GTA
All Springer/NP/PCP Air Gun Discussion General => PCP/CO2/HPA Air Gun Gates "The Darkside" => Topic started by: mrbulk on January 18, 2021, 05:52:06 AM
-
I have received several more silencers (or suppressors, moderators, LDCs, pickles, front-ends or whatever you want to call’em) so it seemed like a good time to do another sound output comparison test.
Key point - prior tests were performed with a shrouded .22 cal. Air Venturi Avenger.
There were questions about how the shroud might be “pre-silencing” the full air blast before it reached the external silencer, possibly favoring some silencer designs over others.
So for this new test I used a bare barrel airgun (no shroud or baffles), the Evanix AR6K Renegade in .22 cal. shooting JSB 18.13gr Match Diabolo Exact Jumbo Heavy pellets at 800fps making just over 25 FPE.
Un-silenced it was pretty dang loud and definitely not backyard friendly.
The gun’s air reservoir was recharged every 24 shots to ensure shot-to-shot consistency.
All silencers were shot through three (3) times each and the averages calculated.
An earlier test had the decibel meter placed approximately even with the gun’s muzzle and 6 feet off to one side.
A subsequent test had the meter placed 25 feet downrange and almost directly in the line of fire, to capture as much of the forward sound output as possible. This method seemed to spread out the max sound readings more, and made it easier to see the spread among sound outputs. In my opinion it made for a more accurate comparison.
So this time the meter was located a full 50 feet downrange and again as nearly into the direct line of fire as practical (without shooting up the sound meter). In other words, how loud would it sound to someone standing 50 feet downrange.
The meter itself was a Meterk Digital Sound Level Meter, Range 30-130dB w/Self-Calibrated Decibel Monitoring.
The pellet trap used was a duct seal “silent trap” with no target paper in front, so it was virtually silent and did not affect the sound meter’s readings.
And as it turned out, some silencers now showed better efficiency than before due to the way they were designed to muffle the full blast. Interestingly this yielded some different results from all prior tests.
=====================================
See the details about all the silencers tested, listed alphabetically (any commercial links are just what I could find, there may be others):
0dB (Zero dB):
Commercially available silencer.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.airgunsofarizona.com/airgun-silencers/0db-airgun-silencer-110c-black-with-1/2-unf/ (https://www.airgunsofarizona.com/airgun-silencers/0db-airgun-silencer-110c-black-with-1/2-unf/)
Amazon Pill Box - Modified:
Modified from a screw-together aluminum pill box available online, in this case Amazon.
Modified build by private owner contributed for test.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=180311.msg156046962#msg156046962 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=180311.msg156046962#msg156046962)
A.U.O.:
Finalized production version of the MM-1.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182312.new#new (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182312.new#new)
DonnyFL Sumo & Tanto:
Commercially available silencers.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://donnyfl.com/collections/ldc (https://donnyfl.com/collections/ldc)
FX factory - Modified:
Standard factory silencer that came on FX airgun, with additional baffles added to certain sections of the internals.
Contributed for test by private owner.
Geo Short & Geo Hunter:
Commercially available silencers made of 3D printed monocore internals with a polymer shell and decorative vinyl wrap.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.airgununiverse.net/wp/store/12-20-hunter-class-ldc/ (https://www.airgununiverse.net/wp/store/12-20-hunter-class-ldc/)
HT-68:
This large hefty unit is made of metal with extra wide & short proportions, created to facilitate use of an unnamed proprietary fluid to dampen harmonics and thereby improving accuracy in larger, more powerful airguns. Not specifically designed as a silencing device, although some sound reduction was noted as a side benefit.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=181725.msg156068211#msg156068211 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=181725.msg156068211#msg156068211)
Huma 30mm - Modified:
Standard Huma silencer with partial replacement of the internals with 3D printed baffles.
Contributed for test by private owner.
Huma 40mm Standard:
Commercially available silencer.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
(USA) - https://www.trenieroutdoors.com/gear/airgun-moderators/airgun-moderators-3/huma-air-airgun-moderators/ (https://www.trenieroutdoors.com/gear/airgun-moderators/airgun-moderators-3/huma-air-airgun-moderators/)
(U.K.) - https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Airgun-Silencers-or-Moderators#filter:9fcb43a01238ad8db1bd75a7a6370d97 (https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Airgun-Silencers-or-Moderators#filter:9fcb43a01238ad8db1bd75a7a6370d97)
MM-1 (Mystery Moderator 1):
3D printed proprietary internals, with end caps and body tube machined from 6061 aluminum, comes apart for maintenance.
Prototype of the A.U.O.
MM-2 (Mystery Moderator 2):
3D printed proprietary internals and end caps, aluminum body tube triple painted with one coat primer and 2 coats enamel.
Contributed for test by private owner.
Neil Clague custom build:
This is a build-to-order maker, the tested unit was built to handle airguns up to 50 FPE power.
Contact the maker directly online:
https://sites.google.com/site/ncairstrippers/home (https://sites.google.com/site/ncairstrippers/home)
Rocker2 and Rocker1:
Actually I do not know the model number, but since it was from the same builder as the Rocker1 (except a bit longer with improved sound dampening), I called it the Rocker2 to differentiate.
The builder is a member here, please do a search privately.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182340.msg156077081#msg156077081 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182340.msg156077081#msg156077081)
STO Falx:
Commercially available silencer.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.silentthunderordnance.com/air/falx (https://www.silentthunderordnance.com/air/falx)
TKO Slim:
Commercially available silencer.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
http://www.tko22.com/index.html (http://www.tko22.com/index.html)
Wolf 30mm & 35mm:
Commercially available silencers from Poland.
See here for detailed descriptions and photos:
https://www.wolfairguns.com/index.php?cPath=32&osCsid=eg830cbqg305ls5c1a1gvrsdb7 (https://www.wolfairguns.com/index.php?cPath=32&osCsid=eg830cbqg305ls5c1a1gvrsdb7)
========================================
Here are the results by category, beginning with dB (decibel) output averages of 3-shot readings:
Sorted by dB Low to High:
79.0 Huma 40mm Std
79.1 A.U.O.
79.4 Huma 30mm (modified)
79.5 Rocker2
79.6 MM-1
79.6 Neil Clague
79.9 FX Factory (modified)
80.0 Wolf 30mm
80.2 DonnyFL Sumo
80.9 Rocker1
81.3 0dB 110C
81.3 STO Falx
81.4 Wolf 35mm
81.5 Geo Hunter
82.9 Geo Short
83.3 TKO Slim
83.4 MM-2
83.7 DonnyFL Tanto
86.8 Amazon Pill Box (modified)
91.9 HT-68 Fluid Damped
105.2 bare barrel (meter overloaded)
Interestingly some of the louder silencers from the earlier test (shot from the shrouded Avenger), performed better in this new test through a straight barreled gun. For example the Neil Clague rose from 11th place to 6th when capturing the full air blast from the straight barrel.
The Huma 40mm Std did well in both tests, it was no.2 when shot through the shrouded Avenger and no.1 through the bare barrel AR6K.
The worst performing Wolf 30mm when shot through the shrouded Avenger, rose from 14th up to 5th when shot through today's bare barrel gun.There were more position changes if you compare the tests:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=180075.0 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=180075.0)
Sorted by PRICE ($):
27 Geo Short
29 Geo Hunter
49 Wolf 30mm
59 Wolf 35mm
59 A.U.O.
65 Rocker1
70 Rocker2
80 FX factory (modified)
92 TKO Slim
99 DonnyFL Tanto
120 0B 110C
125 Huma 30mm (modified)
129 STO Falx
135 Neil Clague
150 DonnyFL Sumo
160 Huma 40mm Std
n/a Amazon Pill Box
n/a HT-68
n/a MM-1
n/a MM-2
Sorted by WEIGHT (oz.):
1.7 Geo Short
2.3 Geo Hunter
2.9 TKO Slim
3.0 MM-2
3.3 Rocker1
3.5 0dB 110C
3.7 Rocker2
3.8 DonnyFL Tanto
4.1 A.U.O.
4.1 FX Factory (modified)
4.2 MM-1
4.7 Huma 30mm (modified)
4.7 Wolf 30mm
5.1 Amazon Pill Box
5.9 DonnyFL Sumo
5.9 Neil Clague
6.4 STO Falx
6.6 Wolf 35mm
7.6 Huma 40mm
13.7 HT-68
Sorted by VOLUME in cu. in.:
(calculated from external dimensions only)
5.11 Rocker1
5.25 TKO Slim
5.49 Rocker2
5.68 0dB 110C
5.99 A.U.O.
5.99 MM-1
6.02 DonnyFL Tanto
6.06 Geo Short
7.33 MM-2
7.68 Geo Hunter
8.32 Wolf 30mm
8.72 FX Factory
8.96 Huma 30mm
11.25 Wolf 35mm
12.10 DonnyFL Sumo
12.44 Amazon Pill Box
12.70 STO Falx
12.88 Neil Clague
14.14 Huma 40mm Std
15.70 HT-68 Fluid Damped
The sound deadening effect is dramatic going from bare barrel to almost any silencer. And it should be remembered that on the decibel scale, a doubling of intensity corresponds to an increase of 3 dB. This does not correspond to a perceived doubling of loudness, however. We perceive loudness to be doubled when the intensity increases by a factor of 10, which corresponds to a 10 dB increase.
Therefore, going from the bare barrel’s 105.2 dB reading (which could be even louder since it maxed out the meter) down to even the loudest silencer (91.9 dB from the HT-68) was more than 50% less in perceived loudness to the ear. It was a 13.3 dB reduction, or more than half the perceived loudness of the bare barrel.
Again it should be noted that in today’s test, by placing the dB meter almost directly in the line of fire of an un-shrouded bare barrel gun, the forward sound throw was more accurately measured and the loudness differences between the various silencers clearly magnified.
For example the spread between all silencers was only 12.9 dB (the HT-68’s 91.9 dB minus the Huma 40’s 79.0 dB) and the bare barrel output overwhelmed the meter into overload, measuring a maximum of 105.2 dB before the screen locked and started flashing.
Keeping in mind that a 10 dB increase creates a perceived doubling of sound to the human ear, this 12.9 dB spread means the output from the loudest silencer was more than twice as loud as the quietest. So the spread was easier to see when the meter was 50 feet downrange and almost in line with the muzzle.
It also appeared that silencers with more open internal structures that provide room for the incoming air to expand quickly, were more effective on shrouded or baffled guns, but units with more complex internals that directly engage the airflow and force it into convoluted patterns thereby delaying their exit time, seem better able to handle the full air blast from a straight barrel, while still working quite effectively on shrouded guns.
A few things I noticed among the units that seemed to be desirable:
Durability: Metal threads are preferable to synthetic ones for longer wear, and less chance of cross-threading
Disassembly Friendly: the ability to take the unit apart for cleaning and maintenance would seem important in the long run
Bang For Buck: how quiet vs. how much
Finally, please remember that these comparisons are for these particular units on this day with this gun shooting this ammo at this distance at today’s temperature, barometer, humidity and other associated weather conditions. Maybe even the phase of the moon and the tides, so YMMV.
Also rest assured that absolutely no science was harmed (or even used) in the completion of this test.
;D ;D ;D
-
Your efforts are to be commended, Charlie!
Great information for all interested parties. 8)
-
Excellent review and really useful.
-
Great review Charlie! Thank you for your effort! I wish that I had more time to contribute to the hobby. Airguns are Great for Tinkering. I am changing out my Sentry’s shroud for a CF tube for experimentation.
Thanks again!
Keith
-
Dang Charlie.. You put some time and effort in that.
Greatly appreciated !
-
Very cool Charlie. Thanks so much for all this info.
-
Charlie
Outstanding report and information, very well done............. ;)
the only very minor error IMHO, was listing the total overall size ie: length and O/S diameter etc.
What is your elevation and average humidity if known?
Thank you for your time and effort.
Don
-
Charlie, as said above, you are to be commended on your efforts in these sound tests! Did you notice the different sound signatures coming from each LDC? I know that some are lower pitched while others higher in pitch but nonetheless the same dB....I for one thought the lower pitched sounds were quieter but not so. Anyhoo, kudos to you and your work done on this project!
-
You should do a test in a Hill LDC.
-
That's a lot of work !!!!!!
-
Thanks for all the work you put into this, I'm sure it will be helpful to many people.
-
WOW! What a job. Thank you for doing this comparison testing.
-
Great job...very informative.
-
Thank you.
-
Very useful data, Charlie.
I posted a link to this thread; on that thread about finding a new way to do LDC testing:
Meaningful, non-standard objective testing of LDCs, providing a better signal to noise ratio ( :) ) https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156082548#msg156082548 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156082548#msg156082548)
-
Craig, Alastair, Keith, Bill, Bryan, Manny, Jerry, Stephen, gamo2hammerli and Kurt, your kind comments are appreciated!
Thanks Don, the lengths and widths were listed in a prior test but I realized a quicker/easier comparison was to use cylinder volume so I just went with that. Las Vegas is at an elevation of 2001 feet, with avg. annual humidity at about 25%, and today is at 16%.
Thank you Randall, unfortunately the AR6K has a revolver style pellet feed so there is a bit of blow by at the breech when firing which effectively masks the report from the shooter’s listening perspective, and I did not have a spotter down range to listen for tonal differences. Maybe when the FX arrives (this Wednesday!) I’ll start planning out another test...
🙄🙄🙄
Chuck, I wish I could test all of the dozens (or scores or even hundreds?) of different silencers available, but I have already invested (depleted?) several thousand dollars into the units I already have, even after accounting for the ones kindly loaned to me...do you have a Hill you could loan me for a few days?😀
Thanks Sub, I’ll check it out.
-
Very useful data, Charlie.
I posted a link to this thread; on that thread about finding a new way to do LDC testing:
Meaningful, non-standard objective testing of LDCs, providing a better signal to noise ratio ( :) ) https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156082548#msg156082548 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156082548#msg156082548)
Sub, the link provided is to this thread. Did you mean another one?
-
mrbulk, I'm adding my thanks for you doing this research and sharing with everyone. Thanks!
-
Sub, the link provided is to this thread. Did you mean another one?
Charlie,
My post in that thread displayed a link to this thread. If you click on bold heading to that post, it takes you to the thread, and post concerned.
I would suggest backing up to the top of that page for context, here: https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=176737.msg156081231#msg156081231 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=176737.msg156081231#msg156081231)
You actually posted to that thread months ago, and may have unsubscribed; but it was about developing a meaningful method for evaluating LDCs.
While I have spent too much time in that thread; explaining why the standard method used to evaluate PB suppressors is not applicable to airguns; you have actually been developing better methods, and using them. Talk is cheap, so kudos to you.
-
Oops, mea culpa! I totally did not know you could do that...cool! ;D
-
Hey Charlie
I just reread your 14 Mod test and could not find the listed length/diameter of the mods etc.
Oh Well, ::)
Thanks,
Don
-
Thanks again for the awesome comparison, once again! The huma 30 I sent in did not have 3d printed internals. It was factory, but had a couple of felt dampeners removed from the 1st 2 chambers. But the FX +25mm extension did have 3d printed baffles. :)
-
Hey Charlie
I just reread your 14 Mod test and could not find the listed length/diameter of the mods etc.
Oh Well, ::)
Thanks,
Don
Don, sorry you are right. I went just now and measured a couple for your visual reference if you want to check the photo of all the units:
Longest were the Wolf silencers, both were 8-3/8"
Shortest was the 0dB at 4-1/2"
Unless the diameter is mentioned (40mm, etc.) the rest were all around an inch thick or close to it over/under.
Also some of the commercial silencers should show their dimensions in the links provided up top.
HTH 8)
-
Thanks again for the awesome comparison, once again! The huma 30 I sent in did not have 3d printed internals. It was factory, but had a couple of felt dampeners removed from the 1st 2 chambers. But the FX +25mm extension did have 3d printed baffles. :)
Dallas, corrections noted (by you in your post since I can't modify mine no more, haw). And another great big Thanks for your contribution to our collective airgun sound muffling knowledge!
-
Gentlemen.....
As many have stated, there was alot of time and effort made to provide this very useful information.
So much so that the GTA staff has decided that the thread should be a 'sticky' and will remain pinned at the top of the gate.
Please, be mindful of the GTA rules against discussing the internals of silencers, moderators and LDCs.
Any such discussions will be removed from the thread without warning.
-
Definitely a thread worthy of being a sticky, :D.
Thanks for the excellent test info MrBulk;
Jesse
-
Much appreciated Bill and Jesse.
I would hope that this only becomes a gateway (hey, see what I did there? haw) for others to post about their experiences with, and knowledge of LDCs to add to our collective data bank.
There are a ton of considerations and nuances and the very real science regarding the diversion/modification of air movement to curtail perceived sound output to the human ear, and this little test barely scratches the surface using just one very narrow set of circumstances to produce just one very narrow set of results.
We need more!
-
Tons of great info resulting from tons of hard work! Thank you for taking on this project! Any chance you can provide links to some of the lesser known moderators? One that specifically has my interest is the A.U.O. mod, I'd love to give one of those a try! Thanks again for the awesome reviews!
-
Tons of great info resulting from tons of hard work! Thank you for taking on this project! Any chance you can provide links to some of the lesser known moderators? One that specifically has my interest is the A.U.O. mod, I'd love to give one of those a try! Thanks again for the awesome reviews!
Paul, PM replied to.
-
Here is a summary of some of the results from Charlie's/ mrbulk's silencer tests.
And a few other silencer test I have found on the forums.
Also a listing of the specs of 56 silencers (most of them commercially avaiable):
size,
weight,
price,
calibers,
connectors available (e.g., 1/2" UNF / M20 (FX) / M14 (Vulcan) / M18 etc.),
links.
In a separate file photos of some of the silencers -- for those who care about silence AND looks.
Enjoy. :)
Matthias
Attachment 1: Silencer Specs Table
Attachment 2: Silencer Photos
-
COOLIO! Thanks Matthias! 8) 8) 8)
(56 silencers?!?!?!)
-
Yupp, I'm surprised myself of the vast amount of options we have...! 😊
And I didn't include some models as I couldn't get clear specs to differentiate them from other models.
And the custom made models aren't included — as they come in all kinds of sizes and designs....
Huma 13x
DonnyFL 9x
Huggett 6x
Wolf 5x
Mystery Moderator/ A.U.O. 3x
STO 3x
Weihrauch 3x
Geo 3x
Hill 3x
0DB 2x
Rocker 2x
TKO 2x
Ramus 1x
Daystate 1x
Matthias 😊
-
Wow Charlie! That's a lot of great work :o This thread was hiding from me in the sticky section, lol. I commend you for taking the time and EFFORT to do this, and giving as much info as possible. This was no small task! Your results tend to validate my thoughts on the best LDCs out there for the most part. My personal experience is a little different, but I've no doubt that has to do with power levels. I haven't even shot a .22 at 25 fpe in years. Heck, I've rarely even tested a .177 at that power level, with the exception of my house gun(.177 at 20 fpe).
A large majority of my shooting is at 30 fpe+. I wouldn't dare ask you to run these tests again at a higher power level. I will ask that you tell us which LDCs seem to be most effective, when you do get a gun running at higher power levels though. I mean, as in, your "seat of the pants" thoughts on it ;)
P.S.
Matthias, I must commend you on these lists you add as well! You're quite good at condensing a lot of info into short form for quick reference. That is no small amount of work!
-
A large majority of my shooting is at 30 fpe+. I wouldn't dare ask you to run these tests again at a higher power level. I will ask that you tell us which LDCs seem to be most effective, when you do get a gun running at higher power levels though. I mean, as in, your "seat of the pants" thoughts on it ;)
Thanks Donny. You know actually come to think of it, I just received a Wildcat MkIII .22 that is supposed to be capable of 35-40 fpe depending on tune and pellet weight. Since I like shooting it so much, after I get it broken in maybe I'll run another set of tests at max power, whatever that turns out to actually be. 8)
-
Power level isn't going to have so much to do with sound level as the actual relationship between pressure, valve dwell, and barrel length. And I suppose a shroud or lack thereof. My 65fpe .22 is VERY quiet with just a single module from my huma moderator. (basically just a single expansion chamber maybe 2.5" long and eland end cap) On target, not so quiet
That said, I think the test you did do here, is highly indicative of the actual potential of the various units.
-
Power level isn't going to have so much to do with sound level as the actual relationship between pressure, valve dwell, and barrel length. And I suppose a shroud or lack thereof. My 65fpe .22 is VERY quiet with just a single module from my huma moderator. (basically just a single expansion chamber maybe 2.5" long and eland end cap) On target, not so quiet
That said, I think the test you did do here, is highly indicative of the actual potential of the various units.
Technically, power itself doesn't have as much to do with it, but... Higher power usually means more air to deal with, and likely more valve dwell. I understand what you mean though ;) 60 fpe out of a 20" barrel will usually be a heck of a lot louder than 60 fpe out of a 27" barrel. Power isn't a surefire indicator of how things will do, but it is a general reference point that can be used, and nine times out of ten, 45 fpe will be louder than 25 fpe. If all things are equal, the gun making more power will be louder.
-
Yeah, I'm thinking to test with the Wildcat's power level cranked up a bit and shooting heavier pellets (maybe slugs) to keep them in the barrel a bit longer. And then measuring the dB output from 50 feet away downrange, and see what happens then.
I understand what is meant by a unit sounding louder to one's ear, but that ear (mine anyway) is right there next to the gun, and yet Behind the muzzle, totally different situation. I just wanna know what the output sounds like to a bystander 50 feet away straight downrange (the distance at which some of my neighbors are literally located from where I shoot in my yard).
This whole testing thing started with me not wanting to annoy these fairly close-by neighbors all around me so that criteria was primary to me. Testing at a different distance, or offset more from the line of fire, or changing any of the various other parameters, would likely end up giving significantly different results.
-
thank you Matthias and Charlie, It is very much appreciated! 8)
Knife
-
Yeah, I'm thinking to test with the Wildcat's power level cranked up a bit and shooting heavier pellets (maybe slugs) to keep them in the barrel a bit longer. And then measuring the dB output from 50 feet away downrange, and see what happens then.
I understand what is meant by a unit sounding louder to one's ear, but that ear (mine anyway) is right there next to the gun, and yet Behind the muzzle, totally different situation. I just wanna know what the output sounds like to a bystander 50 feet away straight downrange (the distance at which some of my neighbors are literally located from where I shoot in my yard).
This whole testing thing started with me not wanting to annoy these fairly close-by neighbors all around me so that criteria was primary to me. Testing at a different distance, or offset more from the line of fire, or changing any of the various other parameters, would likely end up giving significantly different results.
It would be interesting to see how some of the models compared on your gun with high power, versus the AR6. And even slugs versus pellets in your wildcat.
Technically, power itself doesn't have as much to do with it, but... Higher power usually means more air to deal with, and likely more valve dwell. I understand what you mean though ;) 60 fpe out of a 20" barrel will usually be a heck of a lot louder than 60 fpe out of a 27" barrel. Power isn't a surefire indicator of how things will do, but it is a general reference point that can be used, and nine times out of ten, 45 fpe will be louder than 25 fpe. If all things are equal, the gun making more power will be louder.
Well, I know you're as aware as anyone that even apples to apples, you can get two guns of identical specs to output the same power at completely different sound levels. :) But I do %100 agree with you. 45fpe is quite a step up as well. I did get that short barrel of yours up to 30fpe. I know it would go higher. But that was plenty loud, haha. I've actually got it backed down to 15fpe for the time being. It's been shooting very tightly with 16gr AAs, and that tensioned shroud 8)
-
Thank You for your hard work. GOD Bless
-
Thanks Knife!
Thanks, Jr.!
-
NEW SOUND METER
I bought a new sound meter the other day and it made me realize how basic the range of dB measurement was with the prior meter I was using up until now.
From my understanding after reading the documentation, this new meter is better in three important ways:
1) While the old meter measured for the sound output through the entire range of 30-130 dB, this new meter allows you to break it up into six (6) smaller 50 dB ranges, focusing the meter’s reading capabilities to better evaluate just the loudness within each narrower range.
2) The old meter also measured for decibels through an “A” filter (readings were in dBA) while the new meter has both “A” and “C” filters (called dBC), with dBA better for mid-range sound levels while dBC is better for low or high sound levels.
3) The old meter took a sound measurement once per second (on Slow setting only) to better capture the average loudness over this time period, while the new meter can also measure once every 125 milliseconds (Fast setting), or eight times per second to better isolate peak volume.
And with more buttons and toggles to switch all these settings on and off, the new meter also looks more complicated and thus … cooler. 8)
Finally, since the microphone of this meter is unidirectional, it will be mounted horizontally to aim it directly at the gun’s muzzle (from 50 feet downrange) for more accurate, and theoretically better differentiated, readings.
So it looks like I will be using the new meter for testing. According to Subscriber, this meter pretty much replicates the capabilities of the one used by Pyramid Air for their own decibel testing.
Which means I will probably have to test all the silencers again... ::)
-
Charlie,
This is the unit PA was using in their airgun test videos about four years ago, when I bought mine:
www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EWY67W (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EWY67W)
The one you are describing sounds like it has even broader capability. I was looking for a meter with "fast" (short duration) capability, that took into account the human perception of loudness as a function of frequency. My understanding is that this is setting "A".
Also, I figured that rather than argue with PA, I would use "their meter" :)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/717vH6r1VdL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
-
Hats off to you Charlie, fantastic ongoing effort!!! Hopefully you had some fun mixed in with all the work ;D
-
Charlie,
This is the unit PA was using in their airgun test videos about four years ago, when I bought mine:
www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EWY67W (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EWY67W)
The one you are describing sounds like it has even broader capability. I was looking for a meter with "fast" (short duration) capability, that took into account the human perception of loudness as a function of frequency. My understanding is that this is setting "A".
Also, I figured that rather than argue with PA, I would use "their meter" :)
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/717vH6r1VdL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
Yeah but mine has nine buttons...(just kidding Sub!). ;D
-
Hats off to you Charlie, fantastic ongoing effort!!! Hopefully you had some fun mixed in with all the work ;D
Thank you Steve! I did have fun (or else I wouldn't do it, ha ha)
-
Yeah but mine has nine buttons...(just kidding Sub!). ;D
Yes, but does it go to 11? :)
Video runs, if you click it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc)
-
Yeah but mine has nine buttons...(just kidding Sub!). ;D
Yes, but does it go to 11? :)
Video runs, if you click it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc)
;D ;D ;D (No, but the volume on my car radio does - for real)...
-
This is awesome info! Thanks for the time and effort you put into this Charlie! This is going to save me and I am sure many other people some time and money down the road!
-
Thank you Cory. 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
-
Charlie, have you done any analysis on POI shift between the various LDC's? I ask because I was testing the A.U.O. on various air guns and noticed a definite and different POI shift on everyone of them. Everyone of them would have needed to be re-zeroed after swapping LDC. I find this fascinating since there is no evidence of clipping. I'm also happy to announce, it has found a permanent home on my .22 DAR. While there was a POI shift, the groups also tightened up considerably! Don't ask me why, I have no clue, but I'm not going to argue with the results! ;D
-
Charlie, have you done any analysis on POI shift between the various LDC's? I ask because I was testing the A.U.O. on various air guns and noticed a definite and different POI shift on everyone of them. Everyone of them would have needed to be re-zeroed after swapping LDC. I find this fascinating since there is no evidence of clipping. I'm also happy to announce, it has found a permanent home on my .22 DAR. While there was a POI shift, the groups also tightened up considerably! Don't ask me why, I have no clue, but I'm not going to argue with the results! ;D
Glad you found better grouping with the A.U.O. Paul.
Although I did find POI shifts every time I switched silencers (during testing using the same gun) I was only shooting from 25 yards away which is all the room I have to shoot over.
But the shots all stayed on target except for one or two exceptions, which were mainly the screw-together units made of several separate sections. All the others kept the POI fairly close to each other.
Of course in normal use once a silencer is zeroed you would usually leave it on the gun.
Variances in POI could be attributed to weight of the unit or construction of the internals (which we cannot discuss details of here) but accuracy is usually because the internals are consistently concentric so the projectile takes the same exact path every time.
Thanks for testing it out. 8)
-
Oh man, you're a glutton for punishment! No, the work is greatly appreciated by all of us ;)
-
Oh man, you're a glutton for punishment! No, the work is greatly appreciated by all of us ;)
"Airgun S&M"... ;D
-
Gee, I was going to ask if you could post a picture of your set up......
"Airgun S&M"... ;D
:o .... Never mind.... We don't judge :-X
-
Charlie,
Kidding aside, I appreciate the amount of effort you put in and are planning to put into the upcoming tests.
A thought on your test setup. I think in earlier posts you said the target was at 30 yds and the sound meter at 50 ft. I'm not sure exactly how the soundmeter samples in Fast mode, but you may want to place it far enough away from the target so that the impact sound arrives more than 125 ms after the arrival of the muzzle sound. The picture below shows a shot with a P-17 pistol with the target much closer. You can see the second sound on the trace and in this case it would be lumped into the 125 ms long measurement. If you know the approximate average speed of the pellet, the timing and placement can be calculated. If I did my algebra right, at an average pellet speed of 700 ft/s and your 90 ft range, you would get a 125 ms delay at about 47 ft from the muzzle. Further for slower pellets, closer for faster pellets.
If you have a laptop, you can check this with the free Audacity software and the internal (or external) mic. You don't really need to get into the software too much to check the soundwave timing like I did in the image. This approach can also give you an idea how reflections from the ground and walls show up in different locations.
You can also check it with your sound meter and multiple shots with a moderator in place, by moving the target closer to see if the readings change. Though without knowing when each sample starts that may be a bit of a hit or miss.
-
Charlie,
Kidding aside, I appreciate the amount of effort you put in and are planning to put into the upcoming tests.
A thought on your test setup. I think in earlier posts you said the target was at 30 yds and the sound meter at 50 ft. I'm not sure exactly how the soundmeter samples in Fast mode, but you may want to place it far enough away from the target so that the impact sound arrives more than 125 ms after the arrival of the muzzle sound. The picture below shows a shot with a P-17 pistol with the target much closer. You can see the second sound on the trace and in this case it would be lumped into the 125 ms long measurement. If you know the approximate average speed of the pellet, the timing and placement can be calculated. If I did my algebra right, at an average pellet speed of 700 ft/s and your 90 ft range, you would get a 125 ms delay at about 47 ft from the muzzle. Further for slower pellets, closer for faster pellets.
If you have a laptop, you can check this with the free Audacity software and the internal (or external) mic. You don't really need to get into the software too much to check the soundwave timing like I did in the image. This approach can also give you an idea how reflections from the ground and walls show up in different locations.
You can also check it with your sound meter and multiple shots with a moderator in place, by moving the target closer to see if the readings change. Though without knowing when each sample starts that may be a bit of a hit or miss.
Thanks Stan for the insightful comments, much appreciated.
The unidirectional mic on the new meter will facing straight back toward the muzzle of the gun, while the target will be 25 feet away in the other direction (due to our suburbian lifestyle I only have 25 yards distance total ::) ). Any pellet trap sound produced might be difficult to discern as it is filled with a couple inches of a clay-like material (it is a duct seal trap with no paper target in front) and is fairly silent. The meter will be reading a "peak" sound measurement once every 125 ms, but I can't say whether it is actively "on" and looking for sound the entire time, I think likely not since it must stop reading at some point, in order to prepare for yet another just 1/8 second later.
If the duct deal target surface, when struck by a pellet, produces sound detectable by the meter within that 125 ms span, I also wonder if the meter would "lump" both sounds together cumulatively? Only further testing will bear this out I guess. Weather and personal time will dictate how far and how soon I can go.
I like the idea of moving the target back and forth by the way, but as you said to capture this sound *within* the 125ms span may be a challenge to figure out. But determining how to time this sequence and seeing what significant meanings could be derived from it would be valuable, though. Thanks again. 8)
-
Would it make sense to screen the rear of the microphone from the pellet trap? Curved so that the convex side faces the muzzle. The point of that is to dissipate reflected sound from the front face of the screen towards the mic, to avoid forming a parabolic reflector that would capture more of the muzzle signature.
Or perhaps a flat or V-shaped screen, angled to minimize radiated sound from being directed at the mic?
-
Duct seal?? It should be lead on lead. This is GTA, we all stack pellets at 25yds. ;D
I was surprised, the P-17 shot I posted was into a folded t-shirt and it still made noise and showed up on the trace.
Not sure about the unidirectional mic. What little I've read, the soundmeters tend to be omnidirectional (since in the typical use the sound direction is not always known).
I think your soundmeter records Max which is the value of highest sample set. Peak is the highest individual noise spike (usually very short duration) It is available on some higher cost units and is more related to hearing damage than loudness you hear.
Do you know the pellet velocity that you'll be setting the gun for?
-
Sub, the way to get around all of this is to have another 50 yards (or more) behind the meter to the target. In a perfect world...
Stan, my own highly unscientific test using a repeatable sound source both from the side and then from the "front" of the mic (the end with da holes) yielded higher readings from the front. But as is typical with the tests I have done, no science was harmed nor used...
As for pellet velocity, I have not really decided on a gun yet, trying to order a higher powered straight barrel gun (no shrouds or baffles) than the AR6K to better test the muffling capability of each unit. Everything else I have is shrouded for now.
-
Nice work MrBulk.
A word of caution with the new sound meter, make SURE the range is set correctly for each and every shot. I somehow made an error when testing with my Extech 407730 and ended up with lower than normal measurements (all those darn buttons ::) [size=78%]). [/size][/size]I suspect my test SHOULD still represent the discharge sounds in a ratio from one LDC to another LDC, just not at the right 'number' for an actual reading. (if that makes any sense)[size=78%]
Another observation I just read and made was the impact noise effecting the sound reading. I was lucky enough to have my backstop hundreds of feet beyond my meters when I did my tests. There was virtually no impact noise to affect the overall quality of the test. Another interesting test might be to take a DB reading with the backstop where it is, then try taking a shot into a clearing to see how much of a DB difference there is. Of course, much like my test, all things being equal for each of the 'test subjects' the comparison between each should be representative of how they perform to each other regardless of what the actual reading is.
One thought also just crossed my mind as far as measuring sound DB down range. How much effect does the shape of the pellet/slug make a difference to the DB output down range? At a far enough distance, you might well be hearing the pellet noise in flight and the impact over the discharge noise. I suspect that is why most manufactures test the performance of a suppressor closer to the muzzle so as to test how it suppresses discharge noise, as their main concern is suppression for the shooter. Though it is always good to know what the neighbors might hear as well, since it is the primary concern of us airgun shooters.
I think everyone (including myself) will be looking forward to your future testing at higher FPE levels, as it was one of the criteria I HAD planned on testing with my AirForce Escape after my original Maximus LDC project (but never found the time). Kudos to you MrBulk for running with the job of testing every LDC under the sun and posting your results.
Cheers,
M
-
Nice work MrBulk.
A word of caution with the new sound meter, make SURE the range is set correctly for each and every shot. I somehow made an error when testing with my Extech 407730 and ended up with lower than normal measurements (all those darn buttons ::) [size=78%]). [/size][/size]I suspect my test SHOULD still represent the discharge sounds in a ratio from one LDC to another LDC, just not at the right 'number' for an actual reading. (if that makes any sense)[size=78%]
Yes Matt thanks, I plan to use my new meter to present both A- and C-weighted readings for the readers' own interpretation, but will keep the sampling rate at the faster 125ms rather than just once per second. Also the ranging feature will help keep the expected output noise levels within a narrower, 50 dB spectrum which helps the meter concentrate on more accurately reading results within a specific sound intensity range.
Another observation I just read and made was the impact noise effecting the sound reading. I was lucky enough to have my backstop hundreds of feet beyond my meters when I did my tests. There was virtually no impact noise to affect the overall quality of the test. Another interesting test might be to take a DB reading with the backstop where it is, then try taking a shot into a clearing to see how much of a DB difference there is. Of course, much like my test, all things being equal for each of the 'test subjects' the comparison between each should be representative of how they perform to each other regardless of what the actual reading is.
Oh, I knooow ::) and as I said before, in a perfect world... ;D But seriously I have made up a large layered sack of old clothes and will be firing into that (with a sturdy backstop behind) in the next test. Test shots so far have ensured it is quite silent. At first I tried stacking the clothes in a cardboard box, but the box itself would still help produce a low "Foomp" noise like a very quiet bass drum, so I took all the clothes out and wrapped them up with a large bed sheet and am just shooting directly into that now.
One thought also just crossed my mind as far as measuring sound DB down range. How much effect does the shape of the pellet/slug make a difference to the DB output down range? At a far enough distance, you might well be hearing the pellet noise in flight and the impact over the discharge noise. I suspect that is why most manufactures test the performance of a suppressor closer to the muzzle so as to test how it suppresses discharge noise, as their main concern is suppression for the shooter. Though it is always good to know what the neighbors might hear as well, since it is the primary concern of us airgun shooters.
I am fairly confident the sound of the muzzle blast far exceeds any sound the pellet makes, even when passing within inches of the meter, otherwise all of the sound readings would be the same since I am only using identical 18.1-grain pellets for every shot plus the meter locks in the max output it detects. But even if different pellets did make a difference, using the same pellet for everything would still make the comparison valid I feel.
Also when I was placing the meter directly to the side of the muzzle and about 6 feet away, it may have been picking up incidental noise from the gun action itself as the readings were all much closer, especially for example when I was using the Evanix AR6K revolver-action PCP, which had some blowby on each shot from gas escaping between the cylinder/breech seal. Next test will use the regulated FX Wildcat MkIII.
I think everyone (including myself) will be looking forward to your future testing at higher FPE levels, as it was one of the criteria I HAD planned on testing with my AirForce Escape after my original Maximus LDC project (but never found the time). Kudos to you MrBulk for running with the job of testing every LDC under the sun and posting your results.
Thanks Matt, although I might leave testing significantly higher FPE guns to someone else, I just simply don't have the room (nor neighbors tolerant enough) to go too much further up the power scale. ::)
Besides, this whole journey began when I decided to find out which silencers would work best in my particular guns, so right now I am already in my happy place... 8)
Cheers,
M
-
Clickbait.
Pure clickbait!
WHY do I keep clicking on this thread?!? 😟
Someone help me!! ::)
Matthias
-
WHY do I keep clicking on this thread?!? 😟
Because you automatically receive notifications to subscribed threads. :)
You can always click "un notify" if you like. I do that with any thread that no longer informs or amuses me...
-
WHY do I keep clicking on this thread?!? 😟
Because you automatically receive notifications to subscribed threads. :)
You can always click "un notify" if you like. I do that with any thread that no longer informs or amuses me...
Self-induced clickbait is not the responsibility of management... ;D
-
I sometimes 'think out loud' while my fingers go spazoid on the keyboard so bare with some of my comments.
Actually I didn't mean to imply the sound of a particular pellet might wildly throw off your test results, but it was a curious thought that just randomly came through my head. Ie. "I wonder how much difference there is between one projectile noise and another' SHOULD have been my comment. OH, and I should probably proof read before I post
Initially I had the same issue as you, trying to stop pellets while sound testing (nice solution you have by the way). Almost everything I put down range to stop pellets made noise, so as I said, moved the 'backstop' Waaaaaaaaay far away...cause I could. ;)
Perhaps "caution" was a bit strong of a word on the meter setup, it was just a pitfall I managed to fall into that threw my readings off. My 'team' of my young Sons may have contributed to my error during testing as well. Not throwing them under the bus but keeping track of two 'helpers' at the same time as running the tests didn't work out as well as I'd hoped. At least the results were consistent. ;)
Keep up the great work and I'll be looking forward to reading more test results.
-
Clicking "un-notify"?!? ??? Are you serious, Peter? ::)
I don't think I can find the moral courage to do that.
This and several other threads are just too good.
Taking full responsibility....
🔶 Here is another tread — cued to the thread's most insightful post — on noise levels from an AG.
When we want to lower the noise we make when shooting silencers are a huge factor. The other is the particular tune of the gun. Cf. the link!:
https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/noise-when-90-fpe-doesnti-think-all-this-extra-air-results-sound-like-90-fpe/?bbp_quote_to=923089&_wpnonce=14978587cb#post-923089 (https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/noise-when-90-fpe-doesnti-think-all-this-extra-air-results-sound-like-90-fpe/?bbp_quote_to=923089&_wpnonce=14978587cb#post-923089)
Matthias
-
Wait! What? How? Pics or it didn't happen! ;D :D ;)
.... I'm also happy to announce, it has found a permanent home on my .22 DAR......
-
One thought also just crossed my mind as far as measuring sound DB down range. How much effect does the shape of the pellet/slug make a difference to the DB output down range? At a far enough distance, you might well be hearing the pellet noise in flight and the impact over the discharge noise. I suspect that is why most manufactures test the performance of a suppressor closer to the muzzle so as to test how it suppresses discharge noise, as their main concern is suppression for the shooter. Though it is always good to know what the neighbors might hear as well, since it is the primary concern of us airgun shooters.
Interesting you brought that up. It would be cool to get a gun quiet enough to actually measure this. CPHP 14.3 pellets can be a bit noisy at high speeds. I've also shot some RWS 12gr wadcutters, and they seem to be quite noisy as well. I don't think they're intended for much over 600fps if even that.
-
Interesting you brought that up. It would be cool to get a gun quiet enough to actually measure this. CPHP 14.3 pellets can be a bit noisy at high speeds. I've also shot some RWS 12gr wadcutters, and they seem to be quite noisy as well. I don't think they're intended for much over 600fps if even that.
What do we suppose that noise must sound like? An angry bumblebee buzzing so loudly right past one's ear that you can feel the vibration in the air as it whizzes by?
But that's a bullet from a powder burner (ask me how I know), this would be the smaller mass of a .22 pellet moving at nowhere near that same velocity.
If someone had access to an open field backstop, they could shoot from waay back enough to be quiet (and with a silencer attached, of course) and attempt to record the sound of the pellet in flight as it passes next to the front of the mic.
But don't shoot the mic.
-
But don't shoot the mic.
If you do, be sure to write a song about it. It might go something like this:
"I shot the mic; but I did not shoot the chrony..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRgcwT9X2J8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRgcwT9X2J8)
-
Thanks, Peter. That was the hearty laugh I needed to finish out a 10-hour work day!! 😄👍🏼
Matthias
-
-duplicate-
-
I confess. It was me, I shot the Chrony. Shoulders low. Guilty as charged. :(
-
Thank you mrbulk for your work and the good information.
-
Thank you mrbulk for your work and the good information.
You're welcome Earl! :D
And a new, more accurate sound meter was recently acquired so a more comprehensive test of seventeen (17) commercially available silencers (excluding any one-off, modified or self-made units) is upcoming. 8)
-
Charlie,
with all the pandemic bad news — you are the man that delivers some EXCELLENT NEWS!! 😄
Thank you!! 👍🏼
Matthias
PS: I have some good news for those who shoot and hunt in Peru (yeah, I know, that doesn't concern a lot of people around GTA....) — but it's still good news! 😄
After the Peruvian government locked us down again for a whole month —
no driving — no going anywhere outside a 5 mile radius from your home — max. for 1 hour per day, etc. —
we now can drive again.
And shoot again.
And hunt again!! 😄
Tomorrow the pigeons will be sorry!
(And I will not.)
-
I appreciate the work that was put into this. It was very helpful. Thanks
-
Clinton, thank you for your very kind comments. 8)
Matthias, so does this mean we will get some photos and videos and stories over at Hunting Gate soon? ;D
-
Well, Charlie, 😊
when I go shooting, I get so intense, I forget about pretty much everything else.
For example, I spent all night fixing and prepping gear, slept two hours, and then went for a full day of shooting, actually 100 yard slug testing.I was sitting on 4 inches of dried cow dung, hunched over my shooting table that's 6" too low for me.
And I was out in the tropical sun all day.
I hardly ate or drank anything!
I didn't rest.
I think I went to the bathroom just once on that "cow range".
I was so burned up, so dehydrated, the stomach empty — but I didn't even feel it!!
(Well, the next day I sure did.... 🤣).
Yeah, I call it FOCUS. My wife might call it crazy.
So, filming, pictures, and stuff really requires a lot of divided attention from me.... That's hard — since I'm so FOCUSSED.... 😄
➔
🔶 I've been drooling over a Tactacam with the FTS scope mount, because that's just a button press and done. Easy peasy, even when I'm FOCUSSED.
But the price is just far out of reach.
So, yeah, I should go through my shooting notes and see if there's anything worth telling....! 😄
Matthias
-
Well, Charlie, 😊
when I go shooting, I get so intense, I forget about pretty much everything else.
For example, I spent all night fixing and prepping gear, slept two hours, and then went for a full day of shooting, actually 100 yard slug testing.I was sitting on 4 inches of dried cow dung, hunched over my shooting table that's 6" too low for me.
And I was out in the tropical sun all day.
I hardly ate or drank anything!
I didn't rest.
I think I went to the bathroom just once on that "cow range".
I was so burned up, so dehydrated, the stomach empty — but I didn't even feel it!!
(Well, the next day I sure did.... 🤣).
Yeah, I call it FOCUS. My wife might call it crazy.
So, filming, pictures, and stuff really requires a lot of divided attention from me.... That's hard — since I'm so FOCUSSED.... 😄
➔
🔶 I've been drooling over a Tactacam with the FTS scope mount, because that's just a button press and done. Easy peasy, even when I'm FOCUSSED.
But the price is just far out of reach.
So, yeah, I should go through my shooting notes and see if there's anything worth telling....! 😄
Matthias
Okay okay okay, we'll just take your best written stories from your memories and notes... ;D
-
Okay okay okay, we'll just take your best written stories from your memories and notes... ;D
Orrrrr... he could have a photographer behind him. :D
-
+1^^^
-
Gents,
I'm supposed to be in bed, resting up for a day* of shooting.
But here you keep prodding me and keeping me awake....!
And the fool I am keep reading, and responding. 🤦🏻♂️
So, yeah, maybe some airgunner want to come down here to Peru for a vacation! (yeah, you'll have some camera duties, too....! 😄
But Peru is — when the corona craze is over — an incredibly beautiful country:
▪20,000 foot mountains
▪Tropical jungle (think National Geographica), including sweetwater dolphins
▪Clean and beautiful beeches, some with black sand (warm weather when the US shudders under sub-zero's)
▪Macchu Picchu — the Inca settlement everyone should have seen before they die
▪The Nazca Lines, mysterious lines engraved in hardened sand — several hundred yards wide — half a millennium before they invented planes and drones — How in the world did they do that, and why??
▪Deserts, rocky hills, almost right behind my house
▪Islands with sea lions, seals, and penguins
▪The food, oh the food, Peruvians can cook like no other nation that I have visited so far.
OK, I'll stop here. Visiting Peru is an adventure, not a 5-star tourist tour.
OK, enough, I'll turn this screen off, NOW! And maybe I'll have a story to tell after tomorrows shoot. 😊
Matthias
*(yes, I worked both weekend days full, tomorrow is my day off...)
PS:
I have succeeded to thoroughly derail Charlie's thread. 😟 Sorry, man.
But..., you pushed my buttons!
And so I pushed the keys..... 😄
NOW BACK TO THE SILENCER TOPIC!!
➔
I just tuned a PP700 with the HST from 12FPE to 14.5FPE — and with my ears I could not perceive a difference in loudness.
-
Chinese Solvent Trap vs. Swift Stumpy - Sound comparison
https://youtu.be/xf2DDmqOjg4 (https://youtu.be/xf2DDmqOjg4)
*** Mods, let me know if this is a step too far and I will delete it, with deepest apologies.
-
Gents,
I'm supposed to be in bed, resting up for a day* of shooting.
But here you keep prodding me and keeping me awake....!
And the fool I am keep reading, and responding. 🤦🏻♂️
So, yeah, maybe some airgunner want to come down here to Peru for a vacation! (yeah, you'll have some camera duties, too....! 😄
But Peru is — when the corona craze is over — an incredibly beautiful country:
▪20,000 foot mountains
▪Tropical jungle (think National Geographica), including sweetwater dolphins
▪Clean and beautiful beeches, some with black sand (warm weather when the US shudders under sub-zero's)
▪Macchu Picchu — the Inca settlement everyone should have seen before they die
▪The Nazca Lines, mysterious lines engraved in hardened sand — several hundred yards wide — half a millennium before they invented planes and drones — How in the world did they do that, and why??
▪Deserts, rocky hills, almost right behind my house
▪Islands with sea lions, seals, and penguins
▪The food, oh the food, Peruvians can cook like no other nation that I have visited so far.
OK, I'll stop here. Visiting Peru is an adventure, not a 5-star tourist tour.
OK, enough, I'll turn this screen off, NOW! And maybe I'll have a story to tell after tomorrows shoot. 😊
Matthias
*(yes, I worked both weekend days full, tomorrow is my day off...)
PS:
I have succeeded to thoroughly derail Charlie's thread. 😟 Sorry, man.
But..., you pushed my buttons!
And so I pushed the keys..... 😄
NOW BACK TO THE SILENCER TOPIC!!
➔
I just tuned a PP700 with the HST from 12FPE to 14.5FPE — and with my ears I could not perceive a difference in loudness.
I wish I was there now!
Knife
-
Chinese Solvent Trap vs. Swift Stumpy - Sound comparison
https://youtu.be/xf2DDmqOjg4 (https://youtu.be/xf2DDmqOjg4)
*** Mods, let me know if this is a step too far and I will delete it, with deepest apologies.
I'm using the smaller one on the pp-700 now does a fine job! It was given to me by an LE friend.
-
I have received several more silencers (or suppressors, moderators, LDCs, pickles, front-ends or whatever you want to call’em) so it seemed like a good time to do another sound output comparison test.
I wonder if an actual pickle would work? Plus, you know, if you're out hunting and you get hungry.... ;)
---------------------
But seriously, I see you tested the lower-end silencers from Wolf, but has anyone tested their high-end units? Evidently those use something called a "K baffle," as opposed to the more common conical baffles. It is implied that this shape works better.
I'm quite interested to know if it's true.
-
I have received several more silencers (or suppressors, moderators, LDCs, pickles, front-ends or whatever you want to call’em) so it seemed like a good time to do another sound output comparison test.
I wonder if an actual pickle would work? Plus, you know, if you're out hunting and you get hungry.... ;)
---------------------
But seriously, I see you tested the lower-end silencers from Wolf, but has anyone tested their high-end units? Evidently those use something called a "K baffle," as opposed to the more common conical baffles. It is implied that this shape works better.
I'm quite interested to know if it's true.
Allan, I am unsure because I have never shot one to my knowledge, there may be key baffles in some of the units tested before, but most of them are unable to be opened up, the makers wanting to keep their internals proprietary. I bought the two wolf silencers because of their better pricing, the K-baffle units are all well over $100.
-
But based on the latest tests of some units I have in my possession now and will eventually be posting about, the best sound reduction results seem to come from units that are designed asymmetrically inside. Without going into further detail, it’s just that they are designed to break up and further occupy the air blast within the unit while giving time for the pellet to exit first, and then to release the rest of the air blast in a slower, more controlled rate out the front. The uneven, unequal, asymmetrical internal designs of those types of units appear to be superior.
-
Chinese Solvent Trap vs. Swift Stumpy - Sound comparison
https://youtu.be/xf2DDmqOjg4 (https://youtu.be/xf2DDmqOjg4)
*** Mods, let me know if this is a step too far and I will delete it, with deepest apologies.
Unsure how the mods would react to this video but I now have one incoming, should be interesting to see the test results...
-
But based on the latest tests of some units I have in my possession now and will eventually be posting about, the best sound reduction results seem to come from units that are designed asymmetrically inside. Without going into further detail, it’s just that they are designed to break up and further occupy the air blast within the unit while giving time for the pellet to exit first, and then to release the rest of the air blast in a slower, more controlled rate out the front. The uneven, unequal, asymmetrical internal designs of those types of units appear to be superior.
Great, and I just ordered one of the old designs? Maybe I should’ve waited a bit and you would have a better, more efficient one. ;)
-
But based on the latest tests of some units I have in my possession now and will eventually be posting about, the best sound reduction results seem to come from units that are designed asymmetrically inside. Without going into further detail, it’s just that they are designed to break up and further occupy the air blast within the unit while giving time for the pellet to exit first, and then to release the rest of the air blast in a slower, more controlled rate out the front. The uneven, unequal, asymmetrical internal designs of those types of units appear to be superior.
Great, and I just ordered one of the old designs? Maybe I should’ve waited a bit and you would have a better, more efficient one. ;)
Haw! No worries Rich, according to the makers the AUO has been designed to use the main housing as a permanent test chassis. Any new development of the internals, if/when one is created, would be a direct drop-in replacement at significantly less cost than the all-metal machined housing you would already have. 8)
-
I found this engineering video on youtube, which might explain some things.
"Tesla Valve | The complete physics - Nikola Tesla had invented a very interesting one-way value. Let's understand the complete physics of this valve in this video."
https://youtu.be/suIAo0EYwOE (https://youtu.be/suIAo0EYwOE)
-
I found this engineering video on youtube, which might explain some things.
"Tesla Valve | The complete physics - Nikola Tesla had invented a very interesting one-way value. Let's understand the complete physics of this valve in this video."
https://youtu.be/suIAo0EYwOE (https://youtu.be/suIAo0EYwOE)
Yes Stephen thanks, a version of the Tesla valve (or diode) is used in the STO Falx, for test results please refer to the dB readings in the OP above.
-
If cost is not an issue, what is the one silencer you would recommend? The only stipulation is I can use it on multiple guns.
-
If cost is not an issue, what is the one silencer you would recommend? The only stipulation is I can use it on multiple guns.
Man, I would love to be able to publicly recommend certain ones, but not only might that put a damper on any new ones volunteered for tests (there have been units offered for test already in the past, and there are now a couple of new units to be included in the next comparison), but also please recall that the testing regimen uses only one gun, on one day, under one set of conditions.
So like if you had a 50fpe gun for example, the Neil Clague I have was built specifically for that exact level of power and likely would perform best on it, but many if not most of the smaller units might do worse, and perhaps even fail structurally.
But the guns that were (and will be) used are the AV Avenger .22, Evanix AR6K .22 and FX Wildcat Mk3 .22 which, in their states of tune, all average more along the medium range of power for most PCPs (up to 30fpe), so the results you see in the OP would represent .22 guns with that average level of power, and hopefully cover the most useful range of guns for the majority of people.
If the guns used were different, like a high fpe model, or a CO2 gun, or a springer, etc., then results would certainly be different.
In other words the best recommendation I could make would be to take the results and figure which one most closely suits you based on purpose, looks, budget (oh yeah, cost was no issue), size and the intended gun itself.
Subjectively, I myself do like certain ones better because of perceived value, or cooler looks, or easier handling (spinning on/off, grip, texture, etc.), or overall size vs dB, accessibility, etc., but then someone else might prefer different units based on these same parameters.
So to sum up, I just report (and actually have a heck of a good time doing it!). ;D
-
If cost is not an issue, what is the one silencer you would recommend? The only stipulation is I can use it on multiple guns.
Now that we have the official answer, I feel free to be a little facetious:
If cost were no object, I would buy 20 acres of land with a natural backstop on the north end, so I can shoot from the south; to see clearly without glare :) . That should work to quieten anything I care to shoot. :)
-
...or this ;):
If cost were no object, I would buy 20 acres of land with a natural backstop on the north end, so I can shoot from the south; to see clearly without glare :) . That should work to quieten anything I care to shoot. :)
-
If cost is not an issue, what is the one silencer you would recommend? The only stipulation is I can use it on multiple guns.
Get the AUO for $65 shipped (got mine in 2 days, seriously) to your door.
All aluminum except for the 3D- printed monocore internal.
Stupendous machining and finish ;D
Waiting for a 3.5” version (wink2x, lol!) for my shrouded carbine ;D
-
I'm definitely interested in the AUO. How would I order it?
Thanks,
Mark
-
PM Mr. Charlie, aka Mrbulk ;D
-
Thanks very much. I actually did a while back, but I never received a reply. I wasn't sure if I had gone about it the wrong way or not.
-
Thanks very much. I actually did a while back, but I never received a reply. I wasn't sure if I had gone about it the wrong way or not.
He is a fast gent, sir ;D
-
Thanks very much. I actually did a while back, but I never received a reply. I wasn't sure if I had gone about it the wrong way or not.
So did you order one?
;D
-
Thanks very much. I actually did a while back, but I never received a reply. I wasn't sure if I had gone about it the wrong way or not.
So did you order one?
;D
Thanks sir Richard, truth is they are down to their last 20 units or so with no plans to make any more.
-
Thanks very much. I actually did a while back, but I never received a reply. I wasn't sure if I had gone about it the wrong way or not.
So did you order one?
;D
Thanks sir Richard, truth is they are down to their last 20 units or so with no plans to make any more.
I am lucky to have one then, sir ;D
I would not hesitate to get one, but I already have 4 of about the same size LDC’s.
Looking for a small one right now.
Might order that Mini Belita ;D
Well, at least it is moving—their inventory ;D
-
It also appeared that silencers with more open internal structures that provide room for the incoming air to expand quickly, were more effective on shrouded or baffled guns, but units with more complex internals that directly engage the airflow and force it into convoluted patterns thereby delaying their exit time, seem better able to handle the full air blast from a straight barrel, while still working quite effectively on shrouded guns.
Re-reading this entire thread, I find that to be the most interesting point of all.
It also appeared that silencers with more open internal structures that provide room for the incoming air to expand quickly, were more effective on shrouded or baffled guns, but units with more complex internals that directly engage the airflow and force it into convoluted patterns thereby delaying their exit time, seem better able to handle the full air blast from a straight barrel, while still working quite effectively on shrouded guns.
A few things I noticed among the units that seemed to be desirable:
Durability: Metal threads are preferable to synthetic ones for longer wear, and less chance of cross-threading
Disassembly Friendly: the ability to take the unit apart for cleaning and maintenance would seem important in the long run
Bang For Buck: how quiet vs. how much
I would add two more important things:
1: Some designs seem to have what is functionally a sort of air stripper at the nose. (My DonnyFL Shogun, for instance. I assume that's what those slots are for, and a few other brands have something similar. I would think such a design would help a little with accuracy.
# 2: The big one. The one nobody has mentioned: Frequency of the noise. (Pitch)
It's fairly well accepted that a short-term noise of lower pitch but equal volume will appear lower in volume. (For several reasons.)
Before I decided on a Shogun for my bare barrel, I considered just adding a shorter silencer to my existing Hatsan QE shroud. (With an Ebay aftermarket baffle, which would be great to see included in any future tests.) Still mainly looking at DonnyFL, for no major reason other than their basic good reputation, I was puzzled by the difference between their Sumo and the Ronin. The Ronin is 2" x 6.5" and the Shogun is 1.6" x 8", so approximately the same volume. (I don't know how to calculate that)
So I found a test on da' yootoob, with both of these mounted directly on an FX Crown barrel. In this test, they were the exact same volume, but the Shogun was slightly lower in pitch and definitely less noticeable. I actually expected the larger diameter Ronin to be lower in pitch, but nope. Additionally, The DonnyFL tech had already recommended the Shogun for my application, so I went for it.
I wonder if this has to do with your earlier point about "open internal structures?" I don't know how these are constructed, but maybe that is the case with a 2" diameter vs the 1.6"
=====================================================
Final thought:
My ported .25 Flashpup currently has the original QE shroud, but with an after market baffle from Ebay.
It's the $40, blue, “10-Stage Vented Baffle for Hatsan Air Rifles” It uses a conical monocore construction, and is VERY quiet. Not "only hear the hammer" quiet, which is why I just ordered the Shogun, but pretty close.
It would be fantastic if you could include that unit in any future test.
-
You know what would be REALLY interesting?
Record all the shots, then run them through a digital FFT analysis. (Easy to do with any consumer DAW, like Protools, etc.)
This shows the amplitude across the full frequency range, kind of like looking at a relief map of a mountain range.
-
You know what would be REALLY interesting?
Record all the shots, then run them through a digital FFT analysis. (Easy to do with any consumer DAW, like Protools, etc.)
This shows the amplitude across the full frequency range, kind of like looking at a relief map of a mountain range.
Hi Allan, you may not realize this, but each test involves a lot of planning and equipment. I do it the way it suits me to find out my own results that I seek in particular.
If you seek to develop amplitude wave form measurements to test for specific Other results, you are welcome to invest the thousands of dollars as I did, and test multiple silencers as I did. Feel free to buy specific airguns too, to test specific configs like the internal baffles you refer to.
Again, I am set up to test silencers in my own specific way to fit my own specific needs, and you are welcome to come along for the ride.
;) ;) ;)
-
You know what would be REALLY interesting?
Record all the shots, then run them through a digital FFT analysis. (Easy to do with any consumer DAW, like Protools, etc.)
This shows the amplitude across the full frequency range, kind of like looking at a relief map of a mountain range.
Something like this?
(https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/MGalleryItem.php?id=7796)
That is just two shroud configurations in addition to bare barrel and background noise. I was testing in a field in late summer and the crickets were very busy. You can see their contribution near about 5000 and 6500 Hz, though of course they didn't mess up any shooting sound measurements.
Note that the shroud, though effective doesn't seem to really cut down the stuff above 18kHz. Adding the can did. (I am kicking myself for not testing the can by itself, but next time...). The can by the way is a huge "solvent filter" with the filter still in it! But then again, notice that the can didn't remove (or rather, perhaps added some) at frequencies around 5500, 7500, 11000, and 17000 Hz. Those frequencies are suspiciously related, so I can't rule out aliasing of very high frequencies vs true sounds and harmonics at those frequencies. Was the system essentially whistling?
What is really interesting is to play the audio back at about one third speed. That exaggerates the tonal differences between them.
The other thing that you see is a steep drop off at 20 kHz. That is from the USB microphone, which had a built in cutoff at that frequency. What we don't know is what happened above this frequency. Do sound levels change out there? Is the response at any ultrasonic frequencies actually made worse? (Is my LDC a huge dog whistle?) Is the game affected or able to sense this? Probably not from what I've seen, but in the months since that test was done I have obtained a microphone that is good to 40kHz and I intend to repeat this test.
I just remembered that I created a "video" of the playback of the audio at normal and reduced speeds. Give this a whirl (get your headphones on and turn it up until you can start to hear the crickets when the playback starts...):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1ishPFD9m8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1ishPFD9m8)
Anyway, I'll second Charlie's comment about what it takes to set up a test like this, or more specifically, to get the audio comparisons. I set up a laptop and microphone and recorded everything in Audacity. But everything had to be recorded in one sitting--it would be difficult to guarantee an identical set up for a repeat test. After that is just some processing and cleaning up, but if I want single number dB ratings, I can do more work in a spreadsheet to convert the data in the graph above into an A-weighted dB value.
But even then, I only have comparisons, not any absolute measurement, without a calibration standard. These sounds are what the microphone picked up about 20 yards away and somewhat off axis, though in front of the gun. If I were to move the microphone, I would get different results as I move through the "radiation" lobes from my source, the muzzle (an interesting test in itself, by the way).
-
More important data:
I recently purchased a DonnyFl Shogun (1.6" x 8") for my ported .25 Flashpup.
I had been using the QE shroud, but with an aftermarket 10-stage baffle. That system is pretty good, but still allows for a small bit of "thump". That thump is at a very low pitch, so it's quite neighbor-friendly, but definitely not silent. I was hoping to only hear the hammer strike, so I went for the Shogun.
When I first put the Shogun on my plain barrel, I was quite disappointed. It actually seemed LOUDER than before. After recording both ways, I realized that the Donny was doing a better job of killing the air noise, but there was a very noticeable, high-pitch ring. I did everything I could to dampen the barrel, but that ring didn't go away.
Finally I realized the problem: It's the Shogun itself causing that ring! The aluminum body goes off like a bell. Grabbing it with my hand (especially at the muzzle end) causes all the ring to go away.
-----------------------------
My solution was to wrap the Shogun in 2 layers of gaffer's tape. This doesn't completely kill the ring, but it comes very close.
IMO, all moderators should be made out of something that's acoustically inert, like high-density plastic or CF.
-
Finally I realized the problem: It's the Shogun itself causing that ring! The aluminum body goes off like a bell.
IMO, all moderators should be made out of something that's acoustically inert, like high-density plastic or CF.
Yes, but an aluminum body tube does a number of valuable things:
It keeps the "inlet" and "outlet" concentric and aligned;
It is able to resist muzzle pressure of more powerful PCPs; and survive a long time with repeated use;
It creates an impression of quality due to the above, that justifies the price-point.
Rather than use a weaker plastic tube, or more expensive CF outer tube, aluminum tubes just need to be lined with a viscoelastic damping material to reduce that ping. Such material can easily be applied to the outside, but that hides the nice anodized aluminum. Thus, the "ring" damper material needs to be applied as an "internal sleeve"; and Bob's your uncle, as they say on the other side of the pond.
One way for DonnyFL to achieve that cheaply and elegantly would be to have an O-ring contact the aluminum tube ID at each baffle wall OD, rather than just at the two ends.
-
I am very new to air guns tho a long time powder burner. I work in healthcare so my free time is literally nonexistent for the time being and all I have is a bit of time for plinking in my backyard every now and again. This topic is of interest and on point since we don't want our neighbors to call the sheriff....In any case, I don't have the knowledge to contribute to the thread other than a heartfelt THANK YOU to @mrbulk and the other contributors for their generous sharing of information, the time they put in collecting this data and generally being such nice folks.
