P
Pro Digy
Guest
+3dB is x2, +10dB is x10, +20dB is x100 That's why a lot of the vibe and vibro-acoustic tests are done at -3dB, nominal and +3dB Power Density
Last edited by a moderator:
Ported Barrels: Are They Worth the Effort?
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
Am thinking of getting a stainless Garrison. Your article was quite interesting! A very thorough testing of ported vs. unported pistols. Good job, sir!Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “Ported Barrels: Are They Worth the Effort?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/ported-barrels/.
Agreed. But for larger (revolvers). Have a S&W 44 model 69 I had Magnaported a few years ago. It was a good investment I think. As far as most pistols go I really don't think so being that they have a ejection port and in general don't have the recoil of most large revolvers.
ExpiredLifetime
Alpha
A few things here:
1: I own and have carried ported pistols. I do not carry a ported pistol anymore because while it does help to mitigate recoil, a single day of sweaty or dusty Texas weather results in having to clean the barrel. I don’t want to have to bore snake my EDC ten times as often to cut down on a small amount of recoil.
2: A phone is NOT an accurate sound meter. Phone microphones have compression, limiters and gates built into them to make it possible to talk on the phone in a noisy environment. You will never get an accurate decibel reading off of one because they’re intentionally designed to squash sound down to a level where a phone call can be possible. Do not ever trust a cell phone sound level app because your phone’s hardware is messing with that dBm reading before it ever hits the app.
1: I own and have carried ported pistols. I do not carry a ported pistol anymore because while it does help to mitigate recoil, a single day of sweaty or dusty Texas weather results in having to clean the barrel. I don’t want to have to bore snake my EDC ten times as often to cut down on a small amount of recoil.
2: A phone is NOT an accurate sound meter. Phone microphones have compression, limiters and gates built into them to make it possible to talk on the phone in a noisy environment. You will never get an accurate decibel reading off of one because they’re intentionally designed to squash sound down to a level where a phone call can be possible. Do not ever trust a cell phone sound level app because your phone’s hardware is messing with that dBm reading before it ever hits the app.
Bassbob
Emissary
This is true, but the author states up front it’s not going to be an exact dB meter. That said, as a person who has worked a lot as a live sound engineer I can tell you that there are phone apps that are pretty damn close. The app I used automatically flattened the frequency response and accounted for compression.
In any case in the article the dB numbers aren’t important. The difference between the two is the point.
Belt Fed
Ronin
I bought this H&K 93 that was converted to full auto years ago and it had eight small holes drilled in barrel up near the flash hider. Four on each side of the barrel. now whoever done it did a good job, it looks good but i hate it. you can't fire it without hearing protection and yeah i know you should always wear it. but still it will bust your eardrums and on full it is really bad.
I am one of the old geezers that don't like brakes and comps. also don't think they are needed on a small caliber gun, but that's just an opinion that most will argue. The H&K don't have any less muzzle climb than the M-16 to me. The last few AR's i bought had brakes on them as it's the latest fad. i have taken a a few off as i hate hunting with hearing protection on.
When i target shoot i always wear it but not when hunting. and with a brake or ported barrel you need it.
I am one of the old geezers that don't like brakes and comps. also don't think they are needed on a small caliber gun, but that's just an opinion that most will argue. The H&K don't have any less muzzle climb than the M-16 to me. The last few AR's i bought had brakes on them as it's the latest fad. i have taken a a few off as i hate hunting with hearing protection on.
When i target shoot i always wear it but not when hunting. and with a brake or ported barrel you need it.
Mr. Untactical
Master Class
From an interesting (and supposedly accurate) article I found:
Even small increases in dBA level can have a big impact on your hearing health. As dBA rises, your hearing is more likely to be damaged, and more quickly than you might expect. Sound is more likely to damage your hearing if it is:
- 85 dBA and you are exposed to it for at least 8 hours.
- 100 dBA and you are exposed to it for at least 14 minutes.
- 110 dBA and you are exposed to it for at least 2 minutes.
- dB: a measurement scale that only measures sound intensity
- dBA: a measurement scale that measures sound intensity and how the human ear responds. Theoretically, dBA provides a better idea of when sound can damage your hearing (thus the readings above are in dBA).
P
Pro Digy
Guest
Here's a good graph from Dakota Silencer
And some caliber-specifc measurements from Montana State University:
And some caliber-specifc measurements from Montana State University:
Last edited by a moderator:
Good graph but I don't feel this is a totally accurate representation of decibels when shooting suppressed.
This graph has semi-auto rifles listed as quieter than a semi-auto pistol.
In my experience the added length of a rifle adds velocity to the bullet which increases the decibel rating. This is especially noticable with .22lr ammo. I shoot standard velocity .22lr through semi auto pistols and the sound is equivalent to an airsoft gun, but when the same ammo is used in a semi-auto rifle the unmistakable crack of the sound barrier breaking is heard.
P
Pro Digy
Guest
Which graph? The first one shows suppressed AR-15 quieter than unsuppressed 9mm, that is for sure. I do have recording myself of this. And it's got 9mm suppressed quieter than AR suppressed... I don't see a problem with this one either.
The second graph shows consistent data with what you're saying.
The first graph in relation to shooting fully suppressed rifle vs pistol in .22lr
P
Pro Digy
Guest
Ah, the Walther P22, didn't even see that one, 162dB seems very high indeed for a 22, it should be in the 125dB range.
You're right, the SIG P322 sounds like an ant's fart, nowhere near louder than a suppressed AR! Must be a typo, or an overly excited marketing intern
Here's Silencershop's test data for P22:
Agree. Have a couple PC Shields that are ported and they are smoother than the non ported
I much prefer my ported Shield PC over my standard model.
Bassbob
Emissary
Not me. But to be fair my standard model is an M2.0 .45 ACP and my PC model is a .40. I shoot the .45 much better, but I do wish it had the PC sights on it.
I went shooting with a jarhead I know at work a few years ago. He had the standard Shield .40 and I had my Performance Center. We swapped for a round. I couldn't tell a difference other than the sights. Of course we weren't on a timer.