My bedside gun is a Sig P220 in 45ACP. In that same drawer I've got Howard Leight Impact Pro electronic muffs. I'm assuming any home invaders will have the decency to wait until I get fully prepared.

I've contemplated outfitting the 220 with a suppressor but am not too impressed with the data.

Google says the dB level of an unsuppressed 45ACP is about 160dB. Google also says any instantaneous noise above 85dB is potentially damaging to my hearing (which is already damaged from squirrel and bird hunting; and rock and roll).

But even a suppressed 45 is between 130 to 140 dB which means I'd still need hearing protection. Even more if I fire it in a room with sheetrock walls (and ceiling) and ceramic tile (or wood floors).

It all seems like diminishing returns or, what am I missing?

Now, for a hunting rifle with 24 inch barrel outdoors, etc, that's different.

I haven't measured the Db's while shooting my P220 with my Obsidian, but I look at it this way - IF I have time to put the suppressor on the gun and use it against an intruder, then great (my nightstand drawer isn't big enough to fit the pistol with it installed - maybe I need a bigger nightstand...). If I dont, the last thing I will be worried about is ringing ears or potential damage. Me not ending up in a body bag will be my primary concern. 130-140db still will have less potential for damage than 160db.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RB211,

Clearly, the suppressor isn't all that important to you, either.

My bedside gun is a P226 MK25 with a silencer. If given the choice between two of said MK25 pistol for this duty: one with a silencer and one without; I'd pick the suppressed option.

However, this is in a world where I either didn't incur the expense and rigmarole of the silencer purchase or, in my case, had already invested years ago.

Knowing what I now know, and feeling the way I currently do about silencers, I would definitely not purchase a silencer for the sole reason of suppressing a nightstand gun.

So, in this specific context of the bedside firearm, the suppressor "isn't all that important" to me.

A rifle, however, in the duty or "fighting" role, is a host and use-case that I very-much believe that a silencer is value-added.

quote:

Originally posted by KSGM:
I would definitely not purchase a silencer for the sole reason of suppressing a nightstand gun.

Appreciate your candor and helpful insight. In my case, the hardware expense would be a Sig threaded barrel, suppressor and booster. Plus the commie tax.

In light of it merely being a nightstand gun, it's looking a lot like not worth the cost.

You guys know a boatload more about suppressors than I. I only have 3 so far and have fired only two - 5.56 Huxwrx and a Banish 22; the 7.62 CAT is yet to be shot with.

Based on those two plus a friend’s .45 suppressed,I am a fan of suppressors. They are expensive, but they are kind of like good optics - you seem to get what you pay for. I am personally looking for my next can, probably in .45 just because I have more threaded barrels in .45, although it’s close with the 9mm.

To me personally, suppressors are a help. I have a 227 as my “nightstand” first line weapon, and a Winchester 1897 as my second line.

Decibels are a logarithmic measure of sound, not linear. The difference between 160db and 140db is massive. The difference between 140db and 130db is still massive.

If you don't have experience with shooting suppressed weapons, looking at the numbers won't actually give you any meaningful idea about what it's really like. It just won't. My opinion, but I stand by that. YouTube videos, same thing there - just watch the guys talking immediately in the seconds following their shooting a suppressed weapon and notice that you can't hear it because the microphone attenuated. Suppressed guns are still loud, but they're a lot less loud.

A lot of what changes is the tone. A loud, lower-pitched tone is going to less of a problem than a loud higher-pitched tone. Suppressors on pistols lower the tone quite a bit. It ends up sounding something more like a pneumatic nailgun than a pistol, especially when it's subsonic.

I don't know where you're located, but rental ranges often have suppressed weapons. I suggest trying to shoot a suppressed .45 before forming an opinion on what kind of value it might have for a bedside gun. A pistol you leave a suppressor mounted on is going to be quicker to action and do more to protect your hearing than any notion of putting on some Howard Leights or Peltors. Sorry, RB211, but the idea of having to mount a suppressor in response to a home invasion is kind of a silly argument against having or using one for defensive purposes. Costs you nothing to leave the damn thing on the gun, right?

