G&R Tactical
Page 1 of 42 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 419

Thread: Military Weapons Trial, only the Kalashnikov AK 103 finishes the torture tests.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,137
    Feedback Score
    0

    Military Weapons Trial, only the Kalashnikov AK 103 finishes the torture tests.

    Each of these tests took place at different military installations and with varying numbers of participants.

    The following companies were invited to participate in the trials:
    • Beretta
    • Kalashnikov
    • Sig Sauer
    • Mechanical and Chemical Industry Corporation (MKEK)
    • CZ
    • PWS
    • FN Herstal
    • LWRC Intl
    • Zastava Arms
    • Anderson Manufacturing Inc
    • HK
    • Hanwha
    • Denel Land Systems
    • Colt
    • Steyr
    • Armalite



    On to the trial…

    The weapons trial consisted of numerous tests; below is a partial list:
    • Technical briefings
    • Hot chamber cook-off
    • Iron sight accuracy
    • Optics accuracy
    • Penetration
    • Hot and cold environmental chambers
    • Interchangeability
    • Endurance
    • Pluff mud
    • Sand test
    • Mud


    *Highlights of the test results.

    I. Pluff Mud Immersion Test, (uncontrolled mud test, tidal/coastal natural area mud testing). Condition of the rifles; bolt closed on an empty chamber with a loaded magazine inserted and the muzzle capped. The SSG took the rifles into the tidal pluff mud and rolled them in the mud until they were completely covered.

    Findings. MKE and CZ rifles along with Serbian and Chinese AK’s were able to get one or two rounds fired before jamming. The US weapon wouldn’t even chamber a round. The Russian Kalashnikov AK ran without issue.



    II. Sand Test. Condition of the weapons, the muzzles were capped, and a round chambered. The weapons were buried under two feet of sand and left to bake for one hour. The temperature was 56C (133F) in the shade. After the requisite bake, the weapons were dug up and test fired.

    Findings. The US weapon wouldn’t fire. The CZ and MKE rifle along with the Serbian and Chinese AKs were able to get one or two round fired before jamming. The Russian Kalashnikov AK ran without issue.



    III. Extreme Climate Test, Hot. 360 rounds loaded into magazines and three test weapons were conditioned at +60C (140F) for 12 hours.
    *Note, this particular testing results regarding the US weapons doesn't make sense to me- as to what exactly happened, it doesn't say.

    Findings. All the test weapons performed without issue except for the US weapons, all of which had the bolt catch fall out of the weapon during testing and one of which launched the muzzle break down range.



    IV. Extreme Climate Test, Cold. 720 rounds loaded into magazines and three test weapons were conditioned at -40C (-40F). Two cycles of 120x rounds fired from each weapon.

    Findings. All the test weapons performed without issue except for the US weapons which would not chamber a round and did not fire a single shot.



    V. Mud Test 2, (controlled testing environment). Condition of the weapons; the muzzles were capped, and a round chambered.

    Findings. Only the Chinese and Russian AK’s fired. The Chinese AK had a single jam and once cleared continued to run. The Russian Kalashnikov AK ran without issue.



    Final Results. However, since the completion of the trials, Pakistan has purchased 140,000 AK 103 rifles.


    http://soldiersystems.net/2018/07/16...assault-rifle/



    Kalashnikov AK-103 firing after mud submersion test, it's the only one that functioned during this phase of testing.

    *Personal note, depending on how thick the mud is I think that it didn't interfere with the bolt carrier being able to close such as the thicker mud found on the Inrange you tube test video. However thinner mud would penetrate some of the closed system designs like the AR weapons. However the Swamp Test by Regular Guy on youtube showed similar results between the AR/AK/Tavor when only the AK variant functioned and obviously given the swamp like water- all the weapons were compromised. Perhaps the water blew the gas tubes on the AR's and is the reason they failed both the Pakistan military torture testing as well as Regular Guy's swamp test. In my opinion however, a weapon should handle firing submerged or partially submerged in water, basically pass an over the beach style test but others might feel differently.





    Obviously third world countries do a little less scientific testing yet their findings are completely different than our own. One thing of note, the Pakistan military requires the weapons manufacturers to submit their rifles along with a fee to be tested directly under supervision of the Pakistan military rather than submitting independent controlled lab testing results. I think this does one thing, it eliminates the potential for rigged testing procedures such as might be found from a lab that is being paid directly by a manufacturer. However just seeing what happens to various weapons that are dunked into muddy/sandy water via youtube torture test videos- I personally trust the Pakistan military testing results. The AK overall, is probably the most reliable rifle available on the market but obviously is a dated design that isn't the most ergonomic nor accurate. However for the Pakistan military needs or most budget minded military needs- is perfect for a low maintenance weapon. I would however wonder if Kalashnikov submitted weapons with over sized gas ports to increase reliability since the other AK variants didn't perform as well. Another thing that struck me as different was the "interchangeability" test, basically taking weapons apart and re-assembling them from other weapons- somehow the AK's passed this portion which means they have really tightened up their manufacturing procedures. Either way, the Russian AK passed the torture testing elements that failed the other more modern designs for this particular test.


    7n6
    Last edited by 7n6; 08-01-18 at 14:32.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    407
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    7N6. I see how you love to bag on the SCAR, however, what does the Conclusion of that article say??

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,137
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by PNorris View Post
    7N6. I see how you love to bag on the SCAR, however, what does the Conclusion of that article say??
    Says they liked the SCAR, contracted it but decided to buy AK's instead due to cost. However there is no mention on how the SCAR actually performed, just that the AK was the ONLY rifle to pass the mud tests, sand tests etc. Probably goes along with what everyone does, wants the newest most modern weapon to succeed- not the seventy year old relic.
    Last edited by 7n6; 08-01-18 at 14:09.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    407
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    http://soldiersystems.net/2018/07/16...assault-rifle/

    Conclusion: No rifle passed all the tests without issues; however, the FN SCAR was the only rifle that was finalized, officially accepted, with licensed manufacturing approved.

    Hmmm, perhaps if FN took your advice it would've been flawless : )

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,137
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by PNorris View Post
    http://soldiersystems.net/2018/07/16...assault-rifle/

    Conclusion: No rifle passed all the tests without issues; however, the FN SCAR was the only rifle that was finalized, officially accepted, with licensed manufacturing approved.

    Hmmm, perhaps if FN took your advice it would've been flawless : )

    The only weapon that passed the torture testing segments "without issue" was the AK-103 Kalashnikov having passed the first mud test, the sand test, the second mud test and the hot/cold environmental tests. Perhaps they picked the SCAR for contracting which probably had more to do with it being the most modern design with modern ergonomics but perhaps it didn't do well during the tests or as mentioned was to expensive- so they chose the AK variant. There's actually not one mention that the SCAR passed the actual torture testing segments "without issue" like the AK 103 did. The writer of the article isn't that organized and should have broke each segment down more thoroughly.

    "However, since the completion of the trials, Pakistan has purchased 140,000 AK 103 rifles. The number of SCAR rifles purchased is zero – too expensive."

    So who knows, maybe they just chose the rifle that ran the best but cost the least- which appears to be the case.


    7n6
    Last edited by 7n6; 08-01-18 at 14:38.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    1
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 7n6 View Post
    "However, since the completion of the trials, Pakistan has purchased 140,000 AK 103 rifles. The number of SCAR rifles purchased is zero – too expensive."
    Maybe the only "issue" with the SCAR was the cost. Isn't the rule of thumb to go with whatever option will complete the given task at the lowest possible cost? I.e., maybe the SCAR and AK 103 were on par with one another, but the difference in performance between the two was so negligible that it wouldn't justify the additional cost for the SCAR.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Herndon,VA
    Posts
    814
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    So was the US weapon the Anderson, the Colt, the PWS, the Armalite or the LWRC. I would surprised if they hadn’t picked the AK. David

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,521
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    I love how everyone says oh the gubbiment bought this but its a LPTA bid.

    Yeah, they buy the cheap shit.

    And the Pakis are better off with AKs, when they start running with the Taliban or AQ they blend right in.
    - Rhino

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    401
    Feedback Score
    0
    Why didn't the tests include setting the rifle into a block of wet concrete, allowing that concrete to cure, then breaking the rifle free with a sledge hammer before shooting it over a piece of cover without using the sights?

    Sounds like these tests were lame.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hamburg PA
    Posts
    3,506
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Okay, let me get a couple things here clear. First, the test was for 7.62 guns from the article. At which point my general shits given kind of goes the way of the dodo and a 7.62X51 platform verse an 7.62X39 Ak is not two platforms I would generally be comparing, two different missions there. An AR15 was not tested, AR10s were and various other 7.62 rifles. So the whole, "Aks are great and beat ARs." derp is rendered irrelevant in my opinion since one is running an intermediate round, the other a full blown rifle round. The fact that the author pretty much just strokes the AK's cock and makes it like AR15s suck I would be inclined to question his integrity as a writer or journalist as well, more so since caliber is referenced at most like 3 times in my reading there, and never that it wasn't a 5.56 rifle.

    My take? There is nothing I see here that isn't a 3rd world shit hole testing and deciding on the weapon that their average solider would be least likely to **** up.
    "I don't collect guns anymore, I stockpile weapons for ****ing war." Chuck P.

    "Some days you eat the bacon, and other days the bacon eats you." SeriousStudent

    "Don't complain when after killing scores of women and children in a mall, a group of well armed men who train to shoot people like you in the face show up to say hello." WillBrink

Page 1 of 42 12311 ... 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
  •