I would have found out by shooting the dog.Originally Posted by OlongJohnson
I would have found out by shooting the dog.
This sums up every MAC gauntlet thread ever.
To be fair, he says in the video it's mainly for entertainment and that it's not scientific. The problem isn't MAC and their torture testing, it's people ignoring the disclaimers and putting too much weight in the "tests". And I'm sure there are a lot of channels doing stupid tests and trying to pass them off as actual data to be considered when purchasing a weapon, but the people that take them seriously were going to buy a Taurus or XD anyway and OC it in a Serpa.
It's interesting to see how guns fail but the tests are not realistic (except MAYBE in really rare circumstances in actual combat. IE a muddy WWI trench or you're deployed in a third-world country and your convoy took a wrong turn and tried to turn around in what looked like a dry field only to find out it was an open sewer that had crusted over in the hot sun and now vehicles are stuck and you're taking fire.) and they should not be looked at as any real indicator of how good or bad a gun is. If fact I think this is how InRange TV describes their mud test videos.
Last edited by Bigghoss; 10-16-2017 at 09:33 PM.
I like that his tests are consistent and I think there's value in seeing what level of abuse the guns can take, and in seeing the specific ways in which they fail. I do wish they would go into more detail about what is actually causing malfunctions, as InRange does.
And speaking as an occasionally clumsy dumbass who's dropped guns in dirt and mud I don't think MAC's protocol is particularly unrealistic.
"Customer is very particular" -- SIG Sauer
I think for the armed civilian, the majority of these, “tests,” are a masturbatory fantasy...if it gets THAT bad in your self defense scenario, you did something really wrong. Like who did you piss off at the Honda ATV 4 Wheeler quarter finals?
I think dropping the gun in a mud puddle or a heavily flooded storm gutter in a torrential rain would be more appropriate. But, it would probably be a snooze fest, as the guns wouldn’t have much of an issue handling them. Even the 1.0 M&P...and this is why I occasionally post essays on a boring website instead of generating daily gun-related, “content.”
[emoji6]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by Sherman A. House DDS; 10-16-2017 at 10:12 PM.
It's really a shame how much influence just a few YouTube gun reviewers have over the average mouth breather gun guy.
Do you know who? Not doubting but I’m very curious
I like the USP a lot and just recommend a USP40 to a friend but I’m not aware of anyone besides Dr No here running one at a high level on competition. Just don’t see many HKs being gamed hard
I agree. I don't think it's realistic that you'd ever get your gun that caked in shit--and expect it to shoot. But I don't think that's the point. Rather, I think it's about understanding the physical limits of a machine. I think that's what interests people--not necessarily "will my gun shoot if I drop it in a pond."
Based on the results of this "test" (if you can call it that) as well as other factors, my "feeling" is that the HK USP 45 is probably more resilient to unnecessarily extreme conditions than most other guns. Does that really mean much in the scope real world use? Probably not.
But it's still cool to see a machine stand up to that kind of abuse. And I still think HK's engineering puts it in a different league in terms of toughness. And I would still rather shoot a Beretta.
Last edited by MattyD380; 10-16-2017 at 11:08 PM.
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.
Last edited by Bigghoss; 10-16-2017 at 11:33 PM.
Not a lot of folks running them now. In the early 2000s, Bruce Gray, Mike Boyd, and a fistful of European shooters were running them regularly. I know some folks are still shooting .40 guns in Limited 10 in USPSA, but I don't know if they are winning national titles doing so (I assume not, since I'm not seeing them on the radar).
I don't see a ton of HKs gamed here in the US, either. In Europe, especially Germany and Scandinavia they get run more, but still probably not as much as Glocks.
Reply With Quote