ExSoldier

Howard Leight. Thunder 29 or Thunder 31. For non-electronic you can't DO any better.

__________________
Former Infantry Captain; 20 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

Silica

The issue is not whether the sound is transmitted via bone conduction. The real issue is whether that the sound is damaging to the inner ear. The sound will be transmitted to the ear at any point on the skull. For example, strike a tuning fork and place it in the middle of your forehead; you will hear the tone in both ears. The loud noise produced by gunfire will demonstrate bone conduction regardless of whether you dampen the mastoid with a muff. Do not get me wrong, I am a strong advocate of hearing protection. I would recommend wearing both muffs and in-ear protection anytime that the circumstances allow. The real value in double protection is not through any effect on bone conduction, but on the additional reduction of sound pressure into the ear canal and to the tympanic membrane. I guess it's a nice way to motivate people to wear double protection, but it's based on a myth.

There is no scientific evidence that bone conduction of noise alone (SPL around 140dB) produces any permanent hearing threshold shift. If you know of such evidence, I would very much appreciate learning of the source.

Anubis

Probably a good idea to keep the mouth closed while shooting is occurring in the vicinity, too. If the Eustachian tube is clear, there's a direct air channel from the outside world through the mouth to the inner side of the tympanum. (Of course there's one through the nose too, but the mouth channel is shorter and less convoluted.)

I noticed ringing in my ears after one session while wearing good ear muffs, kept my mouth closed after that with no recurrence.

__________________
Send lawyers, Glocks, and money!

cuban11182

Surefire Sonic Defenders....I used them at Blackwater during our 3gun course..they performed very well. In fact 3 of the instructors asked me about them. http://www.surefire.com/maxexp/main/...4306/sesent/00

taggart

Giggle...Mike said "mastoid bone".

Ok, sometimes I'm still 12 years old. Sorry!

But seriously, as an audio (recording) engineer, I'm not really sold on the electronic earmuff idea, yet. I'm assuming they use something we in the recording industry call a "noise gate". The gate is programmed so that when audio reaches a certain point, or threshold, it clamps down on that audio and doesn't let it in. Audio is heard normally before the threshold is reached. The problem I have, theoretically, with electronic earmuffs is that the gate allows a teeny-tiny bit of the initial noise to get through before it clamps down on the noise as a whole. That initial noise is called a transient. Keep in mind, that threshold has to be reached and even surpassed for the gate to react. There is no such thing as a gate that will stop a signal before it reaches a set threshold. That would probably require, well, time travel! And it's my understanding that a millisecond (I'm not sure of the exact amount) of gunshot noise is just as damaging, although probably not noticeably so, as an unprotected blast. Let me know if my "electronic earmuff doubts" are off track. It's a slow day at work and my mind is wandering.
And I'm not saying that they don't work, don't get me wrong. Also, I've never used a pair, so there's my other disclaimer.
Just my $2.02 worth!

__________________
Taggart Snyder
Man about town...

Silica

You've raised a good point. Impact noise, or loud noise of very short duration. Very little good science on this issue. All of the noise standards (OSHA) used in the US are based upon continuous noise, or at least of minutes to hours duration. The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has some recommendations for short duration noise in their book of recommended workplace limits (the TLV/BLV book). NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) also has some material on short duration noise. Research on this area is harder and harder due to budget cuts. Noise induced hearing loss just doesn't have the sex (no pun intended) appeal of AIDs to the budget makers.

obxned

We keep several sets of muffs in our range bucket. Everyone in the family swears by them, except for one oddball that prefers plugs. I've used both, both seem to do the job, but the plugs seem like more trouble to me.

If we ever did any indoor shooting, I would probable use both.

__________________
http://www.obxammo.com/

There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

When governments make laws, they must consider the unintended consequences.

pgrass101

Yes I use 2 sets of hearing protection

__________________
Noli nothis permittere te terere

Janq

Interesting.

From your own perspective how do they work I meaning the sense of reducing real noise. Also were you training inside or out?

I for year have been doubling up with inner ear plugs and a set of Peltor model 6 electronic muffs which alone are 19NRR.
I've been checking prices though and am this close to buying myself a pair of Peltor Tactical Pro at 26NRR for Christmas; http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpag...374&t=11082005

They are spendy but then I only have one set of ears and I'mnot getting any younger.

- Janq

__________________
"Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy
Monday, March 12, 2007 -- Op Ed -- The Washington Post

cspearling

I have the Caldwell ES85, which are NNR27, work good, and are only $14.99 right now at midway.... They work great, but dont have electronic noise canceling.. just electronic cutout... they are stereo tho.

__________________
"I'd rather be judged in a box by a jury than carred in a box by my friends!"