silencer for sendero

[Guest]

I was wondering how hard it would be to have a silencer fitted for my remington sendero?

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

I'm not to sure if its any more difficult to put a silencer on a rifle as it is a muzzle brake. I know it takes a couple months usually to get all the paperwork done and what not. I believe gem tech is one of the better silencers out there. Sorry cant be much more of a help.

 

[Guest]

I looked online today at there website, they have very good prices. is there an age limitation. only 18?

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

Im not positive, but I think you have to be 21.

 

[rick smith]

I hope you realize you have to shoot subsonic ammo for the silencer to work.Rick.

 

[Asa Yam]

Rick,

A suppressor works no matter if the velocity is subsonic or supersonic. However, with supersonic rifle ammo, the "boom" of the rifle is suppressed. The suspersonic "crack" of the bullet is not.

The directional noise diagram at http://www.guns.connect.fi/rs/dirdiagr.html shows the difference when firing an AK-47 type rifle unsuppressed, suppressed, and surpressed + subsonic ammo. Note the following:

• The combination of suppressor + subsonic ammo is quieter in all directions.
• Simply adding a suppressor (i.e., using standard ammunition) decreases noise level in the spherical volume excluding a cone extending to 60 degrees to either side of the muzzle. The difference in this case is quite significant - up to 20 dB.

Additional information + links to more can be seen at http://www.guns.connect.fi/rs/measure.html

 

[rick smith]

Asa Yam, I have fired a supressed rifle both ways, regular and subsonic ammo, and I think a recoil arrestor will give you less noise downrange with regular ammo. Supressors are just not that effective with regular ammo. I looked at the charts and that reinforces what I said.Rick.

 

[Asa Yam]

Rick,

Think again. From http://www.guns.connect.fi/rs/308measured.html

Downrange, most of the noise is from the bullet, not from the discharge of the firearm.

Oh yes. Firearm noise is measured on a logarithmithic scale, not a linear one. Every reduction in firing signature by 3dB means a 50% reduction in energy (sound) perceived by the shooter. A 21 dB reduction means sound energy perceived by the shooter is 128x less than the original value. 30dB Less is 1024x quieter.

 

[rick smith]

Not when you are sitting at the bench firing or spotting for the shooter. What is the distance on your charts? Don't mean to be disagreeable but if you want the true value of a surpressed rifle, you need to shoot subsonic ammo. The loud part is the bullet breaking the sound barrier as it leaves the barrel. Not too worried about 100yards. The surpression is most needed at very close range. Your numbers are interesting but not practical for up close.
The muzzle break reduces down range noise to the same degree as it increases noise at the shooter. Tried that without any high dollar equipment.Rick.

 

[Asa Yam]

Not when you are sitting at the bench firing or spotting for the shooter. What is the distance on your charts?

Distance is printed on the chart.
Blue = at the shooter's ear.
Yellow = @ 1 meter perpendicular to the bore.
Black = @ 10 meters perpendicular to the bore.

Don't mean to be disagreeable but if you want the true value of a surpressed rifle, you need to shoot subsonic ammo.

I did say it was more effective to do so. Still a 20 dB reduction in blast signature to the shooter when using supersonic ammo is plenty significant.

Your numbers are interesting but not practical for up close.

See above for measurement distances.

The muzzle break reduces down range noise to the same degree as it increases noise at the shooter. Tried that without any high dollar equipment.

NO.
The suppressor study registered a 9dB increase to the shooter when a brake was fitted. Downrange noise is still dominated by the supersonic bullet.

 

[rick smith]

The people I know who use surpressed weapons are not doing so for their personal benefit. It is being used to help prevent the local surroundings from being aware that they are firing. So your one meter and ten meters really has little practical use. Using numbers without real life usage is akin to picking a load from a manual and saying that is what your rifle is producing.
I agree that a muzzle break is much louder at the shooter but it is much quieter at 100 yards than a rifle without a break. Your scale shows perpendicular to the bore at ten yards which is where a break is sending most of the gases. I am talking about straight downrange.
Numbers and charts are fine but if you want to get full measure for the purpose of a suppressor, you need to shoot surpressed ammo. A 20db is significant but of no use if you are shooting indoors of culling animals outside of someone's window.
Scientific articles are interesting and enlightening but often done for publication, publish or perish. I read at least 40-50 of them a month. First thing I look at is who paid for the article. Second will be who is the author and where was the work completed. Read the introduction and conclusion, decide if it contains any new or useful info. Read the entire article if it does. The article you are using would not have been totally read. Surpessed rifles with subsonic ammo are the quietest-agreed. Surpressed rifles with regular ammo are quieter than unsurpressed rifles with regular ammo but louder than surpressed rifles with subsonic ammo-agreed. Muzzle breaks are louder at the shooter-agreed. They are quieter at 100yards-presented charts only go to ten yards.
I enjoy a good debate. Hope you have a thick skin and don't take this as a personal attack. It is not meant to be so.Rick.

 

[Asa Yam]

So your one meter and ten meters really has little practical use.

Really? At 1 meter, the noise affects the shooter. At 10 meters, the noise affects the shooter next door.

Read the introduction and conclusion, decide if it contains any new or useful info.

Did you read ALL the links on the first page I referenced? Evidently not. Here's the summary: http://guns.connect.fi/rs/summary.html

Read the entire article if it does. The article you are using would not have been totally read.

Here's the full report: http://guns.connect.fi/rs/suppress.html

A 20db is significant but of no use if you are shooting indoors of culling animals outside of someone's window.

Think again:

• The Finnish Ministry of the Environment and the Finnish National Board of Labor Protection thought it was worthwhile to fund the study.
  
• Summary point #7:

  In military use, or other sniping activities, the suppressor also hides the muzzle flash and effectively prevents the movement of foliage, grass or twigs, and the puff of sand or dust which otherwise tend to reveal the shooter's location. ("Suppressor doesn't make the soldier silent, but invisible", says a Finnish proverb.)

  The US Army agrees with this position so much that efforts are underway to provide suppressors for M24 (7.62 NATO) and M107 (.50 BMG) rifles.
  
• From the full report, point #5:
  

  BLANK CARTRIDGES?
  
  When shot close, blank cartridges can be louder than bulleted ones and they indeed cause most of the acute hearing damages of conscripts. The simulated gunfire should be achieved with methods 25 dB less loud than at present. The tested suppressor models do not apply for Finnish wood-bulleted military blank cartridges. However, they apply for usual blank cartridges with folded head. Harmless theatre weapons which sound "real" are also available. Shooting indoors with non-suppressed blank cartridges generally means the risk of immediate loss of health. (Emphasis mine.)

Scientific articles are interesting and enlightening but often done for publication, publish or perish. I read at least 40-50 of them a month. First thing I look at is who paid for the article. Second will be who is the author and where was the work completed.

See above - the Finnish Government paid for the study.

They are quieter at 100yards-presented charts only go to ten yards.

A moot point. From the full report:

The front sector is dominated by ballistic noise, which is not affected by suppressors. Bullet noise, however, is concentrated in higher frequencies than muzzle blast and thus attenuates faster when propagating.

Hope you have a thick skin and don't take this as a personal attack. It is not meant to be so.

None taken - but read the full webpage and all associated links before attempting to defend your position further.

 

[rick smith]

Don't need to defend my position, I am speaking from practical experience. Have no intention of reading the article, if their governmental studies are anything like ours, it is a complete waste of time and money. I don't get hung up on numbers, charts and statistics. One can prove just about anything if the study is designed properly. Just look at the gun control studies our government has funded.
I stand by my position, if you want to use a surpressed rifle for it's real purpose, you need to shoot subsonic ammo.Rick.

 

[old #7]

What practical purpose would sub sonic ammo serve. I can't remember the speed of sound but I do know from personal experience that subsonic 22lr ammo will only anger raccoons. It will not penetrate bone. I have not shot any other subsonic ammo but to be subsonic it would be traveling at the same speed as the 22CB Lr.
My point is a normal 22-250 round with a 40gr bullet will dispatch a coon with NO PROBLEMS. A 22-250 loaded subsonic will have the same effect as my little 22lr subsonic loads because the bullets would be traveling at the same speed. I couldn't imagine trying to target shoot at 200yds with subsonic ammo. The trajectory wouldn't be much better that my kids slingshot.
I would recomend hitting something with a bat rather than shooting it with a subsonic load. I also think the bat would be quieter.
I do like the idea of a supressor on a rifle rather than a brake because the supressor would actually lower the sound levels for the shooter.

 

[rick smith]

Old #7, 1100fps is the speed of sound. Think 300Whisper with a 220gr Sierra leaving the barrel at 1000fps. You don't want to be hit by that. Know that two treated 2x8s won't stop it at 100yds.Rick.

 

[Sharpsman]

What practical purpose would sub sonic ammo serve. I can't remember the speed of sound but I do know from personal experience that subsonic 22lr ammo will only anger raccoons. It will not penetrate bone. I have not shot any other subsonic ammo but to be subsonic it would be traveling at the same speed as the 22CB Lr.
My point is a normal 22-250 round with a 40gr bullet will dispatch a coon with NO PROBLEMS. A 22-250 loaded subsonic will have the same effect as my little 22lr subsonic loads because the bullets would be traveling at the same speed. I couldn't imagine trying to target shoot at 200yds with subsonic ammo. The trajectory wouldn't be much better that my kids slingshot.
I would recomend hitting something with a bat rather than shooting it with a subsonic load. I also think the bat would be quieter.
I do like the idea of a supressor on a rifle rather than a brake because the supressor would actually lower the sound levels for the shooter.

old#7

So....subsonic ammo is not accurate! Dang......news to me! I hit a 10" X ring from 1000 yds. shooting subsonic ammo quite regularly!! It's fired from a .45/110 1874 Sharps shooting a 570 gr. bullet! Starting velocity is only around 1320 fps....but I'd hate to have my head hung inside that X ring and let a few fellows I know shoot at it using the same load!!

 

[old #7]

I could drop a brick from the top of a tree and it would break two 2x8s but I wouldn't try to drop one on a black bear. :lol:
Sharpsman, I did not say thet subsonic ammo wasn't accurate.
I said the trajectory wouldn't be much better than my son's slingshot.

 

[Sharpsman]

I could drop a brick from the top of a tree and it would break two 2x8s but I wouldn't try to drop one on a black bear. :lol:
Sharpsman, I did not say thet subsonic ammo wasn't accurate.
I said the trajectory wouldn't be much better than my son's slingshot.

old#7

" I couldn't imagine trying to target shoot at 200yds with subsonic ammo. The trajectory wouldn't be much better that my kids slingshot."

I've shot thousands of rounds of subsonic .22 ammo target shooting in 200 yd. matches on a course of fire that's been totally forgotten about here in America! Once a very popular game! It appears that from your above statement that it was a 'slight' inference that it wasn't accurate! And frankly...it doesn't make any difference what the trajectory is as far as accuracy is concerned. Incidentally...the ten ring on the 200 yd. target was 2" diameter and the X ring was 1"! Last time I fired that course of 20 shots...I had a 198x14X. And I'd really hate for one of those .22 pills to have socked me in the ear from 200 yds. because that 40 gr. slug will shoot completely through a sun-dried 2x4 from that range. :lol: :shock:

 

[old #7]

Sharpsman,
You are a better shot than me with that subsonic ammo. The match you speak of sounds like a fun challenge.
I have to disagree on the terminal preformance of your 40gr 22.
I shot a coon ,at ten inches, between the eyes only to anger him. As he was pulling his foot out of my trap growling angrily I decided to use shovel to dispatch him. I found the bullet just under the skin and in good shape. :shock:

 

[Sharpsman]

Sharpsman,
You are a better shot than me with that subsonic ammo. The match you speak of sounds like a fun challenge.
I have to disagree on the terminal preformance of your 40gr 22.
I shot a coon ,at ten inches, between the eyes only to anger him. As he was pulling his foot out of my trap growling angrily I decided to use shovel to dispatch him. I found the bullet just under the skin and in good shape. :shock:

old#7

:lol: :lol: I think the killing effect is good; it's just that you got a hold of a coon wif a harder head than some folks on these forums!! :lol: :lol: