PDA

View Full Version : Suppressed XD, CZ or USP


aranman
December 21, 2008, 04:26 PM
Hey all,

Having a bit of trouble here. Im looking for a good suppressable handgun, and I have chosen a springfield XD, a CZ, or a HK USP. I have sensitive ears and particularly don't like loud noises, and i was wondering out of 9mm, .40 or .45 which caliber would be best in terms of quietness and stopping power. My ideal gun: quiet with stopping power. Any suggestions?

ctsracer
December 21, 2008, 07:05 PM
WOW, that's a loaded question. I think you would have a hard enough time if you had just asked what's the "best" caliber?

aranman
December 21, 2008, 07:11 PM
yeah lol hopefully im not going to start another caliber war :eek: the thing is, i like the .45 acp in every way....except it seems just too darn loud when fired from a suppressor....the 9mm is cool becuase it has hi-cap lo recoil, quiet, but im afraid i wouldnt be too confident with that in my gun if a bear of a guy for some reason broke into my house....would a 180 grain .40 s&w be quiet enough but still offer good power.....i think thats what im trying to go for here

CWiley
December 21, 2008, 07:23 PM
The lighter 135-155 grain .40 bullets have better kinetic energy and stopping power. If I was you i'd go with the USP Tactical .40 with jetfunnel 16 round magazines and a suppressor.

aranman
December 21, 2008, 07:33 PM
arent those supersonic loads? usually that creates the ballistic crack which pretty much defeats the point of a suppressor

Sport45
December 21, 2008, 07:58 PM
Don't you use hearing protection when you shoot?

If you limit yourself to subsonic you probably want the heaviest bullet. Look at the .45acp or .45gap. If you really want stopping power you won't find it in a handgun. To stop the "bear of a guy" think 00 buck out of a pump or auto shotgun.

aranman
December 21, 2008, 08:13 PM
sure but is there anyway i can fire a suppressed .45 without protection without blowing my eardrums out? thats the whole dilemma. The real thing is that would a 147 grain 9mm be good for defense? Cuz i get the feeling if i shot a guy with it he wouldnt like it but probably wouldnt keel over either....about time a magic bullet came along :p

Sport45
December 22, 2008, 11:00 AM
Bad guys aren't guaranteed to keel over with one shot from any handgun. I don't care how cool, rugged, or tactical it seems.

Keep looking for that magic bullet and let us know when you find it. :)

cchardwick
December 22, 2008, 01:12 PM
Um....this post probably should have been posted over in NFA guns and gear, that's where suppressor talk is posted (Class 3 NFA suppressors).

What kind of suppressor are you using that blows out your ear drums? You should look into a suppressor that is 'hearing safe' first before you look into ammo that is slower or less powerful. Several months ago I ordered a .223 Advanced Armament Corporation (AAC) suppressor that is hearing safe. The supersonic still has a crack to it but it cracks at a distance away from the shooter. I paid for it and it's been months and I'm still waiting for it:

http://www.advanced-armament.com/images/silencers/silencer~m42000.jpg


This table doesn't include 45 ACP, but check out the 'Suppressed' numbers. In general, they say anything over 140 db and you need hearing protection.

http://silencertalk.com/results.htm

Found this statement on the Canadian OSHA site for limits to 'sudden impact' sounds:

The exact figures vary slightly, but generally the regulations in which the exchange rate is 5 dB permit 10,000 impulses at a peak pressure level of 120 dB; 1,000 impulses at 130 dB; 100 impulses at 140 dB, and none above 140 dB.

So to use this information, I used the noise reduction of my silencer (36 decibles) and subtracted that from the average 5.56 report in the table (link) above (165 db) and ended up with a suppressed sound level of 129 db. According to the Canadian OSHA figures I am allowed to shoot up to 1000 shots a day without hearing protection.

:D

Do your research because some 'suppressors' are not hearing safe, they have a reduction in sound but still are over 140 db. Also keep in mind that the decible scale is logrithmic base 10, which means that 130 db is ten times as loud as 120 db, which in turn is ten times as loud as 110 db. So when comparing suppressors, 140 db is 100 times as loud as 120 db!!!

One more thing to keep in mind is that the first shot of a suppressor is always louder than the following shots. Take a look at suppressors on YouTube, you'll see the first shot is always the loudest.

RAnb
December 23, 2008, 05:27 PM
I thought that a change in 10 db was a ten times difference, 20 db 100 times and so forth. This would make a 3 db change double the noise.

Ranb

444
December 23, 2008, 09:26 PM
1) The idea that using supersonic ammo "pretty much defeats the point of a suppressor" is a complete falsehood. This is an internet myth that will never be stamped out.
The sound of you firing a weapon is made up of more than one sound. There is the report of the shot, the action cycling, and a sonic crack if you are firing supersonic ammunition.
The sound of the weapon being fired as well as the muzzle blast will be the same regardless of the ammo's muzzle velocity. This sound will be attenuated by an astonishing degree.
A sonic crack (if you even get one) plus a suppressed report is WAY more quiet than firing the same weapon without a suppressor.
FWIW: you don't get the same sonic crack under all conditions. If you are out in the open desert firing a suppressed pistol with supersonic ammo you very well might not hear any sonic crack for example.
2) If you don't have to conceal the weapon, such as when defending yourself inside your house, use a long gun. Shotgun or rifle. Either are infinitely better than any handgun.


Dry, a the 9mm can is going to be the queitest.
Wet, the .45 ACP can will be more quiet than a dry 9mm can.

The internet thrives on arguments like .45 vs. 9mm and I am not going to be sucked into it. But, it is like saying your Gremlin is faster than my Pinto. They are both pipsqueeks compared to a rifle or shotgun and comparing them is just something to waste bandwidth on. If you think that a couple thousands of an inch bullet diameter and 70 grains of lead is going to make a HUGE difference, then just shoot the guy twice. Or, make a logical argument and use a rifle or shotgun and forget debating handgun calibers.

Beretta686
December 23, 2008, 10:16 PM
I've never seen a threaded barrel for an XD and an NFA dealer down in Corpus Christi told me that nobody makes them (of course he was trying to get me to get my barrel threaded with him..... :rolleyes:).

I'd go for the USP since you can get the thing ready to roll with your suppressor right out of the box if you get the tactical model.

And as someone else has pointed out, just because the round goes super-sonic doesn't mean a suppressor is useless, since it does make it more pleasant to shoot. BUT, shooting a shorty 556 w/ a suppressor is still pretty damn loud and makes you want to wear ear pro.

Pilot
December 24, 2008, 09:16 AM
I agree with the others. The USP Tactical .45 is designed for use with a suppressor. It comes with threaded barrel, match trigger and taller adjustable sights.

aranman
January 1, 2009, 03:17 PM
thanks everyone! got two more questions for you then i'll leave you all alone :) once, i fired a 12 gauge flare gun when i was out sailing and it made my ears ring like a b*tch. it was pretty painful. How loud would a 12 gauge flare like that be in decibels? and my other question is would a .45 acp fired out of a dry suppressor still be hearing safe?

aroundlsu
January 1, 2009, 04:37 PM
I have a .45 USP with suppressor and it sounds great. I also have a .22 suppressor and can tell you with supersonic .22LR the sonic crack is a definite deal breaker. I feel comfortable shooting the .45 suppressed in the backyard without alerting neighbors but I can't get away with shooting the .22LR supersonic. Subsonic .22 loads are another whole story... :)

Despite what "444" writes, supersonic cracks won't hurt your ears but will 100% ruin your ninja stealthiness. Go for .45. You will need to shoot it wet, but that's not a big deal at all.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2341/2025527247_028613bcfb.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2073/2429960552_b74f5d16f4.jpg

Ricklin
January 1, 2009, 04:51 PM
Would not a wet supressor, and HD use of the weapon be a wee bit incompatible?
Excuse me Mr. Bad Guy I need to check the water in my gun prior to shooting you, you don't mind waiting a bit, gooood thanks a bunch.:)

Sorry I couldn't resist.:D

444
January 1, 2009, 06:40 PM
If you are a ninja, then worry about stealth. If you a realistic Amreican sport shooter, it isn't an issue.
Whenever the subject of suppressors comes up, people forget common sense and shift right into the mode of their favorite secret agent terminating the enemy agent with extreme prejudice at a coctail party in Geneva while everyone else dances the tango. This kind of BS bleeds over into what were intended to be serious discussions on internet gun forums all the time.
In reality, we buy suppressors so that we can shoot without hearing proection, and so we can shoot without grief from neighbors. Real suppressors arn't silent and they don't need to be. They make noise when you fire a shot through them. The action makes noise as it runs. And supersonic bullets make sonic cracks downrange as they fly through the air. These are real facts of like and not some fantasy of your imagination.

Let's say you are out at your local range firing an AR15 at a target 200 yards distant. Your rifle is equipped with a suppressor. As you fire the rifle the report is very similar to that of a rifle firing .22LR.
Does it matter that it isn't completely silent ? No
Does it matter that the report has a little sharper sound to it because the bullet is supersonic ? No.
The fact is that you have taken a VERY loud rifle and toned it down to something that you can comfortably shoot without hearing proection.
This is real life, not the crap you see in the movies. If someone was standing 10 feet away they would know you were firing a gun. But the Gestopo isn't going to take you away for interrogation.
If you are firing a 9mm or a .45 ACP handgun with a suppressor and you want to be able to shoot on your couple acre lot without the neighbors knowing about it, it is certainly something you can do. They won't have a clue unless they see you doing it.

I am all for getting the quietest suppressor you can and doing whatever it takes to get it as quiet as possible (loads, firing it wet.....) but let's keep it real.

The stuff I see on these foums is amazing.
Ninja :rolleyes:

aroundlsu
January 1, 2009, 07:49 PM
The Ninja comment was tongue in cheek.

Sport shooting in my backyard, the sonic crack of .22 is too loud for me to get away with it for any length of time. YMMV

Further, you'd be hard pressed to consider someone with a suppressor in this country a "realistic American sport shooter". I've yet to see anyone on the shooting line with a can besides me and I shoot on a weekly basis at busy public ranges.

Ricklin, in a HD scenario a dry .45 can will be good enough not to make you permanently deaf. However, if you are going to spend that kind of money preparing for a home invasion why don't you invest in an AR-15 with a suppressor? Dry, indoors, my M4-2000 on a 9.25" AR-15 doesn't ring my ears.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3287/3032898530_1db0c8b87c.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3219/3156880205_bc74902622.jpg

444
January 1, 2009, 07:54 PM
I was just messing with you.


If you don't think suppressors are normal, you arn't going to the right ranges. But, if I didn't live here I doubt that I would be shooting much on organized ranges with other people. First of all it defeats the purpose of having a suppressor if everybody else at the range is shooting without one: then you have to wear hearing protection. Second, organized ranges have too many rules.
My local range here is probably not like a range in Ohio or whatever. We have monthly machinegun matches. It isn't unusal to hear a belt fed going now and then. Seeing someone shooting something suppressed isn't all that unusual.

Ricklin
January 1, 2009, 09:10 PM
Aroundlsu: I was just having some fun with the subject. I have no need or want for a supressed HD weapon. If I do the math for the probability of needing to use the weapon it just don't pencil out. Given that a gunshot also will alert neighbors / LEO's. That said a can for my Walther G-22 is on the shopping list, pending funds. It's crazy that supressors are considered evil, I like to think of them as being polite.

GE-Minigun
January 2, 2009, 03:06 PM
I have no dog in the race, but I do have an observation. Why is it that no one thinks it’s a bad idea to shoot someone with a suppressed gun, but if you shoot someone with reloaded ammo you will spend the rest of your life in prison? As mentioned I have nothing in this, just something I’ve wondered.

aroundlsu
January 3, 2009, 03:33 PM
I'm assuming he's made the personal decision that it's OK for him to use a suppressor in his HD situation since he didn't ask for political opinions.

444
January 3, 2009, 04:30 PM
Why wouldn't it be OK to defend your life with a suppressed handgun ?
I don't know why you would want to, but if you did........................

GE-Minigun
January 3, 2009, 09:08 PM
Why wouldn't it be OK to defend your life with a suppressed handgun ?...

As mentioned I have no dog in this race, but everytime someone asks about using reloaded ammo for home defence it bring all the lawyers out of the wood work..."High power killer ammo"..."what's wrong with factory ammo"..."use what the local police use"...it goes on and on. Now someone asks about using an NFA item and not a peep.

Beretta686
January 3, 2009, 10:04 PM
I think we may need to divide the discussion here into two different sections:

A. The tactical/practical value of using a suppressor for self-defense (not the tacti-kewl value).

B. The possible repercussions of utilizing a suppressor.

My answers:
A. Yes there is a practical advantage to using a suppressor, in allowing you to not be defeaned by the discharging of a round in a confined area.

B. No way in hell I'm shooting someone with my "Rambo-style weapon of mass death & destruction, designed only to kill" as I'm sure some trial lawyer will put it. I've dealt with trial lawyers and the subject of weapons as it relates to a court case, and believe me if they can twist something to their advantage they will. And given what most people think of NFA type weapons, I'd hate to give them more ammo to come at me with.

boomer4278
January 4, 2009, 06:36 PM
I know I dont have a dog in this race but I love guns and everything to with guns and love to shot.I got alot of guns from shotguns to rifles to handguns and thousands of rounds for them all.I love to shot them all.I have a supressure and it is not illegal to have it.If you do the paper work from the ATF you can own it.Now if someone breaks into my house lol he or she will have a bad day at the rock but I am not going to worry if I have a supressure on one of my guns when I shot his or her ass off.I got two kids and I have the right to protect them no matter what.:D

Ricklin
January 4, 2009, 08:49 PM
+1 When my permit finally arrives I'll pack my Glock, one of the many reasons is because it is what LEO here uses. I bought the ammo off the shelf that said Premium Self Defense on the box. The Glock is 100% stock and will remain that way.
I have had occasion to watch our legal system in person lately. One must be extra careful as it's politics masquerading as justice.