Anyone run a suppressed MR920 or G19?

[hk45]

I’m debating buying a MR920 with a threaded barrel. I like my guns to be functional so if I buy one with that barrel, I would want to shoot it suppressed. I don’t see the point of buying a threaded barrel with no intention of ever shooting with a suppressor.

I’ve obviously never owned a threaded barrel and do not own a handgun suppressor. For those of you that do, why? I would assume there are drawbacks such as limiting your holster selection if you chose to carry it, safely having it by your bedside with the suppressor mounted, possible reliability issues.

I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts.

[Kirk]

I've legitimately never heard of anyone carrying a suppressed pistol. It seems incredibly uncomfortable and if OWB, very hard to conceal.

[JCN]

I’m debating buying a MR920 with a threaded barrel. I like my guns to be functional so if I buy one with that barrel, I would want to shoot it suppressed. I don’t see the point of buying a threaded barrel with no intention of ever shooting with a suppressor.

I’ve obviously never owned a threaded barrel and do not own a handgun suppressor. For those of you that do, why? I would assume there are drawbacks such as limiting your holster selection if you chose to carry it, safely having it by your bedside with the suppressor mounted, possible reliability issues.

I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts.

You can think of a threaded barrel in a couple of ways:
1. More velocity, gives a G19 the velocity of a G17 without the rest of the slide length.
2. Can run a compensator.
3. Can run a suppressor.
4. Can swap barrel to a generic G19 barrel if you like anytime.

These are my MR920 lowers mated to a G19 upper with threaded barrel plus attachments.
68726
68727

The Aurora II is the smallest suppressor you’ll find.

68728

Also, modifying a holster from a G19 to a threaded barrel only takes a couple minutes with a BIC lighter.
Or you can order a G17 holster.

[757_Magnum]

I don't know of any reputable kydex benders that don't allow for a threaded barrel by default. The only issue I can foresee is that the new Glock gen 5 factory threaded barrels have a chubby thread protector, but that's nothing that a call to the maker or a few minutes with a file won't fix. Extended strings of fire in a class while running AIWB might get interesting with that hot barrel poking out, so a G17 holster might be a better idea in that situation.

Speaking of G17 holster compatibility, you can use a G17 Safariland holster with a threaded G19. The G17 versions are much easier to find in stock than the G19 versions in my experience, even before the current panic.

[hk45]

Excellent. What a fantastic response. I appreciate it.

Do you find that suppressor provide any meaningful decrease in sound?

I’ll be honest. What has me focusing on threaded barrels is that many of the MR920 models, including the one which features the Holosun 507c included, have threaded barrels. But, I’m wondering if people buy them mostly for asthetic purposes.

Also, will a MR920 lower work with a Gen5 19 upper or only a gen4?

[757_Magnum]

Yes, there's a huge difference in sound with a suppressor on. A good full size can will bring it down to hearing safe levels with good 9mm subsonic loads, somewhere around the level of an air gun or a hammer hitting a board. I've been playing with a micro 9mm can, a CGS Mod9 SK, with the intent of using it for home defense. With the smaller size, weight, and balance I'm trading off for noise reduction, but it still beats a bare barrel.

I'd guess that there's a good number of people who do buy threaded barrels primarily/initially for aesthetic purposes, or maybe they like the idea of being able to run a suppressor or comp. Whether they eventually do, or learn to actually shoot is another thing altogether. There's a lot of gun owners who get caught up in tricking their guns out to keep up with the Joneses on IG. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but we need to be honest about what it is. Don't worry about them when it comes to making decisions on what you want/need. I don't think there's any actual disadvantage to running a threaded barrel, only some considerations to keep in mind.
68733

[JCN]

Excellent. What a fantastic response. I appreciate it.

Do you find that suppressor provide any meaningful decrease in sound?

I’ll be honest. What has me focusing on threaded barrels is that many of the MR920 models, including the one which features the Holosun 507c included, have threaded barrels. But, I’m wondering if people buy them mostly for asthetic purposes.

Also, will a MR920 lower work with a Gen5 19 upper or only a gen4?

In my pictures above it’s actually a G19.5 MOS slide on it. You just have to change the backplate. So put a Gen 4 striker control device on it and call it good.

Also that suppressor has wipes so it’s only for use with ball ammo and accuracy suffers because it’s actually hitting urethane and Vaseline on the way out.

[hk45]

In my pictures above it’s actually a G19.5 MOS slide on it. You just have to change the backplate. So put a Gen 4 striker control device on it and call it good.

Also that suppressor has wipes so it’s only for use with ball ammo and accuracy suffers because it’s actually hitting urethane and Vaseline on the way out.

Thanks everyone for your replies. I went ahead and ordered a SS-1510 which is the elite model that comes with the bronze slided, TB, and holosun 507. Seemed like a decent deal when factoring in the cost of the holosun. I figure if I don’t like the TB I can buy a non threaded version from SS.

[alamo5000]

For carrying around you would not really need or want to carry a suppressor. That said they do make special holsters for them that work quite well. Typically the people carrying them in that fashion are doing hog hunts or something along those lines. Especially if you are getting rid of hogs and don't want to alarm the neighborhood it's a great tool. Another option is the new Griffin QD system. You can put the can on the pistol in like 3 seconds.

Suppressors make my P226 easily hearing safe. Even with super sonic ammo it's way more quiet and can be shot without ear muffs.

As far as function goes I've never had an issue but I know this varies with the gun. From what I have heard Glock based guns are not the best suppressor hosts. The VSO gun channel on Youtube has videos out on why that is. It's older but still quite relevant. He explains it perfectly.

The main thing I have found is to always wear eye protection no matter what when using ang pistol suppressor. The slight back pressure can send particulate back towards the shooter especially when using cheaper ammo.

As far as threaded barrels go I have several and they are all great. If you want to run a compensator it's great. If you don't want a compensator then by all means just swap out the barrel when you run a suppressor.

[alamo5000]

Here is the video I mentioned above.


https://youtu.be/Z5Xm_UbA3oQ

[Default.mp3]

Suppressors make my P226 easily hearing safe. Even with super sonic ammo it's way more quiet and can be shot without ear muffs.How can supersonic ammo be hearing safe? I am fairly certain that the supersonic crack is almost always non-hearing safe; just because you don't experience any ringing or anything doesn't mean that the crack isn't causing hearing damage. To be sure, the occasional round or two without any ear pro will have minimal hearing damage, but given that hearing damage is cumulative, I wouldn't want to risk it without good reason; I personally would refuse to shoot supersonic ammo without ear pro if I'm at the range, suppressed or not.

As for the downsides, threaded barrels can be easier to push out of battery in a contact shot situation. I know folks have argued that WMLs can be used as stand-off devices to help with that, but the introduction of a threaded barrel can reduce the amount of stand-off provided.

[JCN]

How can supersonic ammo be hearing safe? I am fairly certain that the supersonic crack is almost always non-hearing safe; just because you don't experience any ringing or anything doesn't mean that the crack isn't causing hearing damage. To be sure, the occasional round or two without any ear pro will have minimal hearing damage, but given that hearing damage is cumulative, I wouldn't want to risk it without good reason; I personally would refuse to shoot supersonic ammo without ear pro if I'm at the range, suppressed or not.

As for the downsides, threaded barrels can be easier to push out of battery in a contact shot situation. I know folks have argued that WMLs can be used as stand-off devices to help with that, but the introduction of a threaded barrel can reduce the amount of stand-off provided.

That’s a common misconception.
The supersonic crack is actually very little of the pressure wave that causes damage.

This is from a test I did.
I own a Larson-Davis LXT that is professional grade.

68757

You can have hearing safe 357 Sig, interestingly enough.

[Default.mp3]

That’s a common misconception.
The supersonic crack is actually very little of the pressure wave that causes damage.

This is from a test I did.
I own a Larson-Davis LXT that is professional grade.

68757

You can have hearing safe 357 Sig, interestingly enough.I understand that in an unsuppressed firearm firing supersonic ammo, the crack would be a minimal part of the damage done to hearing; however, this doesn't necessarily mean it has a zero effect on permanent hearing loss.

As for the test data you've provided, I'm honestly not educated enough to interpret the validity of it, given how much gnashing of teeth comes up whenever folks do suppressor metering.

If someone has any hard published information on whether or not supersonic ammo's crack is hearing safe (or not), I'd love to read it.

[JCN]

I’ll let you Google it rather than try and convince you, but pressure is pressure and if it’s not pressurized enough it won’t cause separate damage above the total pressure.

The crack is higher pitched so you notice it, but it’s not high pressure by itself.

That’s actually why I bought the meter. To test things myself rather than go off half cocked.

The other thing to keep in mind is that for a shooter to hear a supersonic crack, it’s actually the reflected wave you’re hearing and not the primary wave. So by that distance, it’s not very powerful.

Like you can hear a sonic boom from a fighter jet from far away but the distance reduces the power and pressure and you’re not damaging your ears if you’re far enough away.

I guess to answer your question more specifically, the sonic boom contributes to the total sound pressure read by the meter. But as evidenced by similar readings with similar power factor ammo that’s just under 1050fps and just over, it’s not a big contribution.

I should go out sometime and take some 147gr HST+P and shoot it out of a compact and full size gun. It’s just enough to break the speed out sound with the longer barrel. If I positioned the meter at the same distance from the muzzle you’d be able to see how much it contributes.

I’d think probably only a dB or two, which is something. But not the bulk of the damaging pressure wave.

[alamo5000]

How can supersonic ammo be hearing safe? I am fairly certain that the supersonic crack is almost always non-hearing safe; just because you don't experience any ringing or anything doesn't mean that the crack isn't causing hearing damage. To be sure, the occasional round or two without any ear pro will have minimal hearing damage, but given that hearing damage is cumulative, I wouldn't want to risk it without good reason; I personally would refuse to shoot supersonic ammo without ear pro if I'm at the range, suppressed or not.

As for the downsides, threaded barrels can be easier to push out of battery in a contact shot situation. I know folks have argued that WMLs can be used as stand-off devices to help with that, but the introduction of a threaded barrel can reduce the amount of stand-off provided.

"Suppressors make my P226 easily hearing safe. Even with super sonic ammo it's way more quiet, and can be shot without ear muffs."

I was directing my comment towards the OP that asked if suppressors "give any meaningful sound reduction". My response is absolutely.

I can't recall the exact numbers but I think my can with the new baffles metered around 137 at the ear in certain configurations using factory ammo (but I could be wrong about the specifics and am open to being wrong). The question however was very generic about 'suppressors' so I didn't want to get in the weeds about metering data.

I can shoot my 226 with full power 124gr ammo, but given I am doing reloads and tend to tailor make my ammo, and yes it's supersonic. Without ear muffs I don't care if it's sub or supersonic there is no way in hell I would shoot even a single shot unsuppressed which is the baseline the OP is coming from (per my interpretation). Coming from that baseline nothing I said wasn't true in the context of a few shots here or there especially using my ammo and my can. The new baffles have substantially larger relief cuts in them so it reduces the back pressure and overall sound reduction a lot (I paid to get new baffles when the new design was released)

I did though leave out a comma in my sentence. It is 'way more quiet' and it 'can be shot without earmuffs' (even with supersonic ammo). Whether or not that is every shot on a thousand round day is a whole different matter.

None the less I was trying to relay to a person who never has owned a suppressor before about what the reduction can be. It's not 100% silent, but there is definitely meaningful sound reduction. That doesn't mean anyone can or should blast away all afternoon without ear pro, but a shot here or there is easily tolerable without any pain or ringing*.

*This is a sample of one using my own ammo and my specific can but doesn't mean it will be that way 100% of the time with every kind of ammo on every gun.

[alamo5000]

What I have found is that in almost anything I've tried the ammo is the wild card. You can get two subsonic rounds and one will ring your ears on the first shot but the other not at all. Some ammo is substantially more quiet than others even with similar velocity. I've proven that (at least to an audience of one) on 300 BLK as well as 9mm. If you shoot green and white box Remington 'subsonic' ammo in my rifle you will only want to do that once. On the flip side with my 225 grain Hornady bullet over some Accurate #9 it's substantially more quiet than anything else I've tried and the muzzle velocities are both subsonic.

The same thing is true with 9mm. I can make loads the get within 20fps (or less) of some ammo brands but mine is noticable more quiet than theirs.

[DMCutter]

To the OP's question, I have an MR920 and run an Octane 45 on it. With subs I can shoot it in my back yard without disturbing anyone. I've had no issues with function or accuracy. I have an RMR on that gun and there is a lot of crud blown back on the lens, although if you have a target focus it's not a significant problem. That is a particularly gassy can, though.

[Default.mp3]

I’ll let you Google it rather than try and convince you, but pressure is pressure and if it’s not pressurized enough it won’t cause separate damage above the total pressure.

The crack is higher pitched so you notice it, but it’s not high pressure by itself.

That’s actually why I bought the meter. To test things myself rather than go off half cocked.

The other thing to keep in mind is that for a shooter to hear a supersonic crack, it’s actually the reflected wave you’re hearing and not the primary wave. So by that distance, it’s not very powerful.

Like you can hear a sonic boom from a fighter jet from far away but the distance reduces the power and pressure and you’re not damaging your ears if you’re far enough away.

I guess to answer your question more specifically, the sonic boom contributes to the total sound pressure read by the meter. But as evidenced by similar readings with similar power factor ammo that’s just under 1050fps and just over, it’s not a big contribution.

I should go out sometime and take some 147gr HST+P and shoot it out of a compact and full size gun. It’s just enough to break the speed out sound with the longer barrel. If I positioned the meter at the same distance from the muzzle you’d be able to see how much it contributes.

I’d think probably only a dB or two, which is something. But not the bulk of the damaging pressure wave.Sure, I think I understand how sound works in relation to hearing damage; after all, it's not just the peak impulse, but also the overall length of said impulse, hence why anything above 85 dB can cause permanent hearing loss... if sustained for over an 8 hour period.

As for the tool, it is my understanding that it's not just the issue of the meter itself, but how it is set up, and all that jazz; I know that's generally the criticism leveled at the various suppressor metering tests done on YouTube, in that they do not follow the strict military procedures used to measure sound (and the whole playing with "measured at ear" versus the 1 meter offset and all that).

As for the supersonic crack, the problem I guess is, when someone says hearing safe (though I guess with further explanation, there was just ambiguity with the statement), I would take it to mean under all conditions; once you're indoors, then there's a lot more stuff to reflect back that crack, so that makes things much more difficult to quantify.

But I guess I'm just splitting hairs at this point, and I would personally be comfortable saying that a suppressed pistol is going to cause minimal (though probably non-zero) permanent hearing loss, while providing significant acoustic signature reduction. I will say I don't really care for the way they significantly change the balance on a handgun, though, nor how much they can change a zero. Rather just keep a PCC by the bedside with a can if that's doable (or even a suppressed rifle).

[alamo5000]

https://lodge-cdn.ammunitiontogo.com/lodge/wp-content/uploads/ATG-Silencer-Test-Data-1.jpg

[JCN]

Sure, I think I understand how sound works in relation to hearing damage; after all, it's not just the peak impulse, but also the overall length of said impulse, hence why anything above 85 dB can cause permanent hearing loss... if sustained for over an 8 hour period.

As for the tool, it is my understanding that it's not just the issue of the meter itself, but how it is set up, and all that jazz; I know that's generally the criticism leveled at the various suppressor metering tests done on YouTube, in that they do not follow the strict military procedures used to measure sound (and the whole playing with "measured at ear" versus the 1 meter offset and all that).

As for the supersonic crack, the problem I guess is, when someone says hearing safe (though I guess with further explanation, there was just ambiguity with the statement), I would take it to mean under all conditions; once you're indoors, then there's a lot more stuff to reflect back that crack, so that makes things much more difficult to quantify.

But I guess I'm just splitting hairs at this point, and I would personally be comfortable saying that a suppressed pistol is going to cause minimal (though probably non-zero) permanent hearing loss, while providing significant acoustic signature reduction. I will say I don't really care for the way they significantly change the balance on a handgun, though, nor how much they can change a zero. Rather just keep a PCC by the bedside with a can if that's doable (or even a suppressed rifle).

Ah, okay. I get what you're saying. I share your criticisms and concerns about suppressor testing.

I agree that the issue with published testing is the applicability (or lack of applicability) to changing environments and conditions.

I also agree that it's not a good idea to think of hearing safe / unsafe as a binary thing.

I got the meter because all the testing puts most suppressed things just at the border of safe vs unsafe and I actually really wanted to know what it would be in the conditions I would potentially use it in (home self defense).

Even being close to a wall or hard surfaces changes the sound intensity at your ear quite a bit.... but those levels show up on the meter.

My point about the supersonic crack is for firearms, it's always associated with the much louder muzzle blast and that's what's going to overwhelmingly dominate the pressure wave.

I suppose if you could have a supersonic crack without muzzle blast and were close enough to the path it could damage your hearing.

In reality, you can't divorce the two when you're firing handguns.

Regarding military standard... they're concerned with other people hearing so it's 1 meter from the muzzle.

For me, I only care about how it might damage my hearing so I measure at my ear because the intensity really changes by muzzle to ear distance... and when you're talking about things that are borderline safe, I wanted to know what the real world application of my firearms for my intended purposes are.

[Nephrology]

Ah, okay. I get what you're saying. I share your criticisms and concerns about suppressor testing.

I agree that the issue with published testing is the applicability (or lack of applicability) to changing environments and conditions.

I also agree that it's not a good idea to think of hearing safe / unsafe as a binary thing.

I got the meter because all the testing puts most suppressed things just at the border of safe vs unsafe and I actually really wanted to know what it would be in the conditions I would potentially use it in (home self defense).

Even being close to a wall or hard surfaces changes the sound intensity at your ear quite a bit.... but those levels show up on the meter.

My point about the supersonic crack is for firearms, it's always associated with the much louder muzzle blast and that's what's going to overwhelmingly dominate the pressure wave.

I suppose if you could have a supersonic crack without muzzle blast and were close enough to the path it could damage your hearing.

In reality, you can't divorce the two when you're firing handguns.

Regarding military standard... they're concerned with other people hearing so it's 1 meter from the muzzle.

For me, I only care about how it might damage my hearing so I measure at my ear because the intensity really changes by muzzle to ear distance... and when you're talking about things that are borderline safe, I wanted to know what the real world application of my firearms for my intended purposes are.

Do you have data for 9mm through that Octane 45HD of yours, by any chance?

[JCN]

Do you have data for 9mm through that Octane 45HD of yours, by any chance?

Hi sorry, I don’t think I own an Octane 45? I have a TiRant 45 that has a long and short config.

I shot 9mm through a short config 45 baffle / end cap combination.

If there’s something specific you’d like to see, I can do it or at least give you my extrapolation of what I’d think.

[Nephrology]

Hi sorry, I don’t think I own an Octane 45? I have a TiRant 45 that has a long and short config.

I shot 9mm through a short config 45 baffle / end cap combination.

If there’s something specific you’d like to see, I can do it or at least give you my extrapolation of what I’d think.

Oh oops, I saw another user's post of the 45HD and confused it with yours.

Would be curious about how well 9mm rates to the shooter's ear roughly. From the data I am seeing online it seems to average about 133dB with 124gr supersonic 9mm and 130 or so with 147 subs. Not sure where those are measured from, however. Mostly curiosu tif it is truly <140db at the ear.

[JCN]

Oh oops, I saw another user's post of the 45HD and confused it with yours.

Would be curious about how well 9mm rates to the shooter's ear roughly. From the data I am seeing online it seems to average about 133dB with 124gr supersonic 9mm and 130 or so with 147 subs. Not sure where those are measured from, however. Mostly curiosu tif it is truly <140db at the ear.

Yes that’s consistent with what I got at shooter’s ear with 9mm and a full length 9mm suppressor... in an open field with only soft things around. Would be louder indoors.

But use a shorty silencer configuration and it’s up around 144-146dB.

I don’t like suppressors on tilting barrel guns due to piston porpoising.

I tried to make the Maxim 9 work, but the trigger is so garbage.

Overall I wound up suppressing the home SD rifles but not the handguns. Electronic muffs are by the nightstand.