View Full Version : SIG Fail! Slovene Triumph!
Thought that might get a look:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuPOqDlaX6U
This has some fumes coming off of it on SIGTALK.
I like how he did the test, albeit its a sample of one each and there are a ton of things guns do that this doesn't touch. And, the Rex is a newborn. Not much for experience on it much less Mil/LE use. (Slovenia MAYBE uses the 92FS).
But it makes me want to at least handle one.
Coal Dragger
08-31-16, 18:51
I notice this idiot's channel never features any testing involving actually measuring accuracy results, or comparing two guns against one another based on how quickly or what kind of score can be obtained on a given drill. He seems to only focus on bullshit tests that do not represent typical operating conditions that a shooter is most likely to need.
A sharp pointy stick will be more reliable in mud than either of those two pistols, but how well does the sharp pointy stick perform on an El Pres drill, or on a low probability shot at 50 yards? I guess we won't find that out from this guy's channel. He doesn't appear to be capable of testing for any of that anyway.
For the record I don't own a SIG Legion series so I have no dog in this fight, but his tests are rubbish.
I actually like his vids. I won't compare them with others who do real and thorough reviews. But, they are interesting, and he shows some decent details, albeit randomly. This video does a useful demo - won't call it a test. But, how a gun handles sand and mud in a plausible/systematic way is notable. Pouring sand into an action is a bit ridiculous. Getting them INTO the sand/dirt/mud is a useful to replicate some type of field condition. Its just one aspect of reliability, but one that is good to know. I'd like to see it done to G19, MP9, PPQ, and others.
I notice this idiot's channel never features any testing involving actually measuring accuracy results, or comparing two guns against one another based on how quickly or what kind of score can be obtained on a given drill. He seems to only focus on bullshit tests that do not represent typical operating conditions that a shooter is most likely to need.
A sharp pointy stick will be more reliable in mud than either of those two pistols, but how well does the sharp pointy stick perform on an El Pres drill, or on a low probability shot at 50 yards? I guess we won't find that out from this guy's channel. He doesn't appear to be capable of testing for any of that anyway.
For the record I don't own a SIG Legion series so I have no dog in this fight, but his tests are rubbish.
I'm about a second away from unsubscribing from his channel. He's gotten into all these exotic things that just don't interest me.
One of the things that really bothers me about half these internet gun review channels is that general lack of real accuracy/precision measurement. Which I take to mean that most of the guys making the videos really can't shoot that well.
wildcard600
08-31-16, 19:52
I notice this idiot's channel never features any testing involving actually measuring accuracy results, or comparing two guns against one another based on how quickly or what kind of score can be obtained on a given drill. He seems to only focus on bullshit tests that do not represent typical operating conditions that a shooter is most likely to need.
A sharp pointy stick will be more reliable in mud than either of those two pistols, but how well does the sharp pointy stick perform on an El Pres drill, or on a low probability shot at 50 yards? I guess we won't find that out from this guy's channel. He doesn't appear to be capable of testing for any of that anyway.
For the record I don't own a SIG Legion series so I have no dog in this fight, but his tests are rubbish.
Accuracy and speed/score tests are terribly subjective. Personally I care more about how well a given firearm performs in adverse conditions vs how accurate or fast one or a small group of people can shoot them on a square range or match course.
That said I'm not a huge fan of MAC for other reasons, but sometimes he does have some interesting videos.
Combloc weapons have piss poor qc.
He got a good one wait a year
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
MountainRaven
08-31-16, 21:37
Combloc weapons have piss poor qc.
He got a good one wait a year
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
What Combloc weapons do you have experience with backing this statement?
eightmillimeter
08-31-16, 22:01
A comprehensive comparison test would include side by side accuracy testing, maybe comparisons of trigger pull weights and other features, and reliability testing. Reliability testing does not need to necessarily be "torture" testing, but it is interesting to see what happens. I'm not a MAC fan, but at least he's trying to standardize a comparison method. Can't fault the effort, even if not realistic. Baseline data in guns that is NOT subjective or personal, can be very hard to come by.
I liken it to FBI testing protocol for ammunition. It doesn't realistically represent what happens to bullets when they impact living/breathing targets, but it is decent baseline data to compare one bullet against another and prioritize one's needs.
MAC is interesting to see a new gun in motion. Otherwise, I take all he says with a grain of salt. I'd sooner have a Sig over most handguns and a Glock over a Sig.
He banged the Beretta ARX drum pretty loud and I simply have no use for one.
This thread is about as dumb as the idea that MAC's videos are useless...
It is ONE guy's opinion and it was a non scientific test and a sample of ONE. It means nothing yet exists merely for entertainment purposes on the internet. If you dont like it, dont watch it.
If you think you can do better or want to see something different either do it yourself or ask him if he will do whatever it is you want according to your standards...
tacticaldesire
09-01-16, 01:20
I fail to see what is so egregious about dropping a gun in sand and mud and seeing if it works? To me that is more useful information than seeing how fast someone can run a drill or make a 50 yard headshot with a specific handgun, That tells me virtually nothing aside from how well some guy can run a drill. Entirely subjective and almost impossible to replicate between shooters. Besides, MAC has done TONS of accuracy tests between firearms in the past. I don't even see what Tim did wrong here besides his test not meeting some peoples ridiculous standards of what a test should be. In which case, do your own. At least an attempt was made to standardize his testing rather than throwing a VP9 at lumber and AR500.
This was not a scientific test with a sample size of one. Who cares?
Sure it's only a sample of one. That doesn't change there fact that the Rex was pretty impressive and the Sig was a little disappointing. The results are by no means an absolute in what can be expected out of either platform. They also cannot be completely discounted. However, it is funny how some are inferring the results should be ignored because the "test" was unrealistic and overboard. Especially with this being a forum that places such a premium on a firearm's ability to handle hard use. When in one thread you can have people arguing that a perfectly functioning Brand Hated On is no good because it won't take serious abuse. Then in another have people defending the failure of Brand Awesome because the scenario was unreasonable. We have a disconnect with reason and equity.
Getting back to the topic at hand. Would this stop me from purchasing a Sig? No. I'm fairly certain my next purchase will be a P320, which will also be my first Sig. Does the video give me a small bit of pause? Sure. These tests didn't really mimic the majority of real world scenarios, but I've also seen instances of greater abuse than displayed here. One thing that did strike me, was the lubrication seemed a bit on the wet side. I use Slip EWL, and haven't run the spray on type lubricants. So, maybe what he applied is normal for that type of product? Generally, mixing excessive lube with adverse conditions doesn't do any favors for reliability. Yet, I'm going to assume that he lubed both firearms the same way. Even then, I do realize that some firearms like to be run on either the dryer or wetter side.
I appreciate the video, and think it was at least a fair comparison in this small sample. Again, it won't make me draw any universal conclusions, but it does make me interested to see more.
Plus: The Rex overperformed, and yes, it was surprising.
Minus: I looked it up, and the Rex has an internal extractor setup that looks like an XD - its the one point about the XD (read: hated gun on M4Carbine) that I really don't like, other than the name. (Yes the grip safety is nuts too - OK). I really prefer an extractor that is EASY to replace yourself (like the P99). Also looks like the sights are tiny, and the mag release is impossible to use well. As a typical KVAR deal it is basically offered only at FULL MSRP. Grip looks like its as thick as a FNX45.
WickedWillis
09-01-16, 18:33
I watched the video earlier this week, and he's gotten tons of flack for it. I get it, people have egos mixed up in their guns and whatnot (see the VP9 test), but these things don't help influence my choices in buying a firearm. If he was sheering parts off, or having other breakages I might be concerned. The Legion has tighter tolerances than the standard P226, and that is where I think the failures happened. The only thing that concerned me about the Legion, was how incredibly slow the slide cycled on the Sig after the first failure, and how weak the extractor looked. I don't know, YMMV.
I believe follow up comments show that the Arex had tighter clearances. Glad to have my 2022!
MAC's guns shop just happens to have the Slovenian wonder nine in stock.
I'm about a second away from unsubscribing from his channel. He's gotten into all these exotic things that just don't interest me.
One of the things that really bothers me about half these internet gun review channels is that general lack of real accuracy/precision measurement. Which I take to mean that most of the guys making the videos really can't shoot that well.
i don't see what an accuracy test would do for anyone. Unless each reviewer had a machine doing the shooting, the accuracy would vary from reviewer to reviewer and would be worthless data.
I fail to see what is so egregious about dropping a gun in sand and mud and seeing if it works? To me that is more useful information than seeing how fast someone can run a drill or make a 50 yard headshot with a specific handgun, That tells me virtually nothing aside from how well some guy can run a drill. Entirely subjective and almost impossible to replicate between shooters. Besides, MAC has done TONS of accuracy tests between firearms in the past. I don't even see what Tim did wrong here besides his test not meeting some peoples ridiculous standards of what a test should be. In which case, do your own. At least an attempt was made to standardize his testing rather than throwing a VP9 at lumber and AR500.
This was not a scientific test with a sample size of one. Who cares?
cornell ;)
I like MACs vids and have been a subscriber for years.
However, I take his opinions with a grain of salt, especially since he does run a gun shop. Regardless, he shoots some interesting vids, and sample of one or not, data points are data points.
i don't see what an accuracy test would do for anyone. Unless each reviewer had a machine doing the shooting, the accuracy would vary from reviewer to reviewer and would be worthless data.
So you're writing off molon's work then? As its only one shooter and all. And particularly, accuracy tests might show you 6" groups from an M&P and 3" groups from a glock. Kind of important info.
So you're writing off molon's work then? As its only one shooter and all. And particularly, accuracy tests might show you 6" groups from an M&P and 3" groups from a glock. Kind of important info.
yea u right. ;)
I watched the video earlier this week, and he's gotten tons of flack for it. I get it, people have egos mixed up in their guns and whatnot (see the VP9 test), but these things don't help influence my choices in buying a firearm. If he was sheering parts off, or having other breakages I might be concerned. The Legion has tighter tolerances than the standard P226, and that is where I think the failures happened. The only thing that concerned me about the Legion, was how incredibly slow the slide cycled on the Sig after the first failure, and how weak the extractor looked. I don't know, YMMV.
Tight fitting guns usually work better after a break in period. I had a sig p229 that went 15k rounds without a failure. I didn't purposely drop in the mud, but would run it dirty and lubed without an issue. My glock 19 gen 4 had 3 or 4 FTE within the first 100 rounds. If I did a test like this, it would be written off. Now it has been flawless for the last 8k.
The Sig P226 platform has been drug through the mud for decades as the SEAL's sidearm. If it had issues with sand/mud, I bet we would have heard about is a long time before this video.
I enjoy MAC's videos and think he does a good job at what he's trying to demonstrate. If there is one thing to learn from this video it's that you can't assume spending more money equates to a more reliable firearm. I'd bet that a Makarov would perform just as well as the Rex Zero 1. BTW, I have a TZ99 which was made in South Africa about 15 years ago. This Rex Zero 1 looks like an updated version of it.
I enjoy MAC's videos and think he does a good job at what he's trying to demonstrate. If there is one thing to learn from this video it's that you can't assume spending more money equates to a more reliable firearm. I'd bet that a Makarov would perform just as well as the Rex Zero 1. BTW, I have a TZ99 which was made in South Africa about 15 years ago. This Rex Zero 1 looks like an updated version of it.
No but the corelation coefficient is certainly greater that 0 and probably greater than 0.5 meaning there is an association between cost and reliability. There is also a point of diminishing returns.
TacMedic556
09-07-16, 14:23
Multiple times on a SWAT range on more than one occasion, I watched ultra tight fitting (will not name) $3,000-$5,000 1911's choke - just choke - round after round on different loads from WINCLEAN to duty ammunition to Speer Lawman, you name it. I would sit back and watch pristine, broke in, clean, well maintained high bred 1911's literally malfunction like it was their job. Tight pistols do that. Meanwhile my series 80, loose as an AK, Colt 1911 would eat everything problem free - to this day.
No but the corelation coefficient is certainly greater that 0 and probably greater than 0.5 meaning there is an association between cost and reliability. There is also a point of diminishing returns.
I'd say that point is right around what the typical new modern, striker fired service pistol like a G19, M&P, etc etc costs, namely the $450-$550ish range. Extra money will buy you a lot of things but I doubt it will consistently buy you more reliability than you see in that range....
Multiple times on a SWAT range on more than one occasion, I watched ultra tight fitting (will not name) $3,000-$5,000 1911's choke - just choke - round after round on different loads from WINCLEAN to duty ammunition to Speer Lawman, you name it. I would sit back and watch pristine, broke in, clean, well maintained high bred 1911's literally malfunction like it was their job. Tight pistols do that. Meanwhile my series 80, loose as an AK, Colt 1911 would eat everything problem free - to this day.
Amen.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
I hope he does another HK torture test.
There is no butthurt quite like HK butthurt.
I'd say that point is right around what the typical new modern, striker fired service pistol like a G19, M&P, etc etc costs, namely the $450-$550ish range. Extra money will buy you a lot of things but I doubt it will consistently buy you more reliability than you see in that range....
Dude, you just posted something that I agree with 100%. I knew you had it in you. JK ;)
Dude, you just posted something that I agree with 100%. I knew you had it in you. JK ;)
lol blind hogs and acorns?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
We DO know that SIGs in general are very reliable and accurate, and this is a sample of 1 test. Having served with the SEALS and many other LE/MIL roles for a long time speaks to the gun, and as has been proven here on many threads, with proper care of the rails, the P series stays afloat for a long service life. My title has elliptical aspects.
We DO NOT know how the Rex will fare over time. But it looks promising and the decocker/slide stop combination makes a heck of a lot of sense. Having a gun perform in the dirt and mud like this opens the eyes - but I haven't ordered one yet. We will see how many QC issues they have in selling thousands to the public, and how many LE/MIL catch on. Then there is support - where will gun control go? When the lying-criminal-witch gets anointed, where will mags for this go? Where will imports go? Blah Blah.
I DON'T like the XD like extractor and mag release you can't use well.
I hope he does another HK torture test.
There is no butthurt quite like HK butthurt.
Lol so true, but Sig is close. You really want to see the wheels come off this thing, let's see a SR-25 test. I doubt there's much appetite to screw around with $4000+ rifle. It would still be highly entertaining.
the combo decocker slide stop idea has been around a while.
I picked up a yugo zastava cz99 on the cheap cheap a while back. looks like the bastard child of a walther p88 and a sig. it's got the same combo on it.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
09-10-16, 18:00
Is that a new Sig gun? It seems more like a gun issue. I know he does the function check, but the SIG never seems like it operates as smoothly and cleanly as other. So the Sig is tighter, runs closer to edge and has a higher probability of having issues with gunk. It is kind of surprising. A tight STI 2011, I can understand and know doesn't like fine dusty soil. I had a Sig X5 that handled that dust they call dirt here in Colorado just fine. And I'd think a Sig X5 would be tighter than a Legion model.
The AREX doesn't use sig mags?
Note to self, don't buy used guns from him.
I'd be more curious to see a long term durability test.
I believe most of the Sig's failures can be attributed to the new external extractor design. The new long extractor design seems like it would bind up if sand/mud gets in there. Dunking into water may not dislodge or get that stuff out.
I'd love to see the same test with an older p226 with internal extractor. I'd be willing to bet those would do significantly better.
Would like to see this test on the pantheon of 'go to' weapons.
When it was completely clean, the Sig didn't seem to be tossing spent cases with much velocity. Perhaps it just had too heavy of a recoil spring installed. If so, anything to slow the slide velocity a bit could result in failures.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.