HKPRO Forums banner

HK MR762/HK417, Sig 716, Armalite AR-10 High Speed Video Comparison

29573 Views 71 Replies 10 Participants Last post by  forFREEDOM
Not my video.
Different shooters on each rifle.
Note the bolt bounce.
More importantly note the cartridge bounce as it leaves the mag feed lips.
One of these three is not like the rest.

61 - 72 of 72 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Discussion Starter · #61 ·
@tktm:

I opted to not inform you of the number of failures allowed, as I hoped it would keep you from over-analyzing the issue.

Guess I failed there.
What you did was ask a question that was Not well posed; more over what was the purpose of the question? Where you asking if it was reliable enough to protect my family? Where you asking if it was reliable enough to shoot at paper targets? The real question is what were you trying to accomplish? What was the end goal of the question? I give you the benefit of the doubt your asking real questions because you want a real answer; if you are asking questions just to be "tricky", that is a different matter.

@tktm:
It does not come across as an aside to me, and when Grumpy made the statement about bolt bounce being virtually meaningless in a semi-automatic, you argued that it caused extra wear, it provided a venue for debris getting inside the action, causing it to "jam" and that it would actually activate the disconnector during fully automatic fire.
Unneeded motion, and unneeded openings do cause excess wear and do provide an entry point for debris to jam the mechanism; It is hard to believe that someone would argue that they don't do those things. Moreover, what was said about the disconnector had a big [IF] in front of it. It probably would have caused less confusion if I had not tried to give a quick answer; on the other hand, when detail answers are given the accusation comes that I am "over analyzing"

You then continue to state that you will not dry fire your weapons because of the extra wear.
Why not give the whole truth? What I said was I didn't dry fired my USP9 because it would cause additional wear and tear on the weapon; my position was substantiated by HK when they had to redesign the USP firing pin and block because of dry firing breakage.

For some of us our weapons are tools to protect our love ones. God forbid we have to use our weapons, but if we do have use our weapons we want them to function with the highest probability of success. People who shoot at paper and don't desire or have the ability to protect loved ones may feel different. As for me, I pay extra for HK because I don't want to compromise my loved ones.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
What you did was ask a question that was Not well posed; more over what was the purpose of the question? Where you asking if it was reliable enough to protect my family? Where you asking if it was reliable enough to shoot at paper targets? The real question is what were you trying to accomplish? What was the end goal of the question? I give you the benefit of the doubt your asking real questions because you want a real answer; if you are asking questions just to be "tricky", that is a different matter.
A weapons mechanical reliability is measured by how well it manages to go "bang", under a variety of circumstances. There are no other conditions. Was the gist of my question so hard for you to grasp, that you have to add your own conditions to judge wether or not my question is valid? What makes you so entitled?

I asked a simple question in regards to a weapons mechanical reliability. If you need to read something different into it, be my guest.

Unneeded motion, and unneeded openings do cause excess wear and do provide an entry point for debris to jam the mechanism; It is hard to believe that someone would argue that they don't do those things.
I believe we have provided valid information disproving your theory. You are making blanket statements that this happens, "just because you say so". What real world experience do you have to corroborate your position? You have not provided a single piece of evidence, not even an anecdote, describing malfunctions caused by bolt bounce. I cannot find a single problem mentioned at all, except people who experience failure to fire due to the hammer riding the bolt home when firing on fully automatic.

I have shot my weapon covered in dust, snow and in a variety of other austere conditions, no failures to date because of debris in the action at all.

And dude, they are called malfunctions. Jam is something you put on toast.

Moreover, what was said about the disconnector had a big [IF] in front of it.
Well, the post you made pointed to an obvious lack of knowledge of the weapon system, and making assumptions based on that flawed knowledge. If you were familiar with the weapon system at all, you would understand that neither the disconnector (in semi auto) or the sear (in full auto) can engage the trigger in any way because of bolt bounce. A simple test by manually cycling the weapon would have shown it. It is not possible. Also, that you use the incorrect terms does not add credibility to your arguments.

For some of us our weapons are tools to protect our love ones. God forbid we have to use our weapons, but if we do have use our weapons we want them to function with the highest probability of success. People who shoot at paper and don't desire or have the ability to protect loved ones may feel different. As for me, I pay extra for HK because I don't want to compromise my loved ones.
I try to be polite and professional in my replies, but do not ever again patronize me by insinuating that I only shoot paper and thus have no interest making sure my weapon functions reliably. I have carried a weapon as part of my job for 10 years, serving my country. This includes deployment to combat zones. I would say that I am pretty qualified to comment on weapon reliability, based on real world experience in a vast variety of environments. When my life, or the lives of my colleagues/friends, rely on me having a functional weapon, I can assure you that I take care of it. Even if it is an HK.

How much time do you have on the AR platform?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Discussion Starter · #63 ·
Keep in mind that when people quit arguing with you, it's not because you have "won" the argument, it's because we're here to discuss, learn, and share real world information about guns that we like and USE, not provide a socialization area for special needs adults who argue just to argue. We'll stop talking to you simply because we're tired of wasting our time trying to explain the REAL WORLD to a number cruncher with no experience.
Toodles.
Why do you seek to make this a competition? I'm just trying to decide between spending the extra money on a MR762 over a Sig716; but it seems to me as if you have taken on the role of Charlie Sheen and are all about "WINNING".

Moreover the claims you make are not conservative, which means if you are wrong people are at risk.
You make a classic mistake, you assume that your experience is representative of the entire population of possibilities.

So you advise others that extra motion/impact and additional openings on a weapon from "bounce" do not cause additional wear & tear or potential for debris to enter/relocate and as a result are "meaningless". You claim personal experience as your guide. But you have NO capability to actually to determine if bounce actually influenced any failures you may have experienced. The question is how exactly would you know if a failure was influenced by "bounce". What is your detection method?

You are telling people something is meaningless when the fact is you have no way to determine if you have actually ever experienced a "bounce" related failure. So the question comes down what kinds of odds are you willing to play with someone else's safety so you might have a feel good "win"? I hope that is not what you are about.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
But you have NO capability to actually to determine if bounce actually influenced any failures you may have experienced. The question is how exactly would you know if a failure was influenced by "bounce". What is your detection method?
So you are saying that failures can occur because of bolt bounce, but it cannot be determined if that was the actual cause.

How can you then state that this will cause increased wear and increase the chance of malfunctions due to debris getting in the action, when you claim that there is no way of proving it.....?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Discussion Starter · #65 ·
A weapons mechanical reliability is measured by how well it manages to go "bang", under a variety of circumstances. There are no other conditions. Was the gist of my question so hard for you to grasp, that you have to add your own conditions to judge wether or not my question is valid? What makes you so entitled?
Your exact question was "Is it reliable in your eyes?", so YOU made me so entitled. In my eyes, I need to know what is on the line and what is the cost of failure.

And dude, they are called malfunctions. Jam is something you put on toast.
The lexicon polizei? But if you want to go down that road, "malfunction" is referential to the weapon; "Jam" is referential to the mode of failure.
The example I previously gave was when a chunk of walnut media "jammed" in my USP9 between the breechface and cartridge, causing the action to lock.
Would you prefer if I had stated that the walnut media "malfunctioned" between the breech face and cartridge?


I try to be polite and professional in my replies, but do not ever again patronize me by insinuating that I only shoot paper and thus have no interest making sure my weapon functions reliably.
There is no intent or desire to patronize; that's why I said "people" and not specifically "you". Maybe you may feel patronized because your arguments stand in contrast to what you say you believe, but that is only something you can determine. However I will ask, do you purchase and carry a firearm on your person for the immediate protection of your wife/husband/children? That is something way different than having someone else purchase a weapon for you based on someone else's reliability criteria, all for a cause which is not necessarily immediately your own.


How much time do you have on the AR platform?
I don't like mouse guns, and I avoid them; I much prefer the weapons from the 2nd country to your East.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
833 Posts
How does that old saying go again?

It's better to keep your mouth shut and only have people *think* you're a blithering moron then open your mouth and prove them right.

Some people just don't know when to stop digging.

For all my foibles, when I am shown to be wrong about something, at least I man the **** up and admit it.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
3,705 Posts
Quoted for posterity

How does that old saying go again?

It's better to keep your mouth shut and only have people *think* you're a blithering moron then open your mouth and prove them right.

Some people just don't know when to stop digging.

For all my foibles, when I am shown to be wrong about something, at least I man the **** up and admit it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Discussion Starter · #68 · (Edited)
So you are saying that failures can occur because of bolt bounce, but it cannot be determined if that was the actual cause.

How can you then state that this will cause increased wear and increase the chance of malfunctions due to debris getting in the action, when you claim that there is no way of proving it.....?
The question is does "Grumpy" have the capability to detect and attribute a failure or wear to "bounce"? To be able to claim experience he must have a way to identify if a failure is attributable to bounce. That is vastly different that saying that such failures are undetectable. The people looking for those kinds of failures would need special equipment; it is the type of thing that would be done in an effort to meet (or influence) contract requirements.

If you wanted to gain real life meaningful hands on experience on the subject, one would need field trials with a population of rifles, some with the bounce condition and some improved. The population data would then be crunched to see what the level of improvement was statistically; the results of such testing would be marked competition sensitive by the company involved and outsiders would never see it. Now if Grumpy has that kind of experience let him speak up and say so.

As has been stated previously, it is unclear if the HK has a true advantage over the SIG in the video because it is just a single use case. But the lack of bounce in the HK is of note because it may be an indicator that such an advantage might exist. If that is the case, the lack of bounce in the MR762 video maybe partial evidence that the gas system really is self regulating . However, (as I said early on) what is clear is that the HK feeds one heck of a lot better than the other two guns and that I think is the most important thing that can be determined from the video.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
3,705 Posts
Keep in mind that when people quit arguing with you, it's not because you have "won" the argument, it's because we're here to discuss, learn, and share real world information about guns that we like and USE, not provide a socialization area for special needs adults who argue just to argue.
Toodles.
Pot? Kettle?

Anyone else noticing a trend among those who are actively involved in these pointless train wrecks?
 

· Banned
Joined
·
833 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
3,380 Posts
61 - 72 of 72 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top