The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Gear and Accessories

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 2, 2012, 11:17 AM   #1
Pointshoot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2004
Posts: 233
Pro Ears versus other electronic ear muffs

Hi guys. I own several Pro Ears electronic ear muffs (and a couple of their passive ear muffs). I use them when hunting, target shooting, and for use in a potential self defense situation. I like just about everything about the product - - except the high price !
For others that own Pro Ears electronic ear muffs - - - have you found another high quality product at a lower price ? (By 'quality' I mean something durable that will do the job of protecting your hearing.) I like the Pro Ears sound quality when hunting - - but have you found other products which work well - perhaps in other types of situations ?
I'd like to hear from everyone (pardon the pun) - - but particularly from those that have experience with Pro Ears and also other brands of electronic muffs which they have compared in actual use. Thank you - -

P.S. - - I searched this topic, and wanted to get up to date info from those that own Pro Ears electronic muffs.
Pointshoot is offline  
Old September 2, 2012, 12:48 PM   #2
Creeper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2008
Location: Woooooshington
Posts: 1,797
You don't state the specific model of Pro Ear... so I don't know what you mean by "expensive".

I currently use Peltor TacSport muffs, which run around $110 give or take. Pro Ear makes muffs in that price range... and substantially more.
I've used the Pro Ear Tekt 300 model, which are a little under $200, and found those to have a small "sound quality" advantage over less costly muffs.

C
__________________
Shoulder Drive Nicholson Club
Creeper is offline  
Old September 2, 2012, 04:36 PM   #3
Pointshoot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2004
Posts: 233
I meant the Pro Ears gold series. They run about $289.
Pointshoot is offline  
Old September 3, 2012, 04:45 PM   #4
johnbt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
I can't help, the only electronic muffs I've ever owned are my Pro Tac Mag Golds that run on cr123s. In addition to the sound handling capability, I really like the fact that when the volume is turned off they're still 33db passive muffs.
johnbt is offline  
Old September 3, 2012, 11:42 PM   #5
Pointshoot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2004
Posts: 233
Thanks anyway John. I also have a pair of the Mag Gold 33db electronic muffs. I like them for handgun use.

I ordered a pair of the Pro Ears Gold Slim Tactical 28dB electronic muffs on Labor Day special today. I find that the Mag muffs interfere with mounting to shoulder with some rifles & shotguns. I think this new pair should take care of that. I lose a little sound protection in order to reduce the bulk, but that shouldnt be a factor with the long gun barrels versus the shorter barrel handguns. Regards
Pointshoot is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 10:12 AM   #6
dmazur
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 5, 2007
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 1,310
Just a thought on electronic muffs -

For me, even the cheaper ($100) Pro Ears work well when doubled up with foam plugs. The amplification is just enough to hear range commands through the 32dB ear plugs (when there isn't any shooting occurring...)

And they are small enough to not interfere with cheek weld.
__________________
.30-06 Springfield: 100 yrs + and still going strong
dmazur is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06649 seconds with 7 queries