Largest .30 Caliber Silencer Testing Event Ever

1. A bit dissappointed my Sandman S didnt do better…but I felt it was the best compromise at the time. I was reluctant to get a direct thread can, and I think Dead Air has the best QD mounting method on the market today.

   • It’s my understanding that the Sandman line was designed more with the AR platform in mind. It’s very possible the rank would shift quite a bit if these were done on semi autos.

     Hopefully it’s possible to repeat these tests on some semi auto platforms.

     • Maybe so, Ive used mine on standard 223 ar15’s, a 300blk “pistol”, and a savage model 10 in 223, but since I always hear hearing protection anyway its kinda hard to tell the difference.

     • This is true. The Sandman series tend to have higher dB readings at the muzzle but generally have lower readings at the shooter’s ear since less of that gas is pushing back through the ejection port. Also less gas to the face and better tone overall. Not everything about a suppressor can be told by a dB reading.

   • Yeah, the Sandman-S was designed for automatic actions. It’s also essentially a 7.62 mini can and was designed for lower back-pressure for the shooter on automatic actions, so, what you see coming out the muzzle isn’t coming out the ejection port in your face.

     Many of the high performers in this test will be absolutely horrible on an auto loader like the AR-15. They’re so good at the muzzle because they hold the pressure so well. Baffles act like check valves and dump it back into the chamber when it opens.

2. BWAHAHAHAAAAA !!!

   YHM wins again. I always go with the guys with no-commercial in them. The grey man who just steps up to do the job, and you’re supprised at where they place at the finish line.

   YHM cans are “heavier” is the worst complaint you’ll hear about them, But you’ll hear less out of your weapon when shooting them. And the bullsh_t hype you get out of the rah-rah crowd just blows away in the wind.

   HOOORAH YHM.

   • The YHM still ended up 9th in weight out of the group. I’m not sure I’d consider that “heavier”. I’d take that trade off any day.

   • Nahhh the worst complaint you’ll get about YHM from people that shoot a lot is the horrible backpressure on an AR. If you’re shooting bolt action then it’s all cool.

     • I’ve never found any difference on either.

   • I’m running a 10 yo YHM 5.56 Phantom QD. I have adapters on both of my 5.56 guns and all four of my 5.45 guns. The back pressure required some changes. KNS adjustable gas piston on the AK platform, stiffer recoil spring on the Tavor SAR, hydraulic buffer weight on the AR. I still have to avoid mil-spec loads in the Tavor.

3. I love the idea of a $200 can (once upon a time you could buy a Maxim Silencer at the local hardware store for under $10), but in making the Po Boy cheap, they ended up with top three placing in the categories of “heavy” and “loud”.

   I guess you get what you pay for.

   I’d never heard of Yankee Hill, but their Resonator is fairly light for a sub-$700 can and the quietness is way up there.

   • I just watched the videos, since I didn’t see any mention of ammunition choice in the text, but didn’t find it there either.

     Are we to assume you guys used full power loads in typical weights for the caliber, like 55gr and 147gr?

     • AGU 1E308110 AGU 308WIN 150GR FMJ BT 20/25 for .308 ammo and FED AE223BL FED AMERICAN EAGLE LOOSE 223REM 55GR FMJ BT 100 for .223 ammo.

   • It has a street price of about 499.

4. Wow. Yankee hill beat them all. Awesome. (Sorry I bought what I bought)
   I’d love to see the same test with .22 silencers.

5. This is awesome. Been waiting for someone to do a test like this to get me off my butt and fire up a form 4. Thanks.

6. I wonder if the Hybrid would do better with .223 if you had changed to the .223 end cap? I would also really love to see a .22 LR test! great article btw

   • That surely does look like the .46 end cap in the video.

   • FWIW, I have no complaints shooting mine indoors with .223 and the .46 endcap. I do still wear earpro, though.

7. It would have been nice to see averages over multiple shots to see the effect of first round pop and the can heating up. I guess since the aim of this was not to look at suppressors for the tactical market, but focus on hunting applications then one and done makes a little more sense. That said, thanks for doing this, comparisons that control for as many variables as possible are hard to come by.

   • This was average, not one and done.

     • Thanks. I didn’t see that anywhere in the article or videos. How many shots through each?

8. How was the testing done? Did I miss that in the article? Shooters ear, beside the muzzle, forward of the muzzle?
   Really important to know this because the old methods of testing are not valid for hearing protection.

   Clay

   • Followed the only currently approved Milspec standard.

     • I applaud the amount of effort that went into this, and I understand the standard is the mil-spec, but the standard doesn’t show all the facts. The mil-spec is not correct for the shooter. That’s a fact.
       .
       If you want to show which suppressor is the loudest standing beside the barrel, you did.
       If your goal was show which silencer is the best for the shooter, you didn’t.

       • I would agree, anytime you are doing a scientific study, more data is usually better.
         There are two problems with “at the ear” data in this study. 1) The host weapons were bolt action rifles, 100% of the noise comes out the front. Mil-spec requires 1 m to left of muzzle, the results at mil-spec are averaged and reported. All results would decrease the same with at the ear meter in this test, so current rankings would be the same, but with lower averages. At ear testing only changes results IF you are using an AR host weapon. 2) There is no standard for “at ear” testing, most agree 6” from ear, but what if the shooter is 4’ tall or 8’, what if the rifle is 16” or 22”? At ear is definitely worth testing when AR platforms are being tested.

     • BMaddox, you need to do some more research. Testing at the ear has been in military standards for years.

       It is very unfortunate that at a time when many of us are pushing for more measurements at the ear to demonstrate the presence or lack of back pressure, you would only test at the muzzle and then not explain that many of these are designed to be higher at the muzzle so they’re lower at the ear.

       Yes, a portion of the market may only care about performance on a bolt gun. But to not do this same testing on an AR platform including measurements at the ear does a great disservice to many people reading and watching and erroneous conclusions will be made.

       Please update the article to explain that these results are not to be extrapolated to performance on semi-auto platforms. Obviously on a bolt gun there isn’t much concern about levels at the ear but once you go to semi-auto that’s the only level that matters for most shooters. Many still aren’t aware that when a suppressor generates impressive numbers at the muzzle that probably means it is way over hearing safe at the ear. It’s an inverse relationship and if a manufacturer is trying to do the right thing and balance those concerns then tests like this hurt them without adequate explanation.

       • Aaaaannnnddd Mike nails it. I couldn’t agree more.

         BMaddox–Thanks for the effort in doing so much sound testing and pulling this together. It would be good for people to digest it in context.

         • Yes, if I forgot to say it, I’m still happy to see testing done by 3rd parties even if it’s not perfect. I understand the reluctance of manufacturers to compare their products to competitors publicly, so we need stuff like this or the consumer suffers.

           And thanks to you Todd for being willing to go beyond the easy option and do what’s right for the consumer, even if the transition away from the traditional model might be a little rocky. I was very happy to see Kevin at Q speak out so emphatically on this issue in his recent podcast–he made it clear that he agrees that the emphasis should be on the ear levels for the civilian market. Perhaps you guys could get the ASA in gear to provide some leadership on these matters…? 🙂

       • Appreciate all the feedback and recommendations. We are only aware of one officially approved mil-spec government standard (MIL-STD-1474), which we used as noted above. Please send links to others so we can review.

         There was a question about 10 shot average of baseline before adding the silencer.
         Baseline .308 Average – 168.53
         Baseline .223 Average – 165.42

         There was a question about calibration, we calibrated the meter every 90 minutes. The calibrator [ B&K pistonphone type 4220 (serial #284813)] adjusted for changes in weather conditions, we saw very little to no change in need to calibrate at 90 min intervals.

         There was a question about semi-auto extrapolation (our tests were bolt only, our customers are hunters, bolt is King in the upper Midwest)– all results will be louder with an AR platform.

       • BMaddox,

         I’m not an engineer but I decided to go dig into it for myself to see what I could find. Quick findings:

         In 1474D from 1997, it says in the middle of where the shooter’s head would be or 15 cm from the right ear toward the breech if the shooter is present (page 40 5.4.5 ).

         https://www.denix.osd.mil/shf/references/military-standards/mil-std-1474d-noise-limits/

         In 1474E from 2015, it talks about 6″ straight out from the ear (page 18 4.7.3.2.2.2). Page 39-40 seems to be discussing a measurement at points around in a circle instead of just specific points.

         https://www.arl.army.mil/www/pages/343/MIL-STD-1474E-Final-15Apr2015.pdf

         I haven’t been able to find the official document from the CSASS trials, but according to Tim at Military Arms Channel they used the 6″ directly out from the right ear position.

9. I wish the shooter would have been consistent on the rifle rest. Shooting with the barrel on the rest versus the stock probably doesn’t effect noise, but it sure does on accuracy!

   • The point on the rifle where it rested on the stand was determined by length of silencer. The muzzle exit had to be same as sound testing meter.

10. I am a gun owner of 30 guns . I only hunt pheasants and deer. A hunter does not need a silencer.A silencer is designed for only military special force units or police.

    • WE BELIEVE YOU

    • Hooray
      A Fudd speaks up.

      • Does a Fake Fudd count the same as a Real Fudd?

        • Only if his first name is actually Elmer.

    • I own a mansion and a yacht….

