Help deciding on a 223 can

[Hyrulejedi86]

I just got my Sparrow and Octane 9 a month ago and am already deciding on the next can I want. I probably won't be able to do anything until summer or fall but I haven't been able to come to a decision on what I want. Basically, I am between the Specwar 556 and the Specwar 762. I plan on making an AR pistol with a 10.5" barrel and SBRing it later. I already own a 16" Ar and am going to keep that at 16" as a longer distance rifle. I really do not have any plans on any bigger calibers but admittedly you never know, 10 years from now, what might interest me. The 762 has phenomenal performance on 223 as well as 308 and 300 blackout but it is quite a bit longer and heavier than the specwar 556. I usually abide by the buy once cry once but I am having a hard time seeing the Specwar 762 sticking that far out on an SBR, it almost defeats the purpose. But again I hate to miss out on on something later if I decide to get a 308 for hunting or something down the road. I keep going back and forth, size and weight vs. versatility.

I'd like to see what others think on something like this.

 

[Gtscotty]

Perhaps the 7.62 Saker would be another option? I've pretty well narrowed my .30 cal suppressor choice down to the Saker, it's shorter and lighter than the Specwar, but is still capable of handling magnums. Also, the Saker has a bunch of different mounting options encompassing both QD and direct thread attachments.

 

[Hyrulejedi86]

I agree the Saker is an awesome can but quite a bit more expensive, locally about $300 more. The Specwar seems to perform better on some platforms, as much as 5 db quieter. The direct thread option is nice though on the Saker I'll admit. Does anyone know if the saker would be hearing safe on a 10.5" Ar with the 223 end cap? I have heard the Specwar 556 and was impressed with it but I haven't heard the saker or the Specwar 762

 

[Theohazard]

Medically speaking, no .223 suppressor is actually "hearing safe". The quietest .223 suppressor on a long-barrel .223 bolt-action will still permanently damage your hearing over time. And it will be much worse on a 10.5" barrel.

I'd recommend getting a 7.62 as your first rifle can. That way you can also suppress .308, 300 Blackout, 6.8, etc. (and with the Saker and Specwar, even magnum cartridges). I can't tell you how many people I know who wished they got a 7.62 can first instead of a 5.56, that's why my first rifle can was an AAC 7.62 SDN-6. Now while I wait for the funds to buy a dedicated 5.56 can, I still have a can that will work for all the rifle calibers I shoot. But if I'd started with a 5.56 can I'd only be able to suppress 5.56 while I wait to afford a second can.

The 7.62 Specwar is a terrific can, but I agree that it's too long for SBR use. If I were you I'd save up a little extra and get the Saker. Considering how much the total cost is, the fact that it takes so long to get, and that it's highly unlikely you'll ever be able to sell it, it makes sense to spend a little extra money and get what you really want.

 

[MCMXI]

SBRs, supersonic ammunition and suppressors aren't the best combination. The only thing that appeals to me about the .300 AAC Blackout is SBR, subsonic and suppressed (and full auto of course). Bottom line .... I'd suggest a .30 cal suppressor.

 

[Theohazard]

Don't get me wrong, I love shooting 5.56 suppressed even though it's still supersonic; it's quieter than an unsuppressed .22 pistol and it makes shooting much more pleasant. But it's still going to permanently damage your hearing if you repeatedly shoot it without hearing protection. And once you go to a 5.56 SBR it gets a lot louder, even with a really good suppressor.

1858 is right that if you want a good subsonic rifle round you're going to want a 300 Blackout. However, even subsonic 300 Blackout isn't truly "hearing safe" from a medical standpoint. Here's a good link on noise-induced hearing loss:

http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/pages/noise.aspx

According to the NIH, prolonged exposure to sounds over 85 decibels can permanent cause hearing loss, so that means there is no suppressor in existence that's truly "hearing safe". It certainly seems odd that even a suppressed .22 with subsonic ammo isn't hearing safe, but I guess it just takes a heck of a lot of shooting to cause a measurable amount of hearing loss. I definitely don't wear hearing protection when I'm shooting subsonic .22; I probably get much worse hearing loss from just living in an urban area.

 

[Hyrulejedi86]

There's some really good advice here and you guys have made very good points. I suppose the Saker is looking much better overall but the performance of the specwar 762 is definitely a factor as it is even about 7 to 8 decibels quieter on 300 blackout. I've got to admit I shot my bolt action 22lr with the sparrow and it is quieter than a hand clap. Kind of hard to believe over 100db.

