CFET BCL Siberian 4000 Round Final Report

MistyMountainSupply said:
Why would we want people who haven't purchased from us to leave a review?
Click to expand...

Example: An interested party comes to your store or inquires about a product.

scenario1 : you treat him like ####, he/she doesn't buy and leaves you a one star on google

scenario2: you show him the products and explain everything nicely, even though he/she hasn't bought yet, they leave you a 5 star

I'd say it shows in your postings on here that you don't like those situations. You want to be in control.
 
fritzhanzel said:
Example: An interested party comes to your store or inquires about a product.

scenario1 : you treat him like ####, he/she doesn't buy and leaves you a one star on google

scenario2: you show him the products and explain everything nicely, even though he/she hasn't bought yet, they leave you a 5 star

I'd say it shows in your postings on here that you don't like those situations. You want to be in control.
Click to expand...

I hate to burst your bubble but we don't have a retail location, so its limited to paying customers so it doesn't fill with spam or people who don't like what we say on Gunnutz ;)
 
I mean if you want to see the invoices of every magazine I've purchased, DM me on Instagram. I'll see what I can find in my inbox ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But I don't see how this is super relevant or obtainable info since every reviewer used their own personally obtained magazine.
 
]
Suther said:
While I certainly think that is a factor, you could remove all Canadian manufactured guns and you'd still be in the same place - the guns under $2000 do not have good reputations for reliability (I'm thinking Keltec RDB and SU16 specifically, as well as Norinco T97... Can't think of much else in the sub-$2k range that is an NR 556 semi auto but isn't Canadian Made). Jump up to $2500-3000 and the options really start to open up though.
Click to expand...

What is your personal experience with a T97? I've never owned one but my friend does and although I felt it was not very refined, it would churn right through almost anything. For bullpups I'll still pick a Tavor but the T97 was reliable.

As well, what is your personal experience with the RDB and SU16? I have limited experience with those firearms but I've shot them. Interested to know how you came to these conclusions?

These sorts of tests (mud, dirt, etc) are not exactly a new idea in the gun world... Obviously there is going to be some possible damage caused, but its not like hunting or competitions are done in nice clean dust-free, dirt-free environment.
Click to expand...

Most mud/dirt tests I see are unrealistic. If you are hunting and you got your rifle that messy you would stop and clean it up. I don't know of any competition that requires you to jam dirt or mud into your rifle and then go compete. I've never been in combat but I know dirt, dust and mud can cause problems but nobody in combat is intentionally ramming dirt or pouring shovels of mud into their rifle. And a BCL isn't a military rifle anyway.

Mud and dirt tests are kind of fun, but that's it. Anyone basing their hunting/sporting rifle selection based on the reliability of a rifle to operate after it was intentionally covered in mud is simply foolish.
 
Last edited:
MistyMountainSupply said:
If I'm reading it all correctly, I think people are just pointing out that these malfunctions were NOT counted in the tally and that the gun was cleaned afterwards. So you see a handful of rounds fired in those conditions. That should NOT cause the damage seen in the gun due to likely the heat treating process which there are known issues with on some components. You are seemingly purposefully avoiding the context to drive a false narrative, maybe I am reading you wrong but it does seem like you're ignoring everything around the "dirt test" which is not even a part of the CFET report.
Click to expand...

As pointed out by "MrMeatShower", all my posts in this thread refer to the other video.
 
beltfed said:
I watched the video, did you?
He was packing the action with soil and then immediately fired the rifle repeatedly until he experienced stoppages.
Fine granules of soil and sand are an abrasive, and that much debris introduced into the action would undoubtedly cause a stoppage or worse on any rifle.
In fact, it could introduce a a situation where it could be cause for an out of battery detonation.
He may well be a 'machinist of many years and knows what he is talking about' but he is, in my experience and from what I saw in that video, an idiot none the same.

This nonsense of 'coping' is an infantile retort to a valid observation.
If you think I'm 'coping' as you put it you can review my past comments on BCL / NEA products on this website and see that I'm no fan of their product or quality control.
Click to expand...

I don't think the fellow there is an idiot at all, he raised some valid concerns and I guess he wanted to see what the rifle would do when intentionally covered in dirt, so he did that and found out. Frankly, the rifle didn't do too bad after the first packing of dirt.

I also think your comments that the dirt may have contributed to the wear on the bolt are equally valid. As I mentioned in a previous post- when I "test" something I test it the way I intend to use it. I really cannot see a situation where I would ever jam pack a rifle with dirt and shoot it so any "test" of that nature is pointless to me.
 
fritzhanzel said:
That says a lot.

I have no beef in this since I sold my Siberian. I would like copies of the communication between BCL and you, Post pictures or it never happened.

The mountain supply guys should focus on his business instead of arguing with potential customers.

When do we see his first EE feedback?
Click to expand...

Hi Fritz

We're not going to post invoices/receipts for more than 10 people's magazine purchases. Especially not when no one keeps that sort of thing to hand unless they happened to buy them online. Using what people have is an accurate reflection of what will happen with these guns in the wild so a mix of new and used is representative.

Many shooters will already have magazines or will buy 2nd hand. The test used a wide variety of magazines and had an individual or particular brand of magazine solely been the issue we would have avoided it. Which is exactly what we did in the WK181 test. The difference is the WK181 is stated by KD to only work with PMAGs and actually did work with them. Nkte: we still highlighted how we tried a wide variety of others and their failure. The Siberian states no limitation and didn't really work with any magazine reliably.

Now on to TSE/SAI and others providing ammo. I think it's absolutely fair to question it, which is exactly why we were 100% transparent with it upfront.

Ultimately it's ammo, so it's hyper unlikely that anyone had time to interfer with it and from everything we saw all boxes were brand new. The backlash from us finding something sneeky would be hugely negative for them.

There's nothing stopping another producer/retailer from contributing towards the testing of an R18 MK2, Raven, etc etc. and if there were a negative intent others could jump on that bandwagen very quickly.

I can only say that from my experience the manufacturers do want each other to do well because politically and realitywise they're all struggling and they're all in this together.
 
From reviewing the report:
The rifle did not function well with any of the several makes of magazines used in testing.
No make of magazine gave anything approaching an acceptable level of function.
This is an enormous design/manufacturing failure. It is obviously a problem that must be addressed if the design is to have any hope of success.
Many/most? of the failures documented are obviously magazine related.
There does not seem to be analysis of the causes of the various failures - just reports that they happened. OK, there are problems. Are there solutions? Why do so many makes of magazines not work in this rifle? Were all magazines known to be 100% reliable in other rifles?
Why were there so many light strikes? Bolt carrier not fully home? Magazine drag? Rebound?
 
Gatehouse said:
]

What is your personal experience with a T97? I've never owned one but my friend does and although I felt it was not very refined, it would churn right through almost anything. For bullpups I'll still pick a Tavor but the T97 was reliable.

As well, what is your personal experience with the RDB and SU16? I have limited experience with those firearms but I've shot them. Interested to know how you came to these conclusions?



Most mud/dirt tests I see are unrealistic. If you are hunting and you got your rifle that messy you would stop and clean it up. I don't know of any competition that requires you to jam dirt or mud into your rifle and then go compete. I've never been in combat but I know dirt, dust and mud can cause problems but nobody in combat is intentionally ramming dirt or pouring shovels of mud into their rifle. And a BCL isn't a military rifle anyway.

Mud and dirt tests are kind of fun, but that's it. Anyone basing their hunting/sporting rifle selection based on the reliability of a rifle to operate after it was intentionally covered in mud is simply foolish.
Click to expand...

Do you know what a reputation is?

I agree that a mud test is a poor test to base your rifle selection on, it's a novelty.
 
Last edited:
Suther said:
Correct. I never claimed I did. Does your experience with the su16 invalidate the reports of broken receivers or terrible accuracy? Nope.
Click to expand...

