Recoil is a very subjective thing- everyone has different levels of comfort/tolerance.
It also depends how much you are going to shoot it. If you're going to do a lot of range work or high volume shooting (like goats or rabbits) then recoil will be more of an issue. If you are only going to pull the trigger 6 times a year on a deer it won't be such a problem. (Anectdotally: A lot of people will tell you that when you shoot at an animal you will hardly notice the recoil 'in the heat of the moment', as opposed to punching paper. Personally I've found this to be true).
Rifle weight as well as cartridge calibre/power is a very big factor also. I won't bore you with the maths, but if you think simply in terms of "equal and opposite" forces a heavier rifle will boot you less, quite noticeably for only a small increase in weight. This is a downside to the current trend of lightweight rifles.
In terms of your question: "would a limbsaver alone be enough or better to get it suppressed?" That really depends on your personal preference. My experience has been that a decent suppressor will reduce perceived recoil at least as much as a limbsaver, with the added benefit of being easier on everyone's ears. I don't enjoy recoil much at all, and quite like my hearing- so I start with a suppressor, and then add a better pad if it still needs it.
Bookmarks