 

[Gtscotty]

I believe 85 dB is the max OSHA limit for 8 hrs of prolonged exposure. The key factors for hearing loss seem to be dB and duration. From what I've read, for almost instantaneous sounds like gun shots, the threshold for significant hearing loss (given a reasonable number of rounds) is somewhat higher. Either way a suppressed 10.5 inch .223 SBR is undoubtedly still going to be on the wrong side of the hearing loss equation. On the silencer shop website, the price difference between the Saker and Specwar is only about $180, I think I'm going to try their silencer shop direct program when e-forms come back online so I don't have to worry about a transfer fee at an in-state dealer.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

OSHA Daily Permissible Noise Level Exposure is 8 hours a day at 90 db with the duration halved for every 5db increase up to 140dB. Above 140dB is considered damaging at any duration. In the range of some suppressed firearms the permitted duration gets down into the seconds.

90dB -- 8 hours
95dB -- 4 hours
100dB -- 2 hours
105dB -- 60 minutes
110dB -- 30 minutes
115dB -- 15 minutes
120dB -- 450 seconds
125dB -- 225 seconds
130dB --112 seconds
135dB -- 56 seconds
140dB -- 28 seconds

Assuming a gunshot is about 5ms (2 ms is more like it but I am being very conservative):

Giving:
130dB -- >22,000 gunshots/day
135dB -- >11,000 gunshots/day
140dB -- >5,000 gunshots/day

NIOSH/CDC guidelines are much stricter. They start 8 hours for 85dB and half the exposure time for every 3dB instead of 5dB.

That would give the following for 5ms gunshots:
120dB -- >1700 gunshots/day
125dB -->500 gunshots/day
130dB -- 175 gunshots/day
135dB -- 55 gunshots/day
140dB -- 17 gunshots/day

If I wanted to follow NIOSH/CDC guidelines I would not even drive with the windows open. As someone who does not make a living with my ears, I am comfortable going with OHSA (and occasionally violate in hunting or self-defense situations).

Mike

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

My first suppressor was a 5.56. I am trying to buy a 7.62 now. I think 7.62 is probably the most versatile.

 

[DHJenkins]

I had this same dilemma a few months ago.

After talking to my dealer (silencershop.com), I went with a 7.62.

Should be getting it next month...

 

[Akita1]

I bought the AAC SDN for 7.62. AAC makes a flash hider that allows you to simply screw on/screw off the SDN. I bought three of the flash hiders: one for my 300 blackout, one for my 6.8mm and one for my .223. The SDN works on all three, but best as noted above with the 300 BO subsonic. The .223 and 6.8mm obviously stick crack when the sound barrier breaks and the rifle "boom" is only partially mitigated by the SDN. IMHO, only .22, 300 BO and pistol are best served by a suppressor, i.e., you can shoot them without hearing protection.

 

[Hyrulejedi86]

Well, you guys have convinced me 762 is the way to go. Who knows maybe I will win a Saker762 at the NRA show. Now to decide between the Saker and the Specwar. Size/cosmetics/versatility vs performance.

 

[Gtscotty]

I talked myself into it while I was trying to talk you into it, I'm happy to say I paid for a 762 Saker from Silencer Shop yesterday. Once my trust documents get finalized and eforms come back up, I'll be in business. FYI, in case you're shopping around, the Saker, Trifecta MAAD mount, muzzle brake, separate direct thread mount, tax stamp and transfer fee came to $1299, or $1 under MSPR for the can alone.

 

[Hyrulejedi86]

Just got to check out both at the NRA both and had a nice chat with the guys there. They are all very nice and even showed me the wizard staff. Interestingly, it metered 2Db LOUDER than the warlock. I really like the saker though. The mounting options are really good. I suppose I won't notice 4 Db on 223 ARs.

 

[Theohazard]

I suppose I won't notice 4 Db on 223 ARs.

Yeah, not unless you shot them back-to-back. But you sure will notice the extra weight and length of the Specwar: it's designed as more of a dedicated 7.62 can so it's an inch-and-a-half longer and four ounces heavier. But on a 5.56 that extra length will make the extra weight of the Specwar feel more than just four ounces heavier than the Saker. Trust me, when I hang my SDN-6 (about the same size and weight as the 7.62 Saker) on the end of a 16" 5.56 rifle it makes a big difference in how the rifle handles. I wouldn't want an extra 4 ounces and an extra 1.5 inches more to make the rifle feel even more cumbersome. Add in the awesome modularity of the MAAD mount system, and I think the Saker is definitely the right choice.

 

[gotigers]

I have a 10.5" 5.56. I am waiting on a spec war 5.56. I wanted to capture as much as I could and I don't want a QC for my 308. My 308 will be a thread on going on a rem 700 5r.