PDA

View Full Version : Need a "quiet" semi auto rifle for home defense


rem44m
August 21, 2012, 02:20 PM
I'm looking for a rifle that is not ear drum popping loud and does not produce a muzzle flash that is bright and blinding.

I think my most likely options are something in a pistol caliber. I'm curious to hear any suggestions? I do not know much about AR's or Carbine rifles but I do know that I don't want to fire a AR in 223 or 308 inside my house with out ear protection. :eek:

Any ideas?

Blackops_2
August 21, 2012, 02:43 PM
Anything is going to be loud in a home, i suggest you look into suppressors.

militant
August 21, 2012, 02:44 PM
Even a .22 indoors with stingers are fairly loud.

L_Killkenny
August 21, 2012, 02:54 PM
I'm not that concerned with noise in an HD situation but you seem to be and you may be on the right track looking at the pistol caliber carbines. But also look hard at the M1 Carbines, A favorite of many folks.

Right or wrong, there is no way, no how, no where am I gonna use a suppressed gun for SD/HD. Maybe it's a bunch of bunk but just on appearances only I can just imagine the legal ramifications. In short, I'm not gonna stand up in front of a bunch of non-shooting jurors and try to explain why I was using a suppressor.

BarryLee
August 21, 2012, 03:00 PM
I am curious why you feel you need a rifle in a pistol caliber for home defense? When you look at the disadvantages of a rifle for home defense one issue is the size. Maneuvering with a rifle inside a building is more difficult than with a handgun. The advantage of a rifle is the increased power of a rifle round. I am not sure what the advantage of a rifle in a handgun caliber would be. Why not just go with a large frame handgun?

SamNavy
August 21, 2012, 03:05 PM
How about just getting a modern tactical pistol and a suppressor? HK USP .45 is probably the easiest recommendation.

Heck, you can get aftermarket threaded barrels for just about anything.

http://www.precisionweapons.com/cartgenie/Images/Large/Suppressed_Glock_21SF.jpg

http://svann.ucoz.net/counterst/Suppressed_HK_USP_Tactical_45.jpg

btmj
August 21, 2012, 03:16 PM
+1 what L_Killkenny said. Especially seeing the pictures of the suppressed Glock and HK. Wow...

Ben Towe
August 21, 2012, 03:26 PM
Killkenny has a point. The prosecution will be checking the back of your head for a barcode tattoo if you get into a shooting using a suppressor.

2damnold4this
August 21, 2012, 03:53 PM
Any ideas?


Perhaps you could keep some sort of electronic hearing protection handy.

RT
August 21, 2012, 04:55 PM
You could try a suppressed 300 BLK. It's only like a 7 month wait for NFA stuff.;)
http://300aacblackout.com/

http://i339.photobucket.com/albums/n443/thorm001/8bda28b0.jpg

gwnorth
August 21, 2012, 05:13 PM
Any 9mm, .45acp, .357mag and so on pistol caliber carbine or rifle will produce noise levels in the 130/140/150+Db range. That is, they will be well above the danger level for hearing damage or outright loss, especially in a confined space.

There really is no such thing as a center fire caliber (pistol or rifle) that is not going to produce noise levels that are dangerously high. That is just plain fact. Firing a .308 indoors will make you just as deaf as firing a .357mag (in a pistol or rifle) will.

The only way you are going to get things down to "safe" levels of noise energy is to use a suppressor, or use ear protection.

Other than that, you have to take the good with the bad - the good being a weapon that keeps you and yours from harm or death, versus the risk of hearing damage.

Measured sound levels for a variety of pistol, rifle and shotgun calibers are published on the web - there simple is no caliber with a safe sound level, from .22 on up, they all produce sound energy levels in the dangerous zone. Add in the effect of using them indoors and you just magnify the potential.

hodaka
August 21, 2012, 05:14 PM
I agree with the M1 carbine suggestion. They are basically a pistol round and are not that loud out of the carbine.

However, out of a Ruger pistol they are painfully loud.

SIGSHR
August 21, 2012, 05:33 PM
Anything with a supersonic velocity will be loud, anything with a less than supersonic velocity will be lacking in stopping power.

SR420
August 21, 2012, 05:34 PM
.



Sub sonic 7.62 x 39 cycles properly through this AKM, it delivers plenty of man stopping power and it is very quiet :cool:

http://i895.photobucket.com/albums/ac160/The_H2O_MAN/T56SHTF/IMG_2561.jpg




.

AK103K
August 21, 2012, 05:39 PM
Maybe it's a bunch of bunk but just on appearances only I can just imagine the legal ramifications.
Its a bunch of bunk. If the shooting is justifiable, it doesnt matter what you use, as long as its used appropriately. Ive used an MP5 as my main home defense gun for years.

These days, I keep a suppressed Glock 17 equipped with a Streamlight TL1s handy. Even with the suppressor, its going to be loud enough indoors to probably be considered "loud", but a lot better than one that wasnt suppressed.

I always keep ear plugs on any gun that might be used, and always have. At this point in my life, even a .22 outdoors will deafen me for days if I dont have protection.

For those concerned about using a suppressor because of how "it looks", how will it look if you have the fore thought to put hearing protection in or on prior to using your gun? I dont see any difference, but I suppose if there are legal boggey men under your bed, it will also be an issue for you. Just think how thats going to look?

One other thing that bothers me (well, not really me:)) is the mentality that allows "might could possibilties" that most likely will never happen, to interfere with and decide what you will do in life threatening decisions. Sounds like planning to lose to me. Winning the fight is always job #1, everything else is small stuff until its not, then its back to job #1.

AK103K
August 21, 2012, 05:42 PM
Anything with a supersonic velocity will be loud, anything with a less than supersonic velocity will be lacking in stopping power.
147 grain 9mm is subsonic, and considered by many to be one of the better 9mm rounds.

There are also some rifle rounds, like the .300 Whisper, and .300 Blackout, that are also subsonic and quite efficient.

ZEBRARANGER
August 21, 2012, 05:59 PM
A Beretta CX4 would make a nice HD pistol caliber carbine at only 29.7" long and under 5.7 lbs, it very compact. Its available in 9mm/.40S&W/45acp. The mags are interchangeable with many of the Beretta handguns.
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb204/zebraranger/Collection/004.jpg

Basement-Gunsmith-Z
August 21, 2012, 06:32 PM
Honestly i'd say a suppressed .300 blackout with subsonic ammo. Use a .308 supressor and you have a suppressor for your home defense gun, a 308 rifle, 300 win mag, .223, .270, and lots of other calibers. Before you buy it just check to see what it can handle from the manufacturer. Oh and the .300 blackout subsonic has around 500 ftlbs of energy so it is as good as most calibers. You can also use a suppressed .308 at full velocity and suppress it, and it wont blow your ears out, but it will be loud.

spacecoast
August 21, 2012, 06:37 PM
I think a .45ACP carbine would be closest to ideal if you have ruled out a suppressor. Subsonic, relatively low pressure and still has a good payload. The longer the barrel, the better (all else being equal).

Any 9mm, .45acp, .357mag and so on pistol caliber carbine or rifle will produce noise levels in the 130/140/150+Db range. That is, they will be well above the danger level for hearing damage or outright loss, especially in a confined space.

True, but every 3db reduction is halving the sound pressure level (logarithmic scale). This chart leaves a lot to be desired but it shows the general idea.

http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml

allaroundhunter
August 21, 2012, 06:58 PM
Its a bunch of bunk. If the shooting is justifiable, it doesnt matter what you use, as long as its used appropriately. Ive used an MP5 as my main home defense gun for years.

Depending on where you live and those in charge of prosecuting, no it is not just bunk. The term "intent" has a very big meaning when determining to take a case to the grand jury, or even to trial. Using a suppressor, or an NFA weapon in general, can have a negative impact when trying to determine someone's intend, especially for those who don't know what is required to get a suppressor or other NFA item. And even after that is explained to someone, we all know how hard it is to change the outlook of some people.

Once a shooting is determined to be justified, then no, it did not matter what was used. But it is not your decision to make whether a shooting is justified or not, there are 12 men and women that have that decision, and they have two different arguments to sift through.


That being said, I agree with this:

Winning the fight is always job #1, everything else is small stuff until its not, then its back to job #1.

It is better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

gwnorth
August 21, 2012, 07:09 PM
spacecoast - I've seen that chart before many times. But note that even a 10-20Db reduction in many of those posted values still leaves in the range of energy likely to cause hearing damage. The NIH warns that any sound over about 120Db has the potential to cause permanent hearing damage. So taking a .357mag from your linked sites peak of ~164Db down to even 150Db will still leave you reeling when fired in a closed space indoors.

You need to reduce many weapons by as much as 30-40Db to get down into anything even beginning to approach a safe sound level.

So short of a suppressor or ear protection, there is no such thing as a safely "quiet" center fire caliber firearm, IMO.

AK103K
August 21, 2012, 07:10 PM
But it is not your decision to make whether a shooting is justified or not,
Initally, it is, or at least in your mind, and I think most who understand the rules of engagement, it will be. Beyond that, if you survive...... that may or may not be another battle.

there are 12 men and women that have that decision, and they have two different arguments to sift through.
Thats assuming it even goes that far. Many times, a shooting ruled justifiable, never goes any further than "no charges brought".

mete
August 21, 2012, 07:30 PM
Keep some hearing protection next to your house gun ! In an actual shooting you might not even notice due to "audio exclusion " - but hearing damage can still occur.

tahunua001
August 21, 2012, 08:38 PM
I've shot a few pistol caliber carbines. I like them because 9mm is cheaper than any rifle caliber so it's a more ecomonic way to practice without resorting to 22lr and it's recoil-less glory.

my favorite is my carbine length 9mm AR15 and I will confirm that it is a night and day difference between the report on it and it's older 223 brother. I heavily recommend the 9mm AR15 for it's ruggedness, reliability(with the right magazines) accuracy, ammo capacity(32 round colt mags/30 round glock mags depending on who makes them) and just the fact that all the controls are the same as any other AR15. however they are one of the more expensive in the pistol cal family, not a good choice if you are on a stringent budget.

a close second is the beretta CX4 Storm. very lightweight, compact, I liked the ergonomics but everyone is different, ammo capacity isn't half bad either(I think 15 rounds in the 9mm but I could be mistaken) and from the couple times I've rented them at the range they have never failed me. they are mostly polymer though and they look like they could be a pain to strip down and clean thoroughly.

third is the hi point carbine. they aren't pretty, they aren't fun, and to ost shooters they aren't comfortable but they always go bang and they always hit what you aim them at. they are very affordable and I heavily recommend them for prospective buyers that are on a tight budget.

I don't recommend keltecs, the aforementioned models surpass them in every category. I have never shot sterlings, marlins(discontinued), rugers(discontinued), calicos, or the uzi clones so I will not comment on them.

USMCGrunt
August 22, 2012, 07:51 PM
Well, pistol caliber carbines are quieter and do put out less flash. However, coming from somebody that has gone through trenches and bunkers with grenades and machine guns I can tell you that you are not taking the time to put in hearing protection. You take the concussion, you take the blast, you suck it up, thank God you're still on the right side of the dirt, drive on and deal with it. Sure, it sucks living with the crickets but at least I am still on one piece to hear them!
As far as using suppressors or anything Class III, I am not a fan of using them for self defense. The argument of a good shoot is a good shoot carries weight with us here but would it carry weight with a jury that has a few Brady bunch gun grabbers in it? These people think owning a semi-auto military style service rifle is illegal so what do you think they are going to say about using suppressors? Even if charges are never brought against you or if they are and a jury still sides with you, what about a civil suit brought by the survivors of the goblin you shot? You may not be in prison but you may live your life working to make the goblin's survivors rich. Not an enviable end either because you were using something that even cops don't use.
No, I am willing to put up with hearing loss. Plenty of us in .mil have been dealing with it for centuries but it's not the end of the world and you don't have to worry about going to prison or running the risk of being sucessfully sued into poverty as well.

spacecoast
August 23, 2012, 07:59 AM
coming from somebody that has gone through trenches and bunkers with grenades and machine guns I can tell you that you are not taking the time to put in hearing protection

Even more reason to choose your weapon wisely - something that will get the job done but hopefully leave your hearing intact. Thanks for crawling through those trenches and bunkers, it's appreciated.

SmokyBaer
August 23, 2012, 11:39 AM
Bad guys don't wear hearing protection either. Ya'll got me thinking on my 20 inch Black widow speakers on full blast triggered by motion detector. KaBoom!! like Back to the Future blasted. His ears are ringing while picking himself up and i got time to put my ears on. Probly gone by then anyways. Just badguy runoff to cleanup. :D

evilleprichaun
August 23, 2012, 01:49 PM
kel tec sub 2k in 9 mm with sub sonics

Csspecs
August 23, 2012, 05:07 PM
I suppose I would not feel completely unarmed with a .22 pistol/rifle that was totally reliable. Sure you may not have the tissue shock damage, but your average criminal is not likely to stay for a prolonged shootout while getting holes poked through him.. I'd favor something with a capacity of at least 10 rounds with a .22 since its going to take more than one round to stop a determined attacker.

Its not ideal, but I'd say that putting on ear plugs is even less ideal.

btmj
August 24, 2012, 09:44 AM
I tend to agree with USMCGRUNT. My father-in-law is a Korean War vet, and he was exposed to gunfire and artillery, sustained and repeated for hours at a time. He finally needed a hearing aid at age 62, 40 years after the war. His hearing loss is no worse than many men his age. I have an uncle who fought in vietnam, including extensive time manning an M-60 machine gun. He is now approaching 70 years, and no hearing aid yet.

Hearing loss due to gunfire is real. Tinnitus is real. We all should protect our hearing while training and hunting, all the time, no exception. But exposure to gunfire does not automatically lead to hearing loss. It may in some circumstances, but it often does not. Many people have been exposed to a single very loud concussion (indoor gunfire, explosion, etc), and have suffered only a temporary hearing loss, with no permanent damage.