Not only would super-sonic ammunition still be rather loud because it breaks the sound barrier and will crack like mad upon exiting the barrel. Plus, your accuracy is so diminished that you basically ruin a good hunting rifle by integrating one, and " quickly removeable" ones are worse, especially considering the fact that I' ve watched a surpressed 7mm mag blow one off the end of it' s barrel. For .22' s they are great, I' ve had marlin 60' s surpressed to the point that the only sound produced is the cycle of the action, but accuracy is still diminished to the point I don' t ever use them other than when I' m just having fun. Your accuracy would be EXTREMELY depleted in a .22-250, every .22-250 I' ve shot with factory ammo has at least thrown 2MOA@100yrds, but the ammo is over 3Kfps, nearly three times the speed of sound, so A) you' ve got the crack, B) it' s liable to kick quite a bit harder and C) you' re going to be shooting probably 8MOA @ 100yrds now.

The U.S. military reported years back that their effective range (meaning trained snipers were able effect a head shot=8" target) with a 7.62NATO in the M-24 accurized was around a mile, depending on conditions, with reports of body shots being made out to and surpassing 2000yrds. Then for special operations, surpressors were issued because they hinder the enemy' s ability to determine shot origin by sound (they only hear the crack so it' s incredibly difficult to pinpoint). Good logic, but bad practice, from long ranges typical of sniper shooting no one could find them, but they couldn' t hit anything past 300yrds (body shots were basically impossible past 500yrds) so they went from .5MOA to well over 2MOA if not 3MOA. And that was with .308/7.62mmNATO MATCH GRADE ammuntion, which would still be slower by far than your .22-250, so your change in accuracy would be much amplified of these results.