Hunting Rifle: Anyone Else Have No Desire for a Silencer?

I too think it's asinine when someone chops a 308 to say 16" to throw on a 9" can vs leaving it at 20" to run a 5" can. That's just ice skating uphill. I'm a fan of suppressors and wish they were more available but it does drive me nuts to see the overly short barrel fad. A few threads back I saw guys talking about 18" 300 WSM's and bragging about 22" 30-06 velocities.

I'm a big believer in suppressors and a big believer it keeping cartridges within their intended roles. You won't catch me with a 16" 300 Norma but I'm sure one will be on here before too long because "efficiency"
 
Absolutely not. I think they look awful hanging off a barrel. I also prefer a 26" barrel and have no desire to haul around an ugly 33"-34" barreled conglomeration.
IMO, just another fad to say: "Hey, looky what I have"!
 
I have a suppressor coming, but still several months away. I use a muzzle brakes, on a couple of rifles. Sure tamed them down. In the field having ear plugs don't make much sense. Need to hear what's going. Has my hearing been damage, yes. That happen in Vietnam in 69. I wouldn't have used them even then. I do use ear plugs at the range. I learned a long time ago not to flicks, but don't like the kick recoil either. I know with a muzzle brake, I generally don't lose sight in my scope when shooting. I like that very much. So all my new rifles will have a muzzle brake on them.
 
While not the biggest fan. I have situation right now where they would be handy. Area I hunt is near but safely far enough from houses. Have a few who know property lines better than me and I am one who paid 6k for survey. Every time we shoot a deer we get to talk with game warden.Heck I think they call before the deer knows he is dead.
 
While not the biggest fan. I have situation right now where they would be handy. Area I hunt is near but safely far enough from houses. Have a few who know property lines better than me and I am one who paid 6k for survey. Every time we shoot a deer we get to talk with game warden.Heck I think they call before the deer knows he is dead.
 
I also have compromised hearing from my time in Nam, 69. Also, I would probably not use one for a dedicated hunting rifle, Would I like one for range time, you bet but in California, there not allowed along with other stupid rules. I do think those close to me at the range when I'm shooting a 338 Lapua would like me to have one. Would I chop the barrel down to get the longest one possible, ABSOLUTELY NOT.
 
I thought I wanted one. But my good friend put one on one of his rifles and had to work up a completely different load for it. I don't want to start over with load development just for a can. I'm stubborn that way I guess
 
I do not have any breaks or suppressors on any of my rifles. I shot them but don't care for them. I lost most of my hearing in Vietnam. My hearing aids shut down when I shoot. I can hear the bullet impact. So, I am on the old-school side of the fence.
 
Different strokes for different folks. Personally, I enjoy shooting suppressed. I have a Gunwerks 8ight for my centerfires, and a Form 1 rimfire can. Waiting on another 8ight to be approved right now.
 
General Re lee: You didn't mention what caliber rifles you own.
I have a 20"7mm with No can and no muzzle brake, easy gun to shoot.
I have a 22" 300rum with a can that I'm still waiting on.
If you have a 6.5 or 308 or something along those calibers, then I don't see a need for anything on the gun just because they're really easy to shoot. Last thing I want is to develop a flinch with a large magnum.
For me it's about reducing recoil without wearing ear protection. I would prefer a brake because they're cheap compared to a can but I don't wear ear protection while hunting.
Bottom line is that most people wont buy them because they cost as much as a new rifle!
Why don't you start a pole: Who can afford a suppressor? or who would own one if cost wasnt a factor?

I think whether you're a fan of them or not, you should at least support them. We're all on the same team because we own guns. The laws they have on suppressors(I absolutely hate the term "silencer") are asinine. If you choose ear pro or nothing over a suppressor for whatever reasons then great but don't try and make it harder for fellow firearm owners to attain one.
Let me start by saying that I think that suppressors should be legal with zero paperwork. Unless you are shooting subsonic there is no such thing as a silencer, bad terminology. That said, if there was no paperwork involved I would probably own more, as would I believe many others. If more owned them the price would most likely drop which would facilitate more ownership. I would probably still not hunt with one on a regular basis but that is due to how I hunt. I would run dedicated suppressors on all my short barreled rifles and ARs and probably my 338 @ 30" with the break an extra 3-6"s isn't going to make much difference for it's intended use. I don't care for the extra weight and length on pistols but, to each his own. Until the law changes, the one I have will probably be the only one I own.
 
Last edited:
Most European countries support suppressor use. The noise to surrounding homes and farms is reduced or eliminated. Non hunters don't like the shooting they hear, especially on opening day, and even gun ranges in urban settings could benefit from using them. I believe that the government knows by making them difficult to purchase they actually create more animosity for our hunting and shooting sports!
 
Top