Thread: Kimber Montana 7mm-08

Originally Posted by Seventenths

Accuracy is definately better with suppressors.

Had a CZ .17 HMR without suppressor that shot great with Remington ammo and was more expensive than Hornady. Put on suppressor and the results were the other way around... worked out cheaper.

I like to test all of my rifles with and without suppressors just in case your ever caught having to use a rifle without a suppressor so i know where POI is and i still find suppressors produce tighter groups.

Another interesting point is speed!

Plenty of people chop their barrels down 2 inches to assist with balance of having a suppressor where people always quote you'll loose 50 fps per inch as a general rule of thumb which is BS for example.

My Tikka .223 which i think is 19-20 inch barrel shooting 55 gr Sierras with 26 gr AR2206H
Without suppressor - 2933
With Suppressor - 3005

The same results have occurred with other rifles with suppressors on them where velocity increases. someone said Robbie Tiffen wrote an article explaining this prior to his passing.

So... benefits of suppressors for me show, less hearing damage, less game being spooked, improved accuracy, more retained speed with shorter barrel.

I have a very scientific(read completely made up) theory around supps and accuracy. I think in hunting weight rifles, a lot of accuracy is sacrificed to poor recoil management and follow through. A suppressor doesn't change the amount of recoil energy much but it does lengthen the period and lower the peak force. I believe this change makes for easier follow through and a straighter recoil motion, which in turn aids accuracy.