daniel defense torture test


PDA






sarduy
August 31, 2011, 07:43 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89HEefl1KI4


to be honest, i think it's fake, the torture test was too staged, plus too many errors :neener:

the first thing that give them away was

1.the dirt test... with the dust cover closed...

2. water test... they drop it in the water "with a camara" attached to the rifle and when they pull it out there is no camara, plus stall a long time to drain all the water out...

birdshots at 25 yards... came on , shot a slug or 00buck

drop test... from a 30 feet and heli into grass....? came on you can do it better than that.... plus they cut the scene in every test.

plus... at the time of the explotion there was no rifle in the steel target just a sling

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/9789/83606948.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/823/83606948.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us/)

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/5319/dd2p.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/855/dd2p.png/)


drop test.... the rifle have a camara attached to the right side of the forearm

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/2938/dd3v.png

but when he pick it up the camara is gone....

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/2492/dd4.png

same happen with the heli drop test.

the rifle have a camara...

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/8656/dd5u.png

then when he pick it up the camara is gone again....
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/7323/dd6q.png

If you enjoyed reading about "daniel defense torture test" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
DoubleTapDrew
August 31, 2011, 07:45 PM
Maybe. But I wouldn't tell Larry that to his face. He'll kill ya 5 times before ya hit the ground :)

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 07:48 PM
Maybe. But I wouldn't tell Larry that to his face. He'll kill ya 5 times before ya hit the ground :)
that's why he disable the comments on youtube, so people cant tell him lol....

klcmschlesinger
August 31, 2011, 07:49 PM
Not sure and don't really care. My rifles won't ever go through that so makes no difference to me. But fun to watch.

kwelz
August 31, 2011, 08:10 PM
Considering I know people involved in this I can tell you it is real.
Also if you watch TacTV they show a longer version without the cuts that explains more.

to be honest, i think it's fake, the torture test was too staged, plus too many errors

the first thing that give them away was

1.the dirt test... with the dust cover closed...

If you listen to Larry he even tells you that they only did that because if they didn't then people would complain.

2. water test... they drop it in the water "with a camara" attached to the rifle and when they pull it out there is no camara, plus stall a long time to drain all the water out...

They took the camera off most times before it was shot. And it would be flat out irresponsible to shoot any weapon with water in the barrel.

birdshots at 25 yards... came on , shot a slug or 00buck

This was to simulate shrapnel from explosions in combat. In fact that was really the entire point of these tests to simulate combat situations.

drop test... from a 30 feet and heli into grass....? came on you can do it better than that.... plus they cut the scene in every test.

Actually there were 2 drops from the Heli. The 1st one they didn't track the gun with the camera and had to reshoot. And I am sorry. These show a LOT. Dirt and grass are not that soft when you hit them at velocity

plus... at the time of the explotion there was no rifle in the steel target just a sling

Errr. What? The image is washed out due to the explosion but if you look carefully at the photo you posted you can see ever so slightly where part of the gun are in front of the pole. Also from the way the sling hangs you can tell there is a gun on it.



Not sure what your agenda is but I take issue with you essentially calling someone of his standing a Liar. Especially when your evidence is as sketchy as it is.


ETA: Maye you just really are wondering. However you are doing yourself a disservice by not watching the full test on TacTV. It will actually show a lot of what you are asking about.

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 09:59 PM
Not sure what your agenda is but I take issue with you essentially calling someone of his standing a Liar. Especially when your evidence is as sketchy as it is.


ETA: Maye you just really are wondering. However you are doing yourself a disservice by not watching the full test on TacTV. It will actually show a lot of what you are asking about.

i dont have an agenda, and i dont care how standing a person is, when they post "fake stuff" that make them liers in my eyes those test were all fake, the only one that seems true is the "birdshots". in my eyes those are fake and i have done my fair amount of video/film editing/shooting in high school and college years so i know how those scene cut works.

ETA: it is a good video, and the shooting (scenes) angels are great, with good camara and slow speed added.... but the content is fake. just like a movie.

