PEW Science, LLC

@FilmIsNeat @RetroCoast High surface area. Wonderful performance, especially for the era.

@RetroCoast @SciencePew

Cutaway of the original MAC-10 suppressor Amazingly, the first stage was loaded common shoestring eyelets. They were quite efficient at dissipating gas

@grok @NurseWilderness 😂 this is awesome, great job

Hey, check this out: Guns make a huge blast when they fire, like a super loud explosion from hot gas shooting out. A silencer (that tube on the end) tries to quiet it down, but it works differently depending on the gun it's on—like the barrel length and ammo type. These maps from PEW Science show "danger zones" around the shooter. Red/orange = louder, more risk to your ears (lower numbers). Green = quieter, safer (higher numbers). Same silencer, but on a long rifle? Okay but not great (22-33). On a short one with special quiet bullets? Way better (65+). The gun changes how the blast escapes, so human risk (hearing damage) isn't the same every time. Cool science!

Did you know that the same silencer can produce different human risk depending on the weapon with which it is used? pewscience.com/rankings

@FREEMANREALMD lol..... You should really go to our website. Take care, sir.

@SciencePew Insinuating the silencer is the main factor at play when your using subs vs supers is extremely misleading thats not even bringing the bolt vs semi factor you neglect to mention. The two largest factors at play here are not even mentioned. The fact you want to defend it is wild.

This has got be the dumbest take ever comparing 300blk from a bolt to 308 from a ar is fucking insanely stupid thats like apples to shit buckets comparison dumb. Here i was thinking these people were intelligent.

@FREEMANREALMD Sir, nothing is misleading at all. The point of the post is showing you abbreviated results from the two reports on this silencer published yesterday. Some people use silencers on different weapon systems and want to know how they perform.

@SciencePew Well maybe don't mislead people... your doing shady science when you do that. Clearly I could point out flaws in your comparison that any gun enthusiast could as well. April folls is over, be better, your beginning to sound like climate science. Next you gonna do 22 v 556.

Sir, not everyone understands small arms as well as you do. Our data is intended to help everyone! Sometimes, folks don't understand that a silencer may perform differently on different systems! Sometimes they see a Rating in our Rankings and don't understand it. pewscience.com/rankings

@SciencePew Your comparing a caliber made for supression in a gun that will accel at supresson vs a supersonic caliber in a gun less likely to aid in supresson. How is that remotely scientific you just compared a bicycle to a motorcycle.

@ZBelair711 Awesome! Reach out with questions any time.

@SciencePew Roger that! Good enough for me, I'll be sure to have a listen!

@ZBelair711 No worries at all! Yes, this is our research all located at pewscience.com - we don't make videos but I do a weekly audio podcast that is on YouTube and all podcast providers. You can find links on our website!

@SciencePew of the process because I'd definitely be interested in that kind of stuff.... 2/2

@ZBelair711 You are looking at two different weapon systems. An AR-10 with 7.62 NATO ammo and a bolt action rifle with subsonic 300BLK ammo. Blast sources from the silencer and the breech are contributing to risk with the AR-10. The bolt action has one primary source of blast.

@SciencePew So, if I'm reading this correctly (there's a lot here I'm not familiar with), the danger is the suppressor overgassing the rifle system and producing blast pressure near the user where it otherwise wouldn't be without a suppressor or with a different (non DT) mount?

@PhoenixNFA But not just projectile velocity - blast loads! That is 7.62 NATO from the SR-25 (14.5-in barrel) vs subsonic 300BLK (8-in bolt gun). The combustion is a different sport!

@SciencePew Supers vs subs. For sure!

@Helodriver20 @jerrycurld Indeed

@SciencePew @jerrycurld This looks like warp field generation

@ThatSp00n No sir, not yet!

@SciencePew Damn no SilencerCo Hybrid 46M on a 45-70

@cariboueng Absolutely! We actually have hazard curves in the frequency domain comparing several silencers in those Member research supplements. We haven't done those in a while; we should do some more!

@SciencePew It would be kinda neat to see FR graphs like you get with headphones so you could see what the tone would be before buying

@hcottom1 @robin_sage19 @WeaponOutfitter Please don't make us test this. If we do, we'll use interns I guess.

@robin_sage19 @WeaponOutfitter @SciencePew

ケツ毛、サプレッサー説

@ibeengolfin I bet we will!

@SciencePew Now do the Q Lefty

@cariboueng Great question, sir. Somewhat indirectly, yes, in that we have done some comprehensive frequency domain risk studies as presented in our Member Research supplements. What you hear as an individual can change based on some factors!

@SciencePew Have you ever looked into how different suppressors affect dba, dbb, and dbc reduction differently?

@redbanksbob @AACsuppressors No sir, you are reading it incorrectly. The number is the Suppression Rating which is a human risk criterion. 0 to 100 scale. 0 is very dangerous. 100 is very safe. Check out pewscience.com for more :)

@AACsuppressors @SciencePew Am I reading this wrong? Is that 68.9 decibels?

The numbers don't lie. 🔇 Big thanks to @SciencePew for putting our all-new AAC 762-SDN-6 to the test and letting the data do the talking. This is exactly the kind of real-world evaluation we built this suppressor for and we couldn't be more proud of the results. The original standard is back. And the 762-SDN-6 is ready to prove it. #AAC #AdvancedArmamentCo #762SDN6 #Suppressor #SuppressorData #TheOriginalStandard