Hey /k/, I need some advice.
For those of you with SBR'd PS90s and suppressors, I need to ask if it's worth it? Not SBRing it, suppressing it.
Right now on Gunbroker, there's a G5-T for sale. As far as I know, it's the only suppressor on the market (along with the G5) that has a P90 specific quick mount. It's also disconnected.
I've looked up quite a few videos of suppressed PS90s, and it seems like even with a can they aren't hearing safe. I understand you're going to get the supersonic crack, but they all seemed very loud for being suppressed.
Before I go ahead and buy the sucker, I was wondering if I could get input from people who have shot or own a suppressed PS90. Do you think it was worth it? I only plan on having it as a range toy, but am kind of along the lines of thinking, "If it's going to be a range toy, I might as well go all out and make it the best range toy I can make it."
For what it's worth, I already have the ball rolling for the following cans:
>Osprey 45
>SOCOM 556 RC2
>Saker 762
I know I could make the SOCOM work, but then I wouldn't have the correct style muzzle device on the PS90.
>>29116391
I'd rather pay the tax stamp and SBR that sucker.
>>29116407
In case I wasn't clear, I already have a tax stamp out for my PS90. I'm asking if suppressing it is worth it.
>>29116391
Just my 2 cents, but good luck getting anything but basic threads on your cut down barrel unless you use a real FN armorer.
>>29116491
You can buy p90 barrels.
>>29116491
CMMG barrels are easy to find and are threaded to FN standards.
>>29116416
Depends. Are you using it for anything more than range plinking or self-defence? It would probably make an amazing lamping gun, albeit an expensive to feed one.
>>29116535
Mainly plinking.
Meh, fuck it. I bought it. These are out of production and easily one of my favorite looking cans. I can always use it on other guns too.
>>29116497
>>29116509
No shit? I met a guy who went through all the trouble of cutting his down and threading it 1/2x28. I guess he was either cheap or fucking with me.
Back before CMMG started making barrels, the only way to get a P90 barrel with to pay $800+ for a factory one or have your PS90 barrel cut down by TROS and threaded by him.
>>29116391
DOWN
WITH
THEORETICAL
THREADS
you don't even own a single gun OP you fucking faggot
>>29116709
>Theoretical
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=544445700
You were saying? Look at the end-time, ya' dingus.
>>29116391
Question: if you have an integrated suppressor on a firearm does that count towards barrel length?
>>29116796
It does in the UK. Dunno about the US.
>>29116796
Only if it's pinned + welded to the barrel.
It's like a 14.5" barrel with a P+W muzzle device.
>>29116762
HAhaha you posted it on /k/ and someone bought it
>>29116796
Correct, welded to the barrel or otherwise integral to the construction of the barrel bringing it to 16" makes it a one-stamp gun.
Real nice to have if you travel a lot with your firearms and don't want to file a 5320.20 for every state you may visit throughout the year to transport an SBR.
You just need your stamp to travel with a suppressor across state lines.
>>29116874
I know you're trolling, but I can't understand why people do. Don't you have anything better to do with your time?
>>29116391
>>29116416
Not really desu, 5.7 is a very fast bullet and a silencer would do almost nothing.
>>29116932
i think you over spent
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=544583679
>>29117765
Damn, why didn't that show up in my search? The one I bought was the only one showing up.
Maying because I was looking for G5-T instead of G5T.
Oh well. Live and learn.
>>29116391
Goddamn I wish they would make this shit relevant and chamber it in 9mm.
>>29118094
>chamber it in 9mm
That will never work because of the magazines.
10mm auto is the only other feasible caliber that could be used.
>>29117962
casue you suck at searching action sights. just cancel, pay the restocking fee or w/e and buy the cheaper one.
>>29118295
>just cancel, pay the restocking fee or w/e and buy the cheaper one
That's not how Gunbroker works.
>>29118336
yes it does. you dont pay before you win. you pay after you win. dont pay, work something with the seller or get a new user name. not that hard
>>29118295
>>29118396
I've already paid, but sent him an e-mail regardless. Told him I'd pay a restocking/CC fee if possible.
If he doesn't, I'll just take it as an expensive life lesson. $400 isn't going to break the bank, but it's still $400.
This is my first, "Doh!" moment when it comes to firearms. I usually am a hawk for deals (hell, I got 2500 rounds of 5.7x28 for $.25/rd during Black Friday) and do tons of research on price, but the G5-T is discontinued and listed as out of stock basically everywhere. All three Class III stores I visited in my area said they couldn't get any in.
I have 2 Generation 1's and they sound great with both my silencerco sparrow and the AAC M4-2000
>>29118428
well, shit if you already paid then good luck!
>but it's still $400.
or an outback IId on top
With a can they're hearing safe, but only barely.
I used to have a spectre II on mine but here's the thing with SBRs - they're just not worth putting a can on unless you're running subs. They're still loud as fuck and you're removing the entire point of it being an SBR to begin with - being fuckin' short.
>>29116762
>paying over $1000 for shitty ass gemtech
Ooookay buddy.
>>29118458
>they're hearing safe
No.
>>29118627
>~128dB isn't hearing safe
>>29116762
LOL. I just called sharps shooting supply to tell them the guy who bought this silencer is a 4 Chan predator
>>29118670
lol, no, not even that anon
140 is the threshold for pain
120 spike is the threshold for permanent damage
85 prolonged is the threshold for permanent damage
>>29119800
>120 spike is the threshold for permanent damage
You are an idiot.
>>29119294
>anon overpays for a suppressor
>you e-mail the guy telling him not to sell to anon because he's a predator
>seller cancels transactions, anon gets his money back
>anon buys $800 G5T instead of the $1200 one
I'm going to laugh when OP comes back telling us the transaction was canceled so he saved $400.
>>29119806
http://dangerousdecibels.org/education/information-center/noise-induced-hearing-loss/
>A clap of thunder from a nearby storm (120 dB) or a gunshot (140-190 dB, depending on weapon), can both cause immediate damage.
http://dangerousdecibels.org/education/information-center/decibel-exposure-time-guidelines/
>For every 3dB above 85 dB the permissible exposure level is halfed
>115 dB ~= 30 seconds.
If the math is right 121 dB max time would be 7.5 seconds, and at 127 its down to 1.875s, 130 down to .94s
So not only am I not an idiot, you're an uneducated faggot
>>29119986
Uh oh, better let the entire firearms industry know that literally all of them are wrong.
>>29120137
well most of the noise levels are measured at the muzzle, and the distance from the muzzle to the ear can make all the difference, especially if that distance is increased while simultaneously lowering the noise level. Then it can make all the difference.
Besides the fact that the shape of the gun can disrupt the path of the sound wave itself, further shielding the user. Couple this with atmospheric conditions and how likely the environment is to reflect the sound towards or away from the user, and more things change.
All of these benefit the user, and the gun industry (who didn't voluntarily regulate suppressors). The noise level at the user's ear is what matters, not where it is measured at the muzzle
What I was directly refuting was the claim that 120 dB at the ear, and indirectly 128 dB, were hearing safe.
>>29120302
Milspec measuring is 1m from the muzzle.
>>29120312
Ok, does everyone do Milspec measuring?
Also is Milspec measured from where the ear would be? (behind the gun, sound is directional)
All of the measuring I have seen (suppressor test videos) has been 1m directly perpendicular to the bore axis.
Secondarily, other things to consider are ammo choices, and length of a gunshot (very short, depending on echos and environment, as mentioned earlier)
>>29120508
Most do. Some measure at the shooter's ear as well, which is really nice, but rare.
And yes milspec is 1m directly to the side.
>>29120533
Ok, well there is still some room for error then.
Regardless, 120 at the ear is the threshold for permanent damage, and I would not recommend long exposure ( multiple shots in succession) at or above that level.
>>29120794
>120 at the ear is the threshold for permanent damage
No it isn't.
>>29120823
see first source
>>29119986
>pic related
now you're just being obstinate
Most of them sound loud because 5.7 subs are hard as fuck to find. I work for a company that distributes FN products, and we HARDLY see any subs come down the line for public consumption. Most of that ammo gets drop shipped to .gov contracts when it is made.
>>29120893
The instantaneous threshold for damage is 140.
By your own metric, you list 121dB at 7.5 seconds of exposure. The pressure differential for a gunshot peaks within a fraction of a second.
You are the one being obstinate.
>>29120969
Because 5.7 subs are literally .22lr.
>>29120975
The metric I posted was for Maximum time of exposure.
One doesn't simply get zero damage for the first 7 seconds and instantly get damaged ears when the exposure time hits 7.5.
It doesn't matter, you do you man, I'm going to where ear pro when I feel it's appropriate.
>>29121191
wear* damn phone