TonyAngel
August 31, 2011, 10:01 PM
What I don't get is why the OP finds the torture test so hard to believe. The AR15 is a battle rifle and Daniel Defense is one of the better brands out there.

kwelz
August 31, 2011, 10:02 PM
You are claiming it is fake stuff but have offered no proof of it. And no the stills you offered are not proof.

What I don't get is why the OP finds the torture test so hard to believe. The AR15 is a battle rifle and Daniel Defense is one of the better brands out there.

Because once people get something stuck in their head they have trouble letting go. That isn't a jab at the OP it is just human nature. Something convinced him that this was fake and he is stretching to try to show it.

Zerodefect
August 31, 2011, 10:10 PM
It's a start. The real testing starts with comps and classes. Word will get out that they're good stuff, if they are. So far every DD product I own is excellent. I'm especially liking my DD Lite 14" rail.

But what do I know I'm just a copier repair man that loves to watch Spongebob Squarepants.

kwelz
August 31, 2011, 10:13 PM
Hahaha

it's a start. The real testing starts with comps and classes. Word will get out that they're good stuff, if they are. So far every dd product i own is excellent. I'm especially liking my dd lite 14" rail.

they have been holding up really well locally. I did the math on mine last weekend and i am at about 6000 rounds with no cleaning or pm. About little over half of that has been suppressed. Other have been run much harder. But you are correct. The true test is how they hold up over time in classes, etc.

but what do i know i'm just a copier repair man that loves to watch spongebob squarepants.

best line ever. I was amused at all the crying over that line. Sad that dd decided to edit it. And it was printer repair man. Not copier. :p

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 10:17 PM
kwelz, do me a favor and take a closer look at this.

when they buried the rifle they wanted "to get as much dirt inside the gun and action as possible ,yet the dust cover was closed, and they place it facing down. dirt will not go up, the action is sealed from dust/dirt and the muzzle is taped...

does that look like a dirt test do you? not to me....

BENBRU
August 31, 2011, 10:19 PM
Larry Vickers posts over on M4C... he has stated that things were shot twice to remove cameras...

Larry Vickers is a guy that has lived off of his reputation. He has been nothing but honest throughout his career with everything he has done... He has expressed his discontent with products time after time... he is known in the industry a the guy you send your product to in order to see if it actually holds its metal. You think he wuld fake a video for DD?

Granted they could have found harder tests for the rifle that would have made it fail... but honestly I don't think I ever put an issued weapon through what he put that DD and aimpoint through.

That video strikes me as an advertisement for aimpoint as well as DD

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 10:21 PM
i know DD are great weapons... the part that bothers me is the way they edited the video to make it look from a great weapon to a super weapon.....

rbernie
August 31, 2011, 10:22 PM
when they post "fake stuff" that make them liers in my eyes Just a piece of advice - it's not particularly High Road to call somebody a liar based solely upon your impressions of a cut video.

Complain about the video all you want, but let's not drop our standards to a level not suitable for THR.

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 10:24 PM
That video strikes me as an advertisement for aimpoint as well as DD

that is my point, it's just advertisement... no real test done.... but they make sure it "look" like the ultimate test.

kwelz
August 31, 2011, 10:26 PM
that is my point, it's just advertisement... no real test done.... but they make sure it "look" like the ultimate test.


And our point is that you are wrong. So you are not happy with how they did the dirt test? Ok great. it was still run over multiple times, shot, dropped from multiple heights and had an explosive go off just a few feet from it. What do you want them to do? Take a sledge hammer to it?

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 10:29 PM
Just a piece of advice - it's not particularly High Road to call somebody a liar based solely upon your impressions of a cut video.

Complain about the video all you want, but let's not drop our standards to a level not suitable for THR.
so... how i'm suppose to call by "THR" standard a person who ad. a product based on fake facts...?

kwelz
August 31, 2011, 10:37 PM
:banghead:

^ that smiley is the only way to adequately describe what I am feeling.

You claim it is fake but when presented the facts you choose to ignore them. There was 1 gun run through all of this. It survived. It still worked. Although the rail now presses against the barrel and has thrown off Zero by a bit.

They actually had a second carbine on hand in case they needed it for the later tests. (and yes they would have told people they were switching) However they never needed to switch.

The Carbine survived the following.