      • I own a mansion, yacht, 100,000 acres of oil land in Texas, two Formula I race cars, a Bentley, a tricked out 4-wheel drive truck and… one billiony trilliony rifles chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor!
        Yeah, that’s what I own, yeah, that’s the ticket!
        (Nod to SNL)

    • A suppressor is not just for military and police. A suppressor is for anyone that wants to protect their hearing and also be respectful of others.

      Any sound over 85dB can damage your hearing if heard enough times. The louder the sound, the less exposure it takes to damage your hearing.

      An unsuppressed 308 is right around 165dB and ear plugs can reduce that somewhere between 25dB and 30dB for a noise level of 140db to 135dB. That’s still loud enough to cause hearing damage in a very short time. With a suppressor, that can be reduced another 30dB, for a sound level of about 105dB. That’s low enough that hearing damage is a LOT less likely.

      Not only are you protecting your hearing, but also the hearing of any hunters that might be near you.

      Take it from someone with severe hearing damage due to military service, it’s not something you want to mess with.

      Finally, a suppressor reduces overall noise for people living in the area. They don’t have to hear loud gunshots coming from gun ranges or from hunters. That makes them more receptive of our chosen sport.

    • I see the ‘indoctrination model’ has worked well on Nova. Stop taking your queue from TV/Movies?media and see where suppressors are being used in hunting applications, both in the US and overseas.

    • I guess you never took any of those 30 guns over to New Zealand to hunt red stag. The PHs over there will tell you to put a can on before you go hunting. I will let them know they are doing it wrong.

      If I were you I would sell 29 of those guns and buy a car that didn’t max out with a 307 and three on the tree. At least buy a new front end so it looks like a 72 nova. Otherwise people aren’t sure if it is a nova or a Yugoslavian sedan. Brahahahahaha

    • 1973 Nova-are you allowed suppressors where you live?

      • No No he No he isn’t. Liberal troll farms have strict no gun rules. His arsenal of nerf guns are all tagged registered and securely locked up in his parents upper level living quarters (aka the non basement levels of their house.)

    • Enjoy yourself a Hollywood, box office, action-packed reel-to-reel much?

11. Not another suppressor article.
    Between IEDs and firing 155mm without ear pro. I really don’t need one lol. I would have liked to see how mag lights and oil filters would do against real suppressors.

    • I’m guesseing… nobody wants to just blow money or commmit a federal felony to justify a single article.

    • These test have already been done. In short, they perform very poorly compared to purpose built suppressors, and they fall in the exact same legal category. The second you attach either to a gun, it becomes a felony without ATF approval.

      • Is there a link to these test? I’m really curious, seen a few videos with pop bottles etc. I’d like to see a scientific comparison. Not jackasses on you tube lol.

12. I live in n.c. (in the county) but can’t shoot my guns anymore for all the people moving In the developments. I have enough land and back stops. Can’t even shoot sheet for the law coming to see me. Bad thing I have cows on my property. Not going to shoot those . ( I’M RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT FROM THIS COUNTY IN WHICH I LIVE).. And that pisses me off.!!!!!
    A suppressor may be what I need. Need to make one in a 20 ga, 12ga, 16 ga. Not to mention all cal of pistol
    LAST WORDS, SCREW THE FOLKS MOVING TO NORTH CAROLINA AND THINK THEY OWN EVERYTHING…….
    GOD BLESS AMERICA…….

    • SilencerCo makes the Salvo 12 for shotguns. Beast of a suppressor, but it works.

      On the flip side, even with a suppressor if you are running supers in your centerfires you’re still going to get a pretty loud sonic crack. Quieter yes, but neighbors are definitely still going to hear it.

    • Daniel Wilson, This is the very reason I bought my first suppressor.

13. Hirem Maxim invented “silencers”. He also invented “mufflers” for cars. They are the same thing but for size. I think we would all be better off if we just called them ” mufflers” as they don’t silence.

    • Yup.

    • Blame Mr. Maxim, as he called them “silencers” in his patent.

      • The misuse of the English language by Maxim does not require me to follow his example. Until there is nothing but silence heard when the gun is fired, I’ll use the term that describes what it actually does–suppress the noise levels. 🙂

14. There doesn’t appear to be that much difference in the top performers.

15. Just a few observations.

    – No mention of temperature or humidity
    – The rifle doesn’t appear to be 1.6m above ground.
    – MAC doesn’t follow MILSTD 1474e, equipment or protocols.
    – MILSTD 1474e does specify an at ear location.
    – How much time passed between each silencer tested? Things get louder as it warms up.

16. Please make a spreadsheet for easier sorting and reading. Also missing are the silencer dimensions and the added length after install.

17. i’m really confused.
    suppressors with large blast chambers have a large first round pop. their subsequent rounds are quieter on average. so averaging the first 5 shots would be a really terrible idea. suppressors with shorter blast chambers have less frp and louder subsequent shots.
    were the averages excluding the first shot? 5 rounds is really terrible for an average anyway, depending on the variance. speaking of which, what Was the variance? i’d expect n=20 as kind of a basic minimum. but that really depends on what the frp signature was.
    speaking of frp, what was the timing of the shots? were they consistent? did you take a break and let the suppressor cool down on any of them? many times, there is a 2nd round half pop – were those kept or discarded? or was this an average without understanding suppressors? a black suppressor, left out in the sun, might not have any frp – was the last suppressor the quietest?
    i mean, i get that it’s just an estimate for fun. but this is why i would trust a manufacturer more than these tests. what is the ranking supposed to indicate? the size of the blast chamber? averages with frp with a hidden function for how long they’ve been warmed in the sun?

    • I have never seen manufacturer data that I trusted. My guess is they take the quietest shot they ever measured in the lab and use that as the “up to” Xdb reduction.
      I think what Brandon did was a great way to start a NEW testing method. No manufacturer is going to round up 26 competitor products and show the results.

    • Correct. FRP shouldn’t be averaged in with subsequent shots because it’s a technically a different population. By the second shot your in a steady state and it’s more consistent at that point.

      Five shots can give you a reasonable average (within about 2-3 dB range). For that reason, you can’t really say one is quieter or louder unless it’s more than that. There are always dB chasers out there that will fret over the difference of 137.0 dB results and 138.0 dB. This is an average of a small shotgun blast pattern. They fully overlap and statistically there’s no difference.

      • I only care about FRP. If the first one makes your ears ring who cares how quite the following shots are.

18. All this work and it doesn’t answer your stated fundamental question. “It is a testimony to modern silencer design that a .30 silencer can work well on say a .270 or a .223 gun. But how well does it work?”

    We don’t know because you didn’t collect enough data to answer the question. Does a .30 cal can used on a 5.56/.223 achieve an equivalent SPL reduction as a can designed for 5.56/.223? That would be the measure of how well it works. You didn’t test any 5.56/.223 cans on the same .223 Tika T3 so we don’t know. All we have is a ranking of 27 .30 cal suppressors on a .30 cal gun and a .223 cal gun.

    It’s interesting data, but it doesn’t answer the stated question. No one looking at this write-up and data will have any idea if a .30 cal suppressor works as well on a .223 as a .223 cal suppressor.

    Also, where’s the control data? How loud was each rifle without a suppressor fitted to them?

19. Great test, thanks. How about a 22LR silencer test next?

20. I enjoyed the article and looking at all of the testing results. It was nice to see so many companies represented too! I’d like to see some of the Q stuff done just because of all the crap they talk. And don’t get me wrong I like them and even own their stuff and it’s king of the subsonic I think, but a supers test I’d like to see. Thanks for doing this guys! As some others have said, doing the same thing with 22 cans would be kind of fun too. At the ear measurements would be nice also!

21. When I test stacks for development I use an Ultra 9 as a control can. I’ve seen as much as a 3.5 dB swing from 0730 to 1330. The top 4 are ll within a 1dB. That can be ammo easily. We only do serous testing with match ammo. It meters much more consistent than non match ammo. Either way it was a very good effort to meter all these cans. I’d like to see a test of just FRP of each one. 5 -10 FRP shots from each can. Shoot one shot change can shoot one shot change can. The list would change dramatically. My clients really care about the first shot.

22. I’ve went to each manufacturer’s website and obtain the weight from their specs with what is recorded on this test and they are off. Some are pretty much the same, but some are off by 5 oz.

23. Totally agree by some weight specs, seems to me there is some companies picking and choosing what specs to use and what info to present to tge public.

24. Please run these on semi auto 308 and 556 platforms with at the ear and at the muzzle numbers!

25. Good Stuff. I would have loved to have seen the Griffin RSTA (over the barrel) or others in a similar design compared to end attachments.

26. This is super helpful while trying to pick one to buy, now where is the 2019 version? 😀

27. looks lik a great article but since there needs to be so much advertising on the screen i cant read half the chart. but the import thing is the advertising. i really enjoy starring at a 2 inch margin of a guys face on 1 side and 4 inches of something ill never buy on the right side. which at this point leaves an entire 6 inches of screen left dedicated to what brought me to the site to begin. i feel this is just unacceptable . id really love to read the data and i think its just what i’ve been looking for since i’m in the market for a new 30 cal suppressor but at least give the option to move or X out of all the extras on the screen. sorry to be trollish just had to vent

Comments are closed.