In-ear vs over-ear protection

[Rajish]

In-ear is less bulky but over-ear protects better, I can't figure out which is better for hunting.

 

[Daven11]

I stick with over-ear, they block more sound and keep ears from ringing after long sessions

 

[MisterEd]

I can't figure out which is better for hunting.

Neither when hunting. When hunting one needs to be able to hear whats going on in the woods while moving and NOT be inhibited by the (relatively new) 'belief' a shot taken while hunting outdoors is going to affect one's hearing.

I have been hunting over 50 years and oddly when I HAVE taken a shot at game I essentially never 'heard' it (so to speak) due to the excitement of actually seeing a legal game animal and getting a shot at it.

This whole idea of needing hearing protection while hunting has mostly been a 'hubbub' of people discussion it on outdoor social media, forums etc. I mean how many shots do you think you are going to take? Heck the first shot you get hopefully is the only one you need on your entire hunt.

You do what YOU think is best however I'll continue to hunt with my ears 'wide open'.

 

[Rimfire Fanatic]

Both when using an AR pistol without a Blast Can.

 

[Walter Von]

I feel like my tinitus is much worse after testing out some in-ears from Costco. I returned them and went back to my electronic over ear. The inner ear were easy to dislodge and you wouldn't find out till you took your shot. Don't even try using them indoors. Tried my 10mm pistol indoors and it was like I had no ear protection even with them well-fit.

 

[Citified]

At the range, I always wear inner and outer ear protection.
When hunting, for reasons I don’t totally understand, the shot blast and concussion don’t seem bad at all. Of course, we are only talking about one shot.
Now, in Oregon, suppressors are legal. A real game changer.