Anybody see the Crane MLok vs Keymod testing?

M

misanthropist

Scribe
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
43   0   0
Location
You can't stop here. This is bat country.
I didn't see this here yet - sorry if it's already come up.



http://soldiersystems.net/2017/05/05/details-on-the-ussocom-sponsored-keymod-vs-m-lok-test-conducted-at-nswc-crane/

Full briefing here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3k5QLIgMILLekg2Rll5U1FSdkE/view



Crane did a bit of testing for USSOCOM and...looks like that coffin is nailed shut once and for all. It's a pretty small test but it sounds like they're running with the results. Basic takeaways: Keymod breaks, has issues with POA.

Personally...I have stuck with Picatinny. But replacement rails will probably have some M-Lok if I ever have to replace anything.
 
Interesting stuff - you wouldn't have thought that 2 systems that appear quite similar would yield such different results - especially in the location of the damage suffered. I guess Colt Canada came to the right conclusion about a year ago.
 
The intestine thing is not so much about M-Lok vs K-mod, but 5/6 hand guards that use either M-Lok or K-mod all pretty much failed drop test. The slots either got ripped out or the hand guard itself actually craved in. Either type of damage will render the hand guard useless for mounting laser or light.

This goes on to show that you need some "meat" in the rail to resist failure in drop test. You can't cut too many holes through it and expect it to be as strong as a fully railed hand guard or handguards with no holes.
 
Really? I thought that the big takeaway wasn't that "lightweight rails are more prone to breakage" (partly because that's never really been a question, and partly because this study doesn't have any data on the performance of traditional pic rails) but that if you're going to choose a lightweight rail for whatever reason, there is a demonstrable advantage to one system over another and that is now backed up by quantifiable data.

For example, moving beyond "do they break", the average POA shift on one system was 1.3 MOA on removal and installation, and 4.9 MOA on another.

Or looking at the drop test, one system has lights falling off, and one has lights being pushed backwards a bit on the rail. That's the difference between "still usable" and "not usable".

One system has a failure load three times higher than the other.

I'm not sure how you can read this as anything but "one system vs another". I don't use either myself but there's a pretty clear difference between the options as identified by the testing at Crane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom