m305 relliability in adverse condition (mud/sand/dirt)

B

brutus101

Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
These guys have tested the reliability of a springfield m1a in the mud.
I am wondering if the m305 is reliable in adverse condition given their m1a failed miserably compared to an ar15.
https://www.full30.com/video/9eef6b3a4eb6c8846a4c8dc4b8968bc4
Another m1a torture test with sand.
https://www.full30.com/video/6618755f336970e55e6c50c1fe894ff8

Would it be different with a m305 given that they have chrome lined barrel and chamber?

What's your experience regarding the reliability of the m305 in muddy/dirty conditions?

I say one at a dealer and the action is clearly not sealed against the element.
I would at least remove the excess mud with my hand before firing. I just hope some mud/dirt/sand will not jam it.
 
Last edited:
The chrome lining would make no difference

Given the test conditions in both those conditions, I would expect to see the same types of failures in any Garand action based rifle.
 
Big kids playing war. Any rifle, AK's included, will stop working properly if you fill it with mud/dirt/sand/ice. No rifle's action is sealed against anything. This is why NCO's spend so much time yelling at FNG's about keeping their kit clean.
The M305/M1A's and AR-15's are not battle rifles and should not be expected to function like one.
 
Military weapons are subject to severe endurance/functionality testing and evaluations in a variety of conditions incl extremes of mud, wet, cold, sand, ice/snow, prolonged firing and neglect which might simulate battlefield use. Those with inadequate performance generally don't get adopted. A glaring exception was our very own Ross Rifle which was an excellent target rifle, but failed miserably in the trench warfare conditions of WW1.

This guy is entertaining, but does anyone on here really contemplate slithering through the muck like a salamander on their next hunting trip or range excursion. I think that the "tester" was lucky not to have a barrel burst or badly bulged because of mud in the bore.
 
purple said:
Military weapons are subject to severe endurance/functionality testing and evaluations in a variety of conditions incl extremes of mud, wet, cold, sand, ice/snow, prolonged firing and neglect which might simulate battlefield use. Those with inadequate performance generally don't get adopted. A glaring exception was our very own Ross Rifle which was an excellent target rifle, but failed miserably in the trench warfare conditions of WW1.

This guy is entertaining, but does anyone on here really contemplate slithering through the muck like a salamander on their next hunting trip or range excursion. I think that the "tester" was lucky not to have a barrel burst or badly bulged because of mud in the bore.
Click to expand...


totally agree
only an idiot would fire his weapon covered in mud like that.
if I was a soldier finding my rifle that gunked up, I'd have to switch to side arm while I did an emergency field strip and get my rifle back in the game.
I think these videos are probably not at all representative of real world conditions and certainly don't give them much merit.
 
Wow, finally some realism about reliability in the great ak/ar15/m14 debate. Hopefully some nooby will find this thread and actually learn something instead of all the derp ak47 more reliable than ar15 blah blah blah crap out there. As stated above, you fill the action full of mud, it ain't going to fire, no matter what gun it is.
 
M1a will never do as well as say a t97. I always get a kick out of guys bragging how big the ejection port is on a m1a or vz58, its like who the hell cares how easy you can clear a jam if it wasnt so open it wouldnt have jammed in the first place from crud falling
 
I've not dragged my m305 through the mud but I had it on the quad in wet muddy conditions and still fired hundreds of rounds with no problems in the same weekend.

As said in above posts, knowing how to field service and maintain your rifle makes all the difference in the world with respect to reliability.
 
I've had more stoppages in my Glock 17 (exactly one, ever) than in all 8 of the cheap Chinese garbage M305's I've owned so far.

Of course, I don't cram mud and gravel into the actions, so maybe I'm just babying them.
 
The first time I dissembled my m14 I was stunned to see how open the rifle is. Especially in the op rod/bolt roller area, I'm sure the place is prone to stoppage because it's moving freely. I guess the fact it's wide open makes it easier to clean it? However the parts are well built and won't brake easily I'm sure.
 
These "ultimate SHTF" tests seem like the equivalent of testing how well your emergency food storage is sealed by submerging it in raw sewage. If something is important enough that your life could depend on it, keep it out of the #### as if your life depended on it.
 
The M14 is an evolutionary step from the M1 Garand which proved to be a very reliable rifle during WW2 and Korea when employed in a wide variety of climactic and environmental conditions ranging from desert sand and dust, wet and humid tropical jungles, and cold, ice and snow. It even stood up in the muddy rice paddies of Korea which were well fertilized with human waste. 6 million copies couldn't be wrong. One problem which turned up early on was a tendency for the rifle to seize when exposed to prolonged rainy conditions. This led to the issue of lubriplate grease to the troops which is still in use today. Grease stays when wet. Oil doesn't

Thee biggest cause of weapons failures is neglect of individual maintenance by the troops. Proper weapons maintenance is a function of training, discipline and the availability of proper cleaning supplies. Even the old standby from the WW1 trenches and the desert, the Lee-Enfield, would foul and stop working properly if maintenance was neglected.
 
purple said:
The M14 is an evolutionary step from the M1 Garand which proved to be a very reliable rifle during WW2 and Korea when employed in a wide variety of climactic and environmental conditions ranging from desert sand and dust, wet and humid tropical jungles, and cold, ice and snow. It even stood up in the muddy rice paddies of Korea which were well fertilized with human waste. 6 million copies couldn't be wrong. One problem which turned up early on was a tendency for the rifle to seize when exposed to prolonged rainy conditions. This led to the issue of lubriplate grease to the troops which is still in use today. Grease stays when wet. Oil doesn't

Thee biggest cause of weapons failures is neglect of individual maintenance by the troops. Proper weapons maintenance is a function of training, discipline and the availability of proper cleaning supplies. Even the old standby from the WW1 trenches and the desert, the Lee-Enfield, would foul and stop working properly if maintenance was neglected.
Click to expand...

Yeah if you take care of it (m14) it will take care of you...

But a bolt action rifle is so simple to maintain and has very little to go wrong. You just take the bolt out and clean the damn thing! Sometime I hesitate between a ruger gunsite and a m305. I know that you can shoot a bolt action pretty fast if you keep your thumb and index finger on the bolt handle and use your middle finger as the trigger finger. The answer is to buy more guns and have both a m305 and a ruger gunsite!
 
Pop said:
These "ultimate SHTF" tests seem like the equivalent of testing how well your emergency food storage is sealed by submerging it in raw sewage. If something is important enough that your life could depend on it, keep it out of the #### as if your life depended on it.
Click to expand...

+1!
 
How much time do some of you guys spend imagining yourself grabbing your Norinco, a flat of Alphagetti and the the pretty girl two doors down and making a run for the hills? Reminds me of that kid in a Christmas Story and his Red Rider BB gun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom