Ear muffs?

[k1dude]

I am also interested in replacing my Howard Leights for more protection but they have a 22 NRR vs the MSA which are rated at 18 NRR. Is there something else to the MSA's that make them work better with regard to protection that is not reflected in the printed advertising?

I'm not sure how NRR testing is performed, but in my experience it's only a guide. I wonder if there's even an industry standard for testing. My Sordins are more quiet than other muffs that claim a higher NRR. Perhaps it's the optional GEL seals which have quite a bit of mass, which in turn helps deaden sound. IMHO if the NRR is within 5 or 10 of another product, they could be considered similar in reducing noise.

[JeremyS]

The weird thing is, the dB scale is exponential, and every ~3 dB is actually a doubling (or halving) of the sound pressure level. So going from 22 nrr to 18 nrr would be more than doubling the volume level. The testing standard probably just sucks. Same thing with lumen ratings for flashlights... seems like manufacturers use different methods. That said, the NRR and dB ratings for suppressors seem to be dead on across the industry, as there are absolutely military standards for testing them and there are calibration steps for dB meters, and everybody seems to come up with extremely reliable and comparable numbers.

Anyhoo... another thing to consider is frequency range. One muff might sound quieter because it is muffling a certain frequency range better than another muff, but the overall reduction could still be less. Some frequencies feel louder than others or are noticeable while others really aren't, but any of the audible frequencies will still damage your hearing. It's quite possible that your hearing isn't actually as protected in muff X with a lower NRR vs muff Y, even if muff X feels quieter.

You'd have to really, really get into it but I know a lot of hearing protection fails at properly muffling some of the frequency range of most gunshots. Whenever possible, I have been choosing to double up plugs under muffs, and electronic muffs like the HL are great because they can amplify normal sounds enough that you can hear very well even w/ the plugs on (better than plugs and no muffs).

[-hanko]

Sordin.

Not a great idea to base your choice on price.

-hanko

[sundayduffer]

Indoors...proears 33 nrr for pistols. Outdoors browning low profile 31 nrr. Low profile is great for shotguns and rifles, the earmuffs dont get in the way when you lean your cheeks against the stock.

[Librarian]

Couple of other issues:

If you wear glasses and eye protection over them, the pads on the cups need to be very 'conformable' to seal around the earpieces of the glasses/eye protection. Nice path past the protection.

Getting a cheek weld on a long gun can easily dislodge the earpiece against the stock - protection drops.

I've tried my HLs without plugs underneath, once; never again.

Love your ears:

[Tjfearl]

They just don't provide enough hearing protection specially when shooting rifles and indoors. The electronics on mine have also failed after using it two days straight.

Its common to double up hearing protection when shooting indoors, especially shooting rifles indoors. I use surefire plugs and the fancy Howard Leights when I shoot at Iron Sights. When shooting outdoors I like just my Surefires or some standard foamies.

[Red Devil]

Peltor ShotGunner

$20.00

Work great and they are small and compact to carry.

Shoot short Bbl. .40 and .45 ACP indoors and M1 Garand/12 ga. 870 outdoors.

[k1dude]

I agree it depends on frequency. In addition, the NRR number given is a weighted average across all frequencies. At some frequencies, earmuffs perform very poorly at protection, and at other frequencies they perform well. This is true of all earmuffs. So perhaps my Sordins protect better at frequencies that are more noticeable to me versus the Leights. I guess it also depends on the individual and their hearing strengths and deficiencies regarding frequency.

And the point about glasses is well taken. That's why I use ESS Crossbow Supressors since their temple arms are very thin to fit well under earmuffs. They were specifically designed for that use.

Also, hearing protection can only provide benefits up to around the late 20's or early 30's in NRR max. Beyond that there is no benefit since your bones and flesh transmit gunshot sound energy to your eardrums. Recall how well water transfers sound energy.

[JeremyS]

And the point about glasses is well taken. That's why I use ESS Crossbow Supressors since their temple arms are very thin to fit well under earmuffs. They were specifically designed for that use.

[jvpark]

I`m "over" the Howard Leight Ear Muffs. Absolute JUNK! I now use 50 cent ear Foam, but interested in QUALITY Ear Muffs, that dont cost 200+

you got a point....

[Saym14]

They just don't provide enough hearing protection specially when shooting rifles and indoors. The electronics on mine have also failed after using it two days straight.

If you are shooting a match or taking a class electronic hearing is a must. sometimes when shooting a rifle / 3 gun match I wear foam under them and turn the volume up (they do sometimes get bumped when shooting shot gun or rigfle, but any "muffs" can do that. ) then I can still hear the rangemaster and talk to other members without yelling.

I have used mine for three years. changed batteries only once. always worked.

I dont shoot indoors, I hate it.