[Newton]

I'm a sucker for over-pressure tests as I have always thought them to be the ultimate arbiter in arguments about the general build quality of a gun, and this DSA FAL sounds like a tank, take a look, what a gun.

http://www.dsarms.com/pressure_test.cfm

[hillbilly]

Another FAL torture test of a sort......

Not for the weak of stomach..........


http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=68486&highlight=Ol+dirty

[JShirley]

Holy cow. Wouldn't want to do that to MY baby...BUT SHE COULD!

[C.R.Sam]

The system well served many countries for many years.
Not hard to understand why.

Sam

[wardog]

I was a big fan of the HK 91, but chose a FAL instead.
I looked at several kinds, but decided I wanted the best. (and would pay dearly for it.)

I got a DSA SA-58 Medium Contour.

I love it. Shoots very nice. Very well made.

[Steve Smith]

DSA may have their hearts in the right place, but they must not have a single scientist or engineer on the grounds.

[Kurt]

Here's a quote from the DSA release.

"The Ware Simulation Group at Rock Island Arsenal (The real U.S. Government Rock Island) was contracted to make hi-speed video tapes of one of the current production rifles being blown up. The Ware Simulation Group at Rock Island Arsenal does weapons testing of various types."

They probably have a few "technical types" around.

[Steve Smith]

Ok, so why didn't they use any strain gauges, and why did they start with a destructive load and only one sample? :confused:

A proper test would have used closer to 20 receivers and incremental pressure increases, documented with strain gauges.

Sounds like they just used the Rock Island photographic crew.


Kurt, I'm not being critical of DSA's guns, just their "testing" procedure.

[Obiwan]

The type of test generally depends on what you want to learn

I don't think they wanted to document exactly when their receivers fail

I think they merely wanted to show that you could do "this" and not blow up the receiver. Sort of like a one time proof load.

Now...if the receiver had failed they probably would have been more interested in spending their money on figuring out the how and why.

They did more than I would be inclined to do simply because some bozo blew up his/her weapon.

[Kurt]

Thanks Steve, testing equipment aside for a moment, what they held in their hands afterward - the parts - said some powerful real-world stuff.

[Steve Smith]

The problem is that the FAL dust cover doesn't take much to let go. That thing alone could kill you.

That might suggest that the screw-on dust cover/scope mounts have some safety merit?

[SodaPop]

That might suggest that the screw-on dust cover/scope mounts have some safety merit?


I personally think so.

I had a Chilean round blow out my mag and got specs of brass on my face (wearing shooting glasses) but the scope mount still held in place. The 20rd mag was blown apart and I had to bend a few things to get it back together again.

[Kurt]

I wonder if there'd be other circumstances when a screwed on cover/mount would just serve to allow more pressure to build up before it cracks.....and then lets go. They're usually alloy I believe. The standard cover is superb for its purpose, but it shouldn't take too much of a mishap to cause it to pop off. Still a missile though!

As a comparison, I can't help but think about that much posted about M1A ka-boom a while back. Stunning pictures! That thing REALLY let go - with injuries to boot!

[Steve Smith]

One of the guys I shoot HP with (and incidentally the 2003 Civilian Service Rifle National Champ) still has part of an M1A extractor in his scalp.

[Kurt]

Steve, I'm always on the lookout for any new "chick-magnets", but I believe I'll pass on that one - OUCH!!!!!!!

:)