Are .45s less damaging to the ear drums due to being subsonic?

Status
Not open for further replies.

LoadAmmo

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
92
Location
Central Idaho
I'm wondering if the lack of sonic crack when firing a .45 will make this round a better choice for shooting in a self-defense situation without ear plugs or ear muffs?

Is it significantly less enough that I should go with a Glock 21 (12round capacity) versus the Glock 22 (14 round capacity)?

Thanks...
 
:scrutiny:

Have you fired a .45 indoors? I've fired a .22 subsonic indoors without hearing protection and even that is enough to do damage.

The decibel rating should be the determining factor. Should be able to find ratings online if you search around. Others will come along with better answers.

jmm
 
I've fired off a +P .45's and +P+ 9's indoors...

it hurts, your ears will actually kinda throb in your head..
 
135 decibles will typically implode the human ear drum. Take that into account when you start looking at how many decibles firearms produce. You will probably find most firearms in a close encounter situation, would be near or over that level.
 
My 5" 1911 in .45ACP is why I began doubling up on ear protection (both plugs and muffs). The .22LR is plenty loud by itself; the .45 is much more so.

I figure I paid enough for my home theater speakers, I want to be able to enjoy them for a LONG time.
 
I've fired off a +P .45's and +P+ 9's indoors...

You did this without hearing protection? If so, I hope it was a life or death/SD situation.

That link I provided also has a pretty basic hearing test, I suggest folks here who have been shooting any calibre without hearing protection take that test. You might be surprised to "hear" that your hearing might be compromised in one or both ears.

I'm 57. At the age of 18 on a range, we were told to stop firing so we could go out to our targets. At that point, everyone should have ceased firing. Not one jerk, who fired his black powder rifle. I've had tinitus in my left ear since then, and as the years go by, it's more and more of a problem. Don't be foolish. Wear hearing protection when you shoot (other than SD, of course) or when you use machinery such as chain saws, most lawn mowers, leaf blowers, and so on. Trust me on this.
 
Last edited:
I've fired my S&W 625 (5" barrel) without ear protection for 50 shots. Not very fun, my ears were ringing for a day or so. And that was outside! I imagine with my +P rounds and being inside, it'll cause one hell of a noise. Yet, if it was do-or-die, I could care less about noise/kick.

Always wear ear protection when fireing guns for practise/fun. It'd be stupid not to.
 
Are .45s less damaging to the ear drums due to being subsonic?

I read the above website showing the decibel levels of gunshots with interest. It confirmed my suspicion that there isn't enough practical difference between gunshots to matter. My conclusion: All gunshots can potentially damage your hearing.

Hearing damage is bad business. I should know, as I have about 50 percent hearing loss, due almost entirely to my failure to wear hearing protection when I should have. And so I've learned the hard way that once you lose your hearing, even a percentage of it, you will never get it back. Sure, there are $1000+ hearing aids, but these are a barely adequate substitute for hearing.

So my advice: Don't let a few decibels difference fool you! Wear hearing protection at all times when you shoot recreationally.
 
Well, um, let's put it this way. I couldn't tell the difference in the ringing in my ears between a .45 indoors without hearing protection and a .308 indoors without hearing protection.



Don't ask.

Barrett
 
There was a Soprano's episode where some of Tony's boys shoot a guy in a men's room. You know, all tile, so that the sound would echo until next century. Didn't seem to bother them, and they weren't wearing ear protection.


:eek:
 
... In regards to the other posts I've never fired a .45 before or a .22. Just .40S&W and 9MM.

LoadAmmo, no offense meant. I hadn't been around too many .45's myself, especially indoors, until recently. At an indoor range a few weeks ago, and I didn't see anybody else on the line. A guy came in while I was shooting and in the next lane opened up with his 1911, and I had to flee! I was only wearing earplugs at the time and shooting a .22. It hurt, literally.

jmm
 
You should always wear hearing protection when firing any gun. I had a ND in my gunroom with a .45 Colt (slipped while lowering the hammer) and my ears range for some time. That said, I personally do shoot .22 LR rifles without plugs when outdoors and I do not wear ear protection while hunting. I popped a bunny with my compact 10mm a while back without plugs-ouch!
 
umm... not to pick nits here but a lot of stuff i've read just isn't passing my sanity filter

135 decibles will typically implode the human ear drum.

:scrutiny: the article claims 140db is the "threshold of pain"


granted, ANY gun, even with subsonic rounds will damage your hearing.

however, a 223/5.56 is just obnoxious. it's one of the most annoying, painful reports of any caliber i've ever heard. and yet, the article claims a .45acp is 2db lower.

that means one of two things:
there's not a direct correlation between db and pain
or
the data is garbage (possible, as measuring db is notoriously difficult to do (read silencertests.com's methods for more info than you wanted to know))


if i have to fire a gun indoors (or out, for that matter) w/o hearing protection, i'll take a 22 or 45 over just about any rifle.

i've no idea whether the sonic crack makes a difference

edit: btw, i've been told the fhn 5.7 is obscenely loud, although i haven't fired mine yet so can't say for sure
 
Sonic crack from bullet is IMO incidental - it is already ''out front'' and is not comparable to the fast moving sound waves from expanding gasses.

9mm, 45, .40 - it matters not - there is a whole envelope of expanding gasses at the muzzle - and that is what causes eardrum over excursion and then harm to malleus, incus and stapes - ossicles.

Ear defenders are mandatory to avoid damage.
 
I cannot imagine anybody WANTING to shoot anything short of an air gun without ear protection. It just isn't prudent. As for self defense, me thinks going deaf will be a very very far second to losing yours or a loved ones life. All that being said I tend to have either a .45 or revolver loaded with .38+P for HD since I believe .357 maggie would just be too much everything, noise, flash, penetration etc.

Take this with a grain of salt as I am certainly no expert and some would say far from smart.

Chris
 
db's

Oversimplified, adding 3db means it is twice as loud.
At +2.9db, the 9mm is very nearly twice as loud as the .45ACP.
 
the article claims 140db is the "threshold of pain"


granted, ANY gun, even with subsonic rounds will damage your hearing.

I apoligize, I ment 155 decibles. Most firearms that are shot within a confined space, will easily reach abover 145 decibles. Shotguns especially would be well over 145 dbs. As a general rule, if you shoot a pistol off indoors, with no hearing protection, you will lose some of your hearing. You might not go deaf, but it wont take much to take away 25% of your hearing.

Also, the five-seven is quite loud for its size. The .45acp goes boom, the 9mm goes pop, and the five-seven goes BAAAAAAAANG. Its a real quick sound, much like a whip. Atleast thats how I would describe it..
 
Subsonic does not mean squat to hearing.

As mentioned before, the sonic wave of the bullet is already out in front of you and negligible. The pressure of the wave is relative to mass. Bullets are small. The initial "BOOM" of the shot is what damages your hearing and will damage it if not protected. As for 5.56 being annoying, I'll say firdt hand that in confined space and for any length of time (a few sustained seconds) it made me nauseus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top