General GunTuber thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
ILikeForwardAssists said:
Edit: Video explaining the FA as well as a link to the test document directly below
Click to expand...
You know, this paired with the weight comparison(posted here) really does dismantle the "WWSD" concept to me. You don't save weight, you have to compensate transporting with the A1 stock length/your loose takedown pins, you limit your parts compatibility, you remove function for remedial action - and with the point about the forward assist being accused of being potentially destructive, not that I wish it upon anyone, I also wonder what would happen to the KP lower during a catastrophic failure.
 
WhoBusTank69 said:
and with the point about the forward assist being accused of being potentially destructive,
Click to expand...
I'll be completely honest in saying that I think it would probably take an incredibly strong person to hold that rifle against the barricade hard enough to prevent the FA popping it forward a bit, especially if you weren't aware that you were doing it. That's my biggest reason for disbelieving that story.
 
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
I'll be completely honest in saying that I think it would probably take an incredibly strong person to hold that rifle against the barricade hard enough to prevent the FA popping it forward a bit, especially if you weren't aware that you were doing it. That's my biggest reason for disbelieving that story.
Click to expand...
The amount of confirmation bias needed to accept that sort of claim is astounding. Sure, you can hunker down and accidentally press in on the FA while taking a shot, but to resist the pressure that instead pops open your gun? That is gargantuan strength even with parts wear considered.
Even though MAC is a massive gay, he did do a test on it that I found admirable even at the time.
ETA: there's testimony in the pinned comment that the FA breaks in such an event done by hand, so there's some seriously questionable shit about grenading a rifle with the push of a button.
 
WhoBusTank69 said:
The amount of confirmation bias needed to accept that sort of claim is astounding. Sure, you can hunker down and accidentally press in on the FA while taking a shot, but to resist the pressure that instead pops open your gun? That is gargantuan strength even with parts wear considered.
Even though MAC is a massive gay, he did do a test on it that I found admirable even at the time.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1oUi2YRRtYwETA: there's testimony in the pinned comment that the FA breaks in such an event done by hand, so there's some seriously questionable shit about grenading a rifle with the push of a button.
Click to expand...
I never liked MAC's stuff and so I was unaware that someone had actually done a test on this. Thanks for posting it since it saves me doing it to my beater rifle.
 
WhoBusTank69 said:
The amount of confirmation bias needed to accept that sort of claim is astounding. Sure, you can hunker down and accidentally press in on the FA while taking a shot, but to resist the pressure that instead pops open your gun? That is gargantuan strength even with parts wear considered.
Even though MAC is a massive gay, he did do a test on it that I found admirable even at the time.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1oUi2YRRtYwETA: there's testimony in the pinned comment that the FA breaks in such an event done by hand, so there's some seriously questionable shit about grenading a rifle with the push of a button.
Click to expand...
I think the more amazing thing is Ian taking that claim at face value when he was doing that video with Karl a while back. For a guy trying to make himself into a firearms historian, taking in hearsay without being skeptical and looking into yourself is pretty damning.

I’m glad I never bought Ian’s books given his penchant for cognitive dissonance.
 
ellroy said:
I think the more amazing thing is Ian taking that claim at face value when he was doing that video with Karl a while back. For a guy trying to make himself into a firearms historian, taking in hearsay without being skeptical and looking into yourself is pretty damning.
Click to expand...
Well there's even the argument about Stoner being forced to add a forward assist when his only input was suggesting a physical charging handle, and so much more.
Pointing to the Air Force for adopting it and refusing the forward assist when the other branches wanted it, not knowing the Air Force also wanted their ammunition yesterday resulting in shit performance in the hands of grunts tomorrow(and blaming it on "bean counters"), misattributing this and that to they and whomever all while marketing a product that represents those claims like a late-night infomercial stating matter-of-factly that, yes, you are washing your cat wrong and here's just the thing to solve that.
 
Considering the first linked got bungled with, I'm gonna go on a bet that something might be changed again. So I'm dumping the PDF test here. I've tried to get the Ichord hearings downloaded, bu no fucking way am I going to do 1 page at a time, and I'm mobile fagging currently.

Just having this here for posterity sake. This is the testing done to show the Forward assist actually works.

I want to have a custom AR built with Forward Assists on both sides of the rifle.
 

Attachments

HelpingNoone said:
I wonder how well received a non polymer 6 lb WWSD build with pencil barrel, CF handguard, and FA would go over on the inRange subreddit?
Click to expand...

The hivemind would do whatever to stop you ruining their operator speed 2-gun dream. They have the knowledge, they have the skills. They will find you...
But mom needs to drop them off first.

Legit, I wouldn't be so adverse to the idea of a Polymer lower if the whole "Wuh-ate Reduction" shtick was dropped and the lowers be seen as a cheaper alternative to aluminum receiver, thing is... The plastic stripped lowers are even MORE expensive than an entry-tier aluminum lower, even with the added cost of buying a stock and pistol grip.

Also, who was the one who ordained the rifle to have carbonfiber handguards, a pencil barrel and whatnot? Karl? Ian?
 
ILikeForwardAssists said:
The hivemind would do whatever to stop you ruining their operator speed 2-gun dream. They have the knowledge, they have the skills. They will find you...
But mom needs to drop them off first.

Legit, I wouldn't be so adverse to the idea of a Polymer lower if the whole "Wuh-ate Reduction" shtick was dropped and the lowers be seen as a cheaper alternative to aluminum receiver, thing is... The plastic stripped lowers are even MORE expensive than an entry-tier aluminum lower, even with the added cost of buying a stock and pistol grip.

Also, who was the one who ordained the rifle to have carbonfiber handguards, a pencil barrel and whatnot? Karl? Ian?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the full loadout comes from the 2-gun zeitgeist. Racegun weight saving strategies are codified into whatever the operator version of fuddlore is called.
 
ILikeForwardAssists said:
I forgot to ask this on my diatribe, but what is the hate for on PSA ARs and PSAKs to begin with? I just see @White Devil wig the fuck out anytime someones mentions those supposedly accursed letters.

From my experience they're not that bad. I will admit, me and my father built our PSA AR-15 lower from the parts kit they sold, and bought the upper from them. So we did not buy a complete rifle, but around almost 10 years later, that rifle runs just fine after the 1000s of rounds we passed through it.
So is it an issue of just factory workers being niggers? and not building the complete guns right?

If it is an issue, does this issue extend to the PSAK as well? From what I can tell from complaints here are that the main issue is the front trunnion sucks dick and fitment is shit. Fair enough, as my experience is limited with PSAKs with only a few mags shot out of one a friend lended to me to try. The only two AKs I own are a WASR-10 and Pre-Obama import ban AMD-65.
Click to expand...

Can't speak to the AK bit because I'm not interested in them, but I love PSA's ARs, especially pre-2020. You could get a fully functional rifle, or the parts for one, for less than $400, and splurge a little more for extras if you really wanted. Put it together, beat the shit out of it. It's a great gun to learn shit on, and you won't be worried that you're going to break anything expensive. Hang a bunch of bullshit off it to test any attachment you want.

Then get Aero parts or Daniel Defense when you have more money and know what you're doing. You'll still have the PSA to teach people on. Great investment.
 
The Man With No Name said:
Can't speak to the AK bit because I'm not interested in them, but I love PSA's ARs, especially pre-2020. You could get a fully functional rifle, or the parts for one, for less than $400, and splurge a little more for extras if you really wanted. Put it together, beat the shit out of it. It's a great gun to learn shit on, and you won't be worried that you're going to break anything expensive. Hang a bunch of bullshit off it to test any attachment you want.

Then get Aero parts or Daniel Defense when you have more money and know what you're doing. You'll still have the PSA to teach people on. Great investment.
Click to expand...

An overwhelming majority of people aren't going to be putting enough rounds through their ARs or taking them in such poor environments to need the autistic levels of quality you're going to get out of buying a Daniel Defense or '____ high-end brand' AR15. Most people are going to go out to the range every few months or so, dump a few hundred rounds, and then go back home. The rifle will then live in their closet or gun safe. Same thing with optics. Unless this is a duty weapon that's getting banged around all the time, a Holosun will likely be just fine for you. You really don't need an Aimpoint or Trijicon.

Buy whatever you want, but it reminds me of bootheads who go out and spend $500+ on a pair of boots from Nicks or wherever, get it custom-made to their foot, and then proceed to only wear them to Wal-Mart and their office job.
 
WhoBusTank69 said:
The amount of confirmation bias needed to accept that sort of claim is astounding. Sure, you can hunker down and accidentally press in on the FA while taking a shot, but to resist the pressure that instead pops open your gun? That is gargantuan strength even with parts wear considered.
Even though MAC is a massive gay, he did do a test on it that I found admirable even at the time.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1oUi2YRRtYwETA: there's testimony in the pinned comment that the FA breaks in such an event done by hand, so there's some seriously questionable shit about grenading a rifle with the push of a button.
Click to expand...
"The forward assist sucks because it won't let me chamber a spent cartridge case and jam the gun up"
Amazing MAC. Such wow, much tactical
 
WhoBusTank69 said:
Well there's even the argument about Stoner being forced to add a forward assist when his only input was suggesting a physical charging handle, and so much more.
Pointing to the Air Force for adopting it and refusing the forward assist when the other branches wanted it, not knowing the Air Force also wanted their ammunition yesterday resulting in shit performance in the hands of grunts tomorrow(and blaming it on "bean counters"), misattributing this and that to they and whomever all while marketing a product that represents those claims like a late-night infomercial stating matter-of-factly that, yes, you are washing your cat wrong and here's just the thing to solve that.
Click to expand...
I really, REALLY, hate to invoke Godwin's Law here, but a lot of the rhetoric surrounding the early M16 and the forward assist honestly reminds me of wehraboos quoting German generals and scientist's post war biographies.
"I invented the Blitzkrieg! I was an amazing battlefield commander who always conducted myself with grace and dignity and I followed my orders! My men loved me and I was a consistent tactical genius! The only reason the Russians beat me was because they'd throw so many bodies at us we'd run out of bullets! Surely it isn't MY fault we lost, it's all because of HITLER!" -Heinz Guderian (paraphrased)
Click to expand...
 
I don't think the video by MAC (he does jokingly call it redneck science) or the TECOM test entirely settles it. The TECOM people used some type of tape and a "spring-loaded battery connecting clip". Four times with the tape, one time with the clip. Or maybe four times with the tape, one of them paired with the clip? They interchangeably used the words trial and occasion. There's a lot of variables missing like the barrier itself, condition of the weapon, forces imparted by the user, etc. I think Karl got the story from P&S ModCast 100 - Gun Nerds 5: AR15 Theory

Go to 12:25:


WWSD: Aero Upper


Myth Testing: Will holding the forward assist on an AR15 blow it up?


TECOM 1963 Forward Assist Test Report.png
 
Last edited:
You know what might be useful is knowing the actual force that pushes against the bcg on cycling since that would tell you how much force you would have to resist to manually hold the bolt closed with the forward assist.
 
This guy claims that Ian McCollum copyright struck him, for his response to his and Vickers Rhodesian FAL videos.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom