The validity/usefulness of "torture tests"

[shootist26]

I am specifically referring to the types of torture tests people post about online where they cram the guns full of sand/mud/twinkies/whatever and see if they still shoot. I have seen threads on various forums dealing with these tests, and have seen known reliable guns like HKs, M&Ps, Glocks, and Beretta 92s all fail.

At what point does a torture test go from realistic/useful to ridiculous/expecting-too-much-from-a-handgun? How do we determine this? Is cramming a semi-auto with foreign matter a realistic test? If not, how much foreign matter is reasonable?

[Josh Runkle]

I am specifically referring to the types of torture tests people post about online where they cram the guns full of sand/mud/twinkies/whatever and see if they still shoot. I have seen threads on various forums dealing with these tests, and have seen known reliable guns like HKs, M&Ps, Glocks, and Beretta 92s all fail.

At what point does a torture test go from realistic/useful to ridiculous/expecting-too-much-from-a-handgun? How do we determine this? Is cramming a semi-auto with foreign matter a realistic test? If not, how much foreign matter is reasonable?

I think it really depends on what the gun is being used to or being marketed to. There's a vast difference between marketing to a guy who keeps a gun in the home full time, versus a special forces guy who might not know the days ahead, and may want something to last through salt water or a sandstorm, and then not be cleaned for a week, then be used very heavily. Unfortunately, most gun buyers all see themselves as having the same needs/wants as special forces guys. They can live hundreds of miles from salt water but still want something that has a salt-water corrosion resistant finish.

The issue is less with gun companies and tests and more with who the average gun buyer sees him/herself to be. For the sake of R&D of any product, especially one marketed to such vast audiences, like a beretta, hk, sig, block, etc...I find it highly useful to see failure points in any number of scenarios. The vast differences in scenarios represents the vast differences in audiences, and all scenarios together represent relatively few individuals, like special forces perhaps, but, as stated: the 99% of gun owners feel they need the same capabilities of the other 1%.

[rob_s]

In most cases I think it's just newer shooters that are amazed that the machine will work after that. And they are oozing with pride in their new purchase. I remember when we were first getting into guns one of our guys threw his Glock into the mud, ran it over with his truck, and took it out and shot it. I'm sure that had camera phones been around, and youstube, we would have videoed it and posted it.

That, and everyone seems to be a gun reviewer these days, in some weird quest for fame and free shit.

[DanH]

In most cases I think it's just newer shooters that are amazed that the machine will work after that. And they are oozing with pride in their new purchase. I remember when we were first getting into guns one of our guys threw his Glock into the mud, ran it over with his truck, and took it out and shot it. I'm sure that had camera phones been around, and youstube, we would have videoed it and posted it.

That, and everyone seems to be a gun reviewer these days, in some weird quest for fame and free shit.

funny you should mention that. I saw a video of someone doing the same thing with a HiPoint

[BLR]

At what point does a torture test go from realistic/useful to ridiculous/expecting-too-much-from-a-handgun? How do we determine this? Is cramming a semi-auto with foreign matter a realistic test? If not, how much foreign matter is reasonable?

To build a scientifically valid and valuable test you need to:
1. Define the variables
2. Define the test matrix
3. Define the test procedure
4. Do the the test
5. Report the results
6. Interpret the results

As an example, one could test the size of sand needed to impede function of a Glock trigger mechanism, lubricated and unlubricated. Chances are 2000 grit may act as a lubricant, while 800 may lock it up solid. You could pour in x grams of sand into the trigger mechanism of the assembled gun and fire 100 rounds to ensure proper operation.

Or something along those lines. At any rate, that is approximately what is needed to make a true test, twinkies notwithstanding.

[Zhurdan]

I figure if someones got that kinda cash laying around and they enjoy doing it, have at it.

On the flip side, if someone is limited in funds and they are doing it simply to garner youtube hits... fail.

The worst part of most of the tests, at least for me, is watching them expend copious amounts of ammo that is just going into a dirt berm that could be used for actual training, but again, if they've got the coin...

[ToddG]

I don't know. All those Hilux torture episodes of Top Gear certainly impressed me...

[BaiHu]

I don't know. All those Hilux torture episodes of Top Gear certainly impressed me...

Loved those episodes!

[jstyer]

I don't know. All those Hilux torture episodes of Top Gear certainly impressed me...

Along with north pole in a hilux, and greatest roads in the world episodes... those constitute some of the greatest stuff ever on TV.

[Mjolnir]

I enjoy reading any knowledgeable, insightful, well-written person who chooses to torture a pistol, rifle or any machine, for that matter.

What may be irrelevant to one may be pertinent to another.

In short: everything is not for everyone.

Much is anecdotal but that's okay.