In the market for 45 suppresor

IMO, there is nothing on the level of the .45 Octane HD. Db reduction is top tier but not the best...(which I have attested to for years) Db rating really shouldn't be the primary concern.

It's the ability to remove the end cap and use a 9mm end cap that really makes it shine.
Running a 9mm hand gun through a 45 suppressor is still good. But none of them do it at the level of the 45 Octane with a 9mm end cap.

That's a huge selling point for me.
 
Octane is a great suppressor, The SAS Impact is 37-38 db's of reduction, which is 3-5 more reduction then the Octane. I agree the Octane is a great suppressor, built like a tank, and you can change out the end cap. From the Intel i have the Impact will soon offer the same ability to swap out end caps.

Still not made it up to Sig as of yet.
 
I like the osprey on handguns and the octane on sub guns. Never liked the high sights needed on a round handgun suppressor.
 
Originally Posted By: Rangerwalker71Octane is a great suppressor, The SAS Impact is 37-38 db's of reduction, which is 3-5 more reduction then the Octane. I agree the Octane is a great suppressor, built like a tank, and you can change out the end cap. From the Intel i have the Impact will soon offer the same ability to swap out end caps.

Still not made it up to Sig as of yet. Yes I saw your quoted factory statistic and it's a tough pill to swallow. Especially with no mention of their testing procedure, which are very specific for an industry standard...and to date, there is no independent verification of such results.
To my knowledge, there are only two, accepted db meters, one of which is the B&K 2209 (the second escapes me at the moment) Any numbers generated without these units is misleading to the public.
I hope the numbers are legit, it would be a great step forward in tech, but in the suppressor world. Too good to be true, usually is.

Originally Posted By: 3DHUSKERNever liked the high sights needed on a round handgun suppressor.
I agree to a point, but it took me less than 50 rounds to be able to focus "through" the can and be able to shoot equal size groups in target. It comes down to shooting with both eyes open. It's really not as difficult as it originally seems.
I had high suppressor sights on my Gen3 Glock, but when I upgraded to a Gen4. I didn't bother. Not necessary.
 
Originally Posted By: cbass16Originally Posted By: Rangerwalker71Octane is a great suppressor, The SAS Impact is 37-38 db's of reduction, which is 3-5 more reduction then the Octane. I agree the Octane is a great suppressor, built like a tank, and you can change out the end cap. From the Intel i have the Impact will soon offer the same ability to swap out end caps.

Still not made it up to Sig as of yet. Yes I saw your quoted factory statistic and it's a tough pill to swallow. Especially with no mention of their testing procedure, which are very specific for an industry standard...and to date, there is no independent verification of such results.
To my knowledge, there are only two, accepted db meters, one of which is the B&K 2209 (the second escapes me at the moment) Any numbers generated without these units is misleading to the public.
I hope the numbers are legit, it would be a great step forward in tech, but in the suppressor world. Too good to be true, usually is.

Originally Posted By: 3DHUSKERNever liked the high sights needed on a round handgun suppressor.
I agree to a point, but it took me less than 50 rounds to be able to focus "through" the can and be able to shoot equal size groups in target. It comes down to shooting with both eyes open. It's really not as difficult as it originally seems.
I had high suppressor sights on my Gen3 Glock, but when I upgraded to a Gen4. I didn't bother. Not necessary.

Cbass16. The numbers are from Mil-spec testing. 1.6 meter high off the ground, 1 meter left and in front of the bore of suppressor. Microphone placement.
BK2209 is the model.

I will have video's metered testing showing these numbers. The 18-20 Sept will be doing a ton of vid's with metered testing.

 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: cbass16
To my knowledge, there are only two, accepted db meters, one of which is the B&K 2209 (the second escapes me at the moment) Any numbers generated without these units is misleading to the public.
I hope the numbers are legit, it would be a great step forward in tech, but in the suppressor world. Too good to be true, usually is.



Larson Davis 800B is another meter used, although I know of a couple manufacturers who are working on digitalizing a very expensive custom type sounder meter that directly imports the data to your computer.
 
Back
Top