SSS.6.44 - Dead Air Nomad-Ti and the Savage Model 10 PC .308
/Dead Air Nomad-Ti on a Savage Model 10 .308 with 20-in Barrel
The Nomad-Ti is designed by Dead Air. It is a 30 caliber centerfire rifle silencer, intended to suppress most cartridges with projectiles appropriately sized to travel through the bore, including 300 Norma Magnum. It has a 1.74-inch diameter and is 6.5 inches in length when using the direct-thread adapter. The user may choose to use other Dead Air or third-party adapters compatible with the 1.375”-24tpi system. The silencer is tubeless; the baffles and removeable endcap are constructed of Grade 5 titanium. The silencer weighs 9.7 ounces with the direct thread mount, as tested. The Nomad-Ti can be obtained from Silencer Shop.
This review contains single-test results using the Nomad-Ti mounted with its titanium direct thread mount on the Savage Model 10 Precision Carbine rifle, chambered in .308WIN with a 20-inch barrel. Federal XM80C 149gr ammunition was used in the test.
Nomad Version Notes: The Nomad-30 was originally released in 2018. During its product life, Dead Air has implemented successive manufacturing and performance improvements to the silencer’s design. The Nomad-Ti incorporates all of the improvements known to PEW Science, as of the date of this test report publication. Therefore, the data in this review can be considered by the reader to be an upper bound representation of Nomad-30 / Nomad-Ti performance on the tested weapon system, with regard to both sound suppression and flow restriction (back pressure) metrics. It is postulated that steel Nomad-30 silencers of the latest generation exhibit performance bounded by the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and the Nomad-Ti in this Sound Signature Review.
- Section 6.44.1 contains the Nomad-Ti test results and analysis.
- Section 6.44.2 contains back pressure and Suppression Rating comparisons with selected .30 rifle silencers possessing a PEW Science Back Pressure Metric, Ω [Pa-1] in Omega Zone 4 and above. Further information about the Ω metric and Omega Zones can be obtained in PEW Science Research Supplement 6.40 (Public Article).
- Section 6.44.3 contains high-fidelity comparisons between the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and Nomad-Ti in both pressure and impulse space.
- Section 6.44.4 contains the review summary and PEW Science opinions.
Summary: When paired with the Savage M10 20” .308 and fired with Federal XM80C, the Dead Air Nomad-Ti mounted with the direct thread mount achieved a Suppression Rating™ of 41.5 in PEW Science testing.
The performance of the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) on supersonic .308 is detailed in previous PEW Science Sound Signature Review 6.43, in which it achieved a Suppression Rating of 37.6.
Relative Suppression Rating Performance is Summarized in SSS.7 - PEW Science Rankings
6.44.1 Dead Air Nomad-Ti Sound Signature Test Results
A summary of the principal Silencer Sound Standard performance metrics of the Nomad-Ti 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. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Sound Metric Summary
6.44.1.1 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 1.2 millisecond long portion of the first round sound pressure signature of the Nomad-Ti as measured 1.0 m left of the muzzle. There are four significant waveform features labeled:
The maximum amplitude of sound signature from internal weapon system combustion is measured to be 131.3 dB. This is very similar to the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) internal combustion signature with key amplitude differences discussed in Section 6.44.3.
The endcap exit event results in an initial overpressure peak magnitude of 142.5 dB.
Secondary jetting builds to an amplitude of 144.2 dB.
Peak FRP is measured to reached a maximum overpressure amplitude of 150.0 dB.
This is a somewhat typical sequence observed when firing supersonic .308WIN ammunition from a bolt-action rifle with an attached silencer that exhibits moderate flow restriction (back pressure). However, key negative phase (rarefaction) events in the Nomad-Ti signature differentiate it from that of the Nomad-30 (1st Gen). Internal silencer design can significantly influence the measured timing and pressure amplitudes. Preliminary back pressure comparisons are shown in Section 6.44.2 of this review, with the PEW Science Back Pressure Metric, Ω [Pa-1]. High fidelity waveform comparisons between the Nomad-Ti and Nomad-30 (1st Gen) are shown in Section 6.44.3 of this review.
Fig 1. Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) First Round Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature, 20-MAR-2021
At first glance, the waveform shown in Figure 1 seems very similar to the FRP signatures of silencers exhibiting flow restriction (back pressure) in PEW Science Omega Zone 5, such as the Rugged Surge in its Short Configuration (Review 6.22), the SilencerCo Omega 300 (Review 6.10), and the Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) in Review 6.43. However, there are key differences in negative phase onset; that is, the rarefaction events of the waveform begin earlier and more aggressively with the Nomad-Ti (See Section 6.44.3). This behavior is observed by another silencer in PEW Science testing: the Griffin Explorr EX3 (Review 6.36); albeit with a higher flow rate. Although the rarefaction of the Nomad-Ti is not nearly as aggressive of that from the Explorr EX3, these two silencers are the only rifle silencers tested by PEW Science, to date, that exhibit this early-time positive phase amplitude accumulation with sudden overwhelming rarefaction resulting in an abrupt net impulse decay.
PEW Science postulates that the early onset of significant rarefaction is an indicator of back pressure reduction (early time high mass flow rate). The computed predictive back pressure metric, Omega, for the Nomad-Ti falls below that of the above silencers (Omega Zone 5) into the bounds of Omega Zone 4. See Section 6.44.2.
The FRP signature of the Nomad-Ti, like the Nomad-30, is significantly different than that of the CGS Hyperion K (Review 6.28) - a silencer with much lower back pressure. It is also, again, significantly different than the signature exhibited by the Q Trash Panda (Review 6.4) - a silencer of similar size and moderately lower back pressure. As stated in the previous Review 6.43 of the Nomad-30 (1st Gen), the Nomad series and the Trash Panda are significantly different in supersonic sound signature suppression and gas dynamics; this is a consequence of their radically different internal geometries. Despite being somewhat similar in overall exterior envelope and both being tubeless, the Trash Panda’s baffles are titanium straight ported cones with a generous bore. The Nomad-Ti design possesses titanium stepped-cone baffles with coaxial elements similar to elements of original SWR Omega geometry and elements of modern CGS Hyperion technology; the presence of which relieves localized high pressure stagnation and allows for more efficient supersonic gas flow suppression for a given silencer volume. Comprehensive Suppression Rating and back pressure comparisons with the Omega metric are provided in Section 6.44.2.
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 consistency of the internal weapon system and silencer combustion events between all 5 shots during the test, followed by a consistent endcap exit event. The endcap exit signature consistency in both amplitude and wave shape, from shot to shot, is discernable as a result of the high sample rate and raw, unfiltered data stream from PEW-SOFT. 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 0.24 milliseconds (240 microseconds) and the total timescale in Figure 2b is only 0.1 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. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Early-Time Peaks, 20-MAR-2021
Fig 2b. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Shot 1 Peak, 20-MAR-2021
The primary sound signature pressure histories for all 5 shots with the Nomad-Ti are shown in Figure 3a. The sound signatures of Shot 1, Shot 2, and Shot 3 are shown in Figure 3b, in early time. 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 and Shot 3.
Fig 3a. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature, 20-MAR-2021
Fig 3b. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature, Short Time Window, 20-MAR-2021
Figure 4a. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature, 20-MAR-2021
Figure 4b. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature, Short Time Window, 20-MAR-2021
The Nomad-Ti, like the Nomad-30, exhibits perceptible first round pop (FRP) at the muzzle on this platform; this is typical for silencers of its length and sound suppression performance. The FRP phenomenon is observable in the pressure regime, and it is clearly evident upon examination of the impulse waveforms in Figure 4. However, unlike the Nomad-30 (1st Gen), the Nomad-Ti impulse signatures exhibit early onset decay. This decay is present in FRP and more pronounced post-FRP. Therefore, this decay is not an artifact of secondary combustion; it is, in fact, a difference in gas dynamics between the previous and new generation Nomad silencers. PEW Science inner ear modeling indicates FRP will be perceptible to bystanders and the shooter with the Nomad-Ti on this host weapon platform, albeit not as perceptible as with the Nomad-30 (1st Gen).