I'm kind of with KSGM on it, and kinda not. I have a pistol can, and it does amazing things with 9mm. I don't have it mounted on a pistol, though, it's on a "PCC." However, that gun has proven to be reliable and accurate, so I keep it loaded with a 35rd magazine of HST's, and yes, it's usually out of the safe with the suppressor mounted. It's not a rifle, but I think a guy could do a lot worse. Would I purchase a silencer for the sole reason of suppressing a nightstand gun at this point, feeling how I do about suppressors and what they actually do and do not do? Yeah, probably. In fact, I plan to pick one up a little later this year just for suppressing pistols. But then again, it's mostly because I've become totally sold on the "if you can suppress it, then do so" mindset. I have enough hearing damage, I don't need to add to it, and there's basically no reason I can think of not to suppress a firearm I keep around for defensive purposes. I don't live in a blue state, I'm not going to keep a lever-action "Thuddy-Thuddy" around just to defend my home with my black NFA stuff locked up in the safe because of some notion that a jury will think I'm a wannabe assassin or some shit. The days of gunrag know-it-alls who wear atrocious hairpieces and are experts simply because they're experts spouting opinions that carry more weight than value are over. I don't care if a can sits in an evidence locker for a year or more when the wait for them can be measured in terms of how long leftovers will keep in a refrigerator. That's really the only argument I've ever really heard against using a suppressor for defensive purposes that ever made any sense is having to wait another year or more to replace one, and those days are also over.

I've never fired a suppressor on any weapon and felt like it was a waste. They all make a noticeable difference. It would be nice if I didn't also have to wear muffs when shooting my suppressed 12.5" AR, but it sure AS HELL makes it a lot more comfortable to shoot.

I absolutely love my suppressed pistols, but in the context of home defense, it's like adding a ruler to the end of your pistol. It just feels weird. I have a B&T usw chassis for my G17, but even that feels big for walking around my house. Perhaps the new flux raiders would feel a little more compact. But unless you have a stock or the suppressor is both compact AND ultralight, I don't think they make a lot sense for home defense.

quote:

I don't care if a can sits in an evidence locker for a year or more

I agreed with that before the wait times dropped. When you're talking about defending your family by taking a life, you're talking about a really extreme situation in which the temporary, or even permanent, loss of your silencer is a drop in the bucket.

Smudge makes a good case for a silencer for your nightstand gun, if you'd also get use out of it on other guns, like the PCCs he mentions.

A big part of my opinion is round count. The round count of a defensive gun use is much lower than potential round counts experienced in duty or other fighting scenarios. The need for communication among fellow shooters in those circumstances is highly relevant as well.

My MK25 nightstand gun is equipped with a silencer and light/laser unit not because I consider this equipment essential and worth the expense/hassle, but because I happen to have it. Do these things increase effectiveness? Sure, but I think the juice is ultimately not worth the squeeze.

Having done an extensive amount of shoot house work, suppressors make a huge difference.

quote:

It all seems like diminishing returns or, what am I missing?

IMO P220Smudge hits your question directly and perfectly. The difference in sound level is huge. A nearly 30 db drop in sound pressure is "massive" to quote the correct word from his post.
Now whether adding a suppressor to your P220 is the correct tradeoff for you is more complex. I carry a handgun concealed without a suppressor lots of places on my person because carrying one with a suppressor would be very difficult. I trade the potential hearing damage against the other benefits on size. ON the other hand I don't have that issue in my home. So I subscribe to the idea that I'm not picking a handgun for my home defense weapon in the first place, suppressed or not. Running a shoulder mounted weapon is so much better in every possible way, and on a shoulder mounted weapon the extra weight and length of a suppressor is much less of an issue. The extra weight of the light is not an issue. Its just so much better in every way I can't see why one would do a handgun at least if the legal context of your location lets you. If it doesn't I'd probably run a suppressor for its benefits.

SBR with a can is the way to go!

and as long as the current rulings hold a pistol with a brace.

"The days of gunrag know-it-alls who wear atrocious hairpieces and are experts simply because they're experts spouting opinions that carry more weight than value are over."

Great sentence. I have always wondered if that was a hairpiece.

I've fired a variety of suppressed guns (.22, 9mm, .45, and 5.56) in my house with no ear pro. A shot or two out the window into the ditch. It takes the edge off but it is indeed loud.

I always have a set of electronic (amplified) hearing protection near me. IMO its a tactical advantage in the house, and it solves any issues on gunfire noise as a side benefit. If I don't have time to get them on I am f***ed anyway. Because I can do that in just about the same time I can get the gun up and running. I normally expect some amount of warning (courtesy of 3 dogs an alarm system and a few other things). And while I have experienced drug addicted incursions I have not had a full on direct assault invasion so maybe I am being a bit optimistic...