Author Topic: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?  (Read 14893 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

No-Bits

  • Guest
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #195 on: June 28, 2014, 02:59:PM »
Welcome back Harters  :)! I'd say that pretty much backs up what Grahame has maintained.

Well maybe, but I wouldn't describe it just as a click when the SM was attached. The main thing which stood out, is that the SM didn't actually seem to make a great deal of difference.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44433
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #196 on: June 28, 2014, 03:06:PM »
Is the rifle used mainly for shooting vermin ?

Seems strange that the SM does not make much difference. Not much vermin will be caught.

I assume there are lots of different types of the rifle 22 ?
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #197 on: June 28, 2014, 03:08:PM »
Adam thought you watched the videos on the 22's you posted up and you would know all about them. ;D

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #198 on: June 28, 2014, 03:08:PM »
Afternoon Grahame, I can't always tell when you are just on a wind up or whether you are offering genuinely held opinions.

For the benefit of others, having recently fired a .22 rimfire rifle with and without a P&H moderator. My experience was that without a SM attached, the sound was fairly loud, a bit louder than a cap gun I would say. With the SM attached, the sound was reduced a little bit, maybe by about 30% but was still quite audible.

It was also amazing (to me at least) how light the rifle was.

That was my experience anyway, you may have had a different one.
Hello Hartley :) You opinion is always respected and thank you for that enlightening information. You didn't try it indoors by any chance did you? ;D No I shouldn't think so. Furniture and all that.

No-Bits

  • Guest
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #199 on: June 28, 2014, 03:09:PM »
Is the rifle used mainly for shooting vermin ?

Seems strange that the SM does not make much difference. Not much vermin will be caught.

I assume there are lots of different types of the rifle 22 ?

Yeah, it's noticeable that without the SM attached, all the rabbits scarpered, but with it attached, they just looked up and then carried on. So there is obviously a difference in sound, just not as much as I thought there would be.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 03:15:PM by Harters »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44433
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #200 on: June 28, 2014, 03:10:PM »
Adam thought you watched the videos on the 22's you posted up and you would know all about them. ;D

I have not watched any. I will leave that to you.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #201 on: June 28, 2014, 03:13:PM »
Is the rifle used mainly for shooting vermin ?

Seems strange that the SM does not make much difference. Not much vermin will be caught.

I assume there are lots of different types of the rifle 22 ?
Yes. Some are used for hunting small game and some are just used for target shooting. Some I must agree are louder than others. There I understand from general gossip on the forum that some people use subsonic ammo and some supersonic ammo. Not sure what the difference is though and under what circumstances each are used for, not knowing much about guns myself.

No-Bits

  • Guest
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #202 on: June 28, 2014, 03:13:PM »
Hello Hartley :) You opinion is always respected and thank you for that enlightening information. You didn't try it indoors by any chance did you? ;D No I shouldn't think so. Furniture and all that.

Unsurprisingly,  it was outside.

If fired indoors I suspect the sound may if anything be a little louder, rather than being absorbed/deadened.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #203 on: June 28, 2014, 03:15:PM »
Unsurprisingly,  it was outside.

If fired indoors I suspect the sound may if anything be a little louder, rather than being absorbed/deadened.
Ok Hartley, thank you for that. :)

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #204 on: June 28, 2014, 03:26:PM »
Adam naughty boy trying to get me to do your research on 22's ;D ;D ;D ;D

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #205 on: June 30, 2014, 01:26:PM »
Adam naughty boy trying to get me to do your research on 22's ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quite honestly Susan I don't think we will get much of an idea of how the gun sounded by trawling youtube? I've watched quite a few and they are all different sounds. But I have heard a .22 rifle being fired outside and I must say the sound travels quite a distance. But I'm still not sure about if one is fired inside a building. I've actually been fired AT by someone with a .22 rifle and although I didn't hear the rifle much I did hear the bullet whistle overhead and hit the tree behind me. I've also been hit by a richochet on the arm. Ouch! that really smarts.

Offline Alias

  • Editor
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9435
  • What is in those 200 boxes?
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #206 on: June 30, 2014, 01:32:PM »
Quite honestly Susan I don't think we will get much of an idea of how the gun sounded by trawling youtube? I've watched quite a few and they are all different sounds. But I have heard a .22 rifle being fired outside and I must say the sound travels quite a distance. But I'm still not sure about if one is fired inside a building. I've actually been fired AT by someone with a .22 rifle and although I didn't hear the rifle much I did hear the bullet whistle overhead and hit the tree behind me. I've also been hit by a richochet on the arm. Ouch! that really smarts.

You should get yourself some new friends!  8)

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #207 on: June 30, 2014, 02:16:PM »
Grahame Ha Ha I was not trawling you tube that was Adams suggestion but notice he did not trawl it either "do as I say not what I do" thats his motto ;D.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #208 on: June 30, 2014, 03:32:PM »
Grahame Ha Ha I was not trawling you tube that was Adams suggestion but notice he did not trawl it either "do as I say not what I do" thats his motto ;D.
Well it is obvious that he isn't that curious to be a real detective. I see him more as a book reader to be of much use as an investigator?

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Was there still enough evidence without the silencer ?
« Reply #209 on: June 30, 2014, 03:55:PM »
Grahame think Adam is trying to educate me on this case as I never post a new thread or give scenario's or indeed a source ;D