The torture tests are back!

R

Ramey

New member
MAC is back with their reliability tests on handguns. Basically they subject them to water, sand, dirt and mud (you know... the stuff that covers most of planet earth) and then see if they fail. Some of you will roll your eyes, some will be entertained. Check out how the Beretta 92/M9 did. I gotta say I was surprised.
https://youtu.be/kLlJRpBIHUA


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think the Beretta did pretty good for the test.
It actually preformed about how I expected.

I think the 92 platform is a very reliable gun under reasonably clean conditions I do think there are more reliable systems when run dirty though.

Out of all the "torture" tests I've watched of various guns.. while entertaining are probably not very realistic and reasonable are often beyond reason.

MAC's test on the other hand is reasonable and about the most you could expect a gun to function thru.
 
Wonder what would happen with a real torture test like the guys did with the Hi-Point. Run over by a 3/4 ton pickup, drug behind a truck down a gravel road. Spent brass, and hardened steel bolts hammered into the muzzle, then a 50% over maximum charge load fired.
I bet not many guns would last half as long as the Hi-Points did.
The tests in these videos are more a "severe, dirty duty test" than a true torture test.
 
I like the open top design of the Beretta. You can wipe or blow dirt off most of the mechanism. Empties will eject without bouncing around inside a housing. It is the locking mechanism used in the P38 and that was a very successful pistol.



Wonder what would happen with a real torture test like the guys did with the Hi-Point. Run over by a 3/4 ton pickup, drug behind a truck down a gravel road. Spent brass, and hardened steel bolts hammered into the muzzle, then a 50% over maximum charge load fired.
Click to expand...

Or what about cutting it apart with an acetylene torch or putting it under a 50 ton drop hammer, or throwing the pistol into the sun?

Any Bubba can come up with some "torture test" that will break anything. But can Bubba

1) find a manufacturer who will bid to his specifications?

or

2) make a firearm that will pass his abusive tests?

Militaries have this problem all the time, it is called over specification. Some Gomer wants a firearm that will operate on the face of the sun, and then finds out, no manufacturer will bid no matter what contract value. Unless of course, it is a cost plus contract with cost plus fee. That is the Government pays for the all costs, and the fee increases infinitely as the cost of the contract goes up. Even if Gomer never gets what he wants, the contractor makes giga bucks.

Also, know any humans who can function after being run over by a 3/4 ton pickup, or drug behind a truck down a gravel road, or having hardened steel bolts hammered into their heads? What is the point of requiring mechanical items to survive conditions that kill the operator?
 
I personally like the MAC torture test protocol. As they stated in the video, the series of tests that they subject the pistol to are realistic conditions that a pistol could be subject to ( unlike many of the other 'torture test' videos on youtube).

That said, my carry gun will never see those types of conditions here in the concrete jungle. So while it may be entertaining, I'm not sure how much relevance it has upon your average CCW holder.
 
So while it may be entertaining, I'm not sure how much relevance it has upon your average CCW holder.
Click to expand...

I agree my daily carry gun would never see that but for those who carry hiking, camping, want a survival carry gun, etc I think the tests are very valuable.
 
Also, know any humans who can function after being run over by a 3/4 ton pickup, or drug behind a truck down a gravel road, or having hardened steel bolts hammered into their heads? What is the point of requiring mechanical items to survive conditions that kill the operator?
Click to expand...
Don't know about any human, but the Hi-Point C9 did!
My point was that these are good might happen scenarios to show the durability of a firearm under adverse conditions that are possible. But at what point would it actually fail. Just think it would be interesting to subject an "approved" (by gun snobs) firearm to the same things that a Hi-Point has withstood to see how much of the same it can take.
 
Personally I don't get the point of misuse tests. I have nothing against Hi Points and while I think it's great for consumers that they will hold up to that level of abuse, that they will isn't going to motivate me to buy one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Regardless of what brand pistol, I'd be willing to bet the average
operator(owner?) won't allow a speck of dirt to get into the gun,
let alone allowing it to be pushed into the dirt, sand or mud.

IMO, any pistol which fires in this condition is a matter of luck
on the operator's behalf. Anybody who would need a pistol just
dropped in the mud or sand, without the few seconds it takes to
field strip and clear it, is hard pressed, indeed. Anybody who uses
a firearm in the field, and knowingly holsters it this dirty, except
under the most extreme circumstances, deserves whatever they get,
when they attempt to fire it.
 
Anybody who would need a pistol just

dropped in the mud or sand, without the few seconds it takes to

field strip and clear it, is hard pressed, indeed. Anybody who uses

a firearm in the field, and knowingly holsters it this dirty, except

under the most extreme circumstances, deserves whatever they get,

when they attempt to fire it.
Click to expand...



So if you watch the tests, MAC does make a point that the single environment tests in and of themselves aren't really unrealistic. Fights with handguns are often up close. For those that might be outside when that fight occurs, a pistol getting knocked into the water, sand, dirt, or mud isn't completely out of the realm of possibility (or quite possibly you along with that pistol getting knocked down and into those environments). Feces occurs. I don't think the premise ever was that the user is just negligent and dumps his/her firearm into the mud, holsters it, and then walks on as if nothing happened. The idea is that in the process of the fight exposure to that potential stoppage happens and the user has to continue the fight with that pistol.



A big part of the tests to me, and MAC has emphasized this more this year, is not that a pistol is trash if it has a stoppage, but how hard/easy is it to remedy the stoppages that do occur. They've had stoppages that are solved with simply malfunction clearances, and they've had stoppages where the pistol needs to be beaten open as it has locked up.
 
Last edited:
I love those test videos for funs sake. I was surprised that the Beretta outperformed both P226 samples that were tested the same way. Kind of shoots down the common notion that SIGs are flat out superior guns that Beretta only beat in Military trials by being cheaper.
 
Beretta beat the SIG in the dried mud test if people read the original trials, which in large part led to the mud rails used on SIGs for a while. I wouldn't have expected the SIG to do as badly, but I'm curious how the CZ will do. I wonder if full length slide rails are more of a detriment than anything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I always thought most of these stupid "torture" tests were just that, stupid. :confused: It does look like he has fun doing them and I guess he gets free ammo and loaner guns so God bless him.
 
Last edited:
He recently posted the M&P 2.0 test. It did better than the first M&P. That particular gun was a bust. It failed just from getting dunked in water!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Whenever I see somebody post that torture tests are stupid or a waste of time, I wonder if they're the type of person that goes to the movies and picks apart the plot the whole time instead of just enjoying it. Who cares if it's stupid? It ain't your gun, it's free entertainment, and sometimes it's fun just to see what happens! I'm just glad MAC doesn't cram dirt into an open chamber.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top