Thread: Suppressor effectiveness - Think about this!

This isn't an unknown, there are tons of threads on here and on Fishnhunt doing backyard tests on suppressors with substandard sound equipment and even relying on old human ear drum Mk101, sorry Possumtrapper , as well as some good comparisons.

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaB...1402472871/0#0

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaB...1406260467/0#0

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaB...1459450986/0#0

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaB...1443598908/0#0

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaB...1435475519/0#0

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaB...1440616677/0#0

http://www.fishnhunt.co.nz/forum/YaB...1431327925/0#0

You can also check each manufacturer's website for their own testing results.

Without the very expensive equipment (most cheap stuff is only good for measuring continuous noise, not peak impulse noise) and a full range of equivalent suppressors (graded by cost, weight, material etc) in the same calibre and correct thread, its going to be hard to get a definitive answer.
Another key assessment should also be customer satisfaction, as there will always be some makers who go the extra mile and some who are lacking in customer services skills.

I previously mentioned that a suppressor thread on Fishnhunt ended up as a bitch and squabble between supporters and indeed suppressor makers, so I'll be pleasantly surprised if you can get the various NZ (and overseas - ASE are an active forum member) makers to want to be involved, as they won't want their products looking bad.

I do agree, having one set of testing under the same conditions would be good, so best of luck.