PEW Science Research Note: The behavior of the signature in Shot 5 of this test exhibits characteristics that slightly differ from the other shots, post-FRP. In addition to a slightly delayed maximum positive phase impulse peak (Figure 4a), Shot 5 exhibits positive phase pulsing, post-peak, in the muzzle signature. Due to the consistency of the signature events prior to these anomalies, and the consistency of the late-time signatures, PEW Science analysis has determined that these are flow anomalies and not caused by ammunition inconsistency. This is important to note, because the anomalies in Shot 5 are significant enough to induce more severe inner ear response to personnel located 1.0 m left of the muzzle. These anomalies were not removed from the test record, data analysis, or inner ear modeling, because they are indicative of variance in the Nomad-Ti’s true sound signature behavior and could occur at any time. The resulting influence on the overall Suppression Rating at the muzzle is not severe, but it is not insignificant.
The overall, muzzle, and ear Suppression Ratings for silencers tested by PEW Science, to date, can be compared directly using the tool in Section 7 of the Silencer Sound Standard - PEW Science Rankings and Section 6.44.2 of this review presents a comparison of Suppression Rating and back pressure for silencers with a flow restriction above a certain threshold (Omega Zone 4). Comprehensive silencer back pressure comparisons for .30 rifle silencers are available in PEW Science Public Research Supplement 6.40.
Both the Dead Air Nomad-Ti and the Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) are quieter than the Dead Air Sandman-S (Review 6.11) at both the muzzle and ear on this weapon platform, while exhibiting higher back pressure (a higher Omega zone). While the Nomad-Ti does exhibit lower back pressure than the Nomad-30 (1st Gen), the flow restriction (back pressure) of the Nomad-Ti does not reach the low level of the Sandman-S; the Nomad design results in a lower mass flow rate (and significantly more sound signature suppression). Detailed Nomad-Ti waveform comparisons with the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) are presented in 6.43.3.
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.
PEW Science has made a concerted effort to characterize the FRP phenomenon with true physiological human inner-ear response analyses. Additional PEW Science Member Research Supplements containing this information are released periodically.
6.44.1.2 SOUND SIGNATURES AT SHOOTER’S EAR
Real sound pressure histories from the same 5-shot test of the Nomad-Ti 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. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Pressure Signature, 20-MAR-2021
Figure 5b. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Pressure Signature, Short Time Window, 20-MAR-2021
Figure 6a. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Impulse Signature, 20-MAR-2021
Figure 6b. Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Impulse Signature, Short Time Window, 20-MAR-2021
When examining the impulse waveforms measured at the shooter’s ear with the Nomad-Ti (Figure 6), it exhibits less significant FRP in both the pressure and impulse regimes then at the muzzle and significantly less than the previous Nomad-30 (1st Gen). In PEW Science inner-ear modeling, there is still FRP noticeable to the shooter with the Nomad-Ti on this platform, but as stated above, it is much less than the previous Nomad iteration; the Nomad-Ti exhibits higher performance, in general. The peak pressure and impulse measured at the shooter’s head position are lower than several silencers in this class.
As in the muzzle signatures, the Shot 5 signatures at the ear exhibit post-peak pulsing. However, unlike at the muzzle, these signature anomalies do not influence the perceived loudness. PEW Science postulates that the shooter’s head position is of suitable distance from the endcap such that the amplitude of these post-peak impulse anomalies is below the threshold of inner-ear ligament response. PEW Science inner ear modeling supports that hypothesis. This is in contrast to the post-peak impulse signature anomalies noted at the ear in the Griffin Explorr test; those anomalies are so severe that they significantly influence ear response.
Detailed Nomad-Ti waveform comparisons with the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) are presented in 6.43.3. The member’s version of this review also contains at-ear waveform comparisons. Thank you for your support.
6.44.2 Relative Suppression Rating and Back Pressure Comparisons (.30 Rifle Silencers)
The Dead Air Nomad-Ti suppressor is intended to reduced flow restriction (back pressure) and maximize sound signature suppression for its design envelope. PEW Science has developed an empirical relation to quantify the back pressure (flow restriction) of silencers. Figure 7 shows supersonic suppression and back pressure comparisons between selected 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 PEW Science Back Pressure Metric, Ω [Pa-1], may be generated for any silencer and suppressed weapon system using any suitable raw external overpressure signature data acquired 1.0 m left of the silencer endcap. PEW Science highly recommends data acquisition in accordance with The Silencer Sound Standard.
- Omega Zones are presented in Table 2, below, which are intended to provide guidance to weapons developers, silencer designers, and end-users, with regard to flow restriction characteristics of different silencer designs. It is very important to note that silencers possessing a relatively high Ω can still provide functional use on weapon systems. Some weapon systems are more sensitive to Ω than others.
- It is important to note that a silencer’s Omega Zone can shift when using a mounting scheme that differs from that used in the testing referenced in the published PEW Science Sound Signature Reviews. This phenomenon occurs due to some silencer mounting schemes significantly influencing flow restriction with some silencer designs.
- The theoretical lower limit of flow restriction, or so-called "zero back pressure" would be represented by the unsupressed state, Ω = 0 [Pa-1].
- PEW Science acknowledges that other dynamic events occur within a suppressed weapon system that can also influence weapon function. Therefore, PEW Science acknowledges that Ω is not the sole parameter one must consider for total supppressed weapon system operation. However, PEW Science postulates that the Ω metric influence can be significant.
Figure 7. Omega Back Pressure Metric And Suppression Rating Comparisons Of .308 Rifle Silencers Using PEW-SOFT Data and Analysis
Omega characterizes silencer back pressure. It is important to note that back pressure is not blow back. The back pressure of a silencer is the flow restriction it introduces to a suppressed weapon system. The blow back phenomenon that can occur during the use of a suppressed weapon system is caused by the reciprocating system actuating too early relative to overpressure decay within the weapon system, resulting in exposure of excessive internal system overpressure to atmosphere. Some weapons may be tuned to function well with silencers in a high Omega Zone. Some weapons may require low-Omega silencers due to constraints in their operating system(s). Omega metric technical details can be found in PEW Science Public Research Supplement 6.40.
Table 2. PEW Science Back Pressure Metric Omega Zones And Suppressed Weapon System Functional Descriptions
In Section 6.44.1.1, it was noted that the Nomad-Ti exhibits waveform characteristics measured at the muzzle indicative of silencers possessing moderate flow restriction (moderate back pressure) in Omega Zone 5, such as the Rugged Surge in its short configuration and the SilencerCo Omega 300 with its ASR brake, but also atypical characteristics like early-onset significant rarefaction accumulation like the Griffin Explorr EX3. Anecdotal user data indicates that the Nomad-Ti has lower back pressure than the SilencerCo Omega 300; the PEW Science Omega Back Pressure Metric does indicate this relative behavior. Further anecdotal user data indicates that the latest-generation Nomad-30 (postulated to be similar to the Nomad-Ti) has slightly higher back pressure than the Q Trash Panda; the PEW Science Omega Back Pressure Metric, again, indicates this relative behavior.
