● You don’t want to spook the other squirrels as you kill their mate?
● You have anti-gun neighbors who shouldn’t know what a gun nut like you is doing in the backyard?
● You like to increase the value of your gun and extend its size by economizing its loudness?
Read on!
?Here is a Silencer Specs Table comparing 50 silencers, mostly for PCPs, and usually silencer models that work with different gun brands. That’s the first PDF attachment. A second PDF attachment shows photos of some of the silencers.
Table of Contents and Overview • Silencer Specs Table – Sorted by Length 50 Silencers 9 Silencer Loudness Comparison Tests From 0.88" (2.2cm) thin – to 2.0" (5.1cm) thick From 2.9" (7.4cm) short – to 10.50" (26.7cm) long From $26 to $270 In 6 calibers. From .177 to .50 (4.5mm to 12.7mm)
• Silencers – Limited to Certain Gun Brands or Models or Springers • Makers of Custom Silencers • Loudness Comparisons: Test Details • Links to Some Sellers and Prices • Photos of Some of the Silencers ➔ separate file!
Nice and thank you for your contributions. For sound Vs mass that chart is very accurate. Mass not being restricted nearly always wins, however, like the Ronin or Emperor (especially with that long extender on). I could and actually do mock the emperor consistently, but it does have its place with the Texans. While baffles and sound absorbing materials help, sheer volume in space always wins out, especially since a moderator is not capturing and retaining heat from an explosion but rather directing and dampening sound. The valve on the gun plays into it, so it is hard to have an objective metric other than a decibel sound lever reader that is not a phone.
The phone sound meter, in my experience with my devices, is not ideal.
I'm a poor, someone with a nicer phone, better apps, may have a different outcome.
Could anyone who is a connoisseur of ldcs chime in as to the after-shot decompression, aka emptying, specifically whether they think it is an actual consideration, or just noise?
Posted by: @lieutenantcolumbo
While baffles and sound absorbing materials help, sheer volume in space always wins out, especially since a moderator is not capturing and retaining heat from an explosion but rather directing and dampening sound.
Um... to damp, or the act of damping, are not the same as dampening which is accomplished with water.
Just tossing it out there. If you go to this link, push cntrl+F to search the page, type "dampen" and "dampening" into the field, you will see that neither of these terms are relevant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damping_ratio
A very simple example of damping which does not involve attenuation via mass, would be "destructive interference" and this is not a good reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_interference
Here is an overly simplified version, suffice to say that Maxim's original design was simplistic, if effective, and this is IMHO why we've seen a rise in asymmetrical internal designs.
The phone sound meter, in my experience with my devices, is not ideal.
I'm a poor, someone with a nicer phone, better apps, may have a different outcome.
Could anyone who is a connoisseur of ldcs chime in as to the after-shot decompression, aka emptying, specifically whether they think it is an actual consideration, or just noise?
Posted by: @lieutenantcolumbo
While baffles and sound absorbing materials help, sheer volume in space always wins out, especially since a moderator is not capturing and retaining heat from an explosion but rather directing and dampening sound.
Um... to damp, or the act of damping, are not the same as dampening which is accomplished with water.
Just tossing it out there. If you go to this link, push cntrl+F to search the page, type "dampen" and "dampening" into the field, you will see that neither of these terms are relevant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damping_ratio
A very simple example of damping which does not involve attenuation via mass, would be "destructive interference" and this is not a good reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_interference
Here is an overly simplified version, suffice to say that Maxim's original design was simplistic, if effective, and this is IMHO why we've seen a rise in asymmetrical internal designs.
Take what you will from this flow diagram of a improved k-cup.
Of course, I know nothing about anything, so take it all with a grain of salt.
I stand by what I said. Rather than capturing and retaining heat, a moderator differs from a suppressor because it lessens the sound of the air/valve/hammer by directing and dampening the sound. I work in construction building custom homes that use sound proofing requirements where sound board is used to dampen the noise. Regularly this word is used.
If you look at the Oxford English Dictionary, you will find that the word is used specifically for noise reduction. No, it is not related to fluid in this use, but perhaps the entomology points to moisture previously...
This is even on a basic Google search. The word is used specifically with sound absorbing materials like cloth, foams, certain rubbers, and so in my trade. Usually we use at synonymously with reducing, or making less intense and so on.
Here is just a common use of the word above. Notice it is usually used in the context of absorbing and lessoning sound rather than sound proofing. A moderator often has sound absorbing material like cloths or foams inside, depending on the model, like a Donnyfl.
Combustion devices which are prone to pumping, surging, chuffing or some other oscillation between intake and loss of flow, are fitted with dampers. Take a look here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smudge_pot
"Some groves used natural gas pots on lines from a gas source, but these are not "smudge pots" in the usual sense, and they represented only a fraction of the smudging practice. Experiments using natural gas heaters were conducted in Rialto, California, in 1912.[11] Sometimes, large smudge pots are used for heating large open buildings, such as mechanics' workshops. In Australia they are called "choofers" because of the noise they make when lit: "choofa choofa choofa".
Lighting an Australian "choofer" is a tricky business. Because of the voluminous clouds of oily black smoke they produce when cold, they must be lit outside. This is accomplished by holding a burning rag next to the open damper on the fuel tank. The draught caused by the breeze passing through the chimney will draw air through the open damper into the fuel tank, where the surface of the fuel inside will light and burn instantly. Once the choofer is sufficiently warm, the damper may be closed until a steady rate of burning is attained, when the characteristic "choofa choofa choofa" noise is produced. If the damperis not closed, the choofa may choke itself with its own smoke, causing periodic "explosions" of unburnt gases in the chimney. Such explosions are not dangerous, but they are noisy and they produce a lot of smoke. Once the heater is burning hot enough, the smoke will disappear and the pot may be dragged slowly and carefully inside. They still produce dangerous gas, and must only be used in well-ventilated spaces.
I think you are confused between the usage of damping vs dampening, both as a transitive verb and an adjective. Damping is the scientific term that you are using with water and mufflers etc., but to lesson or reduce the synonym would be damp-en-ing as the “en” is an archaic addition to the verb signifying a “depression” or “reduction”...