Dirt Nap (even Larry said this was a gimmie test)
Submersion into swampy dirty water and then fired without cleaning. (Yes they allowed it to drain. Nobody is stupid enough to do otherwise)
Being shot with a shotgun to replicate shrapnel from a nearby IED going off.
Being ran over by a Truck at slow speed
Being ran over by a truck at high speed
Being dropped off the back of a moving jeep and then ran over by another truck
Having a large explosive go off next to it.
Being dropped from 40 Feet.
Being dropped from a helicopter at Fast rope height not once but twice.

By anyone's standards that is pretty impressive for a single weapon. But you call it a fake because you don't like the way the video was put together.

This was not about testing a weapon to failure. It was about testing it in conditions seen by Troops every day in combat.

Dirt? Check.
Water? Check
Shrapnel and other debris? Check
Drops, bangs, impacts and pressure? Check
Being blown the heck up? Check.

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 10:37 PM
And our point is that you are wrong. So you are not happy with how they did the dirt test? Ok great. it was still run over multiple times, shot, dropped from multiple heights and had an explosive go off just a few feet from it. What do you want them to do? Take a sledge hammer to it?

run over multiple times? have you hear about "multiple "camara angles"?

drop from height? 6' 30' into grass and heli (wich you never saw it hit the ground and picked up in ONE single cut....

and explosive go off next to it? i have watch that scene many times and i have yet to see a rifle in that post, all i see is a sling without a rifle.

and no i dont want a sledge hammer, all i want is... dirt in the action (not cover it) droped from a heli and the explsion "with a visible rifle" all in once scene without cuts...

kwelz
August 31, 2011, 10:42 PM
Annnnnd again.

run over multiple times? have you hear about "multiple "camara angles"?

Yes I have. However if you watch the actual Tac TV episode they show each individual one.

drop from height? 6' 30' into grass and heli (wich you never saw it hit the ground and picked up in ONE single cut....

So because you don't see one cut it must be fake? Once again have you watched the full episode?

and explosive go off next to it? i have watch that scene many times and i have yet to see a rifle in that post, all i see is a sling without a rifle.

Glasses maybe?

and no i dont want a sledge hammer, all i want is... dirt in the action (not cover it) droped from a heli and the explsion "with a visible rifle" all in once scene without cuts...

sarduy
August 31, 2011, 10:52 PM
klews do you own a DD rifle? :rolleyes: that explain....



BTW this alone convinced me to buy a DD rifle :neener:

Dirt Nap (even Larry said this was a gimmie test)
Submersion into swampy dirty water and then fired without cleaning. (Yes they allowed it to drain. Nobody is stupid enough to do otherwise)
Being shot with a shotgun to replicate shrapnel from a nearby IED going off.
Being ran over by a Truck at slow speed
Being ran over by a truck at high speed
Being dropped off the back of a moving jeep and then ran over by another truck
Having a large explosive go off next to it.
Being dropped from 40 Feet.
Being dropped from a helicopter at Fast rope height not once but twice.
Dirt? Check.
Water? Check
Shrapnel and other debris? Check
Drops, bangs, impacts and pressure? Check
Being blown the heck up? Check.

JoeMal
August 31, 2011, 10:53 PM
and explosive go off next to it? i have watch that scene many times and i have yet to see a rifle in that post, all i see is a sling without a rifle.If you start the video at 6:59 (yes, 6:59, not 7:00) you will hear him finish yelling 'hot' and the explosion starts. You will see a complete rifle hanging from the post when the explosion goes off and I assume destroys the camera.

And before you comment about it destroying the camera but not the media, it's definitely possible. I've managed to end up with multiple jump drives/flash drives in the laundry in my life and they all work just fine. I certainly wouldn't expect my digital camera to still work though sending it through the rinse cycle. Sure, apples to oranges, washing something versus blowing it up aren't the same thing, but the ideas are the same.

I certainly think the video is real but I'm going to happily step out of your disagreement with kewlz. Have a good night.

Axel Larson
August 31, 2011, 11:02 PM
The video is made to make the weapon look good and the aimpoint as well. Of course it is. I would say it is real but a little hard to believe. The one problem I had was towards the end after he dropped it from the heli, he cleaned out the barrel with the magazine still in the gun and without safety checking it.

FlyinBryan
August 31, 2011, 11:18 PM
i wouldnt (dont) put much stock in the video. i see it as an advertisement, and nothing more.

i will say it reminded me of the hk video that so many people voiced their opinions about.

EDIT: i put quite a bit more stock in what i hear from people about items that they have bought, not items they are selling, but thats just me.

briansmithwins
September 1, 2011, 12:02 AM
I was much more impressed by the Aimpoint Micro surviving all that. That's one tough little unit.

BSW

HammerheadSSN663
September 1, 2011, 12:19 AM
its a BFD test if you ask me. I expect ANY halfway decent AR to pass that test.

kwelz
September 1, 2011, 01:41 AM
So much wrong with that post.
The initial part of the explosion was nothing but a generated red screen followed by a black screen.
No it isn't Looks just like every other camera I have ever seen getting popped.

The post it hung on was right beside the gun neither of which moved at all despite a massive explosion. There is no hole in the ground despite a massive explosion.

Actually the post it was hung on fell over. That is what ended up breaking the Aimpoint.
Tannerite usually doesn't leave a hole. This stuff is pretty much the same just under a different name. There is also no reason it would destroy a sling. This wasn't a fiery explosion.

It was also put on the post just so it didn't go flying.


It amazes me the conclusions that people can come up with and then deny reality instead of seeing they are wrong.

12131
September 1, 2011, 01:59 AM
Calling DD liars with no proof just makes you look like a fool.

OTOH, blindly accepting this DD "Torture Test" as real objective testing just makes you look like a Kool-Aid drinker.

What do you really expect? This is a video put out by a company "torturing" their own rifle to "prove" how tough it is. Do you honestly think they are going to show a video of their rifle with failures? Same thing with HK and the video of their 416 rifle going against the Colt M4. Real objective testing. Not!
When someone unattached to any of said companies does independent testing on these different brand rifles, and if DD comes out ahead, then I'll be impressed.

sarduy
September 1, 2011, 02:35 AM
i wasn't going to try to reason with anyone alse because eveyone have teir own believes but JEF56 was 100% right

Zerodefect
September 1, 2011, 02:50 AM
The gun may be tough as nails but that video is staged to make it look tougher than it might be. For one thing the majority of the bird shot didn't even hit the gun. Bird shot at 25 yards from that shotgun is not only going to spread a lot but the shotgun was aimed above the gun causing even less bird shot to hit the gun. You can see from the close up that not many pellets hit the gun. And bird shot loses a lot of it's power at that distance as well. Bird shot is made for shooting birds, not metal. That test proves almost nothing.

That plus the fact they talked about getting as much dirt in the gun as possible then having the end of the barrel taped off is definitely misleading.

Then there was the explosion video. The initial part of the explosion was nothing but a generated red screen followed by a black screen. I know something about editing video. Why did they cut away from the long range shot to add in the red and black video?

[Blah blah edit shorter and stuff.]

Top Gear trio it was underpowered, unreliable garbage. That kind of advertisement (negative) might promote their show but it did great damage to the image of what might have become a sensational new technology. The point it that videos get slanted all the time. And this DD video is a perfect example.
Back on topic. A DPMS could probally pass these tests as well. These tests aren't advertisements to educated and smart rifle shoppers. They're there to build an audience. Even if it makes them seem silly, it'll sell rifles.

Look at the little novice things we bicker about. 9mm vs .45, 5.7x28mm, AK vs AR..... All DD is trying to do is get novices to take notice. That's not a true scientific torture test. Just some fun way to gather attention to what probally is a darn good rifle anyways. Just trying to rile us up, and that's an ok, if odd marketing idea.

I'd probally tape the barrel as well. Blowing my fingers off isn't really a productive torture test.