The main differences between the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and the Nomad-Ti are blast chamber dimensions, baffle angle/step geometry, baffle porting, baffle center orifice aperture, and radial notch alignment. These factors, along with mounting, influence mass flow rate through the silencer, and therefore also influence back pressure and sound suppression. PEW Science postulates the Omega metric for the Nomad-Ti shown in this review is a lower bound for users, but mounting schemes may influence the metric. Nonetheless, users should not expect the Nomad-30 or Nomad-Ti to reach the low back pressure of the Sandman-S.
The Dead Air Nomad-Ti exhibits similar supersonic sound suppression performance as the both the larger Dead Air Sandman-Ti (Review 6.19) and Q Thunder Chicken (Review 6.20), with less back pressure. The Nomad design represents a significant performance balance in the suppression of supersonic and subsonic flow, especially for its size. Future PEW Science Sound Signature Review publications will highlight these characteristics.
As stated in Section 6.44.1.1, both the Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and Dead Air Nomad-Ti perform significantly differently than the Q Trash Panda in supersonic sound signature suppression and gas dynamics; this is a consequence of their radically different internal geometries. The Trash Panda has a higher flow rate, and therefore lower back pressure, which lowers its supersonic suppression capability due to its simple ported straight-cone baffle design. In the subsonic performance regime, the performance gap between the Trash Panda and Nomad is reduced. This comparison is also the subject of future PEW Science Sound Signature Review publications.
The Nomad-Ti approaches the at-ear Suppression Rating of the CGS Helios QD (Review 6.13), and does so with lower backpressure, which is significant. The CGS Hyperion K (Review 6.28) exhibits lower back pressure than the Nomad-Ti, but with a moderately lower Suppression Rating. With regard to silencers of similar size, the Dead Air Nomad and CGS Helios QD / Hyperion K product lines are direct competitors in performance. As both product lines use similar technologies (with key differences), PEW Science postulates that other characteristics (such as durability and adaptability) may determine user choice. This is an example of competition in the arena of superior supersonic rifle sound suppression technology in a certain design envelope.
Although it is very important that data in the supersonic flow regime not be extrapolated to the subsonic flow regime, silencers with certain internal characteristics like coaxial relief chambers can be designed to efficiently suppress sound signature in both; features used to relieve high pressure stagnation during supersonic flow can also be tailored to isolate subsonic flow propagation. The Dead Air Nomad and Dead Air Nomad-Ti, CGS Hyperion, and original SWR Omega technologies all possess characteristics that can form the foundation of well-rounded, balanced silencers with variable gas velocity suppression performance. The balancing of secondary and tertiary characteristics such as back pressure and flash, as well as durability and maintenance, provide further opportunities for silencer design advancements.
It bears repeating that peak sound pressure [dB], peak sound impulse [dB-ms], and Omega (Ω) [Pa-1], alone, do not determine the sound supression performance of a silencer. It is the combination of these and other waveform parameters that form the total sound signature and the influence on human inner ear response.
6.44.3 Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and Nomad-Ti Comparisons
As stated above, the main differences between the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and the Nomad-Ti are blast chamber dimensions, baffle angle/step geometry, baffle porting, baffle center orifice aperture, and radial notch alignment. These factors, along with mounting, influence mass flow rate through the silencer, and therefore also influence back pressure. Sound signature is also influenced by these factors. Below, high fidelity sound signature comparisons of the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and Nomad-Ti are presented. Figure 8a compares the FRP early-time pressure history, while Figure 8b provides the same FRP comparison in impulse space. The following five factors are observed in the data comparisons:
Internal combustion (the sound signature measured prior to the bullet and combustion products exiting the silencer) occurs at a similar frequency in both silencers. However, the amplitude of the internal combustion signature from the Nomad-Ti is slightly higher. This is most likely due to the differing wall thickness of the Nomad-Ti and the Nomad-30, as the sound speed in the two materials is similar.
Endcap exit timing relative to internal combustion signature is identical; this is due to the almost identical lengths of the silencers. The amplitude of the bullet endcap exit event is slightly higher with the Nomad-Ti; this is most likely due to the slightly larger bore aperture and baffle notch alignment allowing a slightly more uniform precursor flow jet. It should be noted that post-endcap exit, significant signature deviation starts to develop. Only early-time external flow and ballistics are similar. Gas dynamics significantly differ (see 3).
Rarefaction deviation begins relatively early in the FRP waveforms, 100 microseconds (0.1 ms) after endcap exit. This is one of the most significant differences in Nomad-Ti behavior from the Nomad-30 (1st Gen). As the Nomad-30 continues to build its positive phase signature, the Nomad-Ti signature is measured to start abruptly losing gas momentum.
Rarefaction magnitude and corresponding Nomad-30 rarefaction delay continue; the Nomad-30 continues to build positive phase impulse accumulation almost linearly.
Peak impulse amplitude difference is pronounced, along with significant decay in the Nomad-Ti waveform (Figure 8b). After this significant decay, the Nomad-Ti is observed to stagnate impulse accumulation; a phenomenon that repeats, and is more pronounced, in subsequent shots (See Figure 9 for Shot 2 comparisons).
Figure 8a. Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) And Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature Comparison (FRP)
Figure 8b. Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) And Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Impulse Comparison (FRP)
The second shot with the two silencers offers similar comparisons to that of the FRP phenomena. Certain differences are repeated, and some more pronounced:
Internal combustion comparisons are again extremely similar; this time both lower than the previous FRP internal combustion signatures due to oxygen-deficient atmosphere.
Endcap exit timing is identical, as expected, with the amplitude difference also similar to that during FRP.
Rarefaction deviation is again noted with the Nomad-Ti; it begins at almost the exact same time as in FRP.
Rarefaction magnitude again differs; the Nomad-Ti signature does not exhibit enough net positive phase pressure to continue accumulating positive phase impulse after its major jet event.
Peak impulse amplitude difference is not as pronounced, but the impulse stagnation in the Nomad-Ti waveform (Figure 9b) is plainly visible. A constant impulse plateau is formed for approximately 3 ms; a significant early-time portion of the signature, after which decay occurs at a rate similar to the Nomad-30 (1st Gen). This is a longer stagnation than occurs with the Griffin Explorr EX3 but is a similar phenomenon, as previously discussed.
Figure 9a. Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) And Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Pressure Signature Comparison (Shot 2)
Figure 9b. Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) And Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Muzzle Sound Impulse Signature Comparison (Shot 2)
PEW Science Research Note: PEW Science postulates that impulse stagnation plateaus, such as the one observed in the Nomad-Ti signature in Figure 9b (and previously in the signature of the Griffin Explorr EX3), may indicate a difference in early-time and late-time mass flow rate (back pressure). Silencer gas jetting is a dynamic event and does not reach steady-state in the time regimes of small arm weapon system internal combustion. Further study of this phenomenon is the subject of ongoing PEW Science research.
Similar phenomena are measured at the ear; Figure 10 shows the comparisons, below. Prior to the combustion products leaving the weapon system, the signatures are again very similar. This is to be expected, per the above notes regarding silencer size and materials. Note the fast decay of impulse in the Nomad-Ti signature during Shot 2 (Figure 10b). This waveform behavior, in addition to the lower impulse amplitudes, results in the Nomad-Ti being quieter to the shooter. Post-peak impulse behavior, in both its stagnation and decay, is the subject of ongoing PEW Science research.
Figure 10a. Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) And Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Impulse Signature Comparison (FRP)
Figure 10b. Dead Air Nomad-30 (1st Gen) And Dead Air Nomad-Ti Bolt Action Rifle Ear Sound Impulse Signature Comparison (Shot 2)
6.44.4 Review Summary: Dead Air Nomad-Ti on a Savage Model 10 .308 with 20-in Barrel
When paired with the Savage M10 20” .308 and fired with Federal XM80C, the Dead Air Nomad-Ti mounted with the direct thread mount achieved a Suppression Rating™ of 41.5 in PEW Science testing.
PEW Science Subjective Opinion:
The Dead Air Nomad-Ti is a mid-size, extremely light weight .30 rifle silencer that exhibits notable sound signature reduction in the supersonic flow regime, while possessing a modular rear mount capability. The Nomad-30 has been refined since its 2018 release; users should note that the supersonic suppression and back pressure characteristics of the Nomad-Ti highlighted in this review represent upper bound performance of the Nomad-30 silencer. Nomad-L data and analysis publication by PEW Science is forthcoming.
The Nomad-Ti contains broad and flattened baffles that have more aggressive step geometry than the Nomad-30 (1st Gen). The baffles, again, have ports utilizing an outer baffle annulus. Functionally, the design results in highly efficient management of supersonic flow by preventing a significant degree of high pressure stagnation in a way that does not significantly increase flow restriction. This balance of gas redistribution allows the Nomad technology to perform well with high pressure centerfire rifle cartridges but also excel at the suppression of lower pressure flow; the balance of which is atypical for a silencer of its length. Subsonic performance data of the Nomad-Ti is the subject of future PEW Science publication.
It is interesting to note that the incremental and seemingly small differences between the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and the Nomad-Ti are, cumulatively, enough to result in significant (noticeable) sound signature and mass flow rate (back pressure) characteristics. The Nomad-Ti is quieter than the Nomad-30 (1st Gen) and has lower back pressure. In fact, the Dead Air Nomad-Ti exhibits very similar sound signature suppression to the Dead Air Sandman-Ti and Q Thunder Chicken in the supersonic flow regime, while exhibiting lower back pressure. For a silencer of this length, this performance is notable. The technology advancement in the Nomad product line, over the Sandman product line, is objectively clear in the measured performance.
The Nomad-Ti approaches the at-ear Suppression Rating of the CGS Helios QD, and does so with lower backpressure, which is significant. The CGS Hyperion K exhibits lower back pressure than the Nomad-Ti, but with a moderately lower Suppression Rating. With regard to silencers of similar size, the Dead Air Nomad and CGS Helios QD / Hyperion K product lines are direct competitors in performance. As both product lines use similar technologies (with key differences), PEW Science postulates that other characteristics (such as durability and adaptability) may determine user choice. This is an example of competition in the arena of superior supersonic rifle sound suppression technology in a certain design envelope.
The rear mount threading of the Nomad series is 1.375”-24tpi; relatively common in today’s rifle silencer market. As a result of this common modular interface, a plethora of mounting systems may be used. The performance of the Nomad-Ti may be influenced by mounting system choice. The user’s choice of mount may balance system weight, length, durability, utility, and even back pressure of the silencer. The data presented by PEW Science in this Sound Signature Review was measured with the direct-thread mount. The mount may be removed with included spanner tools from Dead Air; both the mount and the silencer body possess wrench indexing features. The silencer endcap is also removable; the use of endcaps with varying orifice diameter is possible, along with a recoil reducing so-called “E-Brake;” which is an endcap assembly that vents gas radially to counteract rifle recoil kinematics. PEW Science has not evaluated the efficacy of the E-brake system nor its influence on sound suppression performance with the Nomad-Ti.
The silencer is also offered in a steel version (the latest iteration of the Nomad-30). The Ti version may be attractive to some users due to the weight reduction. Durability of the steel silencer is expected to be higher than that of the Ti silencer. Dead Air specifically recommends that the Nomad-Ti be used with semiautomatic fire only (no automatic weapon use), with 3-minute “cool downs” between magazines to minimize subjecting the silencer to sustained high temperatures. PEW Science has not evaluated the durability of the steel or titanium Nomad silencer system(s) on semiautomatic or automatic host weapons.
In this review, the Nomad-Ti 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.
