SSS.6.16 - Rugged Razor and the Savage Model 10 PC .308
/Rugged Razor on a Savage Model 10 .308 with 20-in Barrel
The Razor is manufactured by Rugged Suppressors. It is a 30 caliber centerfire rifle silencer, intended to suppress most cartridges with projectiles appropriately sized to travel through the bore, up to and including 300 Remington Ultra Magnum. It has a 1.5-inch diameter and is 6.4 inches in length. Multiple end-cap options are available for use with the Razor, including a flash-hider end-cap. The user may also choose from various Rugged muzzle devices on which to mount the silencer to the host weapon with its welded proprietary dual-taper locking mount. The outer tube and mount are stainless steel and the cast Stellite baffles of the inner core are fully-welded. The silencer weighs 18.2 ounces with the R3 flash hider but can be used with the Rugged M2 brake for a total system weight of 16.8 ounces. The Razor can be obtained from Silencer Shop.
This review contains single-test results using the Razor with the R3 flash hider and flat end-cap on the Savage Model 10 Precision Carbine rifle, chambered in .308WIN with an 20-inch barrel. Federal XM80C 149gr ammunition was used in the test.
Summary: When paired with the Savage M10 20” .308 and fired with Federal XM80C, the Rugged Razor with the R3 flash hider achieved a Suppression Rating™ of 28.4 in PEW Science testing.
6.16.1 Rugged Razor Sound Signature Test Results
A summary of the principal Silencer Sound Standard performance metrics of the Razor is shown in Table 1. The data acquired 1.0 m (39.4 in) left of the muzzle is available for viewing to all. This is a members-only review and includes pressure and impulse waveforms measured at the shooter’s ear. PEW Science thanks you for your support; further testing, research, and development of PEW-SOFT and the Silencer Sound Standard is made possible by members like you!
Table 1. Rugged Razor Sound Metric Summary
6.16.1.1 SOUND SIGNATURES AT THE MUZZLE
Real sound pressure histories acquired with PEW-SOFT™ are shown below. The waveforms are not averaged, decimated, or filtered. The data acquisition rate used in all PEW Science testing is 1.0 MS/s (1 MHz). The peaks, shape, and time phasing (when the peaks occur in relation to absolute time and to each other) of these raw waveforms are the most accurate of any firearm silencer testing publicly available. PEW-SOFT data is acquired by PEW Science independent testing; the industry leader in silencer sound research. For more information, please consult the Silencer Sound Standard.
Figure 1 shows a 0.8 millisecond long portion of the first round sound pressure signature of the Rugged Razor as measured 1.0 m left of the muzzle. There are four significant waveform features labeled:
An initial pressure pulse out of the silencer, after the bullet exits the end-cap, causes a 147.3 dB peak.
Gas jetting increases relatively quickly and linearly, causing a 145.9 dB peak.
The jet magnitude increases to 149.7 dB.
As gas continues to exit the silencer from the primary combustion event, the peak sound overpressure magnitude is measured to be 152.0 dB.
This is the typical sequence observed when firing supersonic .308WIN ammunition from a bolt-action rifle with an attached silencer that exhibits low to moderate flow restriction (back pressure); however, internal silencer design can significantly influence the measured timing and pressure amplitudes. Preliminary back pressure comparisons are shown in Section 6.16.2 of this review.
Fig 1. Rugged Razor First Round Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature, 09-MAY-2020
Closer views of the first peak of all shots (Fig 2a) and highest peak of the first shot (Fig 2b) are shown below. Figure 2a illustrates the relative waveform-shape consistency of the bullet end-cap exit event between all 5 shots during the test, prior to the influences of internal silencer gas environment. This event is plainly visible and decoupled from the majority of the primary combustion event due to the low gas flow restriction exhibited by the Razor suppressor. Figure 2b shows points later in time during Shot 1 as the maximum sound pressure occurs from the primary combustion event. Note that the total timescale in Figure 2a is 0.20 milliseconds (200 microseconds) and the total timescale in Figure 2b is only 0.10 milliseconds (100 microseconds). PEW-SOFT provides a sampling point every microsecond and the individual data points are shown in Figure 2b to illustrate this.
Fig 2a. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Early-Time Peaks, 09-MAY-2020
Fig 2b. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Shot 1 Peak, 09-MAY-2020
The primary sound signature pressure histories for all 5 shots with the Razor are shown in Figure 3a. The sound signatures of Shot 1 and Shot 2 are shown in Figure 3b, in the regions of peak sound pressure. Note the same peak events are labeled for Shot 1 that were previously labeled in Figure 1. The real sound impulse (momentum transfer potential) histories from the same 5-shot test are shown in Figure 4a. In Figure 4b, a shorter timescale is shown comparing the impulse of Shot 1 to that of Shot 2.
Fig 3a. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature, 09-MAY-2020
Fig 3b. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature, Short Time Window, 09-MAY-2020
Figure 4a. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature, 09-MAY-2020
Figure 4b. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature, Short Time Window, 09-MAY-2020
The measured first-round-pop (FRP) is evident in both the pressure and impulse regimes. When comparing the overall early-time pressure histories of Shot 1 to Shot 2 (Fig 3b), the gas jetting in Shot 1 has a higher magnitude and occurs more quickly than the jetting in Shot 2. This is best illustrated in the impulse regime in Figure 4. Note that after the initial impulse step peak occurs at approximately 29.8 ms, the slope of the impulse rise of Shot 1 is steeper than that of the subsequent shots. It is important to note that the impulse of Shot 1 has significantly more early-time duration and its rise-time to peak occurs more quickly than in all subsequent shots, as expected.
The shape, timing, and magnitudes of the early-time pressure pulses and overall shape of the impulse waveforms measured at the muzzle, from shot-to-shot, are relatively consistent.
PEW Science note: One notable observation from the measured data is the rise-time to peak impulse exhibited by the Razor in this test. The rise-time to peak impulse (peak momentum transfer potential) measured 1.0 meter left of the muzzle, of the Razor, after the first shot, when firing supersonic .308WIN ammunition is measured to be faster than that of the Rugged Radiant in its long configuration, but slower than that of the Q Trash Panda (Sound Signature Review 6.4) and Dead Air Sandman-S (Sound Signature Review 6.11). This is one objective measurement that indicates the Razor exhibits relatively high gas flow rate and therefore potentially low to moderate back pressure characteristics. More detailed and direct comparisons are provided in Section 6.16.2 of this review.
As typically indicated, first-round sound signatures always differ from subsequent shots, as the atmosphere within the silencer changes. The FRP phenomenon cannot always be shown by viewing only the peak sound pressure. This is one of the reasons why The Silencer Sound Standard requires examining multiple sound signature metrics. Ammunition consistency can play a role in the determination of FRP, however, the close examination of measured pressure and impulse waveforms typically excludes ammunition from the possible factors influencing true FRP, due to the relative consistency of most high quality factory ammunition.
6.16.1.2 SOUND SIGNATURES AT SHOOTER’S EAR
Real sound pressure histories from the same 5-shot test of the Rugged Razor suppressor acquired with PEW-SOFT at the shooter’s ear are shown below. Again, the waveforms are not averaged, decimated, or filtered. The data acquisition rate used in all PEW Science testing is 1.0 MS/s (1 MHz).
The primary sound signature pressure histories at the ear for all 5 shots are shown in Figure 5. The primary sound signature history is shown on the left. A zoomed-in timescale is displayed on the right, in the region of peak sound pressure for Shot 1 and Shot 2. The real sound impulse (momentum transfer potential) histories at the ear from the same 5-shot test are shown in Figure 6. Again, full and short timescales are shown.
Figure 5a. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Pressure Signature, 09-MAY-2020
Figure 5b. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Pressure Signature, Short Time Window, 09-MAY-2020
Figure 6a. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Impulse Signature, 09-MAY-2020
Figure 6b. Rugged Razor Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Impulse Signature, Short Time Window, 09-MAY-2020
Similar to the measurements at the muzzle, there is FRP evident when examining the waveforms measured at the shooter’s ear in early time (Figure 5b), but Shot 2 possesses higher peak pressure amplitude than Shot 1 at the ear, later in time. Note that Shot 1 possesses a higher impulse plateau, but the rise-time to peak impulse is not significantly faster than in subsequent shots. Instead of the typical fastest rise to peak impulse, Shot 1 has a faster decay time than Shot 2, indicating that the effects of FRP to the shooter’s ear may be less pronounced. This phenomenon will be examined in a future PEW Science Research Supplement. As typical, note the very similar pressure and impulse magnitudes prior to the gas completely exiting the weapon system (between 27 and 29 ms). The supersonic .308WIN platform creates significant sound signature even before the gas completely exits the weapon system, as was shown in the measured muzzle sound pressure and impulse signatures in the previous section.
The overall sound signature measured at the shooter’s ear possesses significantly less amplitude in both the pressure and impulse regimes than the signature measured at the muzzle (refer to Table 1). Furthermore, the application of both pressure and impulse at the shooter’s ear is delayed when compared to the pressure and impulse at the weapon muzzle. The combination of varying amplitude and rise time to peak amplitude influences the response of the human ear.
6.16.2 Relative Back Pressure and Suppression Rating Comparison (.30 Rifle Silencers)
PEW Science Research Note: As of February 2021, back pressure characterization has undergone refinement and Rev.2 of the Back Pressure Metric has been developed. Research is ongoing. Please see back pressure research updates starting with Sound Signature Review 6.36.
The Razor suppressor is intended to be compact and reduce back pressure. PEW Science is currently conducting silencer back pressure research. Figure 7 shows preliminary relative back pressure comparisons between selected “low back pressure” 7.62mm (30 caliber) rifle silencers shown in public PEW Science Sound Signature Reviews, as of the date of this review publication. The results shown in Figure 7 are calculated from real test data acquired with PEW-SOFT. Please note the following:
The time to reach peak gas momentum transfer potential, as measured 1.0 m left of the weapon muzzle, is the objective quantity used to generate the back pressure data summary.
The waveform characteristics of unsuppressed shots with the same ammunition used in the respective tests are used in the calculations and the unsuppressed relative back pressure and Suppression Rating quantities are shown.
The first shot from each silencer test is omitted from the back pressure computations due to internal gas environment characteristics within the silencer (FRP) that influence peak impulse amplitude, wave-shape, and timing. All unsuppressed shots are included.
Data is normalized to the silencer with the highest back pressure shown (the Rugged Razor) and highest Suppression Rating shown (the Q Trash Panda from Sound Signature Review 6.4).
Figure 7. Back Pressure And Suppression Rating Comparisons Of .308 Rifle Silencers Using PEW-SOFT Data
From the above data, it can be concluded that the Rugged Razor suppressor is capable of reduced back pressure, on-par with that of the Q Trash Panda, but at the expense of some sound suppression. It is postulated that the back pressure of the Trash Panda is 3% lower than that of the Razor but the Trash Panda exhibits a 14% higher Suppression Rating. The relationship between the relative back pressure metrics shown and functionality with semi-automatic and automatic host weapons for practical use is the subject of future PEW Science research.
PEW Science note: The relative percentages described in this section are only valid when examining the data normalized as described in (4) above. PEW Science back pressure research is ongoing. Membership contributions to PEW Science help fund such research.
The slightly shorter Rugged Razor “semi-compact” silencer is measured to be louder than mid-size 30 caliber rifle silencers, like the Trash Panda and Sandman-S, and is predicted to exhibit slightly higher back pressure. In-depth human hearing response comparisons of these silencers will be presented in a future PEW Science Research Supplement.
6.16.3 Review Summary: Rugged Razor on a Savage Model 10 .308 with 20-in Barrel
When paired with the Savage M10 20” .308 and fired with Federal XM80C, the Rugged Razor with the R3 flash hider achieved a Suppression Rating™ of 28.4 in PEW Science testing.
PEW Science Subjective Opinion:
The Rugged Razor is a “semi-compact” 30 caliber machine gun rated rifle silencer that possesses moderate sound signature suppression performance with relatively low back pressure. The silencer is advertised to have extreme durability and has a reasonable weight for extreme duty-use silencers of its size, at a total system weight of 18.2 ounces as tested. System weight is reduced to 16.8 ounces with the M2 brake.
The Rugged Razor uses an iteration of a feature-reduced and modified curved-cone baffle, similar to the feature-reduced curved-cone baffle used in the Omega 300 from SilencerCo and other companies. The Razor possesses only four baffles, in an attempt to increase gas flow rate and reduce back pressure. This is in contrast with the method used by similar silencers from Dead Air (the Sandman series) that reduce back pressure by increasing axial orifice area and modifying cone geometry. PEW Science test data indicates that back pressure reduction by increasing flow area may be more efficient for back pressure reduction than reducing the number of baffles; this is reflected in the Suppression Rating and relative back pressure metrics in this review. However, a reduction in the number of baffles does save weight, particularly when the baffles are constructed of steel.
The dual-taper locking proprietary mount welded to the rear of the Razor that interfaces with Rugged muzzle devices is relatively simple to operate. To install the silencer, the user must thread it onto a coarse-thread mount, which engages a forward taper, and then engage the locking collar which compresses cam levers onto a secondary rear taper. The mount is very secure. PEW Science anecdotal experience with the Rugged mount across various Rugged rifle silencers and host weapons has been overwhelmingly positive and trouble free.
The Rugged Razor is marketed to be durable and is advertised to not have any restrictions on barrel length; therefore, it may be used with aggressive semiautomatic and automatic firing schedules. The combination of durability, small size, and relatively low back pressure compared to that of full-size silencers makes the Razor a reasonable choice for semiautomatic and automatic centerfire rifle use, particularly for cases in which both size and back pressure are a concern. Anecdotal PEW Science experience indicates that the reduction in back pressure of the Razor enables adequate function on semiautomatic AR15 host weapons chambered in 5.56x45mm.
Users may compare the Razor to the Dead Air Sandman-S due to the similar sizes of the two silencers. It is important to note that the Razor is both shorter and lighter than the Sandman-S. The Razor may be thought of as a silencer with length in-between that of short and “k” silencers. For semi-automatic use cases in which the shooter may be using hearing protection, the Razor may be an attractive alternative due to smaller size and lighter weight, at the expense of slightly higher back pressure potential and is very well suited to abnormally severe firing schedules.
In this review, the Razor performance metrics depend upon suppressing a supersonic centerfire rifle cartridge; no easy task. PEW Science encourages the reader to remain vigilant with regard to all supersonic centerfire rifle suppression claims. The gas volume and combustion products created by the firing of the supersonic .308WIN cartridge are significant; the measured pressure and impulse magnitudes, and their durations, illustrate this fact.
The hearing damage potential of supersonic centerfire rifle use is significant. PEW Science encourages the reader to consider the Suppression Rating when deciding on an appropriate silencer and host weapon combination for their desired use.
