Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
E tan e epi tas |
So everybody lost their collective shit over the MAC VP9 test but I have heard like title about the InRange Glock 19 mud test. I jest of course since these are all fairly extreme tests with a sample size of one and a variable the size of a grain of sand causing potential issues. I just found it funny how there isn't the same gnashing of teeth over this. One thing that I did take away from this test that I had never thought of was that this particular Glock must have gotten some particle or particles in the striker channel/action which would not let the striker release, which effectively meant the gun could not be field stripped. I have to say, although likely a rare occurrence, this did show a posssible weakness in most striker designs. (again by weakness I don't mean it happens all the time, just that it could. All guns/tools have weak points.) At any rate all that I was thinking was with one of my HKs or CZs, 1911s or SIGS etc. as long as I can retract the slide I can break it down. Now I think the Glock 19 might damn near be the perfect pistol, but this failure did illustrate a disadvantage I had not thought of......and we all know....."Knowing is half the Battle". Of course the other half is the disciplined application of unmitigated violence brought upon with Red and Blue lasers......but I digress  "Guns are tools. The only weapon ever created was man." | ||
|
| E tan e epi tas |
Sorry I fat fingered an edit hence the second post. My bad. "Guns are tools. The only weapon ever created was man." | |||
|
Bolt Thrower |
You haven't traded in your tactical plastic for a P08 Luger yet? The mud test doesn't lie!  | |||
|
| addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer |
Shush! You're going to RUIN a burgeoning market for all of those potting soil suppliers: YouTube MAC video contrarians. | |||
|
| Member |
The mac vp9 test got overblown in my opinion. Watch this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJr453erCAc&t=35s p229Extreme/P226Tac-Ops/P226 Extreme/P226 SAO) P226 X-5 Blue Moon/P226 X-5 Black and White | |||
|
| E tan e epi tas |
Actually I think a Luger P08 would make a dandy carry piece. I am not trying to rehash the MAC test and honestly I do think these tests provide value. For example in the G19 one above I never thought about a gun going down to where field stripping would become more or less impossible (for all intents and purposes) until the striker could be dropped/cleared etc. it's not that I see this happening everyday but it obviously could. The above doesn't invalidate the G19 or other striker pistols but it's a data point worth logging if you will. "Guns are tools. The only weapon ever created was man." | |||
|
| Member |
I think those 'extreme' tests are pretty silly personally. -------------------------------------------- Proverbs 27:17 - As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another. | |||
|
Sigforum K9 handler |
I put about as much stock in what MAC has to say as I do Maxine Waters. Actually, Maxine Waters is probably more reputable. | |||
|
| Bolt Thrower |
As a follow up I would like to know if it was a blockage in the striker channel or the fire control group. Can you pull the backplate and striker out of a glock slide still on the frame? I should know this but I am not sure. Also I feel like the inrange rifle mud tests would be more like their pistol tests if the rifles got submerged in, rather than splattered with mud. Submerging in mud will lock up anything. | |||
|
| Member |
Reason why MAC's tests are stupid. He doesn't lubricate in between. Stupid! It's metal on metal needs lube. That's what she said anyway. For ME: DA/SA= Sig 9mm Striker fired= Glock 9mm If it's a .45= 1911 Suppressed= HK in .45 I like anything in 10mm | |||
|
Res ipsa loquitur |
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Thanks for posting. In a weird sort of way, this "test" actually seems to have some scientific validity (for a test sample of one). In many ways, I think it portrays real life results for what could or would happen to a VP9 in a wet and muddy environment. In contrast, the MAC test seems to be based solely on what will it take to make a precision tool fail. We just need a part two for desert and forest conditions. __________________________ | |||
|
| Member |
It's exactly what i thought!!!! | |||
|
| Purveyor of Death and Destruction  |
Slight thread drift. Mac really pissed me off when he wanted us to start paying him to do videos. He isnt all that. Havent watched him since. I never put much stock in his stress tests. For one, they dont replicate local conditions. Second, its designed for no weapon to pass. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024