I’ve owned 5 su 16s over the last decade and accuracy was on par with pretty much anything currently available in Canada , with a couple of exceptions.
Last time I heard or read of a broken receiver was about 10 years ago.

They will outrun any Canadian made 1&0 , But! They hit every branch on the ugly tree
 
CFET said:
Hi Fritz

We're not going to post invoices/receipts for more than 10 people's magazine purchases. Especially not when no one keeps that sort of thing to hand unless they happened to buy them online. Using what people have is an accurate reflection of what will happen with these guns in the wild so a mix of new and used is representative.

Many shooters will already have magazines or will buy 2nd hand. The test used a wide variety of magazines and had an individual or particular brand of magazine solely been the issue we would have avoided it. Which is exactly what we did in the WK181 test. The difference is the WK181 is stated by KD to only work with PMAGs and actually did work with them. Nkte: we still highlighted how we tried a wide variety of others and their failure. The Siberian states no limitation and didn't really work with any magazine reliably.

Now on to TSE/SAI and others providing ammo. I think it's absolutely fair to question it, which is exactly why we were 100% transparent with it upfront.

Ultimately it's ammo, so it's hyper unlikely that anyone had time to interfer with it and from everything we saw all boxes were brand new. The backlash from us finding something sneeky would be hugely negative for them.

There's nothing stopping another producer/retailer from contributing towards the testing of an R18 MK2, Raven, etc etc. and if there were a negative intent others could jump on that bandwagen very quickly.

I can only say that from my experience the manufacturers do want each other to do well because politically and realitywise they're all struggling and they're all in this together.
Click to expand...

So I think the issue there would be that since the manufacturer and associated dealer of a competing platform made a significant donation, people would be concerned that you as testers would be compelled to portray the tested firearm in a negative light to appease the people that donated to you.
 
I’ll put this out there. Wanstalls donated 700 rounds of IMI 5.56 M855 for my portion of the test. And some of the testers brought their own ammo (Federal American Eagle, Aguila .223) to the 1k round mag dump test. None of the ammo used in my portion of the test was provided by “competing” retailers or manufacturers, and we experienced the same amount and types of failures that the other testers had.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what would happen to SA sterling or a cz if you dropped a couple handfuls of dirt in a mag dumped it? Twice? Lol
 
Suther said:
Correct. I never claimed I did. Does your experience with the su16 invalidate the reports of broken receivers or terrible accuracy? Nope.
Click to expand...

Your experience is zero. You came to those conclusions with zero experience. Before you praise or disparage anything, try to get some first hand experience with it. We can wait...
 
Last edited:
It's a shame to see another 180 variant bite the dust, and so hard this time.

I WANT to like NEA/BCL stuff, but I've heard very little good things about the quality of their products, so I've never bought one. I'll wait for a 'Gen 2' but I'm not holding my breath.

So far it seems like a WK 180/181 Gen 2 with some upgrades is more ideal, and even Lockhart is starting to look good as it's not a 180 variant, lol.
 
beltfed said:
I watched the video, did you?
He was packing the action with soil and then immediately fired the rifle repeatedly until he experienced stoppages.
Fine granules of soil and sand are an abrasive, and that much debris introduced into the action would undoubtedly cause a stoppage or worse on any rifle.
In fact, it could introduce a a situation where it could be cause for an out of battery detonation.
He may well be a 'machinist of many years and knows what he is talking about' but he is, in my experience and from what I saw in that video, an idiot none the same.

This nonsense of 'coping' is an infantile retort to a valid observation.
If you think I'm 'coping' as you put it you can review my past comments on BCL / NEA products on this website and see that I'm no fan of their product or quality control.
Click to expand...

I saw the video too and it is of no surprise the rifle malfunctioned as it did. At 10.40 Hoser stated that what he is conducting is not a realistic test right after fist slamming mud in the ejection port. Did this also contribute to the bolt face issues? Maybe. But without before and after pics it is hard to say. I think some CGNers may recall a similar independent test was done to XCR-L years ago (loose dirt, bucket of mud and water) and the rifle produced similar malfunctions with mud. So no surprise there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom