Are dB levels a factor in home defense weapons?

[Evil Monkey]

I've been thinking about this alot lately.

Alot of people say they use shotguns for home defense but I suspect it would be VERY LOUD. You'd probably get hearing damage, right?

You can't suppress a shotgun but you sure can do that to a rifle or pistol caliber carbine. But what if your state doesn't allow suppressors? Would you put hearing loss aside and go forth with your rifles and shotguns or would you opt for a 9mm or 45acp carbine of sorts because they're quieter?

I learned that a 3dB increase is doubling the perceived noise. I've also read somewhere that an MP5 produced 157dB and that an M4 produced 165dB.....that seems like a huge increase! This means that the M4 is more than 4 times louder than the mp5, right?

So if you couldn't get suppressors in your state, would it be logical to just use the rifle because your going to damage your hearing either way, or would it be logical to use a pistol caliber carbine to reduce hearing damage and the chance that you will sustain any hearing damage?

BTW, any body have dB levels for SBR's like HK53, AKSU, Colt commando, etc.?

 

[Feanaro]

Alot of people say they use shotguns for home defense but I suspect it would be VERY LOUD. You'd probably get hearing damage, right?

Not probably. One hundred percent certain. Hearing damage sets in after 15 minutes at 100dB. Most firearms are in the 150dB range. Every 3dBs halves the permissable exposure time. Carry it out.

 

[Prince Yamato]

For hearing's sake, I'd use a handgun. I've heard handguns fired without hearing protection (outdoors). They are unpleasant, but tolerable. Ever hear an AR-15 without protection? It's a VERY loud *pop*. I find that different guns seem to emit different "vowel" sounds. Listen with headphones on and you can usually tell which guns will be the most unpleasant w/o.

 

[Nomad101bc]

Cops know if you use supressors you cant just screw them out of the weapon and be like "yep shot him no supressor". You see supressors slow the bullet down and make it hotter leaving distinct burn marks. There would also be the whole issue of nieghbors not hearing any sort of boom and then it makes self defense seem rather suspicous. One loud shot of even a .45 acp or a 12 gauge will not perminantly damage your hearing and its very rare you have to use your weapon for HD typicaly a 12 gauge is enough to stop any pistol wielding bad guy without having to fire it.

I can tell you at one point i was in a very loud heavy metal band and i could literaly hear the drummers symbols split my ear drums. Guess what i did it many times went to the doctor recently no hearing damage. Therefore by that logic one or two shots will never cause perminant irreversable hearing damage.

 

[Regolith]

A couple of shots in the house with no hearing protection will probably do some damage, but its not going to be a whole lot. You'll still be able to hear after, and probably almost as well as before you shot. However, if you fail to defend yourself, you could end up dead. Me, I'll take the hearing damage; I'm not a big fan of being dead.

 

[kd7nqb]

Upwards of 90% percent of defensive handgun uses DON'T involve pulling the trigger. My theory is the 10% of invaders who don't stop when you point a loaded weapon at them are the same people that you want the biggest gun possible for. So pump 12guage for HD is my choice, alive with a hearing aid is FAR better than dead.

 

[Gord]

Any caliber on down through .22 in an enclosed space can damage your hearing. Is there a bigger risk of that with, say, a .45 or a shotgun? Probably.

Am I going to make "gentle on the ol' eardrums" the prime criteria for selecting my home defense firearm? Hell no.

By the way, Google "cochlear implant." If a hearing aid won't help ya, a cochlear implant can. I know - I have one.

I agree that alive with a hearing aid is a lot more useful than dead at any rate. If it doesn't make a lot of noise, it's probably not generating enough energy to put a bad guy on the floor.

 

[mjrodney]

Since I use quality stereo electronic headphones at the range, it makes sense to store them near the firearm I consider the "home defense" weapon.

With the volume turned up, I hear better than I can with the naked ear and it takes the potential hearing loss out of the equation.

 

[joab]

Loss of hearing is not the big issue with sudden sharp noises

It's that extra hearing that you get, and it can be debilitating

With that in mind I believe a boom is preferable to a crack

 

[Rovi]

You can't suppress a shotgun...

HUSHPOWER
Possibly not the most practical home defence weapon.

 

[PercyShelley]

You can't suppress a shotgun

Sorry to be pedantic, but you can suppress a shotgun.

http://www.sai.dk/silencers/shotgun.php

It's essentially a barrel extension surrounded by the suppressor with holes in it. Not as efficient as a rifle suppressor, but it does keep the wad and sabot from getting caught up in the baffles.

Word on the street is that the sonic boom from multiple shotgun projectiles is loud enough that most shotgun suppressors only provide a few dB of noise reduction, so subsonic loads are a must.

I agree with most of the sentiments here; that noise level is a secondary consideration to the efficacy of the weapon. Noise level could become a consideration, however, if you are facing multiple home invaders and you need your hearing to locate them.

I like mjrodney's suggestion about electronic ear protection.

 

[buttrap]

actully if it gets to where I have to actully shoot a person in the house ringing ears and a loss of hearing is not on my top 10 worry list.

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

I agree, Temporary hearing loss is not on my top ten list of things to worry about either. Death to me or my family is.

 

[benEzra]

Would you put hearing loss aside and go forth with your rifles and shotguns or would you opt for a 9mm or 45acp carbine of sorts because they're quieter?

Handguns are pretty much as loud as long guns; the comparatively short barrels make up for the lower gas volume and velocity. There may be slight differences in the frequency spectrum and in pulse duration, but the peak dB is similar.

Here are some data for some common guns. For long guns, note the correlation with barrel length. Not sure if these figures are straight dB or dBA.

http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia_gunfirenoise.shtml

Table 1. SHOTGUN NOISE DATA (DECIBEL AVERAGES)

.410 Bore 28" barrel.....150dB
26" barrel...............150.25dB
18 _" barrel.............156.30dB
20 Gauge 28" barrel......152.50dB
22" barrel...............154.75dB
12 Gauge 28" barrel......151.50dB
26" barrel...............156.10dB
18 _" barrel.............161.50dB

Dr. Krammer continues to say that shotgun noise averaged slightly more that 150dB. This is approximately 14dB beyond the threshold of pain, and more than sufficient to cause sudden hearing loss with complications.


Table 2. CENTERFIRE RIFLE DATA
.223, 55GR. Commercial load 18 _" barrel.....155.5dB
.243 in 22" barrel...........................155.9dB
.30-30 in 20" barrel.........................156.0dB
7mm Magnum in 20" barrel.....................157.5dB
.308 in 24" barrel...........................156.2dB
.30-06 in 24" barrel.........................158.5dB
.30-06 in 18 _" barrel.......................163.2dB
.375 — 18" barrel with muzzle brake...........170 dB

Krammer adds that sound pressure levels for the various pistols and ammunition tested yielded an average mean of 157.5 dB, which is greater than those previously shown for shotgun and rifle noise levels. There was also a greater range, from 152.4dB to 164.5dB, representing 12 dB difference, or more than 10 time as much acoustic energy for the top end of the pistol spectrum. It should be noticed that this figure of 164.5 dB approaches the practical limit of impulse noise measurement capability inherent in most modern sound level meters.


Table 3. CENTERFIRE PISTOL DATA
.25 ACP...........155.0 dB
.32 LONG..........152.4 dB
.32 ACP...........153.5 dB
.380..............157.7 dB
9mm...............159.8 dB
.38 S&W...........153.5 dB
.38 Spl...........156.3 dB
.357 Magnum.......164.3 dB
.41 Magnum........163.2 dB
.44 Spl...........155.9 dB
.45 ACP...........157.0 dB
.45 COLT..........154.7 dB

For those who don't grok decibels, it's a logarithmic scale (usually log10); a 3dB difference equals twice the radiated acoustic energy, and a 10dB difference is ten times the radiated acoustic energy. The ear perceives a 10dB difference as a doubling in volume, and IIRC the average person can just barely distinguish a 1dB difference. A car interior at highway speeds is 60-70 dB, a vacuum cleaner in the 80's to 90dB, I think.

Contrary to popular belief, there doesn't seem to be a huge difference between shotgun, pistol, and rifle noise levels, although the sound spectrum is undoubtedly different. There is a correlation with caliber (e.g., .30-06 is louder than .223 and .357 is considerably louder than 9mm or .45), but the most striking difference to me is how much louder a muzzle brake makes a hunting-caliber rifle (nearly 6 dB louder than an unbraked rifle, using an 18" .30-06 as a comparison, or translates to approximately 4 times the radiated acoustic energy). There's a tight correlation with barrel length (shorter is louder for any given caliber), but also less correlation with velocity than I expected (i.e., a slowpoke .30-30 round out of a 20" barrel is a smidgen louder than a faster but much smaller .223 round out of an 18" barrel). For all the 7.62x39mm shooters out there, I'd assume the sound levels would be about the same as .30-30, which it resembles.

 

[foghornl]

Hmmmmm

Now, if I could get a .45ACP carbine (Hi-Point, Marlin Camp 45 etc), and suppress it, used with standard power 230-gr ammo (NO +P or +P+)....

I have some done shooting without plugs or muffs {My bad! }, so I'll take any help I can get. At least partly why my "Bedside Table Companion" is the Springfield "GI-45", instead of my short-barrel Vaquero in .357Mag

 

[Dave P]

Like Joab said about a crack vs a boom: a 45 ACP is sub-sonic, so it will boom. My 357 sig will be supersonic and generate a sonic boom (crack).

I reach for the 45 first.

 

[NoirFan]

Hello,

I don't think noise level is a significant level in home defense. I have had an ND with a Federal hydra-shok .357 magnum where the side of the gun was about 8 inches from my head, close enough that my face got side-spray from the cylinder gap. It generates a painful ringing but you can still hear your immediate surroundings, like voices and movement. My ears rang for 4 days before returning to normal. Not something I'd do for fun, but I doubt the noise level will matter if you are in that situation.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Not probably. One hundred percent certain. Hearing damage sets in after 15 minutes at 100dB. Most firearms are in the 150dB range. Every 3dBs halves the permissable exposure time. Carry it out.

Feanaro, you didn't do the math, did you? At 150 db, there will be hearing damage. Your suggestion that there won't be damage is wrong.

To quote from the article below...

That is, short-duration sounds of sufficient intensity (e.g., a gunshot or explosion) may result in an immediate, severe, and permanent hearing loss, which is termed acoustic trauma. The degree of hearing impairment seen after acoustic trauma varies and may range from a mild to profound hearing loss.

If you went by the standard you suggested, 100 db at 15 minutes to 150 db would mean 17 (rounded) graduations reducing the duration by half with each. 15 minutes is 900 seconds.

So for shooting a 150 db firearm, we take 900 seconds and divide each cycle by half, right?
db Seconds of Duration Before Damage
100 900
103 450
106 225
109 112.5
112 56.25
115 28.125
118 14.06
121 7.03
124 3.51
127 1.75
130 0.878
133 0.439
136 0.220
139 0.110
142 0.055
145 0.027
148 0.014
151 0.006


Check this link ...
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2052

Here you see many handguns, rifles, and shotguns produce noise in the 150-160 db range, so continuing the chart from above...

154 0.003433 seconds
157 0.001716 seconds
160 0.000858 seconds

So, given that gun reports may last anywhere from 1/10th to a quarter of a second (initial impluse), you may experience instant hearing damage at as little as about 136 db. Now, combine that with the fact that the duration of the noise event of a gun fired inside is prolonged by noise reflection (echo) from walls, floor, ceiling, etc., then you have an event where you actually get multiple fast sequence (and sometimes combined) impulse events.

Say you are in a room and fire a 151 db gun. You will get minimally 6 initial reflections (floor, ceiling, 4 walls) in addition to the actual shot. Even though each reflection will be less than the original shot, they are insults. For example, say the floor and ceiling on came back with 145 db each. The walls to your side with 142 each. The wall directly in front of you with 148, and the wall behind you with just 130 db. This means that one initial insult caused immediate hearing damage as did 5 of the reflected impluses off of the walls. The 6th from behind you did not produce immediate hearing damage, but it did add to the damage as well because of the cumulative nature of hearing loss. Keep in mind that these are ONLY the first reflections. You may suffer several cycles of secondary reflections that will each be less in intensity, but still adding to the damage.