Stay safe, stay healthy
Cheers,
brewbear
-
Finally I realized the problem: It's the Shogun itself causing that ring! The aluminum body goes off like a bell.
IMO, all moderators should be made out of something that's acoustically inert, like high-density plastic or CF.
Yes, but an aluminum body tube does a number of valuable things:
It keeps the "inlet" and "outlet" concentric and aligned;
It is able to resist muzzle pressure of more powerful PCPs; and survive a long time with repeated use;
It creates an impression of quality due to the above, that justifies the price-point.
Rather than use a weaker plastic tube, or more expensive CF outer tube, aluminum tubes just need to be lined with a viscoelastic damping material to reduce that ping. Such material can easily be applied to the outside, but that hides the nice anodized aluminum. Thus, the "ring" damper material needs to be applied as an "internal sleeve"; and Bob's your uncle, as they say on the other side of the pond.
One way for DonnyFL to achieve that cheaply and elegantly would be to have an O-ring contact the aluminum tube ID at each baffle wall OD, rather than just at the two ends.
-
I am very new to air guns tho a long time powder burner. I work in healthcare so my free time is literally nonexistent for the time being and all I have is a bit of time for plinking in my backyard every now and again. This topic is of interest and on point since we don't want our neighbors to call the sheriff....In any case, I don't have the knowledge to contribute to the thread other than a heartfelt THANK YOU to @mrbulk and the other contributors for their generous sharing of information, the time they put in collecting this data and generally being such nice folks.
Stay safe, stay healthy
Cheers,
brewbear
Thanks Ted!
-
Yeah! I just received my AUO, some beautiful machining work done on it. Also don't recall if it was mentioned but all the parts appear to be anodized Vs. simply painting, very nice touch. To be perfectly frank, having seen the guts of many LDC, I'm curious to see how this seemingly simple 3D printed core does compared to some others, and how it holds up. My intent is to work this LDC hard, starting with around 20fpe and working my way up through 50+ and see what 'shakes out' (pun intended). I'm glad I pulled the trigger on buying one of the last of these LDC, the quality is outstanding (even at twice the price) and should easily last a lifetime. Should the core become damaged for any reason, it's easily replace, or easily upgraded should a V2 version become available some day as technology changes. ;)
Crazy busy with 'real work' and family right now, so 'hobby time' is at an all time low, but when I get a chance to do some testing I'll try to post the results.
M
-
Yeah! I just received my AUO, some beautiful machining work done on it. Also don't recall if it was mentioned but all the parts appear to be anodized Vs. simply painting, very nice touch. To be perfectly frank, having seen the guts of many LDC, I'm curious to see how this seemingly simple 3D printed core does compared to some others, and how it holds up. My intent is to work this LDC hard, starting with around 20fpe and working my way up through 50+ and see what 'shakes out' (pun intended). I'm glad I pulled the trigger on buying one of the last of these LDC, the quality is outstanding (even at twice the price) and should easily last a lifetime. Should the core become damaged for any reason, it's easily replace, or easily upgraded should a V2 version become available some day as technology changes. ;)
Crazy busy with 'real work' and family right now, so 'hobby time' is at an all time low, but when I get a chance to do some testing I'll try to post the results.
M
-
Thanks for the time and effort you put into the test. I'm outfitting a new gun and was thinking about a different moderator than my default setting of the STO Falx. I chose the Huma 40 standard.
-
Thanks for the time and effort you put into the test. I'm outfitting a new gun and was thinking about a different moderator than my default setting of the STO Falx. I chose the Huma 40 standard.
One of those that are usually at or near the top of most every sound comparison so far. And they're "adjustable" for length. ;)
-
I have a Huma MOD40, and love how it performs, and the flexibility. The STO Falx high flow version I have was always pretty good, but not as good as the Huma. However, that STO is a different moderator on a shrouded gun it seems. It actually appears to be slightly quieter than the Huma on my Maverick :o The tone is definitely better to my ears. I don't know how much difference there would be with a standard flow version, but I'm pretty surprised by how well it performs on my Maverick. Just goes to show, that what works well on one gun, may work differently on another.
-
I have a Huma MOD40, and love how it performs, and the flexibility. The STO Falx high flow version I have was always pretty good, but not as good as the Huma. However, that STO is a different moderator on a shrouded gun it seems. It actually appears to be slightly quieter than the Huma on my Maverick :o The tone is definitely better to my ears. I don't know how much difference there would be with a standard flow version, but I'm pretty surprised by how well it performs on my Maverick. Just goes to show, that what works well on one gun, may work differently on another.
Hey Donny I absolutely agree about such phenomena, it seem when the LDCs all start getting down around the same low-ish dBs in loudness, then tonality becomes important, especially when judged by the highly subjective human ear and through differently configured airguns.
-
Charlie,
I hope posting more detail about the Huma won't be out of place here:
www.airgunnation.com/topic/huma-silencers-short-review/ (http://www.airgunnation.com/topic/huma-silencers-short-review/)
I would like to see this video comparison test repeated, as proof that the velocity reduction and variability conclusions were correct. That said, I think that combining the DonnyFL airstrippers with (less) soft fill of the Huma might be the best of both worlds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQu5IeWL_3g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQu5IeWL_3g)
-
..... That said, I think that combining the DonnyFL airstrippers with (less) soft fill of the Huma might be the best of both worlds:
It should be pointed out that the HUMA is abut the same diameter as the Sumo, but slightly more than an inch longer. So internal construction might not be the main difference.
But this comparison does raise a question of how many internal chambers is optimal. I'll leave it there, since we're not suppose to discuss construction details on this forum.
note: I have no dog in this fight, just trying to understand things......
-
Charlie,
I hope posting more detail about the Huma won't be out of place here:
www.airgunnation.com/topic/huma-silencers-short-review/ (http://www.airgunnation.com/topic/huma-silencers-short-review/)
I would like to see this video comparison test repeated, as proof that the velocity reduction and variability conclusions were correct. That said, I think that combining the DonnyFL airstrippers with (less) soft fill of the Huma might be the best of both worlds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQu5IeWL_3g (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQu5IeWL_3g)
Yes I saw that video last year, I was unable to draw as many conclusions from it due to the variables such as using a .30 cal vs what I usually shoot (.22); there was a shroud on the test gun (which was extended for the test vs. retracted) which in past testing has shown both positive and negative results depending on the individual combinations of the gun, its barrel vs shroud, the silencer type and the various test parameters utilized and finally, Humas in general have lately been built with a Larger pellet path diameter due to pellet clipping issues, which was referenced in another thread here on GTA that I will need to look for if further details are needed. But the end result is that the Huma sound output and/or signature was affected due to this diameter change.
As for the propriety of showing the internals of any silencers I leave that up to the moderators since the photos are actually from another site and not ours.
In a past test I witnessed POI shifts - at times drastic - from the Huma and a few other LDCs due to assembly/reassembly of their separate LDC sections.
Thanks for the references Sub.
-
This thread keeps supplying food for thought and discussion —
and of course excuses for more money to spend, and more time to spend on modding.
Food, money, and time — I like all of those in bountiful amounts...! 😄
Charlie, thanks for all that you've done here at GTA! 👍🏼😊
Matthias
-
This thread keeps supplying food for thought and discussion —
and of course excuses for more money to spend, and more time to spend on modding.
Food, money, and time — I like all of those in bountiful amounts...! 😄
Charlie, thanks for all that you've done here at GTA! 👍🏼😊
Matthias
Thanks Matthias I aim to be the most successful enabler — of LDCs!
Did you get your pkg from the States yet?
-
Charlie, 😊
I might have the opportunity to travel to the US in June. 😄👍🏼
In Peru it will be 2022 when the govmt. will get to my age group for corona vaccinations.... 🙄 People are dying left and right here. Just this morning we took two 80 pound oxygen cylinders to a lady from church, maybe 35y old — healthwise she's got already 3 strikes against her, and corona could effortlessly do the rests....
Medical attention for say 60% of the people in Peru is right between lousy and non-existent.
So, yeah, I need to look into vaccination options....
Now on the lighter side: ;)
Hopefully I can stock up on ammo and a China pump on my trip, my pump has done well, but if it breaks, I'm done shooting for months/half a year until I can get a new one to Peru....
I'm toying with the idea of getting a couple of souvenirs from my US trip....▪Besides the pkg (😄)....
▪A Tactacam, used, for through-the-scope filming and on-the-cellphone-screen aiming and shot-evaluation.
▪A PP750 .22cal, used.
▪A Discovery or Vector 3-12x44 Scope (Discovery: either the HD or the VT-3 model; or Vector Veyron model).
Well, I had the talk with my wife the evening. And her excitement concerning all or any of these purchases was as far removed from "enthusiastic endorsal" as the West Coast if from the East Coast. "You know that we have to pay for college...."
When she is right, she is.
Usually.Always.
😄
Matthias
PS: In case any of you have info who's selling one of the above items, let me know. She didn't say flat out NO, so if the price is right! 😊 👍🏼
-
Charlie, 😊
I might have the opportunity to travel to the US in June. 😄👍🏼
Coolio!
In Peru it will be 2022 when the govmt. will get to my age group for corona vaccinations.... 🙄 People are dying left and right here. Just this morning we took two 80 pound oxygen cylinders to a lady from church, maybe 35y old — healthwise she's got already 3 strikes against her, and corona could effortlessly do the rests....
What a bummer, both for your church friend and for your government's slow vaxxing actions...although I do understand it's not only a matter of logistics but of national finances as well...funny how the U.S. can inoculate most of our people already and in my state they are even BEGGING for people to show up to be vaccinated due to oversupply! Sad...
Medical attention for say 60% of the people in Peru is right between lousy and non-existent.
So, yeah, I need to look into vaccination options....
Now on the lighter side: ;)
Hopefully I can stock up on ammo and a China pump on my trip, my pump has done well, but if it breaks, I'm done shooting for months/half a year until I can get a new one to Peru....
I'm toying with the idea of getting a couple of souvenirs from my US trip....▪Besides the pkg (😄)....
▪A Tactacam, used, for through-the-scope filming and on-the-cellphone-screen aiming and shot-evaluation.
▪A PP750 .22cal, used.
▪A Discovery or Vector 3-12x44 Scope (Discovery: either the HD or the VT-3 model; or Vector Veyron model).
Well, I had the talk with my wife the evening. And her excitement concerning all or any of these purchases was as far removed from "enthusiastic endorsal" as the West Coast if from the East Coast. "You know that we have to pay for college...."
When she is right, she is.
Usually.Always.
😄
Matthias
PS: In case any of you have info who's selling one of the above items, let me know. She didn't say flat out NO, so if the price is right! 😊 👍🏼
Best of luck on finding these items Matthias, at least you have an LDC waiting... ;)
-
Best of luck on finding these items Matthias, at least you have an LDC waiting... ;)
Yeah, Charlie, I'm happy about that!! 😄
Just to clarify the abbreviation you used there:
LDC =
BarreL Mounted Joy-Increasing Neighbors-Tricking Shot Noise ReDuCer
Matthias
-
Just to clarify the abbreviation you used there:
LDC =
BarreL Mounted Joy-Increasing Neighbors-Tricking Shot Noise ReDuCer
-
Being a backyard shooter most of the time, this is a very interesting topic. Thank you for all of your work in this area.
The more I get into pcp rifles the more fun I have playing with these types of things. Always looking for ways to improve my rifle.
Still learning how to tune my rifle for best results. Never thought I would have this much fun with a pellet rifle. I am hooked.
-
Being a backyard shooter most of the time, this is a very interesting topic. Thank you for all of your work in this area.
The more I get into pcp rifles the more fun I have playing with these types of things. Always looking for ways to improve my rifle.
Still learning how to tune my rifle for best results. Never thought I would have this much fun with a pellet rifle. I am hooked.
Thanks for posting Jerry, and welcome to the ever-more-slippery, deep, dark, rabbit hole that is airgunning - hehe... ;D
-
Hmmm, here we go...I wonder if this will splash over to our PCP (and other airgun) side of things...
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/texas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20210528_FridayDigest_332gi&utm_campaign=%2Fdigest%2Ftexas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans%2F&fbclid=IwAR2ANo0zhnGOpfBdlKI7077TQBuVLGtrSvhhGLGVxnPzLrysD3NFuB9NZgk (https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/texas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20210528_FridayDigest_332gi&utm_campaign=%2Fdigest%2Ftexas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans%2F&fbclid=IwAR2ANo0zhnGOpfBdlKI7077TQBuVLGtrSvhhGLGVxnPzLrysD3NFuB9NZgk)
-
Hmmm, here we go...I wonder if this will splash over to our PCP (and other airgun) side of things...
https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/texas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20210528_FridayDigest_332gi&utm_campaign=%2Fdigest%2Ftexas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans%2F&fbclid=IwAR2ANo0zhnGOpfBdlKI7077TQBuVLGtrSvhhGLGVxnPzLrysD3NFuB9NZgk (https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/texas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20210528_FridayDigest_332gi&utm_campaign=%2Fdigest%2Ftexas-passes-bill-to-remove-nfa-suppressor-requirements-for-made-in-texas-cans%2F&fbclid=IwAR2ANo0zhnGOpfBdlKI7077TQBuVLGtrSvhhGLGVxnPzLrysD3NFuB9NZgk)
New Mexico is next!
;D
-
New Mexico is next!
;D
Okay Mr. Rick we come visit one day... :D
-
I have the Huma standard 30mm 4 section moderator in .25 for my .22 PRod. Works pretty well. Really quiets my upgraded Gauntlet .177 with short shroud. I like the modularity of the different sections so if I have a lower power factor airgun, I can shorten the can.
-
I have the Huma standard 30mm 4 section moderator in .25 for my .22 PRod. Works pretty well. Really quiets my upgraded Gauntlet .177 with short shroud. I like the modularity of the different sections so if I have a lower power factor airgun, I can shorten the can.
I too like the construction quality of the Humas, as well as the separate component sections of their design.
-
Great and very thorough comparison.
As expected the most expensive ones (looking at the ridiculously expensive DonnyFl ones) are not necessarily the best.
I have made my own silencers many times since they cost a few dollars and work almost as well as the expensive ($100+) ones.
-
Charlie, have you toyed with getting your hands on the Huma MOD50 yet?
-
Great and very thorough comparison.
As expected the most expensive ones (looking at the ridiculously expensive DonnyFl ones) are not necessarily the best.
I have made my own silencers many times since they cost a few dollars and work almost as well as the expensive ($100+) ones.
Thanks Nick. I too believe there is a threshold of diminishing returns at a certain point. :D
-
Charlie, have you toyed with getting your hands on the Huma MOD50 yet?
Whoa, they make a 50mm? I am finishing up a round of tests already and hope to compare them here soon. But would like to look at the Huma 50 for maybe another comparo later, thanks Donny. 8)
-
¡¿Huma silencer with 50mm diameter?! WHAT?!? :o I NEED ONE!
For those of us that want to silence our guns without adding too much length — "THIS IS THE WAY" (yes, I do trust the Mandalorians when they tell us that — just looking at their advanced weapons' technology...)
THE WAY being larger diameter silencers with shorter OAL, that is. And so far, only DonnyFL offers 50mm diameter silencers:
● Ronin (6.3" = 15.9cm long)
● Emperor V2 (10" = 25.4cm long)
🔶 Now, if Huma offered a 50mm but shorter than those monsters, that would be very interesting for bullpups and pistols.... 🤔
🔶 And maybe Huma could spruce up the design a bit for the amount of $$ they're charging.
Because in the looks department DonnyFL, 0DB, Ramus, Hugget, and Weihrauch (2020 models) leave Huma in the lead dust they collect.... 😊
Matthias
-
Here ya go:
https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard) (https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard))
It appears the standard MOD50 is longer than the standard MOD40, fwiw. It appears to be offered and in .25 at the smallest, not that it really matters. I use the same moderator on my Maverick for all calibers up to .30. I imagine that would put quite a hush on something just the same.
The Huma doesn't win any looks contests, but none of the others offer the Huma's flexibility either. Personally, looks are pretty low on my moderator importance list, because odds are good it will end up with camo, lol. No seriously, my main looks concerns are that it isn't shiny. After that, I don't care as long as it works :)
Matthias, I imagine you could make that Huma pretty short, just by removing a section or two.
Oddly enough, I'm still using that STO Falx high flow on my Maverick. I just can't get over how well that little dude works on a shrouded gun. I guess that helps the "gas diode" work like it should? I use it up to 130 fpe in .30, and up to 80+fpe in .22, and it still does the job surprisingly well. The short-ish length/size combined with effectiveness is why it stays with that gun. That isn't to take away from the very effective Huma. I've grown to prefer the lower tone of the STO on the Maverick, and it is giving up very little in sound level with a much longer Huma. Now, on my bare barreled guns, the Huma almost always wins no matter what I compare it to.
-
Here ya go:
https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard) (https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard))
It appears the standard MOD50 is longer than the standard MOD40, fwiw. It appears to be offered and in .25 at the smallest, not that it really matters. I use the same moderator on my Maverick for all calibers up to .30. I imagine that would put quite a hush on something just the same.
The Huma doesn't win any looks contests, but none of the others offer the Huma's flexibility either. Personally, looks are pretty low on my moderator importance list, because odds are good it will end up with camo, lol. No seriously, my main looks concerns are that it isn't shiny. After that, I don't care as long as it works :)
Matthias, I imagine you could make that Huma pretty short, just by removing a section or two.
Oddly enough, I'm still using that STO Falx high flow on my Maverick. I just can't get over how well that little dude works on a shrouded gun. I guess that helps the "gas diode" work like it should? I use it up to 130 fpe in .30, and up to 80+fpe in .22, and it still does the job surprisingly well. The short-ish length/size combined with effectiveness is why it stays with that gun. That isn't to take away from the very effective Huma. I've grown to prefer the lower tone of the STO on the Maverick, and it is giving up very little in sound level with a much longer Huma. Now, on my bare barreled guns, the Huma almost always wins no matter what I compare it to.
Thanks for the link. And yes I agree, my own (medium-flow) Falx does perform differently between bare- and shrouded-barrel guns. Some of the others do as well.
-
¡¿Huma silencer with 50mm diameter?! WHAT?!? :o I NEED ONE!
For those of us that want to silence our guns without adding too much length — "THIS IS THE WAY" (yes, I do trust the Mandalorians when they tell us that — just looking at their advanced weapons' technology...)
THE WAY being larger diameter silencers with shorter OAL, that is. And so far, only DonnyFL offers 50mm diameter silencers:
● Ronin (6.3" = 15.9cm long)
● Emperor V2 (10" = 25.4cm long)
🔶 Now, if Huma offered a 50mm but shorter than those monsters, that would be very interesting for bullpups and pistols.... 🤔
🔶 And maybe Huma could spruce up the design a bit for the amount of $$ they're charging.
Because in the looks department DonnyFL, 0DB, Ramus, Hugget, and Weihrauch (2020 models) leave Huma in the lead dust they collect.... 😊
Matthias
The thing I do like most about the Huma units is that they can be mixed and matched to length by just removing a section (or two). 8)
-
Charlie, have you toyed with getting your hands on the Huma MOD50 yet?
Hmmm, just checked prices on that HUMA link but testing one may now depend on affording one - at $261+ not sure it is in the cards at this moment... :(
(I have other guns I would still like to buy so - certain priorities may get in the way, ha ha)...
-
Wish GEO still sold his moderator. I ham fisted the long one I bought and broke it.
-
Here ya go:
https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard) (https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard))
As usual, HUMA's advertisement doesn't explain the fine details very well. ;D :o
I assume the baffles are actually add-on external modules, yes? So then how short can this be, and how long with all baffles installed?
The HUMA spec says it about 8.7" long. Surely that's not the shortest?
For comparison, the Donny Ronin is the same diameter, but 6.25" long. (And "only" $185)
-
Here ya go:
https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard) (https://www.huma-air.com/Modular-Air-Moderator-MOD50-4/0-(Standard))
As usual, HUMA's advertisement doesn't explain the fine details very well. ;D :o
I assume the baffles are actually add-on external modules, yes? So then how short can this be, and how long with all baffles installed?
The HUMA spec says it about 8.7" long. Surely that's not the shortest?
For comparison, the Donny Ronin is the same diameter, but 6.25" long. (And "only" $185)
Yeah I think the length adverts can be a bit arbitrary since they do sell single units as well, at least with their 30 and 40mm versions so maybe these 50mm units might also be.
I guess they're still new enough that the U.S. vendor I bought my 40 from last year does not advertise them on their site yet.🤷🏻♂️
-
Wish GEO still sold his moderator. I ham fisted the long one I bought and broke it.
I’ll be selling my set of Geo’s after this last upcoming test, as well as all the other thousands of dollars of LDCs as there is no sense in continuing to test, because it has become apparent to me that most all mainstream-design silencing units can get down to within a handful of dB between one another, at least objectively according to the several thousand metered readings I’ve taken by now across a variety of gun types and barrels/shrouds. The variances can mostly be attributed to volume differences, not counting the few extremes.
Any new stuff in the future can be compared to whatever unit/s are laying around and then, by reverse extrapolation (thank you, Merriam-Webster online) compare that result to prior tests of the other silencers.
So personal selection might get more down to looks, or durability, or a specific “type” of sound the shooter prefers, or even just a fascination with a particular internal suppression design, even though it objectively and/or empirically quiets the gun no less than any other design.
-
Charlie, have you toyed with getting your hands on the Huma MOD50 yet?
Hmmm, just checked prices on that HUMA link but testing one may now depend on affording one - at $261+ not sure it is in the cards at this moment... :(
(I have other guns I would still like to buy so - certain priorities may get in the way, ha ha)...
I'm with ya on that! I may try and get my hands on one, when Trenier starts having them in stock.
-
Hey Charlie, I decided to give the STO Sarissa "high flow" a testing out. I guess it's safe to say it works pretty well, lol! It's kinda big, but man that sucker is quiet.. Pay no mind to those groups, I was testing some ammo at different speeds, and was shooting groups on top of groups to save target stickers.. This was at 30 yards, and that bird landed there with the gun shooting around 60 fpe in .22 :o
-
That bird landed there with the gun shooting around 60 fpe. :o
(https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=182738.0;attach=365973;image)
A situation loke this one must have given birth to the term BIRD BRAIN.
Interestingly, the term can be applied to both birds and humans.
🤦🏻♂️ I can remember a couple of situations where I should have been the worthy recipient of this term.
Like the one where I shot a window frame because the line of sight and the pellet's trajectory are grossly mismatched close to the muzzle.
I did that once.
And once more....
And..., well, there are 4 (four) pellet holes in that particular window frame.
🤦🏻♂️ Matthias
-
Hey Charlie, I decided to give the STO Sarissa "high flow" a testing out. I guess it's safe to say it works pretty well, lol! It's kinda big, but man that sucker is quiet.. Pay no mind to those groups, I was testing some ammo at different speeds, and was shooting groups on top of groups to save target stickers.. This was at 30 yards, and that bird landed there with the gun shooting around 60 fpe in .22 :o
The way I've been shooting lately in these past (and continuing) weeks of straight hundred-teen temps, those groups look pretty dang good Donny! And at 60fpe? No wonder you needed the Sarissa!
Were you able to get a meter on it somehow? I only have the medium-flow Falx here...although in tests it is always among those in the quietest group so the Sarisaa must have it beat handily. 8)
-
Like the one where I shot a window frame because the line of sight and the pellet's trajectory are grossly mismatched close to the muzzle.
I did that once.
And once more....
And..., well, there are 4 (four) pellet holes in that particular window frame.
🤦🏻♂️ Matthias
Hey Matthias when you replace that frame you should ... keep it and "frame" it! ;D
(I actually did that once myself, but only because we Moved did I not have the chance to do it again!)
-
I will add, that no birds were harmed during my testing. Those little birds eat a lot of bugs, and are pretty good to have around.
Charlie, the gun doesn't really start to bark until I get the power in the 75-80+ fpe range with .22, haha. I just went back over my settings, I was shooting 31.2 grain slugs around 975, so about 65 fpe. The Sarissa handles it with no problem though. Actually it is still pretty back yard friendly with the Falx high flow at 65 fpe. The real test will be in .30 in the 120-130 fpe range!
Those groups aren't my best shooting for 30 yards, but I was shooting fast and changing speeds a lot on that target. These superior heavy liners and slugs are laser accurate, and perfectly capable of same hole groups at that range ;) The shooter is another story though, lol!
-
Hey Charle, great work with the silencers! Thanks for your efforts. Could you post a link to the test you did with the Avenger please? Thanks.
-
Hey Charle, great work with the silencers! Thanks for your efforts. Could you post a link to the test you did with the Avenger please? Thanks.
Thanks Dave:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=180075.0 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=180075.0)
-
Moved it here, as it is not a serious contribution to Charlie's thread:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=190023.msg156195167#msg156195167 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=190023.msg156195167#msg156195167)
-
Thank you mrbulk !!!
-
I'm wondering what makes the 1.22" diameter Huma so bloody efficient.
I'd love to have a highly efficient unit at that diameter. I'm using a Shogun right now on my raw-barreled, highly ported .25 Flashpup. It does a good job, but it REALLY screams "silencer." This is sort of a problem here in NY State, since we're not allowed to hunt with them attached.
I'm thinking that a 1.22" unit could have a plastic or CF tube epoxied to the back of it, so as to look like a factory shroud when attached. That might get me past any game warden or cop that actually decided to check me out. - I sort of did this with the 1.6" diameter Shogun, but it makes it look like some kind of assault weapon. lol....
I figure I could use the biggun' for yard pest removal, and the skinny one for hunting. (Where a few extra db's won't matter.)
It would also be REALLY interesting to see a head-to-head comparison between the DonnyFL Koi and the HUMA Standard, as they are just about the same dimensions.
-
Great comparison Charlie. Did you notice any effect on accuracy by any of them while testing? I am primarily interested in consistent accuracy more than noise. But quiet is nice too. Thank you for doing these tests.
-
Richard,
Charlie may be on walkabout - in case he does not reply.
From what I recall, most of his groups were similar in size between tested silencers; but some of groups moved at the same sight setting. Nothing unexpected, as the different added masses and lengths would change barrel droop and possibly harmonics. In other words, optimizing the rifle's tuning may be required for smallest groups with a given silencer.
-
I went from a $50 Hatsan silencer to a Dannyfl Sumo on my .25 sumatra, I have tried many different poower settings and pellet's and I have a consistently very high dispersion with the Sumo.
I am surprised because this silencer has a very good reputation and I will have to send it back to the store...
-
Alfred,
It could be that the Sumo is upsetting your particular air rifle's barrel harmonics. In effect acting as a tuned mass damper, that needs to be set before it provides a benefit.
Are you sure the Sumo is screwed onto your barrel tight enough to prevent it from drooping?
Have you checked that the Sumo is properly screwed shut, and that there is no felt material that has somehow gotten into the projectile path? There may be something that is easily fixed, if you take a look.
Have you looked inside the Sumo for evidence that the projectiles might be making contact at one or more of the baffle hole edges inside? You would be looking for light colored lead splashes or other visual indicators of such contact.
If there is no evidence of projectile contact (clipping), then the mass and length of the Sumo may just not suit your airgun. This would not reflect on how well it works with other airguns. Each is its own case.
-
Alfred,
you received suggestions from subscriber who writes some of the most thought-out posts on our forum.
Sound advice! 👍🏼
Hope you solve the problem. I have the Sumo in .25 and it's performing great: Kills to 50y and 60y.
Matthias
-
...different guns will produce different results with same silencer...ask me how I know...still on extended walkabout...byee!
-
My wife and I both tested positive for Covid and, during quarantine, I have too much time on my hands so I’ve been thinking…
Most PB bench rest rifles have an adjustable tuner on the muzzle of the barrel (unless they’re bull barrels) to adjust the barrel harmonics, depending on the speed and even the lot # of the ammunition. Since our airgun barrel walls are much thinner than the above, I would think that an adjustable tuner would be even more important. We often read about our members coming up with all sorts of homemade ways to accomplish the same thing. We adjust hammer spring, pellet speed, etc to accommodate the barrel, but why not tune the actual barrel to accommodate our other settings? I’m guessing that it would be too expensive.
P.S. I’m aware that pellets have speed limitations where they destabilize, but it would be nice to pick a pellet weight, adjust a muzzle tuner, and get optimized performance out of that pellet within those limitations. Just thinking! 🤷🏻♂️
-
Alfred,
It could be that the Sumo is upsetting your particular air rifle's barrel harmonics. In effect acting as a tuned mass damper, that needs to be set before it provides a benefit.
Are you sure the Sumo is screwed onto your barrel tight enough to prevent it from drooping?
Have you checked that the Sumo is properly screwed shut, and that there is no felt material that has somehow gotten into the projectile path? There may be something that is easily fixed, if you take a look.
Have you looked inside the Sumo for evidence that the projectiles might be making contact at one or more of the baffle hole edges inside? You would be looking for light colored lead splashes or other visual indicators of such contact.
If there is no evidence of projectile contact (clipping), then the mass and length of the Sumo may just not suit your airgun. This would not reflect on how well it works with other airguns. Each is its own case.
Thank you for your answer all,
I have checked the integrity of the silencer inside it has no damage or filings, everything is tight on the barrel.
I put you a picture of the grouping that I get with JSB Exact King 25.39 grain shoot at 900 fps at about 45 yards
first picture is the Sumo and the second is the Hatsan
-
Thanks Alfred
I see what you mean.
Are those 10 shot groups? Did you try to repeat the results - just in case there is another factor at play? Have you tried to see if this trend continues with other pellets?
If the Sumo seems to open groups generally beyond what you find acceptable, then asking the shop if you can return it would seem reasonable. They may be difficult about taking it back, if the Sumo does not have an obvious defect; or they might say "it looks like new; how would you like your money back?
There is another step you could take before you give up: Ask the owner of DonnyFL if he has any advice for you:
https://donnyfl.com/pages/contact (https://donnyfl.com/pages/contact)
You could contact Donny via the above link, and include the direct links to your posts (see below). Donny is a member of the GTA forum, so he should be able to see them: https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?action=profile;u=11303 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?action=profile;u=11303)
Here are the direct links to you posts about this (if it is not obvious how to get that):
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156266218#msg156266218 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156266218#msg156266218)
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156266430#msg156266430 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156266430#msg156266430)
-
Piggybacking on @Subscribers comment "It could be that the Sumo is upsetting your particular air rifle's barrel harmonics. In effect acting as a tuned mass damper, that needs to be set before it provides a benefit.", and having recently watched a new video from Giles, at 'AirgunGearShow, "Airgun Barrel Tuners - Does it Work?" (Video link below)
You could try using some shim washers between the Sumo and the barrel to see if that changes the barrel harmonics and your POI and groupings.
Just a thought, and not expensive either.
https://youtu.be/xf09L48517Y (https://youtu.be/xf09L48517Y)
EDIT: Spoiler Alert: Yes, they do.
-
Note, the term tuned mass damper typically describes and additional spring and mass system, not just the effect of adding mass to change the natural frequency of the barrel.
-
Here, the barrel is the spring.
Note, the term tuned mass damper typically describes and additional spring and mass system, not just the effect of adding mass to change the natural frequency of the barrel.
-
For a tuned mass damper to be added to an existing structure (barrel) one would need to add the extra mass and a separate spring on which the mass is suspended. If all you do is add a mass to the existing barrel, all you are doing is changing the frequency of the existing spring-mass system (the barrel stiffness and distributed mass). This frequency change can be effective in changing the spread on target. Tuned mass dampers take some analysis to be effective since you need to design in both the frequency and the location.
-
Stan,
In the sense of reducing building sway, you are absolutely correct with your terminology.
I might argue that slowing down the motion of a gun muzzle is a form of damping, and that if an added mass is used to tune barrel harmonics, then that is a form of tuned mass damper. This, in terms of tightening groups, by adding more or less mass to a gun muzzle, or shifting the "pendulum length" of a fixed mass, to shift the resonant frequency of the barrel, to better time projectile release, to a point where the muzzle is not moving very fast in any direction.
But, you are correct: Using the right words is important. Else, we might waste time arguing about terminology, rather than spending it to compare notes about the principles of physics, and their application to solve the problem at hand.
-
Now, I am going to heckle myself: The tuned mass dampers used to reduce wind induced sway in sky scrapers, utilize a number of hydraulic rams to accelerate the damper mass. This way, the rams can be computer controlled to minimize both the acceleration and displacement building occupants feel and might see.
There are no spring elements in such a system, other than the flexible building structure itself. A simple spring and mass would have a fixed natural frequency, and not be as versatile as using hydraulic rams, where the natural frequency of the entire system can be "broken", to damp out sway resonance most effectively.
In the sense of reducing building sway, you are absolutely correct with your terminology.
-
The Tuned Mass Damper term applies to a fairly specific technical approach that is passive in nature. Often is is combined with other damping approaches that may form a hybrid system. The Wiki description is fairly good.
-
Stan,
What is the state of the art in building sway damping now? Consider this a rhetorical question. Else we are not talking about LDC sound reduction, and general performance improvement/degradation - the point of this thread.
PS: My first job was at Gabriel Shock Absorber Company. I found ride and handling tuning fascinating. How to damp body movement, control transient tire loading and allow the wheels to move "freely" to follow the road...
-
I returned the silencer it was new, there was not much sound gain compared to the other much cheaper
-
I have a 2020 AEA HP SS (.22). I just wanted to say thanks to this ongoing evaluation and the discussion here, I bought a threaded shroud and adapter from SurvivalAirguns and a DonnyFL Sumo from ThePelletShop. Couldn't be happier with the sound and the accuracy. Thank you for doing this thread!
-
I found an old silencer comparison that I saved from the old BSAOG forum. Compares most of the commercially available silencers in UK few years back:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51884827993_f25a288651_c.jpg)
-
Cool! 👍🏼
I take it that the x-axis is time in ms? What is the y-axis?
Is there a link to see the test protocol and result data (cal., power, etc.)?
Matthias
-
I wish Geo was still selling the hunter. It was really quite but I had to take it out of the shroud to do something with the barrel and broke it. I never sanded it down like the instructions said to do so it was entirely my fault.
-
I take it that the x-axis is time in ms? What is the y-axis?
Matthias,
The way I read the chart is that the Y-axis is sound level, or relative attenuation; and the X-axis sound frequency. I say that because the peak reading with no silencer is the reference value at zero. Also, higher frequencies drop off faster than lower ones, and the bare barrel traces are the loudest.
I think the chart could be truncated from 20 kHz and up. 20 kHz is the highest frequency most people can detect until their mid twenties. My hearing cuts of at 13.5 kHz, meaning the sound level above that is largely irrelevant to me. So, I ignore data above that.
The chart suggest that the silencers tested were very similar in performance. Perhaps rescaling it to include only the suppressed sounds would highlight the differences more clearly. Then the fact that dB is a log scale, and that human perception is non-linear could be factored in.
-
I wish Geo was still selling the hunter. It was really quite but I had to take it out of the shroud to do something with the barrel and broke it. I never sanded it down like the instructions said to do so it was entirely my fault.
Shame… I wish he was still making them too. I could use a few more.
-
Wow, Peter, you know so much more about so many things than I do — cool! 👍🏼
Thanks for the explain.
I'm always on the lookout for comparative silencer tests that will give us a better idea which models (or which types/ volumes/ lengths) are likely to work best for our personal applications.
🔶 An aside:
Why does FX (and many other PCP manufacturers) make shrouds so THIN?!? That way they are (1) flimsy (flop around like a noodle, esp. with a 700mm barrel) — and to the point of this thread — (2) they can gobble up less air, especially with the enormous power that the increased plenums and other power-pixie-dust are now producing.... Did the mfctrs. test this thin shroud and saw no major improvement in sound supression with thicker shrouds? ❓
(3) Also, did I mention bigger diameter barrels/ shrouds look better (to me, at least). When Huma created the "Hornet" — their 2" dia. mega-monster silencer specifically fitted to the Impact and the Leshiy 2 — it seems like they felt the same. 😊
Matthias
-
Matthias,
I would never claim to know more than anyone else. I just have a particular approach towards making sense of things that is rather intense. I look for specific clues to help me identify the key that unlocks the rest of the data.
I can only speculate about the FX shrouds. You know that they are developing CF barrel stiffeners that replace their flimsy shrouds? These are used with large screw-on LDCs.
One reason to make the shroud "thin" is weight reduction. But the added weight of a larger thin wall tube may be worth it:
Now 1.5" may seem "fat" compared to 1". However, its weight increase is proportional, as in 1.5 times higher (for the same length); while its volume is 2.25 times higher (less barrel volume). And barrel outside volume is more significant with smaller shroud diameters. I could calculate this for specific barrel ODs, but am just trying to make a point in principle.
The increase in shroud stiffness should be about 8 times higher when comparing 38 mm against 25 mm with the same wall thickness.
At what shroud ID does the airgun look silly? That is a matter of opinion. The longer the barrel, the wider the shroud could be before looking odd. Now, in my opinion, having a fat LDC at the end of a slender barrel or shroud looks odd :)
A wider shroud with a more sophisticated air stripper would make a huge difference in overall performance. The larger the space between shroud ID and barrel OD, the easier it would be to make the stripper effective (and the whole system). Not only for sending air to the rear of the shroud, but in protecting the base of the projectile from wobble inducing muzzle blast. If you are interested, I will email you a recent design I did to illustrate a design intended to achieve both aims.
Often the question why design, manufacturing or material shortcuts appear to be taken, can be answered thus: To reduce costs, while achieving "good enough" results.
-
There is another consideration, Matthias
While increasing the OD of a shroud makes it stiffer along its length, eventually the shroud will lack stiffness across its diameter. This could make the shroud more susceptible to ringing like bell at an audible frequency after the shot; and dent if knocked or pushed against an edge or pointy object. This is, unless the wall thickness is increased (or wall depth is increased by swaging or pressing in fluting, for example. Flutes could be in the original extrusion, but the ends will need to be formed back to round for threaded fittings).
-
I take it that the x-axis is time in ms? What is the y-axis?
Matthias,
The way I read the chart is that the Y-axis is sound level, or relative attenuation; and the X-axis sound frequency. I say that because the peak reading with no silencer is the reference value at zero. Also, higher frequencies drop off faster than lower ones, and the bare barrel traces are the loudest.
I think the chart could be truncated from 20 kHz and up. 20 kHz is the highest frequency most people can detect until their mid twenties. My hearing cuts of at 13.5 kHz, meaning the sound level above that is largely irrelevant to me. So, I ignore data above that.
The chart suggest that the silencers tested were very similar in performance. Perhaps rescaling it to include only the suppressed sounds would highlight the differences more clearly. Then the fact that dB is a log scale, and that human perception is non-linear could be factored in.
You sir know your stuff, correct on all accounts. The lower the peak the better the silencer and measurements were taken up to 50kHz for hunters as quarry can hear high frequencies. Rancid Tom's modified Hogan was the best they measured and HW and Hugget were also very good. Here's the link to a thread that made me dig up that test: https://www.airgunforum.co.uk/community/index.php?threads/question-for-those-that-test-moderators.371991/page-2 (https://www.airgunforum.co.uk/community/index.php?threads/question-for-those-that-test-moderators.371991/page-2)
-
Thanks rkr,
Your point about animal hearing is an important one. I am so focused on not upsetting neighbors that I forgot about animals in the field.
How far does sound at 50 kHz travel? My feeling is not very far. Especially if there is vegetation. As long as at the expected range to quarry, the residual sound is lower than the level that would trigger them to run at that distance.
My theory is that prey animals are especially sensitive to the sound of a twig snapping, when it is stepped on by a predator. So are humans. So, the more "snappy" a gunshot sounds, the more attention it grabs. Other sounds that grab attention would be growls and grunts, although those are more to warn intruders off, or call for mates. A predator does not vocalize when it is stalking prey. It just lunges and bites, usually from behind.
Now, if you could make a silencer that converts gunshot sounds from a snap/pop to the mating call of your intended quarry, it might draw them in, rather than chase them off :)
-
I see that my questions were answered by your link, rkr. Should have read that first.
Interesting that a rubber sleeve cut ultrasonic noise from the shroud tube in half. I have advocated the application of vibration absorbing material such as that show below to shrouds and LDC, because the metal tube acts like a speaker: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01KZ5X7KO/ (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01KZ5X7KO/)
Below is a demo of the noise reduction seen when above material is applied to thin metal plate. Should work as well on metal tubes. (I suggest you reduce the volume setting before playing video):
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/S/vse-vms-transcoding-artifact-us-east-1-prod/v2/3255bca3-1dd6-53ab-bf75-a1b586df7ed6/ShortForm-Generic-480p-16-9-1409173089793-rpcbe5.mp4 (https://m.media-amazon.com/images/S/vse-vms-transcoding-artifact-us-east-1-prod/v2/3255bca3-1dd6-53ab-bf75-a1b586df7ed6/ShortForm-Generic-480p-16-9-1409173089793-rpcbe5.mp4)
-
I see that my questions were answered by your link, rkr. Should have read that first.
Interesting that a rubber sleeve cut ultrasonic noise from the shroud tube in half. I have advocated the application of vibration absorbing material such as that show below to shrouds and LDC, because the metal tube acts like a speaker: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01KZ5X7KO/ (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01KZ5X7KO/)
Below is a demo of the noise reduction seen when above material is applied to thin metal plate. Should work as well on metal tubes. (I suggest you reduce the volume setting before playing video):
One way of suppressing the higher frequency ping is to use elastic rust prevention spray on the outside of the silencer. Works well and looks quite OK:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/4039/35732909716_364faab54d_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WrAv9h)pup-final-2_zps07b31a0d (https://flic.kr/p/WrAv9h) by abbababbaccc (https://www.flickr.com/photos/11843711@N08/), on Flickr
-
Your point about animal hearing is an important one. I am so focused on not upsetting neighbors that I forgot about animals in the field.
Some data. https://acousticstoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/The-Evolution-of-Mammalian-Sound-Localization.pdf (https://acousticstoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/The-Evolution-of-Mammalian-Sound-Localization.pdf)
The problem with just looking at frequency is that, at least for humans, your ability to hear short duration sounds falls off as the duration drops below 200 millisec. An airgun sound is much shorter.
The second image shows a shot from my P17. Most of the higher amplitude is within the first 10 millisec
rkr, Thanks for the link. It mentioned another piece of sound software to play with. ;D
-
Thanks for the interesting info, Stan
Directional hearing is important, if it is going to trigger the flight reflex; else prey may run towards the predator, rather than away.
My observation is that the local cottontails freeze when they hear a noise. If the disturbance is over their threshold, the rabbits bolt, but only run about 20 feet before freezing again. I assume they are trying to create distance, but stop to listen. They want to know if the predator is following them, and can't hear properly when they are making noise while running. Also, running draws attention - many animals move in burst to avoid their motion being seen. Running is in effect announcing to predators that you are prey. This is why humans should not run from aggressive dogs (or lions).
The cottontails that visit my yard will let me approach within 15 feet before bolting. Some are habituated and allow me to get closer. What makes them dash out of my yard to over 50 yards away, is if I drag my shoe sole on the paving to produce a multi-spectrum "gggggk" sound. These silly critters think they are invisible of they don't move. Meanwhile, humans are also good at spotting form. Some better than others.
A airgun shot sound may be short, but it tends to echo, depending on what is near the source. Of course, the echo could confuse the location. My point is that the total sound duration and pattern are also important. As for sound frequency, a single sharp event (square wave) such as a shot produces a wide spectrum of sound frequencies from multiple sources: If you slap and oil drum with a length of two by four, you make the drum and wood ring at their natural frequencies. Since you struck one blow, there is no frequency to the event that cause the sound. However, if the event is repeated that makes it much easier to identify and locate.
If you watch a dog's ears and its attention, they trigger on sounds we can't hear, or think insignificant. Then listen actively for more clues as to what and where the disturbance is. We do this too, in that a single airgun shot may trigger our attention, but not be perceived as significant. It is when the person starts to actively listen that they are more sensitive to identifying and locating more shots, should there be any.
We recognize the sound of something like a spring air rifle, not just for its loudness (if close by), but for the cyclic nature of the cocking and shooting sounds at short intervals - if the person is target shooting or plinking, as opposed to hunting.
Likewise, if you live out in the country hearing gunshot may not be especially significant. When I hear them, I freeze to listen (unless I think that I am at risk). If there are more shots, and they all sound the same, then the person is shooting in a particular direction. If the person is shooting in random directions the sound changes. Then the risk of them shooting you accidentally goes up.
If I hear a snap followed by the pop of muzzle blast (with or without lingering echo), they are shooting towards me with something that is still supersonic when it passes by. That is a clear sign to find cover, even if you are not the intended target. People who have been shot at know the difference in sound between incoming and outgoing. Vets reading this may be nodding their heads.
-
Rick67 where please tell me! I have been reading for hours now trying to figure out where to buy that one. Why is it so hard to figure out. Everyone is talking about the suppressors and their results but poor ole me can't figure out how to find out this information. Just post it for us clueless old people.
-
Where? my god it's so hard to find information here. Where can I buy a A.U.O.?
-
Where can I buy a A.U.O.?
Perhaps if you PM the person posting about that device, they could inform you as to its availability. You may be out of luck:
they are down to their last 20 units or so with no plans to make any more.
-
At the risk of emphasizing the obvious; suppressing ultrasound so animals are not spooked by the shot, matters more for culling, shooting pests/vermin, and such occasions where there are no bag limits (or more than one animal per day).
-
Kern,
I don't know what airgun you want to suppress, but this recent thread may be useful to you:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=196584.msg156289805#msg156289805 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=196584.msg156289805#msg156289805)
Leading to this: $16 to $25 Airgun Suppressors
https://youtu.be/GKNnh8sWQuw?t=88 (https://youtu.be/GKNnh8sWQuw?t=88)
Sold here: https://buck-rail.com/product/air-venturi-avenger-suppressor/ (https://buck-rail.com/product/air-venturi-avenger-suppressor/)
Also see: https://buck-rail.com/blog/ (https://buck-rail.com/blog/)
-
For a tuned mass damper to be added to an existing structure (barrel) one would need to add the extra mass and a separate spring on which the mass is suspended. If all you do is add a mass to the existing barrel, all you are doing is changing the frequency of the existing spring-mass system (the barrel stiffness and distributed mass). This frequency change can be effective in changing the spread on target. Tuned mass dampers take some analysis to be effective since you need to design in both the frequency and the location.
i believe this is correct.
However, it's also probable that simply changing the overall frequency will help (or hurt) accuracy, at least to a small extent. The reason is the same as with room acoustics: Certain frequencies are reinforced / amplified whlie other frequencies are nulled because of the length of the room dimensions (or in this case, the length of the barrel) in conjunction with the wavelength of each frequency. So, adding a moderator changes both the resonant frequency of the barrel AND the effective length, at least somewhat. It should be noted, however, that when two objects which have different resonant frequencies (such as a steel barrel and an aluminum moderator) are mechanically joined, they tend to minimize each other's resonance. (This is an actual, known thing.) So, my guess is that MOST of the time, adding a moderator will help, more often than hurt
Still, if one gets negative results, one solution might be to add a carbon fiber sleeve to the barrel, compression-fit to the breech as the moderator is screwed on. (See the two recent, in-depth threads about this.)
-------------------------
Another very important note:
As I have mentioned before, my stock DonnyFL Shogun made a very noticeable pinging sound when I first put it on. I was practically stunned.
I didn't do any accuracy tests, sadly, but surely that was going to cause extra movement beside the extra noise. I simply wrapped the Shogun in duct tape, and the problem went away.
-
The point of my earlier post was not to discourage people from attempting to use mass to change the response of their barrel. It was just that the tuned mass damper terminology sends you into a different technique and Google results may be confusing.
I tried to do some accel based measurements at the tail end of the Titan thread https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=176445.msg156150612#msg156150612 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=176445.msg156150612#msg156150612) The results can be challenging to interpret and most people are much better off just using on target improvement as their guide.
-
I tried to do some accel based measurements at the tail end of the Titan thread https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=176445.msg156150612#msg156150612 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=176445.msg156150612#msg156150612) The results can be challenging to interpret and most people are much better off just using on target improvement as their guide.
Thanks for posting the link, Stan. Your timing with reminding me about that thread is perfect.
Your data and chart annotations seem easy enough to understand. Your work should help make sense of a POI shift with different pellet weights, shot from a springer. So I pointed to your post in this new thread: https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=196622.msg156290196#msg156290196 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=196622.msg156290196#msg156290196)
-
The problem with the testing in that Titan thread is that it is just a teaser of what is going on. It is a difficult problem to partition into simpler tests and results. I did get a second accel module so that may help. Need to think of some test configurations that would produce useful results.
-
Stan,
Any test data that helps GTA members better understand what is going on when they fire their airgun is appreciated.
Each one of us has an idea of the real value carried by a given data set. For me, a long time constant sound measurement device is not worth as much as the subjective opinion of the person doing the "test" (or preferably an unbiased witness). Some might even call such sound measurement devices "worthless" for LDC evaluation.
Certainly, if the person collecting the data is putting a lot of time and money into the rest of the hardware, they should not be using a hammer to drive screws. So, when Charlie was using "the wrong" sound meter type, rather than heckle him, I offered to buy him a "fast" peak hold meter, that I thought would increase the value of his results significantly. Not lab quality, but then my generosity tops out at $100. He got the message and bought his own.
I am not overly concerned about one sound meter reading 3 dB different from another (or about their absolute calibration, as long as they do not drift). Proving they rank different airgun and moderators in the same order; by the same spread. That said, seeing people casually place sound meters near a muzzle suggests they are unaware of the inverse square, sound to distance relationship. They used an "expensive" instrument, "so the data must be valuable".
I accept non-standard meter placement, as long as it is declared and consistent in a comparison test. Pyramyd Air seem to place their sound measurement instrument "near the muzzle". They don't seem to appreciate that the difference absolute sound levels, when measured casually somewhere between what looks like 18 to 24" from the muzzle, turns their data into gibberish. Never mind that the mic is sometimes a little ahead of the muzzle, and sometimes behind. Much less laughable to measure at 20 feet +- 1 foot. And not near the trap, else that is the dominant sound.
As I am more interested in not spooking people much further away than one meter, the standard protocol used to measure "hearing safe" suppressors on firearms is not the standard I insist on. I do insist on repeatable and reproduceable. And that requires a "test plan", however informal.
I assume that the module you would attach to an airgun to measure vibration would have very low mass, so as not to influence the result ("too much"). That said, one uses the equipment that is available to you. Even if attaching the test equipment, induces a shift in natural frequency; that may not null out the trends and dependencies you are attempting to capture and demonstrate. Please carry on.
-
The problem with the testing in that Titan thread is that it is just a teaser of what is going on.
Your standard may be too high. And I mean that in the best possible way.
Which reminds me of the old adage:
The relentless pursuit of perfection is the enemy of achieving good enough.
Or words to that effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good
-
Yeah, it may be worthwhile to start a couple of threads in the engineering gate on test methods and data expectations for both the noise and the barrel harmonics topics. Kick around what is possible given the constraints of a hobby.
-
I got one of Charles Wong moderators and very impressed with it performance, slightly beating out my beloved Huggett Snipe and at half the price too!
Thanks again
Dan
-
I got one of Charles Wong moderators and very impressed with it performance, slightly beating out my beloved Huggett Snipe and at half the price too!
Thanks again
Dan
I’ve not heard of Charles Wong moderators. Do you have a link to them?
-
I’ve not heard of Charles Wong moderators. Do you have a link to them?
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182312.msg156076642#msg156076642 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182312.msg156076642#msg156076642)
-
I’ve not heard of Charles Wong moderators. Do you have a link to them?
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182312.msg156076642#msg156076642 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182312.msg156076642#msg156076642)
I think he meant a link, as in how to obtain one.
-
I think he meant a link, as in how to obtain one.
Unfortunately Charlie is not making those anymore. If you PM Charlie (OP of this thread) he might know of a spare one somewhere. Or, someone reading this thread might know, and pipe up.
-
I think he meant a link, as in how to obtain one.
Unfortunately Charlie is not making those anymore. If you PM Charlie (OP of this thread) he might know of a spare one somewhere. Or, someone reading this thread might know, and pipe up.
They were available for a long time and for so cheap a price ($67 shipped) and yet people hesitated ;D
It is a very nice piece and the 1/2 threads are better than my Donny FL Tantos'.
-
Sorry for the confusion, quote from a PM from Charles, should clear it up
Thanks for the post! Especially about it being quiet like the Snipe.
Just to add one detail, I myself don’t actually construct those AUO silencers, it’s a couple of guys whose names prefer not to be mentioned that I try to help out.
I don’t mind being mentioned as having them available, I just don’t want ppl thinking I’m actually making the silencers.
Thanks again!
-
Sorry, Charlie
Correction: The guys Charlie knew are not making those LDCs anymore. Or, are they still in business?
-
Sorry, Charlie
Correction: The guys Charlie knew are not making those LDCs anymore. Or, are they still in business?
If so, I'd want a mini one this time ;D
-
I have a very simplistic way of thinking: When an unambiguous statement is made, it stands, until it is replaced by another unambiguous statement. I bolded the unambiguous part of Charlie's statement in the quote below.
My attribution to Charlie as the source was not because he made the LDCs, but because he was the contact person on the forum to obtain one.
Thanks sir Richard, truth is they are down to their last 20 units or so with no plans to make any more.
-
Also I was told I was at my own risk shooting a 25cal through it, but it works perfect, even though its made for 22cal without any damage
-
Also I was told I was at my own rick shooting a 25cal through it, but it works perfect, even though its made for 22cal without any damage
They look nice sheathed in a foam grip ;D
-
I got one of Charles Wong moderators and very impressed with it performance, slightly beating out my beloved Huggett Snipe and at half the price too!
Thanks again
Dan
I’ve not heard of Charles Wong moderators. Do you have a link to them?
AHHH! The AUO's! Why didn't you just say that?!?
-
I got one of Charles Wong moderators and very impressed with it performance, slightly beating out my beloved Huggett Snipe and at half the price too!
Thanks again
Dan
I’ve not heard of Charles Wong moderators. Do you have a link to them?
AHHH! The AUO's! Why didn't you just say that?!?
Why why why, sound like my wife with the why's
-
I got one of Charles Wong moderators and very impressed with it performance, slightly beating out my beloved Huggett Snipe and at half the price too!
Thanks again
Dan
I’ve not heard of Charles Wong moderators. Do you have a link to them?
AHHH! The AUO's! Why didn't you just say that?!?
Why why why, sound like my wife with the why's
Your wife sounds like a very intelligent, inquisitive and thoughtful individual! ;D
-
Your wife sounds like a very intelligent, inquisitive and thoughtful individual! ;D
Very diplomatic my son :)
-
thanks, answered a lot of questions
-
Two questions-
How do the Buck Rail moderators compare to any of the tested ones? And is donnyfl out of business? Did he stop making his moderators?
-
Two questions-
How do the Buck Rail moderators compare to any of the tested ones? And is donnyfl out of business? Did he stop making his moderators?
The Buck Rail reduced the sound a LOT on my friend's Crosman 2240.
My friend has a few of the Buck Rails and he likes them all.
The Buck Rails on our Beeman 2027s work good, especially at 700 fps.
The original baffles in my Gauntlet reduced the sound more than my Buck Rail moderator.
no baffles = 108.4 db
stock baffles = 97.5 db
Buck Rail = 99.0 db
-
T And is donnyfl out of business? Did he stop making his moderators?
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=203860.0 (https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=203860.0)
-
Sorry, Charlie
Correction: The guys Charlie knew are not making those LDCs anymore. Or, are they still in business?
Some of us are just staying low key my man for good reason. David
-
Great info, thank for putting it all together and sharing!
-
I realize this is an older thread & test results but....
I'm looking to buy a STO Falx moderator for my .22 Benjamin Marauder.
But I read somewhere that I'll be required to remove the 7 baffles and spring out of the Marauder's barrel shroud for it to retain accuracy and for the Falx work correctly.
Will removing these baffles increase the sound and then the Falx will reduce it, back to the original level, or quieter which is the goal ?
I'm wondering if this is a worthwhile endeavor ?
Did you have to modify the rifles, remove baffles, for this testing?
-
Johnny,
I see no reason to remove the stock Marauder baffles, or why keeping them should reduce accuracy. Except perhaps that adding the Falx will not do as much as someone hoped for, if the stock baffles are kept. Then, comparing Falx on to Falx off might seem impressive when the stock baffles are removed.
My understanding of the STO moderators use "gas diodes", and work better at higher power. So, unless you are hot-rodding your Marauder, the Falx may not do as much as you expect.
Getting back to accuracy; with the stock baffles removed, the pellet will have to travel a longer distance through turbulent air, without the benefit of the stock baffles stripping off a large percentage of that air. Yes, the air stripper that attaches to the barrel muzzle will still be there, but it only diverts some air into the rear of the shroud.
So, your question is hard to answer, except by people that have done exactly what you are suggesting. If we knew where you read the advice about removing the stock baffles, there might be clues as to why that advice was offered. In other words, what else had been changed; and why?
If your .22 Marauder is stock, in stock tune, it will be fairly quiet with the stock baffles. If it seems loud, some tuning may be the first step to make it quieter. If it is stock quiet, but not quiet enough for your purpose, then the Falx may not be the right moderator to use. I assume you have read this thread and formed some impression about what various moderators do? The best performers on higher power airguns, or directly mounted to the barrel are not always the best performers on shrouded PCPs, or at lower power. And by "best", I mean relative measurements when compared to other moderators, attached to that airgun, in that configuration and tune; shooting that pellet.
-
Thank You for the reply and explanation. My Marauder is stock tuned and doesn't seem to be a hot rod. It shoots the 13-15gr pellets I've tried about 950fps. But it shoots Hard, it will shoot thru a 3/4" plywood backer at 20yds.
It's not really loud, but just loud enough that I think if the 'right' neighbor heard it and figured out it was a 'shot' from a "Gun" it might cause an issue in the city limits where I live.
So I was hoping the Falx might quiet it down a little more.
I read about removing the existing baffles on the STO website in 'Feedback' on the Falx.
The guy said it worked great but he had to remove the spring and baffles because it caused his Marauder to shoot "everywhere" with them in.
-
OK; 30 foot.pounds is typical for a .22 Marauder. Apart from the muzzle blast, shooting a piece of plywood likely makes quit a loud noise too. There are many threads about "silent traps" that you might find useful on this forum.
I can't argue about needing to remove the baffles when a Falx is attached, but if the person making that statement was around, I would ask him where the spring is in his shroud? Ahead or behind the baffles? Some people think the spring should be ahead to act as a cushion. Other would tell you that the baffles slamming forward on the shot will make more noise; so the spring should be behind. How did that Marauder owner attach his Falx; and could that method or adaptor be part of the problem? Does that shroud endcap replacement push on the stock baffles so the spring goes solid? So, there are so many bits of info missing.
If a dozen Falx owners reported the same thing based on their own experience, rather than what they heard, I would take it more seriously. I am not suggesting the person is mistaken; just that I would not base a purchase decision on the say-so of one stranger. In fact, I suggest you ask STO about that comment and see what they have to say.
Perhaps someone with real info will reply to your question, here. Perhaps your post on AGN will produce real info, compared to my speculation.
-
Subscriber, 😃
as usual, you cut through the fluff, the hearsay, and the youtube myths — analyzing the problem as an engineer.
Thanks!
That kind of thinking will help jolofree, and all of us. 👍🏼
Matthias
-
I just invited a member who owns several STO moderators to offer some insight about the Marauder baffle question.
-
Sir, Thank You for the reply. I have posed this question to STO and have not yet received a reply.
As you stated there are many unexplained variables, so I'll wait to hear from STO.
Being new to this precision PCP stuff the more I learn the less I know.
And even with an entry level PCP like the Marauder I'm amazed with the 25yd accuracy, this isn't a Red Rider LoL.
I do wish STO had a 'try it before you buy it kind of deal' but that probably wouldn't be practical.
Thanks again, j
-
No worries, Johnny
I hope the guy who has lots of STO experience, replies to this thread, but I can't guarantee it. You can think of me as an information broker, rather than an expert. I also do custom baffle, insert and muffler designs. Hence my interest in this thread. I have done a lot of custom design for the STO customer, and I think he will eventually share his insights, if he thinks he can help.
Ultimately, this thread may not be the best place to continue this conversation; unless Falx owners choose to announce themselves.
-
I do not think there is a straight forward answer to the OP's question as there are so many factors at play.
I have a few of STO's products but the concern about how to hang a moderator off of a Marauder shroud isn't necessarily manufacturer specific. Any time we add a moderator to a baffled shroud, there is opportunity to create a clipping or accuracy problem. if the air stripper allows the shroud to move around a bit, and is not very tight to the barrel, this will be an opportunity for clipping. The OP should make sure tolerances are tight, the barrel is perfectly centered and parallel with the shroud, etc.
IMO, for a Marauder shroud add-on, I would recommend as light of a suppressor as possible. IMO the Hi Flow Falx is a great unit, however I would not add that much weight to the Marauder's shroud. One of Peter's 3d printed units would compliment the Marauder shroud nicely, and likely less than 1/3 of the cost and weight of a Falx....
-
Thanks for the quick reply. I have read of many issues with clipping concerns on the Marauder when a moderator is attached.
Some with recommendations to change the barrel 'band' so it is not of free floated design but anchored like the Hill mfg barrel band.
I watch mine closely to make sure it doesn't get off centered & touch the shroud & affect the barrel harmonics, if this is correct terminology.
Would placing an 'o' ring or similar space filling pad around the shroud to fill the gap under the band & keep the shroud centered help any?
Where can I get info etc on "Peter's 3d printed units" to review and possibly purchase?
Thanks, J
-
Thanks, Mike
-
Where can I get info etc on "Peter's 3d printed units" to review and possibly purchase?
That would be me. The 3D printing section is has a few of my designs: https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?board=250.0
Don't think I have any inserts designed for the Marauder yet. What might make sense would be a monolithic insert that replaces the stock baffles and is a tight fit inside the shroud, that then has an external section that is integral with the internal section. The external section could have any sensible length and diameter. The internal section would have a mating thread that replaces the stock endcap. The stock air stripper and barrel support would be retained.
What are sensible OD and length for the external section? OD could match the shroud, although that is very limiting. 1 to 1.5" OD seems more appropriate. External length could be 4 to 6". Or anything you like, within reason.
My suggestion is that we start a thread in the 3D printing "gate", or conduct this by PM, going forwards.
-
OK, understand, Thanks j
-
Adding Hogan Decimeater : Perhaps 1st Place for quietness. Although bit heavy, it is consistent and accurate.
dB
81 original (11th Place)
78 w/hair roller and ballistic felt modification (1st Place)
price
$60 at time of original GTA post. (6th Place)
weight
5.8 oz (15th Place)
volume
V = π * r^2 * h = π * 1.2^2 * 6.9 ≈ 31.21486 Hogan Decimeater (7.5115 8th Place)
V = π * r^2 * h = π * 1.6^2 * 6.5 ≈ 50.26548 DonnyFL SUMO (0.2407 factor to posted number)
SideNote1: hammer etc action depending upon gun can be lounder than moderator.
SideNote2: sliding over a bicycle innertube dampens misc vibrations and also protects.
-
I realize this is an older thread & test results but....
I'm looking to buy a STO Falx moderator for my .22 Benjamin Marauder.
But I read somewhere that I'll be required to remove the 7 baffles and spring out of the Marauder's barrel shroud for it to retain accuracy and for the Falx work correctly.
Will removing these baffles increase the sound and then the Falx will reduce it, back to the original level, or quieter which is the goal ?
I'm wondering if this is a worthwhile endeavor ?..... I Shoot Bench Rest w/.22 Marauder, When I remove the Baffels, I shoot 10 Points
higher per Card. So it's worth It to remove Them.....Franky
Did you have to modify the rifles, remove baffles, for this testing?
I realize this is an older thread & test results but....
I'm looking to buy a STO Falx moderator for my .22 Benjamin Marauder.
But I read somewhere that I'll be required to remove the 7 baffles and spring out of the Marauder's barrel shroud for it to retain accuracy and for the Falx work correctly.
Will removing these baffles increase the sound and then the Falx will reduce it, back to the original level, or quieter which is the goal ?
I'm wondering if this is a worthwhile endeavor ?
Did you have to modify the rifles, remove baffles, for this testing?
-
Franky,
I don't understand what you just posted. It seems to be two quotes, with nothing added by you?
-
Franky,
I don't understand what you just posted. It seems to be two quotes, with nothing added by you?
I forgot to hit Post, Sorry but I don't know what I never Posted.....Franky
-
Franky,
You may have forgotten your intent, but you did hit "post", here:
https://www.gatewaytoairguns.org/GTA/index.php?topic=182738.msg156530008#msg156530008
-
I think the question is after removing the OE baffles to fit the Falx, will the Falx still be efficient ??? I would say yes, it should if designed and advertised to do so.
-
James,
My only concern would be the reduction in air stripping near the Marauder muzzle, if the stock baffles are removed. That said, the stock air striper/diverter would remain to center the barrel in the shroud. If that is sufficient, then no harm would be done. Else groups may open up. If they do not, then no harm is done. An easy experiment to do, I should think.