barrel, the thread cut work done by the Smith, etc. In other words, we have several variables at play here.

Normally you are fine, and will actually see an increase in accuracy, but it is possible for it to go the other way. That said it should not go negative too bad.
 
#3
Maybe. And likely, in some manner. In many cases, a suppressor can act to tighten a load even more. In others, it can require a minor tweak to your load.

Remember that anything that you hang on the end of a barrel acts as a tuner or de-tuner, affecting the harmonics thereof.

That being said, I developed my load pre-suppressor and when I put my 9" SAS Arbitor on it, it tightened my groupings and bettered results. This is an example to support why I say go ahead and develop your load and when you get the suppressor, put it on and see what the difference is.

Some only find a difference in POA/POI relationship .

Edit: okay so I'm too slow to post while on my phone. What Frank said and more...
 
#5
if you have a can, why on earth would you want to not use it? after 4 years of shooting suppressed, i did one 10 shot group unsuppressed for load testing a month ago and it sucked. granted, i have tinnitus and i double up the ear pro when i shoot pistols or run my heavy equipment and when people are next to me at the firing line.

the lack of the can, is it for ease of moving in between positions, lighter rifle?
 
#9
Thanks for all the replies. I had the rifle built by Mile High Shooting, so I trust it's built well, and don't foresee any problems with the suppressor on it. I was just curious about what may change so I'd know to look out for the tell tale signs.

corey4 said:
if you have a can, why on earth would you want to not use it? after 4 years of shooting suppressed, i did one 10 shot group unsuppressed for load testing a month ago and it sucked. granted, i have tinnitus and i double up the ear pro when i shoot pistols or run my heavy equipment and when people are next to me at the firing line.

the lack of the can, is it for ease of moving in between positions, lighter rifle?
Click to expand...

Honestly, I couldn't give you a good reason why I don't use the suppressor. I'm still mastering the basics when it comes to precision shooting, so I'm not worried about mobility, or weight. I guess I've just never been particularly bothered by the sound!

 
#10
Lowlight said:
If anything it should make it better,

But like anything it can affect it, how would depend on the barrel, the thread cut work done by the Smith, etc. In other words, we have several variables at play here.

Normally you are fine, and will actually see an increase in accuracy, but it is possible for it to go the other way. That said it should not go negative too bad.
Click to expand...


I've definitely noticed improved accuracy on my guns between suppressed and non-s.

Why does this happen? Barrel harmonics? Why would it slant toward more accurate instead of less?
 
#11
pineoak said:
I've definitely noticed improved accuracy on my guns between suppressed and non-s.

Why does this happen? Barrel harmonics? Why would it slant toward more accurate instead of less?
Click to expand...

I think it is more a case of less recoil, means less affect on POI by inconsistent position. I.E Less recoil, recoil control is easier. I have had loads that were borderline, that would show pressure signs with the suppressor on. I have seen loads the suppressor made shoot worse also. I don't think I have ever seen it with a load i worked up using an OCW test.
 
#12
I like shooting non-suppressed just for the recoil management part. If you are doing comps where time is key, you will notice that more and more people are switching to non-suppressed guns. because A, its shorter, lighter, and you have virtually no recoil. put a can on the end, it gets almost awkward to maneuver around obstacles, and you have more recoil on the gun. keeping your glass on target is key in comps to watch your own trace/impact and know how to adjust. I would shoot with my Little Bastard instead of a suppressor any day. now if you're hunting, a can would be nice because its one less thing you need to tote around with you (ear pro).
 
#13
d_train821 said:
I like shooting non-suppressed just for the recoil management part. If you are doing comps where time is key, you will notice that more and more people are switching to non-suppressed guns. because A, its shorter, lighter, and you have virtually no recoil. put a can on the end, it gets almost awkward to maneuver around obstacles, and you have more recoil on the gun. keeping your glass on target is key in comps to watch your own trace/impact and know how to adjust. I would shoot with my Little Bastard instead of a suppressor any day. now if you're hunting, a can would be nice because its one less thing you need to tote around with you (ear pro).
Click to expand...

One of the dumbest things I've read on here in a long while.
 
#15
Suppressor-vs-Muzzle-Brake.png


Looks like roughly 62 of the 2015 top 100 PRS shooters would disagree with you JMGlasgow.

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2015/12/12/rifle-suppressor/
 
#16
There is less recoil with a suppressor than a bare muzzle, and a muzzle brake is marginally better at mitigating recoil than a suppressor.

I'd bet that more PRS jersey shooters that are polled in your graph are running brakes because of the added heat buildup and mirage with a suppressor. Added length isn't a huge deal, especially when running a shorter barrel to begin with. I don't notice the added weight of a 12 ounce can either.

 
#17
Sure chopping off two inches of barrel means they are going to want to add six inches back on. Especially when having to move in and out of baracades.

Mirage may play a small part but in a string of 10-14 shots per stage there is not that much mirage.

We're talking competitions. If something makes even a "marginal" difference, shooters are going to use it.

Same for weight. Doesn't matter until it does. A pound makes a difference when shooting standing unsupported. Not to mention the possible change in balance to the rifle.
 
#18
Did you also ever consider that price and the waiting period for a suppressor changed those results? If a brake and a can were the same price, and the can was OTC, I'd bet you'd see more cans.
 
#20
No need to consider.

These guys run setups in the $5k-$10k range and some even more. And I imagine most have multiple in that price range too.

If if that's not enough they probably go through 2-3 barrels per year. At a cost of $500 per barrel (barrel plus smith work) I don't see a $1K can being that big of deal.

As for time, my first suppressor took nine months to be approved, guess how long my Manners stock took to be built. Guess how long I've been waiting for a Mausingfield action. Suppressor are not new to the shooting game and I would bet 90% of the top PRS people own or have access to one.
 
#21
d_train821 said:
I like shooting non-suppressed just for the recoil management part. If you are doing comps where time is key, you will notice that more and more people are switching to non-suppressed guns. because A, its shorter, lighter, and you have virtually no recoil. put a can on the end, it gets almost awkward to maneuver around obstacles, and you have more recoil on the gun. keeping your glass on target is key in comps to watch your own trace/impact and know how to adjust. I would shoot with my Little Bastard instead of a suppressor any day. now if you're hunting, a can would be nice because its one less thing you need to tote around with you (ear pro).
Click to expand...

I agree. Personally, having run both, I prefer to run a can for minimizing hearing loss. I also have never broken the top 10 in a match with more than 40 shooters.

For me it is faster moving between "windows" and tighter spaces with less length out front. Muzzle brakes I've owned and used easily bested my TBAC Ultra and Omega in terms of taming recoil IME. I found it easier to stay on target using higher magnification using the brakes over the cans.

 
#22
I've seen only the POI/POA shift, less than MOA, on my 300WM Tic Tac, with unsuppressed (without brake, plain barrel) shooting a bit higher. But question. Does the suppressor cause more erosion on the barrel, thus shortening the barrel life? I mean the same load, non- vs suppressed. I met this argument from someone I trust and didn't know at the moment what to think about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
AR-10 Precision Rifle Shopping - Need Some Input & Advice
Replies
20
Views
650
freedom71
freedom71
Bakwa
Casual KAC SR-15 Comparison [a study in performance]
Replies
74
Views
5K
SigSauerM7
SigSauerM7
M
Suppressors Help Me Choose My Next Can.
Replies
86
Views
3K
mebgardner
M
A
Success! (Gun advocacy)
Replies
13
Views
629
M4orturnate
M4orturnate
PhantomWorks
Suppressor and baffle orientations affect on POI.
Replies
5
Views
1K
Lawnboi
L
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts