The UTAS UTS-15: Initial thoughts and observations **range report added on post 21**

Master-G

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
315   0   0
Location
Halifax
**Range report added February 27 on post 21**


I’ve been intrigued by the UTS-15 ever since I saw the first pictures and videos of them a few years ago. I liked the modern look (which reminded me of the H&K G11) and compact size, but the initial reports of reliability and durability issues concerned me enough to bypass them and get a KSG instead. I saw a few video posted by Wolverine about the new Gen 4 version, and user reports of improved functioning (plus a significant price drop…around 30%) convinced me enough to try one. I ordered it last week and it arrived yesterday—just in time for Christmas. Here are my initial thoughts.

The shipping box has nicely fitted form inserts, and the manual is really excellent…maybe the best manual I’ve ever seen. It’s a real printed 57-page book, with attractive typography, detailed photos, thorough explanations and a neat little pop-up exploded parts diagram.

_MG_9799_zpsmxgcwdzi.jpg


The first thing I did was replace the A2-style pistol grip—I hate A2 grips. I installed a Magpul MOE grip—it was not a perfect fit but a little dremelling at the top rear fixed that. I like it much better.


_MG_9803_zps0mqahihp.jpg


Even though on paper they’re not that different it feels bigger than the KSG. It’s a little bit longer, but especially taller top to bottom. This is due to the fact that it’s stacked “three tubes high”…the mag tubes, the barrel, and the tube that the pump handle rides on. You can get a light-laser combination to install in the tube—I was tempted but decided against it for now. Handling-wise it’s not bad, although the KSG does feel a little handier to me. I usually like a short LOP, but the UTS-15 almost feels too short. The sights I scavenged from my Kriss Vector…they feel a little low to me. I had another sight set that was the type that slides on the rail then uses a bolt to tighten. I found the rail too wide to use this sight set—it wouldn’t slide on. The ones I have on there now are the type that has an extendable clamping section


_MG_9805_zpsobjzdh2k.jpg


The gun comes with a screw-in breacher choke—it’s quite sharp. The manual says not to shoot it without a choke so I guess it’s staying in.


_MG_9806_zpszy8twjb9.jpg


There are swing-open hatches on either side to load each magazine—seven 2 3/4” or six 3” in each. That’s one more per tube than the KSG.


_MG_9809_zps7jhsm4e9.jpg


The ejection port is on the right side (with a magnetic latch). The KSG of course ejects from the bottom.


_MG_9807_zpsbfisopfl.jpg



There’s a large swing-open portion on the top of the buttstock to access the magazines and chamber. I like this better than the difficult-to access port on the bottom of the KSG. It’s like the “toilet seat” of the FS2000 on steroids. The action release is awkwardly located on the button of the buttstock.


_MG_9808_zpspuwonqka.jpg

Here’s a better look at the chamber area. There’s a new aluminum housing (the “gear box”) that was previously polymer. That’s one of the improvements in this version.


_MG_9810_zpsvlhnbgva.jpg


The gun easily disassembles into four major components (although I found re-assembly a little fussy…you need to sort of wiggle things into place).


_MG_9813_zpsi2gv9obf.jpg


Here’s a close-up of the bolt.


_MG_9812_zps5ufrz2t6.jpg


You can see the spring for the spring-assisted pump action. I’ve never owned a spring-assisted pump gun and was a little uncertain, but it feels pretty good. The spring is not too strong to make it difficult to rack, yet provides a nice boost when closing the action. I don’t think there’s a way to hold the action open, though. You can see a small screw on the right side of the spring—this fits into a slotted sheet-metal tab on the action bar. I guess that you could choose not to have the spring-assist by not slotting this in place.


_MG_9814_zpsynlub1cn.jpg


Here’s a closer look at there rear of the stock. The switch can be used to specify left or right mag tubes, or if left in the centre, both tubes will be used. The KSG requires a switch between tubes (although that limitation has not bothered me). You can also see that there are plenty of corners and angles. The KSG has a nicely rounded buttstock that’s more comfortable.

So that’s a quick first look. What do I like? I still like the modern, unique look. My wife said that it looked like it was designed by a Japanese anime artist! I like the pump action—it’s slick and makes a very satisfying sound. I like the ease of loading. What are my concerns? The short LOP worries me a bit. I’m concerned about the angular buttstock causing discomfort when firing. I must confess to a slight lingering concern about reliability and durability, too. I’ll see if I can get out to the range after Christmas to provide a range report and side-by-side comparison with the KSG.
 
Last edited:
I too got mine just before Christmas and put 200 rounds through it already. I have had a few issues with it but overall I'm content with it. I too was closely reading reviews of the Gen 4 as I was hoping all issues had been addressed, but unfortunately this isn't the case. I've had two FTF and FTE issues in 200 rounds which might seem not bad, but it's still a problem. Also when pumping this gun with a positive motion to eliminate the FTE or FTF issues, my hatch on the buttstock has flung open on several occasions (5 or 6 times at least) There appears to be a design flaw in the mechanism that holds the barrel to the lower receiver with the hatch. I have been looking at this issue closely because I think it can be addressed with some minor modifications, but it's disappointing to still have these type of issues in a Gen4 gun. I was also disappointed in the review from Grumpy on the Gen4 as he clearly covers up the opening buttstock issue in his video. I made a post about it @ http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...Grumpy-Wolverine-covers-up-a-UTAS-UTS-15-fail!

I would have expected more from these guys, but sales always rumps the truth apparently.
 
Great write up and super photos! Well done. I ordered one after reading your post. I have a KSG as well, and I'm anxious to do a comparison. Quick question about that rear cover... I'm assuming it's some form of press-fit (piece over piece) to keep it locked in place...I've seen issues with the cover popping open, and I'm wondering how tight that fit is?

Cheers,

M
 
Great write up and super photos! Well done. I ordered one after reading your post. I have a KSG as well, and I'm anxious to do a comparison. Quick question about that rear cover... I'm assuming it's some form of press-fit (piece over piece) to keep it locked in place...I've seen issues with the cover popping open, and I'm wondering how tight that fit is?
The rear cover is plastic and, as you surmised, snaps in place—there's no latch or anything. The fit seems snug enough, though, and other than GunNutz007's post above (and the now-infamous Grumpy Wolverine thread) I'd not heard of any issues with it.
 
I've shot approximately 240 shells through mine and I had the cover pop open a couple times. both times the mechanism that locks the barrel and magazines to the lower receiver seemed to come apart during vigorous shooting and I've had a total of 2 FTF and 2 FTE issues. I'm hoping to get out next week to fire off another 50-60 shells and see if it continues to happen. I'll keep you posted.
 
I too got mine just before Christmas and put 200 rounds through it already. I have had a few issues with it but overall I'm content with it. I too was closely reading reviews of the Gen 4 as I was hoping all issues had been addressed, but unfortunately this isn't the case. I've had two FTF and FTE issues in 200 rounds which might seem not bad, but it's still a problem. Also when pumping this gun with a positive motion to eliminate the FTE or FTF issues, my hatch on the buttstock has flung open on several occasions (5 or 6 times at least) There appears to be a design flaw in the mechanism that holds the barrel to the lower receiver with the hatch. I have been looking at this issue closely because I think it can be addressed with some minor modifications, but it's disappointing to still have these type of issues in a Gen4 gun. I was also disappointed in the review from Grumpy on the Gen4 as he clearly covers up the opening buttstock issue in his video. I made a post about it @ http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...Grumpy-Wolverine-covers-up-a-UTAS-UTS-15-fail!

I would have expected more from these guys, but sales always rumps the truth apparently.

These shotguns like any firearm require break in. I have put thousands of rounds through these shotguns of all generations. They will smooth up with some use. They do function better with certain types of ammo versus others, and realistically no firearm is 100% reliable all the time.

You seemed to have forgot to mention to the folks that I addressed the problem with the video but apparently people aren't entitled to mistakes and it is all a huge cover up. When the other thread calmed down you couldn't wait to get it going again I see. If you have a personal problem with me, contact me directly at grumpy@wolverinesupplies.com, I'd love to chat and see how I've wronged you.
 
I too got mine just before Christmas and put 200 rounds through it already. I have had a few issues with it but overall I'm content with it. I too was closely reading reviews of the Gen 4 as I was hoping all issues had been addressed, but unfortunately this isn't the case. I've had two FTF and FTE issues in 200 rounds which might seem not bad, but it's still a problem. Also when pumping this gun with a positive motion to eliminate the FTE or FTF issues, my hatch on the buttstock has flung open on several occasions (5 or 6 times at least) There appears to be a design flaw in the mechanism that holds the barrel to the lower receiver with the hatch. I have been looking at this issue closely because I think it can be addressed with some minor modifications, but it's disappointing to still have these type of issues in a Gen4 gun. I was also disappointed in the review from Grumpy on the Gen4 as he clearly covers up the opening buttstock issue in his video. I made a post about it @ http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...Grumpy-Wolverine-covers-up-a-UTAS-UTS-15-fail!

I would have expected more from these guys, but sales always rumps the truth apparently.
 
You seemed to have forgot to mention to the folks that I addressed the problem with the video but apparently people aren't entitled to mistakes and it is all a huge cover up. When the other thread calmed down you couldn't wait to get it going again I see. If you have a personal problem with me, contact me directly at grumpy@wolverinesupplies.com, I'd love to chat and see how I've wronged you.

Hey Grumpy, no personal issue... looking at the video again.. it's kind of hilarious! What was upsetting to me was the fact that the gun jammed and then it's "all good". The gun is fun and I don't regret the purchase, but it has room to improve some. I personally don't appreciate the hater videos that say it's all bad or the other videos that say it's all good, because reality is that the UTS-15 in the current Gen 4 model is pretty good and mostly problem free, but there are still minor issues that will continue to be addressed as more people like me buy them and provide honest feedback to UTAS.

Thanks for the explanation and we can laugh over coffee next time I come by the shop.
 
Wasn't there a UTAS UTS-15 "road trip" a while ago, where this shotgun exchanged hands with several members of the CGN community for individual, unbiased reviews?

I thought that sort of put to bed any qualms people might have with this product?
 
My UTS arrived on Thursday, and I got a few moments today to take a look at it and echo much of what Master-G has noted in this post. I will add that when I grabbed the box, it seemed significantly heavier than the specified 6.9 lbs... Either I didn't eat my Wheaties, or someone was a little embarrassed about their weight...yes you mister UTAS.... I put it on the scale, with the factory sights, and breacher choke tube and it was 8lbs 13oz.... I hate when people fib about their weight... Time to add some steroids to the Wheaties I guess...

Being overweight aside, the only other small annoyance is the ejection port dust cover that "rattles" like a pair of tin castanets when open... I see another small rare earth magnet being bonded to the takedown screw with some sugru in the very near future...

Aside from that, I really like this gun... seems very well engineered, and has the nicest manual I've ever seen come with a firearm. For $750 price range, I think it's money well spent.

Can't wait to get it out put some ammo through it.
 
The additional weight comes from all the metal parts that have been upgraded from the polymer since Gen 1. They have not revised the claimed weight and still use the Gen 1 published weight. The gearbox, and both magazines make up alot of the extra weight as well as the spring assist and other various parts.
 
I will add that when I grabbed the box, it seemed significantly heavier than the specified 6.9 lbs... Either I didn't eat my Wheaties, or someone was a little embarrassed about their weight...yes you mister UTAS.... I put it on the scale, with the factory sights, and breacher choke tube and it was 8lbs 13oz
So it wasn't just me. It seemed heavy to me too, but I didn't think to weigh it.

The additional weight comes from all the metal parts that have been upgraded from the polymer since Gen 1. They have not revised the claimed weight and still use the Gen 1 published weight. The gearbox, and both magazines make up a lot of the extra weight as well as the spring assist and other various parts.
Makes sense--thanks!
 
The additional weight comes from all the metal parts that have been upgraded from the polymer since Gen 1. They have not revised the claimed weight and still use the Gen 1 published weight. The gearbox, and both magazines make up alot of the extra weight as well as the spring assist and other various parts.

Was the barrel plastic as well in the gen 1... We're talking about two extra pounds of material...
 
No. the barrel would explode if it were plastic... the feed tubes for the magazines were polymer and had alot of open space in them. In fact, you could see alot of the shell through the top of the gun along the rails now you need to look at the small openings on the sides of the feed tubes.
 
Last edited:
No. the barrel would explode if it were plastic... the feed tubes for the magazines were polymer and had alot of open space in them. In fact, you could see alot of the shell through the top of the gun along the rails now you need to look at the small openings on the sides of the feed tubes.

I think your underestimating the inherent strength characteristics of modern polymer. Stronger than steel, lighter than aluminum and is extruded from plastic waste products such as the disposable water bottle. Heck, in 1993 John Malkovich built a plastic gun in the movie "in the line of fire". It worked perfectly without blowing up. I might add that the bullets were stored inside a rabbits foot for luck, which may have played a critical role in the reliability of the firearm. Sadly for Mr. Malkovich, his prototype never saw mass production as he got owned by former spaghetti western star, Clint Eastwood.

So in conclusion, polymer > steel, Superman = steel, Clint Eastwood > polymer, therefore Clint Eastwood > Superman

On a more serious note, I fired off a message to UTAS and asked them where in fact the added weight came from. Speculation be damned, I want facts... ;-)
 
I think your underestimating the inherent strength characteristics of modern polymer. Stronger than steel, lighter than aluminum and is extruded from plastic waste products such as the disposable water bottle. Heck, in 1993 John Malkovich built a plastic gun in the movie "in the line of fire". It worked perfectly without blowing up. I might add that the bullets were stored inside a rabbits foot for luck, which may have played a critical role in the reliability of the firearm. Sadly for Mr. Malkovich, his prototype never saw mass production as he got owned by former spaghetti western star, Clint Eastwood.

So in conclusion, polymer > steel, Superman = steel, Clint Eastwood > polymer, therefore Clint Eastwood > Superman

On a more serious note, I fired off a message to UTAS and asked them where in fact the added weight came from. Speculation be damned, I want facts... ;-)

You have my vote for post of the day :)
 
You have my vote for post of the day :)

Thank you kind sir...

With respect to the weight, UTAS advised it was due to the following changes;

The extra weight, other than the accessories that you have added comes from the new aluminum gearbox, redesigned barrel and action bar.

Hopefully the white stuff falling in Ottawa stops long enough for me to get to the range and put some shells through it...
 
Back
Top Bottom