It seems fairly likely that I'll be in a situation where I need to take a shot without having time for hearing protection, especially when out hunting.
I know that pretty much all centerfire rifles cause hearing damage, but clearly there is a huge difference in the amount of damage between say a 16" .308 with a muzzle brake and a 22" .308 without. I'm trying to contain my collection of firearms to ones that I don't *hate* firing without hearing protection, in case it comes to it. Decibel charts don't seem to tell the whole story here.
Here's my purely anecdotal experience, mostly pertaining to shooting without hearing protection.
.22lr from a 23" barrel isn't bad at all. I wouldn't shoot it all day, but some shots really don't bother me, especially if I use subsonic ammo. If I have to dispatch an animal, I don't mind going without hearing protection.
18" Ruger 10/22 is definitely louder, but not too bad.
16" Ruger 10/22 is getting the point where I'd really rather have hearing protection.
I have shot my 9mm handgun a couple of times without hearing protection. I don't recommend it at all. Definitely quieted my hearing, though no auditory exclusion. It wasn't painful, but not pleasant. I appreciate that I know what it's like and I can tolerate it. I'd be nervous of other handguns not being quite the same.
I shot .32 long out of a Ruger LCR once. I think it was less loud than the 9mm, but more painful. I hated the one shot I did and would only begrudgingly carry it now, in case I did have to shoot it.
.308 subsonic without a suppressor makes my ears ring, but isn't horrible. I think from a 16" barrel.
My .22lr Ruger pistol is very loud, but it dosn't ruin my day to shoot without hearing protection.
My 18" .223 rifle with one can was excessively loud (dissapointingly so), but with another is okay. I have not shot it without a can, particularly based on how it felt with a can.
Obviously, ammunition makes a big difference as well. Shooting indoors completely changes the game for the worse.
Speaking of indoors, I had a 16" .308 (why they make the things, I have no idea unless you are going to run a can) with a bird cage muzzle device. I had good ear muffs on. Immediately quieted my right ear after shooting. I now avoid 16" .308s and double up when shooting indoors.
Obviously, the consensus is to always wear hearing protection. I'm not arguing with that at all. And if not hearing protection, a suppressor. It's just not always possible/practical in all cases.
It seems like some rifles are notably less painful than others. As far as handguns go, semiautomatics are definitely easier on the ear than revolvers (assuming not a Nagant which has no gap.)
A friend of mine has a .44 magnum single shot and says that it's quieter than a .22lr pistol (I can believe this.) It seems like bigger bores, longer barrels, and lower pressures all help. This makes me think that a revolver caliber lever action or single shot would be okay enough for the occasional shot without hearing protection.
I've heard that AR-15s are quite painful regardless of barrel length. I'm not sure if this applies to .223 bolt actions or not, or if it's more to do with the action or muzzle device.
I am pretty sure that 7.62x39 AKs are more comfortable to shoot than 5.56 ARs, but I can't speak from experience. I'm mainly trying to escape the "ruin my day" level of noise (and harshness) that some rifles produce.
So I'm curious, what rifles are in the "ruin your day" category to shoot without hearing protection, and which are a very bad idea to shoot without hearing protection, but don't ruin your day?
For instance, is a 24" .30-06 miserable to shoot without? Is .308 worse for the same barrel length because the pressures are higher?
What about the 18" CZ 527/600 7.62x39 rifles?
What about a 22" .223?
A 29? Mauser? I've wondered if some of the old military rifles aren't as bad as say a modern M4.
AKs, ARs, SKS, VZ58s, etc?
Thank you!
I know that pretty much all centerfire rifles cause hearing damage, but clearly there is a huge difference in the amount of damage between say a 16" .308 with a muzzle brake and a 22" .308 without. I'm trying to contain my collection of firearms to ones that I don't *hate* firing without hearing protection, in case it comes to it. Decibel charts don't seem to tell the whole story here.
Here's my purely anecdotal experience, mostly pertaining to shooting without hearing protection.
.22lr from a 23" barrel isn't bad at all. I wouldn't shoot it all day, but some shots really don't bother me, especially if I use subsonic ammo. If I have to dispatch an animal, I don't mind going without hearing protection.
18" Ruger 10/22 is definitely louder, but not too bad.
16" Ruger 10/22 is getting the point where I'd really rather have hearing protection.
I have shot my 9mm handgun a couple of times without hearing protection. I don't recommend it at all. Definitely quieted my hearing, though no auditory exclusion. It wasn't painful, but not pleasant. I appreciate that I know what it's like and I can tolerate it. I'd be nervous of other handguns not being quite the same.
I shot .32 long out of a Ruger LCR once. I think it was less loud than the 9mm, but more painful. I hated the one shot I did and would only begrudgingly carry it now, in case I did have to shoot it.
.308 subsonic without a suppressor makes my ears ring, but isn't horrible. I think from a 16" barrel.
My .22lr Ruger pistol is very loud, but it dosn't ruin my day to shoot without hearing protection.
My 18" .223 rifle with one can was excessively loud (dissapointingly so), but with another is okay. I have not shot it without a can, particularly based on how it felt with a can.
Obviously, ammunition makes a big difference as well. Shooting indoors completely changes the game for the worse.
Speaking of indoors, I had a 16" .308 (why they make the things, I have no idea unless you are going to run a can) with a bird cage muzzle device. I had good ear muffs on. Immediately quieted my right ear after shooting. I now avoid 16" .308s and double up when shooting indoors.
Obviously, the consensus is to always wear hearing protection. I'm not arguing with that at all. And if not hearing protection, a suppressor. It's just not always possible/practical in all cases.
It seems like some rifles are notably less painful than others. As far as handguns go, semiautomatics are definitely easier on the ear than revolvers (assuming not a Nagant which has no gap.)
A friend of mine has a .44 magnum single shot and says that it's quieter than a .22lr pistol (I can believe this.) It seems like bigger bores, longer barrels, and lower pressures all help. This makes me think that a revolver caliber lever action or single shot would be okay enough for the occasional shot without hearing protection.
I've heard that AR-15s are quite painful regardless of barrel length. I'm not sure if this applies to .223 bolt actions or not, or if it's more to do with the action or muzzle device.
I am pretty sure that 7.62x39 AKs are more comfortable to shoot than 5.56 ARs, but I can't speak from experience. I'm mainly trying to escape the "ruin my day" level of noise (and harshness) that some rifles produce.
So I'm curious, what rifles are in the "ruin your day" category to shoot without hearing protection, and which are a very bad idea to shoot without hearing protection, but don't ruin your day?
For instance, is a 24" .30-06 miserable to shoot without? Is .308 worse for the same barrel length because the pressures are higher?
What about the 18" CZ 527/600 7.62x39 rifles?
What about a 22" .223?
A 29? Mauser? I've wondered if some of the old military rifles aren't as bad as say a modern M4.
AKs, ARs, SKS, VZ58s, etc?
Thank you!