Thread: Old School No Suppressor No Brake

I like the bare look and have only used them until recently when I had my 223 , 6.5 X 55 and 300 Win Mag suppressed, got to admit I like the suppressed ones even though they are a bit differently balanced. But really I like the suppressed ones a bit more and it's got to be better for your hearing and your mates . The dog will appreciate it too.

Supressors or brakes would spoil the balance and the good looks of this:

Brno M21 7x57.

Everything in life is a compromise, and rifles are no different.

Having them bare looks better, they carry and balance better, but I have to wear noise canceling muffs when I hunt with them. Hunt mostly alone, so no huge deal.

Having a suppressor on board (in my opinion) doesn’t add anything positive to the function of a rifle, but certainly goes some way to protect the ears.

I will always have a suppressed centrefire of some kind, as I find myself hunting with a mate and his kids every now and then. It’s a lot easier way to make sure that everyone’s hearing is looked after.

My remaining hearing is 35% left ear and 45% right ear. After 55 years of firing rifles and repairing vehicles for the same time period I very much value all I have left. Also severe continuous tinnitus. My hunting rifles all wear suppressors to try and retain what's left.

Hopefully there will be some breakthroughs in suppressor development that allow for a much smaller one that keeps everyone happy.
I remember reading that shooters on a range wearing both plugs and muffs together still suffered hearing loss with any rifle from 7mm mag power level and up. The concussive shock / pressure wave entering the shooters nose and sinuses and damaging the ear from inside - so motorbike helmet with the visor down perhaps ?

Not a fan of suppresors these days, used to have the on all my rifles but would much prefer the barrel length instead, rifle looks better, handles better, performs better. I have a suppresor on my Forbes 243 but only because it has been cut to 18.5" before my time, if it were up to me I'd rather have the rest of the barrel back and bin the suppresor but it is what it is for now. I've had a 375 HnH and that would have just looked silly with a suppressor, it wasn't bad to shoot at all

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

Not a fan of suppresors these days, used to have the on all my rifles but would much prefer the barrel length instead, rifle looks better, handles better, performs better. I have a suppresor on my Forbes 243 but only because it has been cut to 18.5" before my time, if it were up to me I'd rather have the rest of the barrel back and bin the suppresor but it is what it is for now. I've had a 375 HnH and that would have just looked silly with a suppressor, it wasn't bad to shoot at all

Coming to the same conclusions as you is what prompted me to start this thread .
Barrel length and the performance you forfeit by lopping of multiple inches from the barrel is a topic that seems to have slipped under the radar and is seldom acknowledged .
My caliber selection has got smaller over the years because advances in projectile and powder design has upped the effectiveness of the “ little “ rifles over the last 30 years .
Velocity has always been a major component of effectiveness when your talking about 6.5mm rifles and smaller , removing 4 - 6 inches from the muzzle just moves you back to the 1980’s - 1990’s performance wise . There are many reloading threads talking about how to get more velocity from short barrels and even after their best efforts most will still fall short of achieving what is standard in a standard length barrel.
Give me a 22 - 24 inch barrel which will still be shorter and easier to carry than a suppressed 17 -18 inch barrel and the extra 100fps - 125fps is free apart from the cost of some foam earplugs.
Yes I do own a 18 inch suppressed 6.5 which is a beautiful rifle, but if I had my time again I’d save my money and have some speed back .

#stopshorteningriflebarrels

The loudest firearms I have fired were revolvers. No trouble with hunting rifles unless youre dumb enough to shoot one inside a car - or - standing right next to a building or a wall....

Never owned a silencer, (except on a .22) - I dont see the point in cutting the barrels down to 16 inches and then posting on a forum asking for a "faster" powder that will recover the lost velocity, as if thats a real thing.
I always said suppressors were just another fad for people to fiddle with. ITs different in the UK where you might only get permission to shoot on properties with a suppressed rifle due to them all having neighburs nearby, but in Fiordland or the Urewera...

As for them being an advantage when hunting, I dont believe it. Suppressed rifles are still loud. If deer are that impervious to loud noises, why are we sneaking up on them.

Recoil doesnt bother me until you get up to the safari cartridges. My .30/06 with 180 loads is fine so while I get the recoil reduction part of it, it's still not really necessary.

As for hearing protection, wear it at the range of course, but shots in the big outdoors at deer, I cant remember getting ringing ears. My hearing gets tested at work and I have the best out of 260 people, and I am in my fifties and have been shooting since I was eight. So I dont think even the hearing side of it is justified. Not for big game hunting rifles anyway. Maybe I have got little ears. That only just occurred to me now.

I suppose I am just not suffering from anything a suppressor would help with. But I dont need a bigger longer heavier unbalanced rifle with an intolerably short barrel. But the fad has kept some gunsmiths in business for a while now.

(Its a real shame for the rifles though, half of the second hand rifles you see for sale have all been wrecked - lobotomised with short stubby little barrels. Who wants a .243 with a sixteen inch barrel? Or a .30/30 with a fourteen inch barrel? Whats the point of a .270 with a 20 inch barrel? Its a real shame when they do it to classics. Old Sakos etc.)

I'd love a supressor here in Australia but they're prohibited. The greatest damage to my ears due to noise has come from the seat and 2 curtain airbags going off in my car, thats left me with the continuous tinnitus and sensitivity to loud noises 1 gunshot bearable, 2 gunshots terrible.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Nope suppressors on everything.

My old SMLE has a 16,5" barrel, it was originally a bail gun for pig hinting when I was a kid back in the early 1980s. Funny; there is one area of bush where I hunt goats, in one particular spot where the manuka is behind me in a semi circle and a couple of scrubby ones in front. When i fire the old girl in there it rings my ears like a dinner bell! It must echo or reverberate back from the slope and scrub behind me. Same thing happens with the 223. Yet out in the open I hardly notice it. It rings so much that I'm actually going to get a set of ear plugs to use in that spot, which is primarily a "wait until they come out" spot so i have time to put them in place. I always use ear pro when sighting in etc. Hell; I use ear pro when mowing the lawn!

None of my rifles have suppressors or brakes. Have used and shot alongside suppressed rifles but never felt the need myself.
I only use factory ammunition and prefer the performance from a full length barrel. Better balance. No need to remove/replace a suppressor when rifles are going in & out of the safe several times a week. Easier cleaning, and no risk of bore corrosion if suppressor is not removed after use.
I use compact earmuffs for target shooting and most of my goat culling, and always hunt alone.
Biggest calibres are .308 and .25/06 but .223 gets the most regular use.

Interesting thread Ground Control!

Never went there in the first place. I see their merits but for what I do not needed.

Originally Posted by rockland

I only use factory ammunition and prefer the performance from a full length barrel.

Interesting thread Ground Control!

Factory ammo is a very important factor .
My only suppressed/shortened Centerfire uses reloaded ammo because I like everyone else have tried to recoup some but not all of the velocity loss .
The rest of my rifles now run factory ammo and being full length barrels the velocities are quite acceptable.
Running factory ammunition in a shortened barrel in many cases means that true velocity’s are often a lot slower than people think.
Is that a problem, no not really but it does degrade performance in both ballistics and energy on target which as the caliber gets smaller is in fact more and more important
Let’s face it , if you are here on the forum chances are that you are half knowledgeable and experienced and with hand loading the larger caliber short barrels can certainly hold their own .
If you don’t hand load and shoot 6mm - .22 etc don’t cut your barrel in my uneducated and humble opinion.