Hearing Damage

[Florida J Frame]

Is a sub-sonic .45ACP any less damaging to hearing when fired inside then a typical .38 or 9mm or even a shotgun?

 

[H Richard]

Any of them will damage your hearing. But if it is a self defense the question is your hearing or your life?

 

[major bumm]

er.. um... it won't matter too much: FreeHearingTest.com - Gunfire Noise Levels

Not a bad idea to keep a pair of over-the-ears protection by the gun for those "bumps in the night". I would try the electronic ones myself, but I just don't trust them yet.

According to the website above, the decibel level of a .45acp compared to a 9mm is only a difference of 2db. (each decibel increases in energy by 12 whatever that means)

For comparison, a lawnmower is about 85db and a flash-bang grenade is between 175-190db.

 

[elm_creek_smith]

Spend the money and get a good pair of electronic muffs for you and your significant other. They increase your hearing ability up to a point and shut down in milliseconds to prevent sounds over 85 db from damaging your ears. I have so little hearing left, I need all the help I can get.

 

[sac-gunslinger]

I have kept a pair of electronic ear muffs by my bed for years. I grab them first if I have to roll out of bed unexpectedly. Funny, the cheaper, older pair I have seem to work better than the newer, more expensive ones.

 

[MichiganScott]

Keep a pair of electronic muffs with your gun. With them turned up all the way you may just be able to hear unusual sounds that would give you an advantage. I have a few of the cheap Midway brand that are kept wherever I have a self defense gun.

 

[shouldazagged]

It's a little late for me to worry. Like most guys my age, when I was younger I didn't realize that muzzle blast is forever, the gift that keeps on taking.

In the extremely unlikely event that I need to fire a gun indoors, further hearing damage will be the least of my worries.

 

[Rpg]

Is a sub-sonic .45ACP any less damaging to hearing when fired inside then a typical .38 or 9mm or even a shotgun?

I can't tell you about comparative impact on hearing loss.

I can say that subsonic ammo is less unpleasant to shoot than high velocity, and that larger calibers are also less unpleasant than smaller calibers at the same velocity.

As an example: 22 magnum is so unpleasant in a handgun that I have no interest in it. 22 high velocity ammo is noticeably less pleasant than standard velocity in a handgun.

I prefer shotgun ammo at around 1125 fps. The high velocity stuff adds nothing performance wise for me and is noticeably less pleasant, in terms of noise, to shoot.

A revolver creates more blast and subjective noise than a comparable pistol because of the gas escaping between cylinder and barrel: it's closer to your ears than the muzzle: the greater the distance between the ear and the escaping gas (noise) the less unpleasant it is.

Using your examples, I think the 45acp least unpleasant, the 9mm (subsonic) the next and the 38 subsonic the next among handguns.

None of the firearms you mention would be much fun to shoot indoors without hearing protection.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

[Pef]

The damage is cumulative. That being said, the .45 and the .38 are slightly less than the 9mm.

Side note: I Normally carry .38's, but in a trade a while back a guy threw in a box of Speer Gold Dot .357's. I figured what the heck, I tried them at the range, not too bad, so I carried them one day instead of .38's. One day. I wish I had loaded my carry with .38's instead of full house .357's that day. I had a ND in front of a gun safe in a small room with no sound attenuation. I did not hear the report but for a muffled "whump." That was 14 months ago, and my ears are still ringing with permanent tinnitus.

Regardless, if I have to fight to live, my hearing will not be a concern.

 

[wittmeba]

I can tell you from my experience that if you are in front of the muzzle and even if off to the side by a few feet you can have very severe damage from muzzle noise. It is very painful.

A concern for me is noise if I ever have to exercise self defense with a gun in a vehicle while family is with me. I'm trying to figure out some key phrase to state to get anyone to cover their ears.

 

[Grayfox]

Whut ya say?

 

[SMSgt]

The .45 will leave you only slightly less than totally deaf--unless you need a follow-up shot!

 

[Don 73]

I've been there a few times when shots have gone off in an enclosed area with no hearing protection. Under stress, you don't hear the shots, like PEF said, just a "whump" sound and you can feel the concussion, but the effects don't last long.

 

[WR Moore]

Another vote for electronic muffs.

The .45 and .38 run at lower pressures than the 9mm. They'll produce less hearing damage. The shotgun operates at even less pressure, but you're burning more powder=more damage.

 

[elm_creek_smith]

I spent my 20+ years in the Army on tanks, and there's no hearing protection that can keep your high frequency hearing from being degraded during gunnery. Of course, a "friendly fire" incident where we were on the receiving end of a "Battery 2" 155mm howitzer mission didn't help (no casualties), either.

The effects of shots in an enclosed area may mitigate with time, but the damage doesn't go away. As has been stated earlier, the damage is cumulative.

 

[chief38]

I doubt the difference would be discernible and that would be a small price for saving your life and possibly multiple other ones if you had no choice.

While a few shots might damage hearing slightly, you can use it as an excuse for not doing something your wife asks you to that you really don't want to in the first place. Works great!