"Salvo 12" shotgun suppressor.

Tactical, combat, military, law enforcement and home defense use of a Remington 870 shotgun.
Post Reply
DaveC
Addict Shotgunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:53 pm

"Salvo 12" shotgun suppressor.

Post by DaveC » Tue Jul 22, 2014 4:47 pm

Brand new 12-gauge suppressor for shotguns with removable choke tubes.

Available in 6-in., 8-in., 10-in., and a full 12-in. length. The longest is fully 1400 $USD and reduces the noise to about 137 decibels or really, really loud clapping. Below 140, however.

Silencerco:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014 ... uppressor/

".... just got real." :lol: :shock:

Green with envy. :mrgreen:
Alle Kunst ist umsonst, wenn ein Engel in das Zündloch prunst.

User avatar
Synchronizor
Elite Shotgunner
Posts: 3022
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:04 am
Location: The Inland Northwest
Contact:

Re: "Salvo 12" shotgun suppressor.

Post by Synchronizor » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:47 pm

Yeah, I was reading about that yesterday. It's cool to finally see an attempt at a true commercial shotgun suppressor, and I like how they went with a modular design and decided to use standard choke threads instead of something proprietary.

Still, I'm not sure how practical it'll be. You'd still need hearing protection anyway unless everyone else at the range or in the duck blind also shelled out $1400 for one of these. Sure, there's always solo shooting, but if it really takes the full 12" suppressor to get to a "safe" volume, that's 32 oz - a full two pounds - of extra mass tacked onto the muzzle. If you want to know what that feels like, fill a lightweight plastic container with a quart of water and strap it to the end of your barrel. I think I'd find my normal shooting muffs a lot more tolerable over a day of shooting.

DaveC
Addict Shotgunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:53 pm

Re: "Salvo 12" shotgun suppressor.

Post by DaveC » Tue Jul 22, 2014 10:34 pm

12.19-in. weighs 32 oz. reduces decibels to 137.9, which is purported to be 132dB behind the trigger.
10.28" weighs 27.5oz. reduces decibel level to 141.1, or supposedly 134 dB behind the boom switch
8 inches weighs 23oz. 145.1 decibels, or supposedly 137 dB "felt" decibels.
6.42 inches is 18.05 oz (just over a pound) and reduces to 149.2 dB or 140.6 dB "felt" decibels.

I'm thinking an NFA SBS Rem. 870 with, say, a 12.5-in. barrel and an 8-incher for a total barrel length of 20-1/2in. with a 3 or 4-shot tube mag? :geek:
Or, bear with me here, Synchronizor, how about a non-NFA bullpup kit at 28.5in. overall length plus the 10 inch version for something like just under 40 inches total... About the same length as an SKS carbine (admittedly a huge, chunky, heavy bull-pup too). :oops: ;)

Here in Texas folks are quite enthused about silencers for hunting, since they are legal here. Apparently quite popular with those who pursue feral hogs, a "varmint" that can be taken at any time of year without a license here... If you can actually find one of the wily beasts near one of their "wallows." ;) :?
Alle Kunst ist umsonst, wenn ein Engel in das Zündloch prunst.

User avatar
Synchronizor
Elite Shotgunner
Posts: 3022
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:04 am
Location: The Inland Northwest
Contact:

Re: "Salvo 12" shotgun suppressor.

Post by Synchronizor » Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:15 pm

DaveC wrote:I'm thinking an NFA SBS Rem. 870 with, say, a 12.5-in. barrel and an 8-incher for a total barrel length of 20-1/2in. with a 3 or 4-shot tube mag?
Or, bear with me here, Synchronizor, how about a non-NFA bullpup kit at 28.5in. overall length plus the 10 inch version for something like just under 40 inches total... About the same length as an SKS carbine (admittedly a huge, chunky, heavy bull-pup too).
The SBS would be a fun range toy, but for a defensive gun, I think I'd trade ringing ears for a full-length magazine tube. Plus, I'm not sure how well that silencer would stand up to rough treatment in a combat situation when it's essentially an 8-inch, 23-ounce extended choke tube. As for the bullpup... napkin math here; an 870 Tactical in a bullpup chassis is probably going to be 8 - 8.5 pounds empty. Add another 1.7 for the suppressor and .5 - .7 pounds for the shells. And let's say $400 for the base gun (remember, it needs to be threaded), $360 for the bullpup kit, $1400 + $200 for the suppressor, and optimistically $50 for basic sights and other bits & pieces. You're looking at over $2400 and 10 or 11 pounds (more of each if you want an optic) in a shotgun that's not very broadly-useful. I suppose if you do a lot of pig hunting and you're limited to shotguns, it would do the job. But from what I've heard, shotguns aren't really ideal hog guns anyway unless you're shooting slugs or really big buckshot.

If I wanted a quiet pig gun, I'd prefer a suppressed pump-action rifle.
Image
Say a Remington 7600
in .308 Winchester or .30-06, both of which have 1:10 twist barrels that should be able to stabilize subsonic 200+ grain bullets (if my limited knowledge of .308 ballistics serves). Cut the barrel down to 16 or 18 inches, thread it, and add a mid-range .30-caliber can. Without an optic, that should be around $1750 and just about 8 pounds loaded. Now, the barrel work might pull that price up some, but it should still be well below $2400. Plus, I'd then have a can that I could also use on a .300 BLK AR upper and a variety of .30-cal hunting rifles, and a neat, handy little brush/survival rifle that could shoot fast and eat anything reliably without requiring me to faff about with a gas system.

As an aside, why don't more manufacturers offer pump-action rifles? Remington seems to be the only one doing it these days, but even though they have the 7600 and 7615P rifles, they're not doing much with them. Imagine a line of pump rifles, say a .223 Rem/.300 BLK type that takes AR-15 mags, a 7.62/5.45x39 type that uses AK mags, and a third type for the .308 Win and its derivatives that uses AR-10 or FAL mags. Design it for a popular stock system to give people a variety of pistol-grip, semi-grip, and folding stock options, keep the weight reasonable, and factory-thread the barrels. I think hunters, "operators", and preppers alike would eat these up.

Anyway, back on topic, I'm not looking at shotgun suppressors the same way I do things like quad-rails. I'm sure these'll have legitimate applications for high-volume shooting or in more populated areas, and if you have the money and the itch, hey, knock yourself out. It's just that, for the shooting I do, I can't see one of these doing enough to justify the $1400 price tag and negative impact on handling, and I don't think I'm alone there. If I don't want to use my shooting muffs, a 25-cent pair of foam earplugs is plenty to make the report of a shotgun comfortable, and for some things such as bird hunting, I don't even really need hearing protection. Maybe someday I'll find a reason for one of these when I have a lot more free money on my hands, but If I'm going to spend the time, money, and effort needed to get a suppressor, I think I'd go for a .30- or .22-caliber rifle can and a 9mm pistol can before worrying about one for my shotgun.

That said, options are always cool, and I'm hoping this suppressor will pave the way for more. One thing I would like to see in future is a shotgun suppressor with side baffles or some other design concept that allows an extended magazine tube to fit underneath it. If I've got to run a shorter barrel to keep things from getting ridiculously long or overly unwieldy, it'd be nice not to have my magazine capacity limited as well. It'd certainly make your SBS idea more attractive.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest