HK USP 45--Nearly Flawless Gauntlet Performance

[GardoneVT]

Rant mode on.

Most of us are carrying guns concealed. Meaning under clothing, and hopefully holstered to boot.

So what does dropping a solitary pistol in mud prove? If it works it's a sample of 1 that's not relevant. If it doesn't it's a sample of 1 that's not relevant. If MAC wants page views,he should take .380 carry guns and dunk them in pocket lint.

[MattyD380]

He did a bog standard Beretta either 92 or M9 and it didn't do as well as the HK. Hasn't stopped me from working on transitioning over to my Berettas from Glock, as much as I want a bunch of USPs. He's going to do one with a fullsize PX4 9mm at some point. They're interesting videos but I doubt my gun is going to get knocked into that much crud. I suppose it's also not totally unfathomable that my gun could end up in ONE of those media and in the struggle get stomped on or whatever. There's a million possibilities and "it's not the odds, it's the stakes" only works to a point so everyone has to figure out what they need for themselves. Maybe a park ranger, rural sheriff, border patrol or even construction worker might feel that's a more likely situation for them. Sadly I don't get as much dirt time as I would like so I don't think I need to worry about it as much. Plus, that's kinda what BUGs are for too. I can hedge a lot of bets by just having a second gun. After getting trained on weapons retention, hand-to-hand, and just plain situational awareness and avoidance of course.

Yeah, I think he did an M9A1. Definitely did not fare as well as the USP. But I don't really need my Beretta 92 to shoot with 13 pounds of mud on the slide and dirt in the action. And neither does the US military, really. With just about anything short of intentional abuse... a Beretta 92 is one of the most reliable guns you can get. And for me, it's one of the best shooting guns I can get.

But I still think it's impressive that the USP can handle that. I think that is really what the HK brand represents: exceeding expectations for toughness. And I feel like they offer products that really deliver on that promise.

[pastaslinger]

What is even the point of these videos, literally every part is subjective from different pressure applied each time for dirt and mud to simply the weather conditions. There is zero objectivity, the DA/SA guns are not even all tried with double strike.

Consider this: the Beretta failed due to debris in the hammer channel. This would make ANY hammer fired gun fail and yet it doesn't happen with the USP or the AREX and I doubt it is because they somehow designed that part better...

[Bucky]

Rant mode on.

Most of us are carrying guns concealed. Meaning under clothing, and hopefully holstered to boot.

So what does dropping a solitary pistol in mud prove? If it works it's a sample of 1 that's not relevant. If it doesn't it's a sample of 1 that's not relevant. If MAC wants page views,he should take .380 carry guns and dunk them in pocket lint.

IMHO, the better a gun will perform in extreme conditions, the better it should do in ideal conditions.

Just like some people are ok with a gun reliable with certain ammo, my expectations are that a gun should work reliably with all in-spec traditional ammo. This is why I rarely carried my Kahrs, even though I found the ammo it would always work with.

People fall, guns can get dropped, especially in a struggle. A modern pistol should be able to take on some elements and still function.

I’m not a big fan of MAC, and realize this is more entertainment than scientific. Still, it does give a modicum of info. YMMV.

[Bigghoss]

What is even the point of these videos, literally every part is subjective from different pressure applied each time for dirt and mud to simply the weather conditions. There is zero objectivity, the DA/SA guns are not even all tried with double strike.

He specifically says these videos are not scientific and are mainly for entertainment and partially out of curiosity to see how the guns will fail. InRange also says this with their mud tests.

[breakingtime91]

He specifically says these videos are not scientific and are mainly for entertainment and partially out of curiosity to see how the guns will fail. InRange also says this with their mud tests.

G19 made it one round in the INrange mud test. Something got in the gun and locked it up. Literally everyone in the comments was saying this is why the 320 was selected. Made me realize how stupid people are.

[GJM]

MAC probably got the idea for his tests from the LAV — here is Larry’s from over ten years ago. I am pretty sure this test was the basis for Larry saying the G21 was a dog.

—————

191119111911 191119111911 is offline
Member

Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 80
This is all I have of it.

"Sand Test

Just had a chance to do a harsh sand test on few different handguns. This test was not scientific but was very enlightening.

Pistols tested were; HK USP Tactical
Customized 1911
rack grade GI 1911
Glock 21

Test consisted of placing each pistol loaded in a Bianchi GI field holster inside a plastic bag with approx 2 cups of fine/medium grit sand ( North Carolina type). Then the bag was shaken vigorously for 10 seconds while holding onto the pistol butt for safety. The pistol was then taken out and 3 mags were fired through the 1911 and 2 fully loaded mags were fired through the HK and Glock - roughly the same amount of ammo. The sand coverage was very good and uniformly covered the pistols. The pistols were loaded in the mode you would expect in a field environment - condition 3 for the 1911, loaded for the Glock and loaded in DA mode for the USP.A test was done dry and lubed with TW 25B. This test represented EXTREME sand conditions - not normal field use, even in sandy conditions.A brief rundown of the results follow;

1)Carrying your gun dry in this environment is a NO GO despite what some will say. All pistols performed worse dry than lubed.

2)All pistols required some manipulation in order to fire - none would function normally straight out of the holster.

3)Overall the HK USP performed the best - the performance of it dry was roughly the same as the customized 1911 but was definately the best lubed. Overall it performed well.

4)The custom 1911 was second - interestingly enough the trigger track was not a real problem - the sand that went in through the ejection port to the bottom lugs area caused the most problems. Once the sand shifted in this area the pistol functioned better.

5)The rack grade GI 1911 was a distant third - the custom 1911 had an 18 pound recoil spring and that helped with feeding greatly vs the rack grade gun. Swap out the recoil spring and it probably would have done better.

6)The shocker of the day - the Glock 21 FAILED terribly. The big problem was failure of the trigger to reset. Also at times the pistol would not fire due to sand in the trigger mechanism. The dry test could not even be completed with the Glock due to this.This surprised all of us as we expected the Glock to do quite well.

Moral of the story; The 1911, even in its customized mode, can get the job done if you set it up to succeed. Lube it right, carry it in the right holster and in the proper mode, and it won't let you down - just like it hasn't for nearly a 100 years.

The HK USP series are good guns - well designed and well made - for service pistols. The ergonomics hurt the pistol dramatically but for an out of the box service pistol/field gun, they get my endorsement.

The Glock 21 is a dog - always has been. It has the rep of being the worst gun Glock makes. I have a Glock 17 and 19 and like them for what they are - but don't get sucked into the Glock hype - they are not magical guns. Remember what your dad said when you were in 3rd grade; don't believe everything you read.

Hope you guys got something out of this - I did." Larry Vickers

[GardoneVT]

MAC probably got the idea for his tests from the LAV — here is Larry’s from over ten years ago. I am pretty sure this test was the basis for Larry saying the G21 was a dog.

—————

191119111911 191119111911 is offline
Member

Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 80
This is all I have of it.

"Sand Test

Just had a chance to do a harsh sand test on few different handguns. This test was not scientific but was very enlightening.

Pistols tested were; HK USP Tactical
Customized 1911
rack grade GI 1911
Glock 21

Test consisted of placing each pistol loaded in a Bianchi GI field holster inside a plastic bag with approx 2 cups of fine/medium grit sand ( North Carolina type). Then the bag was shaken vigorously for 10 seconds while holding onto the pistol butt for safety. The pistol was then taken out and 3 mags were fired through the 1911 and 2 fully loaded mags were fired through the HK and Glock - roughly the same amount of ammo. The sand coverage was very good and uniformly covered the pistols. The pistols were loaded in the mode you would expect in a field environment - condition 3 for the 1911, loaded for the Glock and loaded in DA mode for the USP.A test was done dry and lubed with TW 25B. This test represented EXTREME sand conditions - not normal field use, even in sandy conditions.A brief rundown of the results follow;

1)Carrying your gun dry in this environment is a NO GO despite what some will say. All pistols performed worse dry than lubed.

2)All pistols required some manipulation in order to fire - none would function normally straight out of the holster.

3)Overall the HK USP performed the best - the performance of it dry was roughly the same as the customized 1911 but was definately the best lubed. Overall it performed well.

4)The custom 1911 was second - interestingly enough the trigger track was not a real problem - the sand that went in through the ejection port to the bottom lugs area caused the most problems. Once the sand shifted in this area the pistol functioned better.

5)The rack grade GI 1911 was a distant third - the custom 1911 had an 18 pound recoil spring and that helped with feeding greatly vs the rack grade gun. Swap out the recoil spring and it probably would have done better.

6)The shocker of the day - the Glock 21 FAILED terribly. The big problem was failure of the trigger to reset. Also at times the pistol would not fire due to sand in the trigger mechanism. The dry test could not even be completed with the Glock due to this.This surprised all of us as we expected the Glock to do quite well.

Moral of the story; The 1911, even in its customized mode, can get the job done if you set it up to succeed. Lube it right, carry it in the right holster and in the proper mode, and it won't let you down - just like it hasn't for nearly a 100 years.

The HK USP series are good guns - well designed and well made - for service pistols. The ergonomics hurt the pistol dramatically but for an out of the box service pistol/field gun, they get my endorsement.

The Glock 21 is a dog - always has been. It has the rep of being the worst gun Glock makes. I have a Glock 17 and 19 and like them for what they are - but don't get sucked into the Glock hype - they are not magical guns. Remember what your dad said when you were in 3rd grade; don't believe everything you read.

Hope you guys got something out of this - I did." Larry Vickers

Even LAV can't really say that. I realize he's an uber SME with all the right background boxes checked,yet one can't empirically decide the reliability of thousands of guns based off the results of one , good or bad.

[GJM]

Even LAV can't really say that. I realize he's an uber SME with all the right background boxes checked,yet one can't empirically decide the reliability of thousands of guns based off the results of one , good or bad.

Now Gardone, surely you have been around long enough to know the LAV can proclaim anything he wants and his legions of fans will take it as gospel.

[Bigghoss]

How come no body ever does a snow test? Get a snow cone machine and flavor them with Fireclean!