More often than not, I do not enough time to put plugs in. Plus, I have never hunted with anyone who used them. I would never hunt with a muzzle brake and would try to dissuade anyone else from using one. One shot with a muzzle brake without ear pro can cause instantaneous and permanent hearing loss. Suppressors are great and mitigate recoil only a little less than a brake. An extra 8 oz. on the end of my gun just makes it shoot better. Not knocking anyone else's choice, but switching to suppressed hunting has been awesome.
As a European hunter I really have to disagree here. Suppressors most definitely allow you to get more animals out of a group, because they don't run away as often after the fist shot. This effect is especially pronounced if hunting at ranges under 200m, where with suppressors, you definitely increase your chances of taking multiple animals out of a group if hunting suppressed (as in take out both the 2 fawns and the doe in 3 consecutive shots). If they run after the initial suppressed shot, they most often run in all directions, instead of away from you, which also increases your chances for consecutive shots. Additionally a suppressor is protecting your and everyone else's hearing. Especially your dog will thank you not damaging their hearing. And a suppressor allows you to take surprise shots way better, if hunting in dense woodlands. And that's from the experience of shooting hundreds of deer over many years (both by myself and colleagues).
I respectfully disagree. Any noise over 100 DB is not good for humans or dogs. It may seam quitter but it is still harmful . Noise canceling head gear is for now the proper way to go.
@@tompanek7511 I use both a suppressor and electronic earplugs. And I concur with your observation, though I have to point out that even though 130dB definitely still warrants hearing protection, it is definitely less harmful than 160dB. And due to earplugs only suppressing around 30dB, to get to under 100, you definitely need both a suppressed gun and ear-pro. Additionally most dogs won’t tolerate earmuffs if not in a constantly loud environment like a plane. They will simply pull them off their head and then suffer hearing damage, even if positioned a few meter behind the shooter (as for instance sitting under the high-seat)
I almost completely agree just a tiny caveat, but I think in small deer groups they tend to all go in the same direction. Often the deer not shot will find a bit of concealment and then just look around and often going back to do whatever they were doing before. I only take deer per my local regulations but often I would get more shots if I wanted them. The deer I shot will run based on shot placement. CNS they drop, neck they drop, but I usually just take out the lungs since it’s easy and they run as far as possible usually in the direction they were heading prior but sometimes they don’t. The other animals usually run in the same direction but I find it’s more how they’re grouped. If you have a few that are really holding with each other prior, they’ll do whatever the shot deer does. If they’re all random then they’ll mostly just go into alert mode. Suppressed is by far the best way to hunt. I personally like that I’m disturbing the animals less because I’m usually just taking a meat deer and I’m not there to compete with animals. I do respect being a better woodsman but that’s just not what drives me to hunt.
@@bugoutjeep8065 Fully agree. The "small caveat" is not a caveat at all, but a more precise spelling out of what the deer do. I think I was made less understandable by English not being my first language there. With "all directions" I tried to convey, that they will flee in "any direction", not so much that the group suddenly scatters. You are 100% right, that a group of deer will generally flee together. This happens usually under the lead of the most experienced/oldest individuals in the group.
I couldn't disagree with you more. My experience is exactly the opposite. Unsuppressed shots blow out herds, suppressed shots usually don't disturb them at all. You mentioned that a suppressor adds recoil...that is 100% inaccurate. Suppressors reduce recoil. They are not as effective as a brake in recoil reduction, and that is one of the trade offs, but they absolutely do reduce recoil on a gun. In my experience, you don't alway have time for ears. I'll take the reduced noise and (minimal) added weight over the ear piercing sound and concussion of a brake.
When he said they add recoil, he meant that they add recoil compared to a muzzle brake, not a bare muzzle. But I was about to comment the same thing that shooting animals in herds, using a suppressor the herd will most likely not go as crazy versus if you had a bare muzzle or muzzle brake.
This is a common misconception that suppressors “reduce” recoil. What they actually do is reduce, “felt recoil” . They don’t reduce actual recoil, they lengthen the pulse of the recoil so instead of a quick “punch” to your shoulder, it’s a slower “push” to your shoulder. This greatly reduces the perception of felt recoil. Having said all that, there are suppressors now, that incorporate external brakes in their design. Those would have the benefit of both reducing recoil and sound. No question that a brake reduces recoil , however it also increases the shockwave and sound to the shooter. If you’re prone to flinch, this could exacerbate that, especially if you’re used to shooting with a suppressor on the range. Also, depending on your environment, it can raise your dust signature and debris flying from objects near the muzzle.
I agree with your opinion on backpack hunts. Application makes a big difference. My experience is that game animals hear so well, they will most definitely hear a supersonic/subsonic, suppressed gun shot, or even a bow/arrow in some situations. It's a 50/50 whether or not the other animals will run off after the shot. I think that depends more on how alert the animal was to your presence before the shot. I think they are great for blind hunting, or with kids if you are not hiking far.
If I can give my two cents worth of thoughts, my opinion is that distance is the biggest deciding factor! Long range the bullet hits before or if the sound of it going off will, but if shooting closer ranges then I do think that it makes a difference to have the suppressor! Notice that in the video when you talk about the sound down range you can ven use the example of 1,000 yards not many people can or ever should be hunting at 1,000 yards! So from an average range of under 500 yards and for many under 300 yards then the suppression will in fact be positive over a muzzle brake! But each his/her own! Hunt in the way that makes you comfortable, and successful in the field and down range! Be safe and hunt on everyone!
I'm 64 and have been an avid hunter since I was 10. I've been hunting with suppressors for years. IMO, your pretty much full of ****, my experience is almost the opposite. The only thing I agree with is your thoughts on the supersonic crack. Which makes it difficult for the animal to know where the shot came from.
In New Zealand almost everyone hunts with suppressor due to (my option) being able to shoot multiple animals (there is no limit) in a group, it's stalking, animal could 2m away and it's point and shoot, but sure if you are backpacking in and only going to shoot one animal at 800m then there is probably no point, as long as you know your point of aim shift
Get your point about mountain hunting and weight. But give me a can hunting in all other situations. I also find that more animals run towards me after the shot. Assume that is were they hear the crack behind them. I also realize the conflict potential in a company selling a brake not cans. One other advantage of a can is reducing subconscious reactions to the ignition of the cartridge at your face. Helps see impacts.. it’s all a give and take. The answer is not an absolute…
The reason you should hunt with a suppressor is for your own health. The way I hunt assumes I will only get one animal anyway. I am not allowed to keep hunting unless it is a confirmed kill. You use both a suppressor and hearing protections to protect your ears. You can also be nice to everyone around you as they should preferably never even know you exist. If they never notice you, they are never inconvenienced.
If your hunting alone out in the woods and need a quick shot your fine. The sound wave goes around the shooter and it doesnt hurt. The problem comes in when you have a hunting partner with you and thier not prepared for the shot. The soundwave will get them and you will do serious damage to their hearing. I agree to use them on range days, they make everyones day better.
I own a can and it has its merits, but hunting out of box blinds, I like more compact sets up. I often don’t run any muzzle devices. I would never hunt with a brake, ever. Forget to put in ear protection one time and bye bye hearing.
@@airenthusiast1071 Canadian companies can manufacture suppressors. It just requires the correct licensing. Cadex, PGW DTI, Diemaco/Colt Canada are all Canadian companies that manufacture suppressors in Canada.
Just screams someone who hasn't done alot of hunting with a sound mod. You should look at an overseas style of shooting europe being one pretty much contradicts the majority of what you say.
I have had many instances where I have downed an animal suppressed and the herd just sticks around. We have taken multiple animals from a herd with multiple hunters all shooting suppressed. It never would’ve happened if we were unleashing Thor’s hammer every shot. I also believe that it’s kinder and gentler to the other animals in the field and also if you’re in Bear country, you’re not ringing the bell.
This opinion seems to assume that everyone is shooting at calm animals from long range with plenty of time to get set up for the shot. The benefits of a suppressor are greatest when taking quick shots up close at spooked animals.
@@shootinbruin3614 Before you are being condescending maybe you should actually listen to how he delivers his message. Remember that the video is about the pros and cons of a suppressor in hunting. We are NOT talking about muzzle breaks at all so they should never even really be in consideration for this video. The segment before he say that is a segment where he say that suppressors are worthless unless you want to be nice to people during practice shooting. It is then he say that it is a pro that it adds recoil (because he assumes that you always have a muzzle break) so you are better trained. However this is like saying it is a pro to shoot with one arm tied behind your back. Fact is suppressors reduce recoil. He does not want to give suppressors any pros so this is why he delivers this "con" as a pro. The way he delivers his opinions are very strange. In fact. I think this guy never talks about what the actual pros are with hunting with suppressors. He is clearly biased towards muzzle breaks. That is why he never talks about the real reason you have a suppressor. In other words. You use a supressor for YOUR health.
@@Cloud_Seeker Lmao 1:11 "I've shot plenty of times with a brake at animals" 2:16 "It adds recoil. It's harder to spot your shots with a suppressor than a brake . . . It kicks a little bit more" 2:25 " . . . so you gotta be more attentive and have your form built better . . . manage the recoil better than you do with a brake" Regardless of whether you think hunting with brakes is a good idea or not, his statement about suppressors adding recoil is clearly in comparison to that of a braked rifle and not a bare muzzle. YOU need to listen before commenting, my man.
@@shootinbruin3614 1. We are not talking about muzzle breaks vs suppressors. We are talking about the pro's and con's of a suppressor as the title say. He is clearly lying with his title because he made this into a muzzle break good, suppressor bad. But that is beside the point. Guess what. I have also shot things but with a suppressor. 1-shot 1-kill. But guess what. How many things you shot things with X accessory does not mean your argument is better or more legit. No one say you can't shoot an animal with a brake. That is not the argument anyone has presented. Why are you trying with this red herring fallacy? 2. No it does not. You do not assume the base standard is with a muzzle break. But that is what he does. You assume the standard is without any accessories at all. You know. The rifle you actually get from the factory. There is a reason why an accessory is called an accessory. An accessory does not make a gun do its job. 3. Just a repeat of what you said before. And as I said before this is not real advice or any pro or con video. The fact he only at this point actually say he is comparing everything he say while using a brake proves my point. He didn't say he compared a suppressor with a brake at 1:11 or that it was the point of the video. This is why this video is a bad video that present misinformation. Dude. It isn't about me listening. It is about you not being able to use your brain. Guess that is the standard American for you. This guy is biased. I have had a look at his store. - He sell no suppressors at all. - He lies about what this video is actually about. - He only consider taking long mountain trips as hunting. Guess the times I have hunted does not count then as it is a real No True Scotsman. - He is lying by omission and do not actually bring up the real pro's of a suppressor. - He sets false standards and do not actually use the real standard. Having a suppressor is still better than having no suppressor or brake at all. Maybe he is correct in his narrow point of view. But he is also extremely biased and have a financial incentive to have this bias. Maybe if you actually try to listen and understand what I am saying you should be able to understand this.
Respectfully but Strongly disagree with most of this. The backpack hunting argument is valid but doesn’t apply to all hunters. I’m a tree stand hunter and rarely have to walk more than a half mile to my stand, so a little added weight is no big deal. Additionally, Suppressor’s definitely don’t increase recoil. Quite the opposite. How are you going to complain about adding weight to your rifle, then claim it also increases recoil. The added weight helps with the recoil.
I want to see if my theory is true. Shooting a Weatherby MarkV 7mm REM Mag. 1. No suppressor, Berger 168vld observed an exit hole on a deer. 2. With suppressor same gun and grain bullet with NO exit hole? Why is that? My kids tells me it’s my bullet. TIA!
My experiences dictate the same, on the other note,.....ya - lmao at the dudes cutting on EVERYTHING then pack a can, no too mention - dudes are bigger & weigh MORE than EVER, walk & hunt LESS than EVER & worry themselves buying lightweight-junk till they're broke,.....certainly WAY different, even the opposite from 40-50 yrs. ago, even 30 yrs ago, for example - all the goodies & comforts of home are more important than Weapon & optics,.....some dudes carry more food & clothes for 3 days than we use to carry for 3 weeks & walk/hike like 1/10th the miles....ya - have to agree - forget the cans - go hunt, stretch the stalk/not the shot - & make the shot count - they're just animals for food, not the enemy that shoots back - train/practice longrange for that.
I sighted my rifle in with my suppressor attached. If I go hunting with that rifle w/suppressor attached, I have zero change in my POA vs POI...!!! Going hunting w/o suppressor attached...not so much...!!!
Pros for me.. literally everything, from no change in POI to my ears arent bleeding! Cons: go to jail, pretty sure its a felony if i remember right. Oh i live in canada btw! True north strong and errr umm well nvm…..
I agree. Suppressors are still too loud. Any shot over 100 db is harmful to your ears . The best rifle suppressor is rated at 134 db. Suppression is a waste of money.
And you have never considered that it is better for your ears to muffel the sound of suppressed gun rather than a gun that has its shot increased by 70% or so? If you want to be protected from harmful noise. Used a suppressed gun AND hearing protection. You do not have to choose one over the other.
@@tompanek7511 Do you sell those things or are you just a unpaid walking ad? First of they do not cancel all noise. Ear mufflers are not some new invention and these do not make you deaf just like any other. Stuff like having a mic that shut off when there is loud noises are also not new. Construction crews have had those for decades at this point, and military personal even longer. You bring these things up as if just a brand name is enough. It isn't and stop being stupid. You can get just as good ear protection from a budget ear muffler from china. The only thing that is lacking is the mic to help with hearing when there is no loud noise. Having a suppressor and ear mufflers is something you should have if you value your long term health. Ear mufflers are good, but not flawless. So stop act like they are flawless.
You know. I really hate these types of comments as they are more worthless types. Okay, you disagree. But with what do you disagree with? It is of no use to anyone to just say "Disagree". However. Thinking about it. Yes. I disagree with this video as well. You might have helped me out earlier by pointing out what the problems are, but you didn't. The problems with this video is that this guys only assumes his way to hunt is the only way. He also do not put his own health above everything else. He has a conflict of interest in what he advocate for as he sells muzzle breaks and not suppressors. This video is clearly biased. It only give cons to suppressors and try make cons into pros so he doesn't have to present any real pros. He literally used a "shooting with a hand tied behind your back" as a possitive thing.
More often than not, I do not enough time to put plugs in. Plus, I have never hunted with anyone who used them. I would never hunt with a muzzle brake and would try to dissuade anyone else from using one. One shot with a muzzle brake without ear pro can cause instantaneous and permanent hearing loss. Suppressors are great and mitigate recoil only a little less than a brake. An extra 8 oz. on the end of my gun just makes it shoot better.
Not knocking anyone else's choice, but switching to suppressed hunting has been awesome.
I shot a 308 with a brake on w/o ear pro and my ears were ringing for 5 minutes.
One big advantage to suppressors is that you can talk with whoever your hunting with all the way up to the shot.
I hunt with a suppressor but I also always hunt with active ear pro on.
As a European hunter I really have to disagree here.
Suppressors most definitely allow you to get more animals out of a group, because they don't run away as often after the fist shot. This effect is especially pronounced if hunting at ranges under 200m, where with suppressors, you definitely increase your chances of taking multiple animals out of a group if hunting suppressed (as in take out both the 2 fawns and the doe in 3 consecutive shots). If they run after the initial suppressed shot, they most often run in all directions, instead of away from you, which also increases your chances for consecutive shots.
Additionally a suppressor is protecting your and everyone else's hearing. Especially your dog will thank you not damaging their hearing.
And a suppressor allows you to take surprise shots way better, if hunting in dense woodlands.
And that's from the experience of shooting hundreds of deer over many years (both by myself and colleagues).
NO it I NOT protecting yours and everyone else’s hearing.
I respectfully disagree. Any noise over 100 DB is not good for humans or dogs. It may seam quitter but it is still harmful . Noise canceling head gear is for now the proper way to go.
@@tompanek7511 I use both a suppressor and electronic earplugs. And I concur with your observation, though I have to point out that even though 130dB definitely still warrants hearing protection, it is definitely less harmful than 160dB. And due to earplugs only suppressing around 30dB, to get to under 100, you definitely need both a suppressed gun and ear-pro.
Additionally most dogs won’t tolerate earmuffs if not in a constantly loud environment like a plane. They will simply pull them off their head and then suffer hearing damage, even if positioned a few meter behind the shooter (as for instance sitting under the high-seat)
I almost completely agree just a tiny caveat, but I think in small deer groups they tend to all go in the same direction. Often the deer not shot will find a bit of concealment and then just look around and often going back to do whatever they were doing before. I only take deer per my local regulations but often I would get more shots if I wanted them. The deer I shot will run based on shot placement. CNS they drop, neck they drop, but I usually just take out the lungs since it’s easy and they run as far as possible usually in the direction they were heading prior but sometimes they don’t. The other animals usually run in the same direction but I find it’s more how they’re grouped. If you have a few that are really holding with each other prior, they’ll do whatever the shot deer does. If they’re all random then they’ll mostly just go into alert mode.
Suppressed is by far the best way to hunt. I personally like that I’m disturbing the animals less because I’m usually just taking a meat deer and I’m not there to compete with animals. I do respect being a better woodsman but that’s just not what drives me to hunt.
@@bugoutjeep8065 Fully agree. The "small caveat" is not a caveat at all, but a more precise spelling out of what the deer do. I think I was made less understandable by English not being my first language there.
With "all directions" I tried to convey, that they will flee in "any direction", not so much that the group suddenly scatters. You are 100% right, that a group of deer will generally flee together. This happens usually under the lead of the most experienced/oldest individuals in the group.
I couldn't disagree with you more. My experience is exactly the opposite. Unsuppressed shots blow out herds, suppressed shots usually don't disturb them at all. You mentioned that a suppressor adds recoil...that is 100% inaccurate. Suppressors reduce recoil. They are not as effective as a brake in recoil reduction, and that is one of the trade offs, but they absolutely do reduce recoil on a gun. In my experience, you don't alway have time for ears. I'll take the reduced noise and (minimal) added weight over the ear piercing sound and concussion of a brake.
When he said they add recoil, he meant that they add recoil compared to a muzzle brake, not a bare muzzle. But I was about to comment the same thing that shooting animals in herds, using a suppressor the herd will most likely not go as crazy versus if you had a bare muzzle or muzzle brake.
This is a common misconception that suppressors “reduce” recoil. What they actually do is reduce, “felt recoil” . They don’t reduce actual recoil, they lengthen the pulse of the recoil so instead of a quick “punch” to your shoulder, it’s a slower “push” to your shoulder. This greatly reduces the perception of felt recoil. Having said all that, there are suppressors now, that incorporate external brakes in their design. Those would have the benefit of both reducing recoil and sound.
No question that a brake reduces recoil , however it also increases the shockwave and sound to the shooter. If you’re prone to flinch, this could exacerbate that, especially if you’re used to shooting with a suppressor on the range. Also, depending on your environment, it can raise your dust signature and debris flying from objects near the muzzle.
Great to have someone actually being honest, appreciated
I agree with your opinion on backpack hunts. Application makes a big difference. My experience is that game animals hear so well, they will most definitely hear a supersonic/subsonic, suppressed gun shot, or even a bow/arrow in some situations. It's a 50/50 whether or not the other animals will run off after the shot. I think that depends more on how alert the animal was to your presence before the shot. I think they are great for blind hunting, or with kids if you are not hiking far.
I usually just go on a diet and keep the suppressor.
If I can give my two cents worth of thoughts, my opinion is that distance is the biggest deciding factor! Long range the bullet hits before or if the sound of it going off will, but if shooting closer ranges then I do think that it makes a difference to have the suppressor! Notice that in the video when you talk about the sound down range you can ven use the example of 1,000 yards not many people can or ever should be hunting at 1,000 yards! So from an average range of under 500 yards and for many under 300 yards then the suppression will in fact be positive over a muzzle brake! But each his/her own! Hunt in the way that makes you comfortable, and successful in the field and down range! Be safe and hunt on everyone!
yep a 9.7 oz Nomad Ti is just gonna kill my back😂😂
Dude is totally voting for Kamalalala
I'm 64 and have been an avid hunter since I was 10. I've been hunting with suppressors for years. IMO, your pretty much full of ****, my experience is almost the opposite. The only thing I agree with is your thoughts on the supersonic crack. Which makes it difficult for the animal to know where the shot came from.
In New Zealand almost everyone hunts with suppressor due to (my option) being able to shoot multiple animals (there is no limit) in a group, it's stalking, animal could 2m away and it's point and shoot, but sure if you are backpacking in and only going to shoot one animal at 800m then there is probably no point, as long as you know your point of aim shift
Get your point about mountain hunting and weight. But give me a can hunting in all other situations. I also find that more animals run towards me after the shot. Assume that is were they hear the crack behind them. I also realize the conflict potential in a company selling a brake not cans. One other advantage of a can is reducing subconscious reactions to the ignition of the cartridge at your face. Helps see impacts.. it’s all a give and take. The answer is not an absolute…
The reason you should hunt with a suppressor is for your own health. The way I hunt assumes I will only get one animal anyway. I am not allowed to keep hunting unless it is a confirmed kill.
You use both a suppressor and hearing protections to protect your ears. You can also be nice to everyone around you as they should preferably never even know you exist. If they never notice you, they are never inconvenienced.
Agree with everything you said!!
If your hunting alone out in the woods and need a quick shot your fine. The sound wave goes around the shooter and it doesnt hurt. The problem comes in when you have a hunting partner with you and thier not prepared for the shot. The soundwave will get them and you will do serious damage to their hearing. I agree to use them on range days, they make everyones day better.
I own a can and it has its merits, but hunting out of box blinds, I like more compact sets up. I often don’t run any muzzle devices. I would never hunt with a brake, ever. Forget to put in ear protection one time and bye bye hearing.
When is MDT coming out with a suppressor??
Never. Unless they start manufacturing in a legal country.
@@airenthusiast1071 Canadian companies can manufacture suppressors. It just requires the correct licensing. Cadex, PGW DTI, Diemaco/Colt Canada are all Canadian companies that manufacture suppressors in Canada.
Spot-on!
Just screams someone who hasn't done alot of hunting with a sound mod. You should look at an overseas style of shooting europe being one pretty much contradicts the majority of what you say.
MDT sportinggoods have you ever heard of the Blaser R8
I respectfully disagree.
I have had many instances where I have downed an animal suppressed and the herd just sticks around. We have taken multiple animals from a herd with multiple hunters all shooting suppressed. It never would’ve happened if we were unleashing Thor’s hammer every shot. I also believe that it’s kinder and gentler to the other animals in the field and also if you’re in Bear country, you’re not ringing the bell.
This opinion seems to assume that everyone is shooting at calm animals from long range with plenty of time to get set up for the shot. The benefits of a suppressor are greatest when taking quick shots up close at spooked animals.
Did you say that a can ADDS recoil?
You've been playing too many video games, my man.
"Than a brake."
You need to listen before commenting, my man.
Less recoil than a standard gun but more recoil than muzzle break
@@shootinbruin3614 Before you are being condescending maybe you should actually listen to how he delivers his message. Remember that the video is about the pros and cons of a suppressor in hunting. We are NOT talking about muzzle breaks at all so they should never even really be in consideration for this video.
The segment before he say that is a segment where he say that suppressors are worthless unless you want to be nice to people during practice shooting. It is then he say that it is a pro that it adds recoil (because he assumes that you always have a muzzle break) so you are better trained. However this is like saying it is a pro to shoot with one arm tied behind your back. Fact is suppressors reduce recoil. He does not want to give suppressors any pros so this is why he delivers this "con" as a pro. The way he delivers his opinions are very strange.
In fact. I think this guy never talks about what the actual pros are with hunting with suppressors. He is clearly biased towards muzzle breaks. That is why he never talks about the real reason you have a suppressor. In other words. You use a supressor for YOUR health.
@@Cloud_Seeker Lmao
1:11 "I've shot plenty of times with a brake at animals"
2:16 "It adds recoil. It's harder to spot your shots with a suppressor than a brake . . . It kicks a little bit more"
2:25 " . . . so you gotta be more attentive and have your form built better . . . manage the recoil better than you do with a brake"
Regardless of whether you think hunting with brakes is a good idea or not, his statement about suppressors adding recoil is clearly in comparison to that of a braked rifle and not a bare muzzle.
YOU need to listen before commenting, my man.
@@shootinbruin3614
1. We are not talking about muzzle breaks vs suppressors. We are talking about the pro's and con's of a suppressor as the title say. He is clearly lying with his title because he made this into a muzzle break good, suppressor bad. But that is beside the point.
Guess what. I have also shot things but with a suppressor. 1-shot 1-kill. But guess what. How many things you shot things with X accessory does not mean your argument is better or more legit. No one say you can't shoot an animal with a brake. That is not the argument anyone has presented. Why are you trying with this red herring fallacy?
2. No it does not. You do not assume the base standard is with a muzzle break. But that is what he does. You assume the standard is without any accessories at all. You know. The rifle you actually get from the factory. There is a reason why an accessory is called an accessory. An accessory does not make a gun do its job.
3. Just a repeat of what you said before. And as I said before this is not real advice or any pro or con video. The fact he only at this point actually say he is comparing everything he say while using a brake proves my point. He didn't say he compared a suppressor with a brake at 1:11 or that it was the point of the video. This is why this video is a bad video that present misinformation.
Dude. It isn't about me listening. It is about you not being able to use your brain. Guess that is the standard American for you.
This guy is biased. I have had a look at his store.
- He sell no suppressors at all.
- He lies about what this video is actually about.
- He only consider taking long mountain trips as hunting. Guess the times I have hunted does not count then as it is a real No True Scotsman.
- He is lying by omission and do not actually bring up the real pro's of a suppressor.
- He sets false standards and do not actually use the real standard. Having a suppressor is still better than having no suppressor or brake at all.
Maybe he is correct in his narrow point of view. But he is also extremely biased and have a financial incentive to have this bias. Maybe if you actually try to listen and understand what I am saying you should be able to understand this.
Respectfully but Strongly disagree with most of this. The backpack hunting argument is valid but doesn’t apply to all hunters. I’m a tree stand hunter and rarely have to walk more than a half mile to my stand, so a little added weight is no big deal. Additionally, Suppressor’s definitely don’t increase recoil. Quite the opposite. How are you going to complain about adding weight to your rifle, then claim it also increases recoil. The added weight helps with the recoil.
I want to see if my theory is true. Shooting a Weatherby MarkV 7mm REM Mag.
1. No suppressor, Berger 168vld observed an exit hole on a deer.
2. With suppressor same gun and grain bullet with NO exit hole?
Why is that? My kids tells me it’s my bullet. TIA!
Maybe you hit a shoulder joint on the second shot.
Good for training as he says
I sure wish we we’re allowed suppressors in Canada
I wish we were allowed suppressors in California 😕
Team MDT? Don’t you mean Team Walls Rifles?
My experiences dictate the same, on the other note,.....ya - lmao at the dudes cutting on EVERYTHING then pack a can, no too mention - dudes are bigger & weigh MORE than EVER, walk & hunt LESS than EVER & worry themselves buying lightweight-junk till they're broke,.....certainly WAY different, even the opposite from 40-50 yrs. ago, even 30 yrs ago, for example - all the goodies & comforts of home are more important than Weapon & optics,.....some dudes carry more food & clothes for 3 days than we use to carry for 3 weeks & walk/hike like 1/10th the miles....ya - have to agree - forget the cans - go hunt, stretch the stalk/not the shot - & make the shot count - they're just animals for food, not the enemy that shoots back - train/practice longrange for that.
It's ok to be wrong
I sighted my rifle in with my suppressor attached. If I go hunting with that rifle w/suppressor attached, I have zero change in my POA vs POI...!!! Going hunting w/o suppressor attached...not so much...!!!
Oh boohoo what if you had to make one asjustment
Pros for me.. literally everything, from no change in POI to my ears arent bleeding! Cons: go to jail, pretty sure its a felony if i remember right. Oh i live in canada btw! True north strong and errr umm well nvm…..
Great is you are not in Canada.
It adds recoil?? "2:26"
Less recoil than a standard gun but more recoil than muzzle break
How awfully UN-Canadian of you
Does not add recoil…
I would use a suppressor if I were hunting something that could shoot back
I agree. Suppressors are still too loud. Any shot over 100 db is harmful to your ears . The best rifle suppressor is rated at 134 db. Suppression is a waste of money.
I recommend Walker game ears.
And you have never considered that it is better for your ears to muffel the sound of suppressed gun rather than a gun that has its shot increased by 70% or so?
If you want to be protected from harmful noise. Used a suppressed gun AND hearing protection. You do not have to choose one over the other.
@@Cloud_Seeker walker game ears. Increases your hearing ability and cancels gun shots.
$80 - F the suppressors
@@tompanek7511 Do you sell those things or are you just a unpaid walking ad?
First of they do not cancel all noise. Ear mufflers are not some new invention and these do not make you deaf just like any other. Stuff like having a mic that shut off when there is loud noises are also not new. Construction crews have had those for decades at this point, and military personal even longer. You bring these things up as if just a brand name is enough. It isn't and stop being stupid. You can get just as good ear protection from a budget ear muffler from china. The only thing that is lacking is the mic to help with hearing when there is no loud noise.
Having a suppressor and ear mufflers is something you should have if you value your long term health. Ear mufflers are good, but not flawless. So stop act like they are flawless.
Disagree.
You know. I really hate these types of comments as they are more worthless types. Okay, you disagree. But with what do you disagree with? It is of no use to anyone to just say "Disagree".
However. Thinking about it. Yes. I disagree with this video as well. You might have helped me out earlier by pointing out what the problems are, but you didn't.
The problems with this video is that this guys only assumes his way to hunt is the only way. He also do not put his own health above everything else. He has a conflict of interest in what he advocate for as he sells muzzle breaks and not suppressors.
This video is clearly biased. It only give cons to suppressors and try make cons into pros so he doesn't have to present any real pros. He literally used a "shooting with a hand tied behind your back" as a possitive thing.