FIRING GUNS INDOORS, EVEN ONE SHOT, CAN AND WILL PRODUCE HEARING DAMAGE

So with shot number 1, you have maybe as many as 6 hearing loss events. Say you decide to double tap the intruder. Now you have 12 hearing loss events. Say the intruder attempts to shoot you as well. Then there are still more events.

Also see testing done by folks used in a precondition/postcondition test in regard to firearms qualification...
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=1501543&pageindex=1#page

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The purpose of the long explanation was to provide information so that folks can make informed decisions. As others have stated, I am willing to trade a little bit of hearing loss to save my life. Hearing protection is not my primary concern in home defense, although I do keep electronic muffs and other gear near the bed. If I have a chance to use them, great. I do use them when investigating the proverbial bumps in the night. In an immediate crisis, there won't be time to put on muffs. Such is life.

 

[arthurcw]

Not probably. One hundred percent certain. Hearing damage sets in after 15 minutes at 100dB. Most firearms are in the 150dB range. Every 3dBs halves the permissable exposure time. Carry it out.

Feanaro, you didn't do the math, did you? At 150 db, there will be hearing damage. Your suggestion that there won't be damage is wrong.

DNS, I don't think Feanaro was suggesting what you think he was suggesting. I took from his post that it is,

One hundred percent certain

that you will get hearing damage.

 

[benEzra]

Like Joab said about a crack vs a boom: a 45 ACP is sub-sonic, so it will boom. My 357 sig will be supersonic and generate a sonic boom (crack).

I reach for the 45 first.

The shock wave from the supersonic bullet starts at the muzzle and travels forward attached to the bullet, not to the rear. So whether the bullet is supersonic or subsonic doesn't really play much role in the dB level at the shooter's ear, though it could affect what somebody would hear in the downrange direction.

The more significant factors in the .357 vs. .45 ACP noise difference (164.3 dB vs. 157.0 dB) are the barrel-cylinder gap of a revolver (source of a lot of radiated noise--compare a .22 revolver to a .22 semiauto of similar breech-to-muzzle length) and the much greater gas volume produced by the .357.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

There are some strange (unscientific) effects that happen during a gunfight. In post-shooting interviews (or de-briefings) participants often report not even hearing the sound of fired shots. And recall no "ringing-in-the-ears" immediately following the suspension of gunfire EVEN WITH THE EVENT HAPPENING INDOORS. I've often wondered if, within the parameters of actual, life-threatening gunfire, these people who claim to remember hearing NOTHING still suffer (what we believe to be) unavoidable hearing loss. I have, unfortunately, been twice subjected to .45 caliber handgun fire within a confined, indoor location. My ears rang for HOURS like I had been Front Row at a Who Concert.

 

[nate392]

In my opinion in the case of me or my family being threatened by that kind of danger, temporary deafness is something that I can live with with when I walk away with my life at hand.

 

[Feanaro]

One loud shot of even a .45 acp or a 12 gauge will not perminantly damage your hearing

Yes, it will. Anything above 120dBs will cause instant hearing loss.

Feanaro, you didn't do the math, did you? At 150 db, there will be hearing damage. Your suggestion that there won't be damage is wrong.

I think someone was posting before their morning coffee. Though I do admit to not doing the math. Pointless when you know the answer.

I've often wondered if, within the parameters of actual, life-threatening gunfire, these people who claim to remember hearing NOTHING still suffer (what we believe to be) unavoidable hearing loss.

Noise Induced Hearing Loss is caused when the cochlea are "overloaded" by an intense soundwave. This soundwave exists whether we hear it or not. I very much doubt these people escape without hearing loss. It may not be noticed immediately, or ever, but there's no reason why it shouldn't occur.

 

[ServiceSoon]

The louder the bang the more likely a neighbor will send help.

 

[Prince Yamato]

Take into account that unless you have marble floors, walls, and ceilings, your rug and other furniture could act as an acoustic dampener and reduce the overall loudness of the firearm.

To relieve some fears here: you're not going to go completely deaf after discharging a firearm. So relax.