Thread: Suppressor effectiveness - Think about this!

Originally Posted by dogmatix

I think we are missing a key point or two. And its again comparing apples with oranges if we focus purely on sound reduction.

Most customers in NZ are buying a suppressor that is a compromise, a balance between weight, sound suppression and cost.
Whether this is for hunting the hills with a bolt action or shooting a semi, usually for more rapid fire usage, ie targets or pest control.
I used to have two Reflex T8 cans, awesome 1990s technology designed for full auto use in the military.
Those things will never fail, could handle extreme rates of fire and temperature and were pretty good for sound reduction even compared to modern designs.
Would I use them for lugging around the hills in NZ again? No ffffing way!
I changed and went for DPT modular for my hunting rifles. For that purpose their light weight, low cost and pretty good sound reduction is hard to beat.
Even if they don't have the longevity of steel designs (although the new steel baffle insert is the solution in my opinion).

For a semi auto application, I would look elsewhere, for moderate cost and excellent sound reduction, but heavy weight is something like a ASE.
There are cheaper options as well, but again they aren't light. You would need that high spec testing equipment to separate these out.
There are also other design factors, such as internal muzzle brake and back gas design, again these things will costs more.
If you have the $ and want the best of everything, then you could go titanium, with ODL.

So testing purely on sound reduction is a bit pointless in my mind, as you need to give equal weighting to cost, weight and intended usage.

i can't see it pointless we just add the cost and everything else to the test and thereby we compare apples with apples , i guess we will never know then.