Gear Review: Teeny Rimfire Silencer Roundup

tiny rimfire silencers suppressors small

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Outside of Hollywood, the purpose of a firearm suppressor is to reduce the volume of a gunshot to below the threshold of causing immediate hearing damage. While chasing the lowest decibel ratings is the norm for newcomers to silencer ownership, experience eventually takes most shooters in a different direction: a quest for the smallest, lightest can capable of sub-140 dB at the shooter’s ear.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

In the world of rimfire suppressors, Bowers Group made a splash with their Bitty, a can so small it fits in a standard .22 LR ammo box. Despite this, it’s hearing safe (sub-140 dB) on most .22 LR host guns and it’s even rated for use with 5.7×28, .22 WMR, .22 Hornet, .17 WSM, and more.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Getting some trigger time behind the itty bitty Bitty has been high on my list for quite some time now. Thankfully Silencer Shop was happy to loan me not only a Bitty but a handful of mini rimfire cans so I could play with and compare them all.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Left-to-right that’s yer Bowers Bitty, Tactical Solutions Aeris, Q Erector, Rugged Oculus, and Advanced Armament Halcyon. Today’s prices range from about $289 to $399.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Now, that previous photo isn’t exactly “fair” as three of these suppressors are modular. One extremely modular. Seen above is the Bitty and Aeris in their only configuration with the Erector, Oculus, and Halcyon in their longest.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Additionally, the Q Erector (reviewed here) is capable of being run even shorter than seen in the rest of the photos here, with its end cap installed directly onto its blast baffle as above. I chose, however, to compare the Erector to the other shorty suppressors in its smallest configuration that’s still hearing safe on a pistol: two to three added baffles.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Same lineup (Bitty, Aeris, Erector, Oculus, Halcyon), but this time focused on the suppressors’ diameters. All of these manufacturers claim their suppressor is 1-inch in diameter except for Rugged’s 1.06-inch stat for their Oculus. Okay. I reckon AAC’s doing a little rounding.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

The three modular suppressors are not modular to the same degree.

Q’s Erector is comprised of nine, individual aluminum baffles that can be added in any quantity to the blast baffle. The owner can therefore fine tune the length, weight, and suppression requirements for the job at hand.

Rugged’s Oculus is a two-piece design in about a 60/40 split. The larger part is always used as it contains the threaded mount for affixing the can to the host firearm. To run the suppressor in short config the user puts the end cap on this larger ‘half’ and doesn’t use the front module at all. To run the suppressor in long config the user attaches the shorter module to the longer module and puts the cap on the end of the shorter part.

AAC’s Halcyon works in exactly the same way as the Oculus, but adds the ability to switch mounts should you have a rimfire gun with something other than 1/2×28 threads.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

As-measured weights on these suppressors were as follows:

• Bowers Bitty: 2.47 ounces
• Tactical Solutions Aeris: 3.07 ounces
• Q Erector: 0.85 ounces (shortest) and 2.75 ounces (longest)
• Rugged Oculus: 4.52 ounces (shortest) and 7.02 ounces (longest)
• Advanced Armament Halcyon: 4.59 ounces (shortest) and 6.1 ounces (longest)

The Q Erector is so light it isn’t even noticeable on the end of a pistol. Except for the 17-4 stainless blast baffle it’s all aluminum, and relatively thin aluminum at that.

While Q will apparently warranty it for use with any caliber that fits, an all-aluminum build traditionally limits the user to the lower-powered rimfire options. It also limits cleaning options, as aluminum typically should not be cleaned in an ultrasonic tank and won’t hold up to rough scrubbing and scraping like the stainless steel and/or titanium builds of the other suppressors in this roundup.

All of these suppressors are lightweight, though, compared to anything in the centerfire world. With the exception of the Oculus and Halcyon in their longest configurations, everything here is so lightweight that it really isn’t noticeable on a pistol or a rifle.

Blindfolded and limited to simply hefting the gun, I’d be extremely hard-pressed to tell a naked pistol from one with, for example, the short-configured Oculus on it. I mean, maybe if it were a tiny, polymer-framed pistol with an alloy slide rather than my CZ SP-01 with Kadet Adapter seen in these photos, but it’s a weak maybe.

So, in determining a favorite I found myself more concerned with how they look than how much a scale says they weigh.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Seen above is the Bitty again. It’s only 2.8 inches long.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

TacSol’s Aeris. This little guy comes in at 3.0 inches in length.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Q Erector in its shortest [typically] hearing-safe configuration. It’s about 3 inches long with two baffles and the end cap added.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

The Erector fully erected. A very impressive 7.6 inches.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Rugged Oculus in short mode. Just 3.25 inches long.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Oculus in full-length config. That’s 5.25 inches.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

AAC Halcyon in short configuration: 3.4 inches long.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

And, finally, the Halcyon in long mode: 5.2 inches.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

I also tested all of these suppressors in every configuration on a rifle — my CZ 455 Varmint Tacticool Suppressor-Ready — but didn’t photograph it all.

On the range, with every suppressor in its short mode (where applicable) and the Erector in its +2 baffles mode, identifying the quietest one of the bunch was a toss-up for me and my shooting buddy. It ultimately came down to calling it a wash between the Rugged Oculus and AAC Halcyon. The Erector with a third baffle added put it into consideration but it still felt slightly louder or, perhaps, just slightly higher-pitched so it seemed a skosh louder.

This isn’t to say the itty guys were far behind, because they weren’t! On the pistol both the Bitty and Aeris were only ever-so-slightly less comfortable to the ears than the other suppressors in their short modes. And again that could be tone as much as actual decibels. On the rifle, with subsonic ammo it was all so quiet it didn’t matter and with supers the story was the same as everything mentioned above.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Now, none of these (in short config) are what you’d call “quiet” on a .22 LR pistol. They’re all rated to do the job of not leaving you with hearing damage, but the noise isn’t necessarily comfortable in all environments and to all people.

For that — for a noise level that anyone would say “yes, that’s quiet” and practically nobody would feel any level of discomfort — from a pistol you’ll have to run the modular suppressors in their long configurations (5+ baffles added to the Erector).

As the smallest thing going that’s hearing safe without requiring wipes or being run wet, the Bitty is awesome and super cool. It’s amazing that it’s also rated for up to 5.7×28. But other suppressors in this roundup check those dB reduction and use ratings, too, while offering meaningful modularity.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

The Winner:

Though I know everyone expects and loves when comparison reviews end with “they’re all winners” and “now you have the info to choose what’s best for you,” I’m just going to come right out and say I prefer the Rugged Oculus here.

Not only did it sound the best, but it looks fantastic, it’s rated and legit warrantied for everything you could do to it, and it offers the kind of modularity that makes sense: a short mode that meets hearing-safe requirements and still sounds good, and a long mode that’s Hollywood quiet.

Despite opening this article with a generality that I still [generally] agree with — experience leads suppressor purchasers towards the shortest and lightest option that meets hearing-safe levels and the required durability level — I didn’t end up liking the Bitty the best. Rugged’s offering just provides more than enough additional utility that I think it’s well worth it, and, ultimately, the weight difference wasn’t a practical consideration. Yeah, the maths say it’s 80-percent heavier but, sheesh, that’s only two ounces and it simply didn’t matter.

A big thanks to Silencer Shop for loaning me these suppressors so I could test them back-to-back and provide my input to y’all. Nobody in the industry makes suppressor purchasing or ownership easier than Silencer Shop! Give them a call or check the resources on their website if you have questions.

comments

  1. avatar Stateisevil says:

    Who cares? Year wait and inflated prices for these things make it not worth it.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      If everyone takes that attitude it will never change.

      If everyone goes the other route silencers stand a good chance of coming out like CB radio did.

    2. avatar B.D. says:

      So fucking do something about it you complaining little bitch.

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        “The Erector fully erected. A very impressive 7.6 inches.”

        Mmmmm…

        1. avatar Wild Bill says:

          That’s what she said.

        2. avatar The real B.D. says:

          Still trolling under my name huh? Get a life.

      1. avatar Erik Weisz says:

        Hey Jeremy – how about noting the POI shift (if any), repeatability of such, and general effects on accuracy on each can you review?
        This is what I would have to know, or at least have some informed opinions on, before I could buy anything. So far I feel my only safe choices are all made by Thunderbeast.
        Anyway, thanks for the cool reviews!

        1. avatar Jeremy S. says:

          That is all important stuff (and I previously did accuracy testing in a different rimfire suppressor roundup), but… I hesitate to do most of what you’ve listed as the firearm itself is a huge variable. POI shift, accuracy change, etc won’t be the same gun-to-gun. I’d hate to show a result that suppressor X helped accuracy more than suppressor Y when the fact is on a different gun or with different ammo the results could easily end up reversed. I know it’s nice information but if it may well only apply to my gun, the ammo I use, how tight I personally install a suppressor, how clean or dirty they each are, etc, I’d rather not include it as it may be misleading.

        2. avatar Erik Weisz says:

          My thinking is those notations could add to the aggregate – other reviews, tests by you on different guns/barrels/etc could go a long way towards building a better picture of a particular suppressor model. As an example, I see reviews from multiple sources on Thunderbeast cans, and every single one I have read states no effect on poi, regardless of host weapon, and this is across all types of actions and barrel lengths etc, giving a lot of confidence to me in a purchase of their cans.
          I realize you would be notating the results on a sample of one, but you sometimes use the same cans on different hosts, and could also note differences there, plus different cans on the same hosts. More information is always better. If more reviewers did this, it would help a lot to get a better picture of a particular model’s accuracy traits across different platforms.
          I think you could just add a sentence or two to your standard disclaimer about environmental conditions and host weapon, and at least note any major poi shift and if it’s repeatable, and any noticeable effect (or the absence thereof) on group size. This could help inform purchasing decisions for similar set-ups at least.
          I read everything you write and greatly respect your opinion, and I appreciate your consideration of this idea. Thanks, sincerely.

    3. avatar arc says:

      And the “criminals” who make DIY silencers, have a wait time of exactly nil.

    4. avatar George from Alaska says:

      So you are a generally impatient, I want it now – possible “Me” generation younger person who can’t afford the cost anyway? Or are you a “prohibited person”?

  2. avatar strych9 says:

    Kinda cool tech for mini mufflers. I’m not really into rimfire cans though.

    1. avatar Rad Man says:

      Yeah Strych, but a more important question is whothechrist drinks caffeine free diet root beer?

      1. avatar Ing says:

        *jumps up, raises hand*

      2. avatar adambomb286 says:

        Diet root beer and rimfire go hand in hand. Shake those up and you have some great reactive targets. I usually go with a generic brand for shooting at though.

  3. avatar B.D. says:

    Who TF drinks diet A&W?

      1. avatar B.D. says:

        I love all the people who believe that “diet” crap, or act like because a label says something it is “healthyier”. You could literally just slap “healthier” on the label and they’d buy it up. Obviously, we are all human, it’s nice to enjoy some things like that on occasion… a snack or a soda… but the top 3 grocery items in America are 1. Soda, 2. Milk, and 3. Bread. lol. Soda, obviously unhealthy no matter what kind. Milk, well, healthy to a point, but no animal except humans drink it their whole life… so not healthy either. And bread, refined grains not healthy, so stick with whole grains. Dieting is so simple… we just get stuck on snacks because they are available to us.

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          “but no animal except humans drink it their whole life…”

          Complete bullshit. Dogs, cats, raccoons, mice, bears, wolves, coyotes, badgers, and pretty much any mammal that will eat meat will drink milk. It’s simply not regularly available to them.

        2. avatar B.D. says:

          Wrong. Milk is for breastfeeding young. No other animal NATURALLY drinks milk for the taste like we do, throughout our life. Humans milk cows for it. can you imagine being the first guy to discover that? How these food trends catch on is a miracle… Or a disgrace.

          Scientifically, milk should not be drank past the breastfeeding stage. The way we drink milk, is unnatural.

        3. avatar B.D. says:

          Which is why you would never ever catch me sucking on a women’s breast. It’s unnatural.

        4. avatar Knute(ken) says:

          B.D.
          So what cat or dog, of any age, but still alive, have you ever given a bowl of milk to and had them refuse it? None that I’ve ever seen.
          EVER! Not even once…

        5. avatar B.D. says:

          Ken all my cats, and I have alot of cats, are boys. I just like boys, and they would never drink milk that comes from a female.
          It’s unnatural.

        6. avatar The Real B.D. says:

          The troll who keeps replying is not me.

          WIll animals drink milk if given it? YES. Duh, they drank it as babies. It’s got all kinds of fatty acids in it they love. My point is that only humans have made it a habit to drink it their whole lives, by taking it from another animal. It’s unnatural, and unhealthy. No animal, I repeat, no animal will drink milk naturally beyond the breastfeeding stage. Get it now?

        7. avatar Hypercube Jones says:

          J.W. Taylor, dogs will drink antifreeze if made available to them. They may drink milk as an adult because, like antifreeze, it doesn’t taste bad, but they might not be able to digest it (specifically, the lactose) very well.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      People who bother to read the nutrition label and decide they don’t want 46g of straight sugar and 47g carbs, like a whole meal’s worth of carbs, in a single beverage.

      Shit, one 12oz root beer is more fattening than four 12oz bottles of Heineken.

      Hidden carbs and calories are why this country is nearly 50% obese. Why 1/37th of draft-age males could actually be drafted under USMC standards. Just add up all the calories those fat chicks drink in Starbucks daily. They have no idea they’re doing it until they can’t fit in their clothes and have to size up.

      1. avatar Wild Bill says:

        Yes. But I drink a root beer. Heineken is just nasty.

        1. avatar AFGus says:

          Export Heineken is nasty. Go to The Netherlands, or any European country and drink the real deal. You’ll change your mind.

      2. avatar Draven says:

        No, really, revision of the guidelines for ‘Obese’ is largely why 50% of the country is obese. A runner’s physique is not the optimal physique for people, no matter how many times a bunch of doctors say it. Under the guidelines that have been used for at least the last 20 years, Arnold Schwarzenegger was obese when he was Mr. Universe…..

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          Not to get really in depth on this but whoever told you that is full of shit. Yeah, BMI isn’t a great indicator of much, I get that. However, it’s not the only thing we have to work with here. It’s just what fatties like to focus on because, pardon the pun, a BMI is a squishy number with enormous variation to it.

          The clinical definition of obesity is determined by what percentage of your overall weight is fat which can be determined pretty well with imaging of the body. This defintion doesn’t fluctuate the way a BMI does/can and leaves less, pardon the pun again, “wiggle room” for people to say they’re not being ridiculously unhealthy. Men are “obese” if they are 25% fat by weight and women are obese if they are 32% fat by weight. That’s the definition.

          Sorry, Arnie was never like that, this argument is “don’t fat shame me bruh!” bullshit. No rational person would argue that being 200lbs with 50lbs of that being fat is healthy.

          So, no, it’s not a redefinition issue. It’s a fat-as-fuck issue. It’s also why ~37% of this country is prediabetic or Type 2 at this point, or did we just redefine what “diabetes” is? Yeah, that’s gotta be it. Cause ya know we also redefined “amputation”, “kidney failure”, “blindness”, “neuropathy”, “liver disease” and “obesity related cancer” just to fuck with you.

          Yeah, I beat this drum a lot, I know that. I was never fat and I have this problem due to genetics as a Type 1. I’m beating the ever-living-fuck out of this drum because I know from personal experience that YOU DO NOT WANT THIS PROBLEM.

          And I also know that upwards of 90%+ of the people who develop it DON’T HAVE TO. Further, once you do get this, especially if you do it as a Type 2, it will almost certainly go undiagnosed/improperly treated until you’ve fucked yourself up permanently.

          But hey, if you want to deal with all the side issues, costs and stick yourself with needles all the time to administer doses of massively expensive hormone therapy, you go right the fuck ahead. Just make sure to kill yourself before you hit 65 because the last thing I need is another fatass telling me about “personal responsibility” while running up a Medicare bill 300% of what it should and doing it on my dime.

        2. avatar Rad Man says:

          Yeah, you got in depth:)

        3. avatar Don from CT says:

          My girls are both obese per BMI standards. They are gymnasts who happen to be very heavy for their height.

          Of course both have 6 packs that would make Arnold jealous and both completed 80 push ups and 80 sit ups in the presidential fitness test they do in school.

          But they are obese per Government standard testing criteria.

          Key word here. Government. I actually know parents of gymnasts who have received at home standard form letters from school telling them their children are overweight and suggesting a counseling session to help resolve the issue.

        4. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

          Being overweight has strong genetic components too. It’s not just about poor choices. At one point I lost about 100 pounds. The only way to do it was to starve myself. Simply wasn’t sustainable. I eat a very healthy diet, no soda, lots of vegetables. Can’t break 250 without just not eating.

        5. avatar dph says:

          Silencer review or diet soda critique?

      3. avatar B.D. says:

        Dude if you read nutrition labels you shouldn’t be drinking that shit at all.

        1. avatar Don from CT says:

          Just drink water.

          Or if you need the fizz and some taste, drink seltzer, but put a splash of OJ in it.

          Waaayyyy better than that crap.

      4. avatar arc says:

        A lot of nicer grocery stories are carrying legit soda now. Real organic Italian soda with real fruit juice and actual sugar in it, rather than HFCS. They make for a good treat but not something to drink every day.

        1. avatar B.D. says:

          That is what I sub in on the rare occasion I have one. Hanson I think. I usually just drink tea when I want something besides water though, occasional coffee in the AM (very rare for me also).

          Strange turn in discussion from an attempt at a joke I made… didn’t know it would be taken seriously, but hey, stay healthy!

        2. avatar Erik Weisz says:

          I realize this is anecdotal, but I drink a 2-liter pepsi (not diet) about every two days, and have done so for at least 30 years. I also drink exactly 30 oz coffee every day, with what people tell me is a LOT of sugar (I only measure it by sight in my cup), and also about a gallon of water. No one would accuse me of being fat – at 5’11”, I weigh 160-165#s with a 30″ waist. I don’t work out, either, but I also don’t really sit around on my ass a lot. I go to the Dr. every 6 months, and have a blood work up each time, too. I seem to be quite healthy. Maybe I’m just the exception.

  4. avatar Juice says:

    I really wish I had a private place to shoot. I can’t justify the cost to take a can down to a public range and poke holes in paper next to a guy trying out his new muzzle brake, and all I get out of it is extra gas in my face and wear on the parts.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      Where are you? A couple hour drive can make a huge difference and while yes, it is an unnecessary add on, they can be very helpful like say on a home defense weapon, when you don’t have time to grab ear pro.

    2. avatar Cymond says:

      For me, it’s about reducing my own muzzle blast because it’s only about 3 feet from my face. It helps reduce the flinch reflex. Plus, there are many days that the range is empty enough that the next closest shooter is 30+ feet away. I still need hearing protection, but there’s no blast. And of course, it’s great to have on my bedroom gun, too.

  5. avatar Knute(ken) says:

    Congratulations on a subject long overdue! I speak out in favor, OFC, of the idea that silencers should be cheap and readily available for all, the same as a muffler on your car. And for the same reason, the hearing of everyone around. They should be made as small and as cheaply as possible, balanced against the sound levels produced, and rated for performance, favoring levels that are less damaging to human hearing.
    This is what any reasonable, competent government would do. Provide for the common health by creating a way to mitigate the problem by encouraging ones to USE these devices, rather than requiring a ridiculous amount of money and time to use them, such that it’s easier to be loud and obnoxious by running your V8 with straight pipes, rather than put at least a set of glasspacks on it. But in the firearm area, as usual, the US does the exact opposite.
    Knute

    1. I kinda wonder if maybe the hearing-aid companies have hired people to lobby AGAINST suppressors ???

  6. avatar TruthTellers says:

    So what’s the best way to clean the Erector suppressor?

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Squirt Rem Oil in the palm of your hand and with a rapid up and down motion…………

      1. avatar Geoff “Guns. Lots of guns.” PR says:

        Rem oil?

        In the shower while washing my hair works for me… 😉

      2. avatar adambomb286 says:

        I bet you also use Hoppes No.9 as aftershave!

      3. avatar TruthTellers says:

        You’re all a bunch of sick degenerate pervs, I’m outta here.

        Gotta go watch a Bayley Jay video.

  7. avatar Mack says:

    I have a AWC Warp 3
    That’s hands down the smallest quietest can ever
    I own most the cans you reviewed and nothing beats AWC

    1. avatar George from Alaska says:

      I had a Warp 6 9mm can that I regret selling. It was very small and designed to be always shot wet packed full except for the center channel of synthetic grease. One big tube of grease came with it. Later I bought some dedicated 40 and 45 cans from AWC Triads with titanium tubes that worked pretty good dry but were also designed to be shot wet, packed with synthetic grease. The first mag or two is amazingly quiet…. and those cans are strong. I was shooting the .45 one a couple of years ago and thought I missed my steel target so I took a better grip and focused on the sights and the gun went off but no steel hit. I’m not bad a a whole 15 yards so I stopped and checked things out. The suppressor had worked itself loose (I use VibraTite VC-3 now for all threaded barrels and some on the inside threads of the suppressor), only by about 1/8 of a turn but it was enough to send two bullets down the center channel, hit the last baffle and veer off to the side. One full power 45 ACP 230 gr hardball round was stuck in the last baffle next to the outer tube and the other round was stuck between the end cap the last baffle. The end cap was deformed and one or two baffles had strike marks. Sent it to AWC, they tested and measured everything, replaced two baffles and the end cap and I got my original tube/suppressor back. Pretty good build on those… too bad I don’t see them anymore at AWC’s site – in fact they have dropped a lot of cans to concentrate on their fancy pants military stuff forgetting about the very people who made them what they were back when Phil Dater was AWC with Lynn McWilliams and his wife.

  8. avatar Cymond says:

    I agree that the Rugged Occulus is probably the best overall choice. I can understand some people might prefer the Halcyon, and the interchangable mints are a nice option. The Erector is lighter, yes, but also less durable and I personally think it’s ugly, too. And honestly, the Occulus is only about $100 more than the cheapest option here, so why would anyone choose the inferior suppressor for the small price difference? ($500 vs $600, after the tax stamp)

    I absolutely cannot understand why a suppressor as simple as the Bitty costs $300. Look at these internals. They’re insanely simple, nowhere close to being as complex/expensive as K baffles, yet they cost just as much? This should be a $150 suppressor. Again, the added versatility of the Occulus is easily worth the extra $100.
    https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/F886D657-44F4-430E-8E6E-C382CB026F1A-768×400.jpeg

    And the Tornado Technologies Onyx? It’s also $300 and even simpler! It’s literally nothing more than a threaded tube with a single wipe at the muzzle. I bet it costs less than $50 to manufacture. Honestly, if they sold it for $100, it still probably wouldn’t be worth the tax stamp. Check out the internals, no baffles at all. It’s basically just a tube with endcaps. https://www.tornado-technologies.com/PDGImages/Part-showing-baffle-Insta.jpg

    It would be interesting to see how the modular $200 Rebel SOS-22 compares to these $300-$400 models. That’s a price drop that night be worth considering.

    1. avatar Geoff “Guns. Lots of guns.” PR says:

      “And the Tornado Technologies Onyx? It’s also $300 and even simpler! It’s literally nothing more than a threaded tube with a single wipe at the muzzle.”

      The problem is the ‘wipe’. It’s not legal for the user to replace it. It has to go back to the factory or a SOT manufacturer to replace it. A real pain-in-the-ass , as Strych9 adroitly noted a day or so back.

      If we could just get rid of that aggravation, I’d be all over a can that uses wipes.

      John Boch?

      Can your firearm advisory group put a bug in someone’s ear in Washington on this issue, *please* ?

      1. avatar Cymond says:

        I agree and understand about how ludicrous it is that we can’t replace wipes.

        My point is that an aluminum tube with 2 threaded endcaps, and no internal parts, shouldn’t be $300. I thought about building a mini can as a Form 1, but I couldn’t find a short enough “solvent trap” tube. The shortest I could find was 5.5 inches. If I were a machinist, I could walk into any pharmacy, pick up one of those aluminum keychain pill fobs, drill/thread one end, drill the other, and throw in a neoprene disk.

  9. avatar adambomb286 says:

    I would really like to have a suppressor for squirrel/ varmint hunting but I can’t justify spending 3-4x what the gun cost to get one. With that much I could just get a really nice suppressed air rifle.

    1. avatar Cymond says:

      What caliber (cartridge) do you shoot? You can get a suppressor for 223 Rem for $350+tax ($550 total). You can get a rimfire suppressor for $200+tax ($400 total). How cheap is your gun?

  10. avatar Billy Bob says:

    I just don’t get it. We’ve got the 2nd ammendment that says I have the right to own firearms yet here in california I cant buy even a simple Glock from Lone Wolf. I can’t buy rifles or shotguns and I even have to undergo a background check to buy ammo even though I’ve gone through background checks to buy the guns I want to buy the ammo for. I just don’t get it. These are laws put through by the people (a guy doubts they are actually humans) who were elected to represent me and defend me against abuses and excesses of the state. I just dont get it.

  11. avatar Mark N. says:

    Hey, I just wish I could legally buy one, but California is one of the states that bans both the cans and threaded barrels for pistols. That will likely never change no matter what happens on thee federal level.

  12. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Ok. I’m getting a suppressor for my 1022 charger take down. Thanks for the information.

  13. avatar Pork Rind says:

    “The Erector fully erected. A very impressive 7.6 inches.”

    THATS WHAT SHE SAID.

  14. avatar Tim says:

    do you need a form 4 for a silencer for a pellet gun?

    1. avatar Jeremy S. says:

      No, only firearm silencers are regulated. Airguns, black powder guns, and other things not considered to be firearms can be sound suppressed without issue. At least federally. Check your state regs.

    2. avatar Cymond says:

      On the other hand, ATF considered it a firearm suppressor if it *can* suppress a firearm, even if it’s only by a single decibel and only for a single shot. Hence, virtually any suppressor you would mount on an air gun would also qualify as a firearm suppressor.

      However, factory supressed airguns like the Gamo Whisper (an old model, but the first widespread one I know of) are perfectly fine. Those manufacturers out a lot of effort into making sure they’re airgun suppressors couldn’t be considered firearm suppressors.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email