We allready know DD is good stuff. And any real shooter knows that dropping your rifle in a mud puddle deosn't prove much.

sarduy
September 1, 2011, 03:04 AM
All DD is trying to do is get novices to take notice. That's not a true scientific torture test

exactly! lets the novice who dont know better, spend 1500 in a rifle when another rifle can do the same.... the novice will be likethis when their $1500 jams with some sand INSIDE THE ACTION (like theyall do)

... but but but... i saw it on youtube they buried...

sarduy
September 1, 2011, 03:05 AM
this is a bad ad. and total misrepresentation.

Luchtaine
September 1, 2011, 03:20 AM
Since I don't have a job right now I have an Idea... send me one of everyone's favorite AR 20,000 rounds for each and I'll replicate the test and do my own as well! Well... I'll have to use my roof instead of a helicopter.

12131
September 1, 2011, 03:21 AM
^^^ I nominate Luchtaine to be the independent torture tester of all the ARs out there.:evil:

Luchtaine
September 1, 2011, 03:24 AM
I humbly accept. I don't have any good video editing equipment either I'll do it all in one take haha. Heck I'll even do what Browning did for the 1911 6,000 continuous rounds and a bucket of water to keep it from melting :).

ugaarguy
September 1, 2011, 04:18 AM
exactly! lets the novice who dont know better, spend 1500 in a rifle when another rifle can do the same....
I paid less than $1200 for my DDM4V1. Not bad at considering it has a DD Omega-x 12 FSP railed forearm, DD A1.5 rear sight, DD VFG, Ergo pistol grip, and MOE stock all factory installed.

I have family in LE in S. Ga who've toured DD's facility, and have nothing but good to say about the people there. If you read Mr. Vicker's explanation on the thread over on M4C it answers most, if not all, of your concerns. I also have no reason to doubt the folks at DD, nor LAV. You're entitled to your opinion.

ugaarguy
September 1, 2011, 07:57 AM
i dont have an agenda, and i dont care how standing a person is, when they post "fake stuff" that make them liers in my eyes those test were all fake,
Sarduy, you've just publicly called a retired US Army Master Sergeant, with 20 plus years of service, 15 years in Delta Force, a liar. I don't know Larry Vickers personally. There are probably a few members of this forum who do, and I'm interested to see what they say if they respond to this thread. I did, however, spend four years in the US Air Force (including two TDYs to Iraq that were both just days short of being short tours). Your accusations are nothing more than unsubstantiated speculation. You're out of line.

Derek Zeanah
September 1, 2011, 09:29 AM
I've toured the production facilities at Daniel Defense and have spent a brief amount of time with the owner and the head of production. I was impressed enough to say this: my next AR will be a Daniel Defense. To the best of my knowledge they're great people who do their best to make sure every rifle they ship is solid.

With that said, you're looking at a marketing piece. Treat it as such.

ForumSurfer
September 1, 2011, 09:56 AM
drop test... from a 30 feet and heli into grass....? came on you can do it better than that.... plus they cut the scene in every test.

Actually there were 2 drops from the Heli. The 1st one they didn't track the gun with the camera and had to reshoot. And I am sorry. These show a LOT. Dirt and grass are not that soft when you hit them at velocity

I'd like to add that I broke my right femur (the strongest bone in the human body for those keeping score) from a similar impact into that oh so soft dirt and grass combo. I also had something similar to road rash on my shoulder (tried to tuck and roll). I'm just saying that 30 feet is a pretty good impact, regardless of what you land on...particularly for a weapon made of aluminum and steel.

TonyAngel
September 1, 2011, 12:55 PM
The video was just an advertisement and the point was that DD makes a good rifle. I think that they get the point across pretty well too. In this day and age when there are tons of different ARs to choose from, most of which cost less, they have to distinguish themselves from others.

Many, as evidenced by many posts here, feel that they got something just as good after having paid a lot less. Personally, I believe that, more often than not, you get what you pay for. I really don't care that the dust cover was closed or that the shape charge was pointed up. The fact remains that the rifle was immersed in dirt and then blown up and it still worked. It was also dropped out of a helicopter and continued to run.

Heck, as a comparison, there was a guy that posted here not too long ago about his AR giving him trouble. It turned out that his buffer tube was bent as a result of his room mate dropping the rifle as he was taking it out of the cabinet.

The main point that I got out of the video is that not all ARs are created equally, and I tend to agree.

