Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 52

Thread: InRange TV - Mud Test: FNH SCAR 17S

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,742
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911-A1 View Post
    It's not meaningful data, though. The AK could just have gotten lucky that the wrong rock didn't get where it could cause trouble. You need a statistically significant number of guns, controlled, identical conditions for each trial, mud that is sifted to be uniform between tests, etc.

    Here is some controlled conditions with sifted uniform sand filling the receiver using only the most best scientific methods.


  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 7n6 View Post
    Here is some controlled conditions with sifted uniform sand filling the receiver using only the most best scientific methods.

    If you want to just watch some guys get a bunch of guns dirty, go nuts. Let's not pretend it's testing anything of value though.

    The problem is when a guy is trying to choose his first pistol, and he sees Mac say that the VP9 failed his nonsense torture test, then the guy thinks it's a shitty gun, tells his buddies, then we're back on the forum here explaining to them how that's not the case, etc, etc.

    Spreading bad info puts everyone at a disadvantage.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    SWMT
    Posts
    8,188
    Feedback Score
    32 (100%)
    AKs don't stop for no mud or sand.



    Oh, wait.
    " Nil desperandum - Never Despair. That is a motto for you and me. All are not dead; and where there is a spark of patriotic fire, we will rekindle it. "
    - Samuel Adams -

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,742
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fjallhrafn View Post
    AKs don't stop for no mud or sand.



    Oh, wait.

    Notice the difference, the Inrange test gets mud in front of the AK bolt carrier not allowing it to close because it's not a closed system. The AR and SCAR being sealed systems never get compromised- unless there's a significant amount of water, which is what the swamp test shows. On the AK, the bolt has to be able to close fully and the hammer fully reset for it to function. The swamp test video shows it runs fine compromised with water and sand as does dumping the sanding directly in the receiver after verifying the hammer can reset. The Scar may pass the swamp test which the AR nor Tavor can't, so I'd be interested in seeing that.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    suburbs of Philly Pa
    Posts
    6,189
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911-A1 View Post
    If you want to just watch some guys get a bunch of guns dirty, go nuts. Let's not pretend it's testing anything of value though.

    The problem is when a guy is trying to choose his first pistol, and he sees Mac say that the VP9 failed his nonsense torture test, then the guy thinks it's a shitty gun, tells his buddies, then we're back on the forum here explaining to them how that's not the case, etc, etc.

    Spreading bad info puts everyone at a disadvantage.
    So how would you test something? Because everyone just throws their guns in crap and proceeds to shoot. None are identical because no to grains of dirt act the same in each gun

    Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Arik View Post
    So how would you test something? Because everyone just throws their guns in crap and proceeds to shoot. None are identical because no to grains of dirt act the same in each gun

    Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
    Exactly. You don't just throw a gun in dirty water and shoot it because since you aren't controlling the conditions, you don't know what caused the gun to fail. Was it gun related or environmental?

    You need an array of several of the same model of weapon to ensure any malfunctions aren't assembly or manufacturing related, then you need uniform test media, like dust or mud that is uniformly prepared to ensure you don't get one random rock that skews your results. You need to control everything you can and have a large enough sample size to yield meaningful data. That way when the gun fails, you can compare the results to the rest of the samples and narrow down the cause. 9 out of 10 guns ran fine but one choked? Ok, well the sand we used in the test chamber was the same for every test, we used the same ammo, so let's examine the weapon itself. Oh, look the chamber wasn't cut properly, there's your problem.

    Now compare that to a Youtube bubba-test, the AK failed in the mud, but why? You have no idea because you're not controlling the conditions, so you announce that AKs are shit and they're unreliable in mud and then thousands of your subscribers parrot that on every message board for years and argue with you when you tell them that's not the case.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,224
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 7n6 View Post
    The swamp test, each weapon is compromised internally right off the bat in sandy muddy water- in a real swamp. I'd like to see if the SCAR could pass this but so far only the AK has. This to me would be more realistic given say, an over the beach exercise or crossing a river system etc.

    I went and looked up this video when you first mentioned it, and I agree that it is a more realistic scenario to what someone might encounter in real life.

    I'm kind of surprised by the AR turning into a single shot, I wonder if the gas tube blew.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,742
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 556Cliff View Post
    I went and looked up this video when you first mentioned it, and I agree that it is a more realistic scenario to what someone might encounter in real life.

    I'm kind of surprised by the AR turning into a single shot, I wonder if the gas tube blew.


    The gas tube is the weakest link, perhaps it didn't have enough time to drain? I don't know. My thoughts are, since the SCAR passed the Inrange shovel mud test, then it may also pass the Regular Guy swamp test and may even run filled with sand. If it does, then it may surpass the AK but it will still need to be made more durable perhaps in the next generation. Now obviously the filled with sand thing isn't that important but I think it's somewhat important that weapons are designed with room for debris internally. I've always felt the next generation of rifles will be AR 18 based but haven't seen that many tests involved with SCAR rifles other than the Peruvian drop test- which it failed miserably.



    Quote Originally Posted by 1911-A1 View Post
    If you want to just watch some guys get a bunch of guns dirty, go nuts. Let's not pretend it's testing anything of value though.

    The problem is when a guy is trying to choose his first pistol, and he sees Mac say that the VP9 failed his nonsense torture test, then the guy thinks it's a shitty gun, tells his buddies, then we're back on the forum here explaining to them how that's not the case, etc, etc.

    Spreading bad info puts everyone at a disadvantage.
    First, that AK video with it being filled with sand is impressive, there's like half a cup of sand in there. Obviously these aren't scientific tests and obviously small nuances can change with just the angle it lands in the water or the type of sand from one area to another. However the real world isn't made up of perfectly sifted sand nor controlled environments either. So there's a little there that maybe can give a glimpse into what could possibly improve performance or design.
    Last edited by RetroRevolver77; 06-14-18 at 19:08.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 7n6 View Post
    However the real world isn't made up of perfectly sifted sand nor controlled environments either
    That's exactly why we control the environment in these tests. Saying "oh well, the real world has mud" illustrates exactly why we control our variables. Yes, there's mud of various types in real life, that's why the data you get is worthless if you just chuck it in a pond.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,742
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911-A1 View Post
    That's exactly why we control the environment in these tests. Saying "oh well, the real world has mud" illustrates exactly why we control our variables. Yes, there's mud of various types in real life, that's why the data you get is worthless if you just chuck it in a pond.

    So here's the thing, supposedly the AR, Tavor, and AK have all already gone through those controlled testing procedures you talk about sponsored by whatever their respective governments require. However once introduced to a real world uncontrollable variable such as chucking them into a little pond and rolling them around in a little dirt- only one came out functioning. MAC did the same test on his youtube video and the exact same thing happened, that's not by accident. I've found the same things true myself with rifles I've owned. Which is why I welcome some more real world testing of these newer weapon systems be it SCAR's, B&T's, maybe some new model AUG's, or HK 416's etc.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •