Reliability Test IV: M&P 9mm

IM_Lugger said:
If a manufacturer has a consistent quality control of a mass produced product results should be very similar or same regardless of sample size.
Click to expand...

You weren't sitting beside me in my stats and production classes in business school were you?
 
Canuck44 said:
Perhaps but I am not aware that any of these tests are used when selecting a handgun by the military. Things like stoppage rates per thousand, parts inter changeability, the infamous drop test, ability to withstand heat and cold seem to dominate the testing along with the key selection criteria.....How much will the system cost and how many jobs will the purchase generate?

If they are not used by the military and have no relevance to the civilian environment...what value do they have? You are right though it is a measurement tool. Imluger is right as well when he indicates it will justify ones purchase if your gun passes and sets up howls of consternation if your pet blaster fails.

wayupnorth pretty much sums it up though in his recent post....

Take Care

Bob
Click to expand...

Any testing system is not 100% reliable and certainly the military tests are more appropriate than this test. The only real test is prolonged use of multiple firearms in the intended environment of use. The Ross worked great under controlled conditions but sucked in trench combat. The Russian military firearms typically sacrifice accuracy for ease of use and reliability. I would never put my Pardini or CZ TS though these sorts of tests as they are precision target guns. On the other hand a combat handgun should be able to take a fall into mud, sand or dirt and certainly the drop test as these are quite realistic things to have happen in a combat situation. I think it is OK if you can rack the slide and get it working again but the need for a detail strip in a combat handgun for these types of situations I would consider unacceptable. Any handgun design is going to be a compromise between a bunch of factors. In a combat handgun there is more emphasis on reliability under adverse conditions but it still has to be acceptably accurate. I think the one at a time tests as per this post are reasonable but the one after the other are over the top as the chances of that actually happening are negligible. I find these test kind of interesting in a warped kind of way but I would not use these test as a basis of decision on what to buy but I am actually quit impressed by how well most guns perform.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom