HK 416, MR 556 InRange TV Mud Test.

[vicious_cb]

These types of shennanigans are Circus nonsense.

I dont think thats true. They have value in slaying some sacred cows and figuring out weird quirks about different platforms. I dont think we would have discovered how the gas venting out the BC clearing debris contributes to reliability in the DI system. I certainly would have never thought about it.

If you watch all of them your start to see the emerging pattern where having a sealed receiver is the most important factor in keeping gunk out of your gun.

[Pikey]

I dont think thats true. They have value in slaying some sacred cows and figuring out weird quirks about different platforms. I dont think we would have discovered how the gas venting out the BC clearing debris contributes to reliability in the DI system. I certainly would have never thought about it.

If you watch all of them your start to see the emerging pattern where having a sealed receiver is the most important factor in keeping gunk out of your gun.

I see videos like that as entertainment. I enjoy watching them but I am not going to make a weapon selection based on any of those videos. Much like the HK videos of the 416 being compared to a M4. Or Arsenal ‘s videos that they made of some of there torture test. Both great weapons and I enjoy watching the videos but they prove nothing to me.

[SteyrAUG]

I would add that it must first be submerged in saltwater, then sprayed with saltwater continuously for a month, then frozen to -50F and tossed off a building five times, then submerged in the quickcrete for an hour. All with a round chambered, of course.

And the ammo must be a combination of Greek Olympia, Tula (steel case) and Brown Bear. Magazine must be ProMag, Lancer or Korean poly knockoffs.

[JoshNC]

I find their mud tests to be entertaining and to have some merit. They are not scientific tests by any means. But they have merit nonetheless. And they essentially treat all firearms the same in conducting their tests. Their results are interesting, however it’s important to avoid making far reaching conclusions against or in support of one’s favorite firearm(s).

[Arctic1]

A few observations:

1. They are not using an HK lower, with the included red action spring and tungsten weighted buffer that HK sepcifically states in the manual must be used for optimized reliability:

"NOTE: It is recommended that the unique HK416 buffer and recoil spring not be exchanged with other non-HK components to ensure optimal reliability and functioning."

It is designed as a system, so removing one part of the system potentially skewes the result.

2. Unless a "torture test" posted to You Tube follows the scientific method and adheres to an established test protocol, it's nothing other than entertainment. There is no consistency in mud composition, amount of mud, placement of mud, shaking after mud application etc. In the DI AR-15 video, the mud is much looser and he scrapes most of it away from the bolt carrier before firing.

3. Realism? Sure, in extreme events this type of environment can be the case. During one operation Norwegian forces participated in in Afghanistan in April 2009, including parts of my team, conditions were extremely muddy.
However, they took required steps to ensure full weapon operability during the contact, to include rinsing off firearms and re-lubing as soon as the situation allowed.

Are weapons expected to function with that amount of mud/debris in the action, without taking steps to fix it? Nope.

[impactbumper]

Just meh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SteyrAUG]

Honestly, if car reviews were done like gun tests, somebody would sugar the gas tank, remove the tires, drain the transmission fuel and then evaluate how fast and far it goes under those conditions and then criticize as they see fit.

If you pour mud INTO the action of any firearm it will experience a failure. There is some validity to dust tests, certain real world conditions "over the beach" tests and for those who go swimming with their firearms "emerging from water" tests.

But the main lesson learned shouldn't be "does Gun A perform better than Gun B when you fill the action with mud", it should be "don't let the action of your firearm get filled with mud or you will need to transition to a 9mm handgun which is less than ideal in a gunfight."

The only thing as ridiculous is open air / open range suppressor comparison videos. They are made for people who don't understand all the factors involves so they can feel special about their particular purchase or in this case to feel they will be fine if they didn't purchase a HK, Colt or whatever name brand they couldn't afford.

Pistons and DI have been around a LONG time. There are small advantages of one over the other in certain applications. Both have a proven and acceptable track record of military application. You aren't going to get "vietnamed" if you run a DI system but you won't be able to go maintenance free in Borneo during monsoon season with a piston either.

[montrala]

1. Have gun related Youtube channel.
2. Take HK and make it not working.
3. All gun related internet is all over your channel.
4. Profit!

Just kidding*


* - Not really. My most viewed and most commented video on my excuse of Youtube channel is one where I show my Benelli Supernova jamming on me constantly. Drama sells https://youtu.be/jlntD0xykYU

[MountainRaven]

I think Karl and Ian have stated that they don't particularly like doing the mud tests, but that people keep asking for them and they are some of their most-watched videos. So they give the People what they want.

I know that they have stated that the mud tests should not be used as a do-all, be-all for what firearm you might choose: Both the AK and the M1 Garand have fared poorly, but they are both some of their favorite guns nonetheless. And they've got a couple of convoy sand tests with an AR and an AK (spoiler alert: they both function fine).

And lastly, they don't pour mud into the open action of the guns. Obviously, they'd all fail hard and nothing of value would be learned. What they do it put it on the outside of the gun, which allows us to learn about how well (or not) a gun is sealed against the elements. And slay sacred cows.

[Arctic1]

They are not slaying any cows....