Axel Larson
September 1, 2011, 12:59 PM
SO am I the only one who has a problem with the fact that he cleaned out a barrel without removing the magazine and doing a safety check. Like someone said this video pointed at novice shooters, I do not want them seeing that as an example. Also they did not have a backstop for some of the shooting, I know I am being picky here but still. Otherwise the video is just like a few others have said a marketing video it is designed to make their product look good like every other company does.

Aiko492
September 1, 2011, 11:04 PM
The video IS a marketing video. Vickers is a legit guy with a reputation that stands pretty tall. Same for DD, their quality is tops. They are the first ones to run a test of this type, as extreme and show it on TV-why not give them the credit.

I do agree with calling Vickers and DD liars is BS.

Adam123
September 1, 2011, 11:24 PM
I do agree with calling Vickers and DD liars is BS.

If they are intentionally misrepresenting their product, that's exactly what they are... regardless of years served in any branch of the military. That said, I don't care either way. I've never heard of DD until I saw this thread.

FlyinBryan
September 2, 2011, 01:30 AM
its just an advertisement.

i reserve the right to decide if i believe it or not, and if that makes anyone cry "omg flyinbryan called him a liar" (why does that remind me of grade school? LOL)

,,,,,, then so be it.

p.s.,,, my next course of action in this dispute will be to grab someone by the wrist, make them hit themselves about the face and neck, and start frantically requesting that they "stop hitting yourself!! stop hitting yourself!!

sarduy
September 2, 2011, 03:28 AM
lmfao... you guys make me laugh so hard....

i'm ok with a company doing some kind of propaganda but i wonder if DD still honor the warranty after i do those test :evil: sand in the action, swimming in a salt water lake, blow something next to it and drop it from a 20 story building...

browneu
September 2, 2011, 10:38 AM
Larry Vickers posts on m4carbine.com. I think a Rep from DD also posts there.

Why not post a thread over there so Mr Vickers or DD can respond to your accusations.

Better yet send Mr Vickers a pm and let him reply to you directly.

That would be more productive than talking about it here.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk

Chindo18Z
September 2, 2011, 12:52 PM
The video may seem a little over the top, but the scenarios are actually representative of what a field weapon might have to endure across a wide variety of missions and environments.

Weapons having to survive impact with the ground or hard objects are a fact of life. When executing HAFs (with likely shoot down or crash landing) or other dynamic ops (building climbing, obstacle breaches, parachute landing falls, boat movement/recovery, vehicular dismounts, etc.), carbines have to take hard knocks. This despite slings; when you get blown off the top of a roof or assault laddered wall, you tend to get hurled with the weapon and then land on top of it.

The weapon would have worked even had the explosive charge consisted of C-4 or Comp B. Without direct charge contact, a high brisance explosive (C-4) would not cut the suspended weapon (or even launch it into the sky). The small quantity of low order Tannerite used wouldn't launch the weapon either (unless it were placed directly under the weapon, in contact, and using the weapon's mass for tamping)

Had anyone actually employed a bona fide shaped charge (with appropriate standoff), a platter charge, or an EFP in that video...no weapon would survive...not even an M2 .50 HMG. But that wasn't the point.

The charge footage was included for visual marketing effect, but was representative of the kind of exposure an assaulter could run into from nearby detonation of a frag, banger, or breaching charge. Very common occurrences in today's combat environments.

Is the video edited for presentation? Yes. Is it a little over the top? Sure.
Will the weapon actually survive such abuse? Damn straight.
It's called marketing. You were watching an advertisement. Get over it.

Daniel Defense makes solid gear used by solid folks for real fights. Period.

I'd carry one of their Aimpoint mounted carbines into combat without a second's hesitation.

browneu
September 2, 2011, 01:14 PM
Why should we want to confront the guy?

My point is the OP should ask Mr Vickers himself if he has that.Mich disdain for the video. That way Mr Vickers can defend himself.

By the way I have the utmost respect for him too.

Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk

browneu
September 2, 2011, 02:40 PM
Its just me but if I would rather tell someone how I felt to them directly if given the chance. There were terms used like liar in this thread which denotes a strong emotional response. My grandfather always told me to call someone that to there face or don't say it at all.



Sent from my LG-P999 using Tapatalk

kwelz
September 2, 2011, 02:43 PM
For someone who claims to understand explosives you know very little about them. Different explosives have different properties. Tannerite and southern thunder are low pressure slow explosives. They look flashy but lack the punch os something like TNT or military explosives.

If anyone had bothered to watch the Tac Tv episodes with this in it like I had suggested they would see where they brought in the pople who created this stuff and blew up a very large quanity of it. Guess what! No crater.

I am amazed at the armchair commandoes and engineers on this thread. You claim it is fake and offer shakey and downright wrong evidence. When told you should go directly to the source people claim that they Sontag want to confront the guy. Well if you are going to call someone a liar then have the brass ones to do it to their face.

Right now this thread is nothing but a bunch of people who don't like the way a video is cut claiming it is fake. Guess what, I have talked to people who were there. While they chose angles and shots that best showed to the camera, the rifle still survived everything they threw at it. Would another AR? I don't know. No other company has done this yet. Once they do then we will know.

This is what is wrong wit h THR recently. People are allowed to get away with BS like this. They can claim anything and don't have to back it up. That isn't how the world works. Some people's statements simply are worth more than others because they have the backing of experience. And experience doesnt mean playing with M80s as a kid.

Mike1234567
September 2, 2011, 03:16 PM
This thread is fake. In fact, my post in this thread is fake. I ought to know because I typed it on a fake keyboard connected to a fake computer and sent it over a fake LAN through a fake ISP and to this fake forum. Anyone viewing this post is a fake. You FAKERS!!:evil::D

kwelz
September 2, 2011, 03:20 PM
This thread is fake. In fact, my post in this thread is fake. I ought to know because I typed it on a fake keyboard connected to a fake computer and sent it over a fake LAN through a fake ISP and to this fake forum. Anyone viewing this post is a fake. You FAKERS!!

Best post ever!

Chindo18Z
September 2, 2011, 03:23 PM
I'm no explosives expert...

No. You're not.

On the other hand, I've employed explosives professionally for over 35 years.

Dissimilar explosives & charge configurations deliver wildly different performance with regard to detonation velocity, effect on target, visual hallmarks, and blast wave.

M80s are not dynamite or even TNT. They are simply fireworks. If you understood explosives, you'd understand why your trash can launched and that rifle didn't.

That was a low order blast from a small charge of Tannerite, detonated in the open air. Visually impressive, but not especially powerful.

I am certainly not going to start something with Vickers over it.

Then don't bother posting about it.

Aiko492
September 2, 2011, 04:04 PM
Because we would put him in a position to have to defend something that isn't defensible IMO. I'm no explosives expert but I've seen enough to know that an explosion that large would blow things back if it hadn't been for the fact that the explosion went almost entirely straight up and had very little explosion affect to the sides. My knowledge of explosives comes from M-80's as a kid (quarter stick of dynamite) and other explosions I've seen over the years including one about the same size as that explosion that was inside a dog food processing plant (a small place designed just to process meat to send to the factory). There were animal parts spread in every direction for 50 yards or more and I'm talking large animal parts like half a pony here, a big chunk of a cow there, etc.. I have photos of that somewhere. I've seen the results of very large explosions too that were directed at dirt because they occured underground. It was a pipeline explosion in fact and it blew boulders the size of cars for half a mile. It blew out a hole 30 foot wide and 30 foot deep (essentially the area that was dug up to bury the pipeline) up the entire side of a hill (about a quarter mile long) and shot debris for miles in some cases. The flash was seen 125 miles away. Explosions can be VERY powerful. That explosion in the video was powerful. I'll point out one other explosion I saw just for reference. It was at a dance with a live band playing. They liked to end their show with a small pyrotechnic event. They had pots where they loaded flash powder which was loud, bright but not particularly powerful in other ways. But on this particular night one band member loaded the pots and then another band member loaded the pots. The explosion came as the drummer was doing a drum solo at the end of the last song they played. The rest of the band had left the stage already. It's a good thing too. The drummer was blown backwards about 8 feet into a wall and his drum kit and half the mic stands on the stage were blown out onto the dance floor. That's a very good representation of how an explosion can react IMO and just for the record that could well have been me on that stage since I was the drummer for that band for a while. And that was a MUCH smaller explosion than the one in the video. Something was very, very fishy about that rifle laying that close to the explosion site with the post lying right beside it. You might notice that the base of that stand/post was mangled/knocked loose from the post. Yet the gun which wasn't attached except by a sling was lying right beside the post. The sling was also broke in two which would require a substantial amount of pressure exerted on the post and rifle in different directions. If the explosion was strong enough to break that sling it was certainly strong enough to separate the rifle from the post it hung on (by the sling).

None of that makes any sense. I have seen enough of explosions to know how they react. A contained quarter stick of dynamite explosion can launch a trash can a long way for example and that explosion in the video was far more than a quarter stick of dynamite.

I don't doubt the quality of the rifle btw. It might well do quite well under severe conditions. But I've seen other gun tests that far exceeded the level of that gun test. I saw a Sig P220 with an explosion roughly equivalent to a hand grenade placed directly under that pistol. It launched that pistol a long way into the air and it survived. There were no cut away shots in that video either. I certainly don't doubt the ability of that gun to survive abuse. I saw a Toyota truck fall from the top of an 18 story (I think it was) building that had been demolished and the truck drove away from that spot even though the frame was broke in half. Steel is not something that is easily destroyed. But that big of an explosion should have done a lot more to that gun and post than just knock it over. But it didn't.

I don't care that they did this. I am certainly not going to start something with Vickers over it. I've done far worse at an earlier time in my life even though I wouldn't do it now. If he can make a living testing products more power to him. I just don't believe everything I see especially when there are glaring examples of things a person would do if they were intentionally rigging a test. It's like NBC putting a flare in the back of that pickup so it would burn on impact. This stuff happens a lot and if a guy who gave his country as much service as Vickers did wants to cash in a little on that experience I'm not going to confront him about it. He's earned the right IMO. Yes in a perfect world things wouldn't happen that way but this is far from a perfect world. Almost every job on earth requires you to sacrifice your integrity at least a little. It's the lesser of two evils thing again. You either let your family starve or you do what it takes because that's not as bad.
This is the best and funniest post in this thread. A non-expert in explosives with experience with firecrackers calling BS on Special Ops guy.

kwelz
September 2, 2011, 04:24 PM
If you can't back up your claims and get called out on it then that isn't a personal attack. You know video? Great. Post your credential. Because the DO matter. I could claim to know nuclear physics. That doesn't make it true.

FlyinBryan
September 2, 2011, 06:27 PM
this is honestly a more impressive test. this is ten thousand rounds from a dpms rifle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHNvUPjIOzY

it is more applicable practically speaking, for instance:

1. if i have my rifle in my hands, and a bomb explodes 10ft from my face, i probably dont need a rifle anymore.

2. if i fall out of a perfectly good helicopter, i should not be trusted to have a rifle in the first place. (and probably wont need one anymore)

3. in usmc basic training in s.d., if you let your rifle be run over by a vehicle you will probably be toting a pink super soaker for the next 6 weeks

etc, etc, etc.

the 10,000 round torture test is truly impressive though. no cleaning, no cooling, no ceasefires, just bang bang bang bang bang ten thousand times.

kwelz
September 2, 2011, 06:35 PM
They fired about 25 actual rounds on video. And what the hell did they shoot that video with.

And he even admits that it malfed. But claimed it wasn't a "real" malfunction because it was dirty.

FlyinBryan
September 2, 2011, 06:45 PM
lol, ya, but they couldnt film the whole 10000 rounds as it probably took 24 hrs to do all 10000. (you can tell because it was daylight when he started, and then it got dark, and then it was daylight again when he finished.

it didnt stop because it was dirty, just because it dried up, so he sprayed lube in it and kept it running that way.

i dont own a dpms, nor have i ever, just saw it out beside the dd test and clicked it.

afponiky
September 2, 2011, 07:06 PM
Haa Haa Haa,,,,,, your all funny!


Now where is my popcorn?

Gregaw
September 2, 2011, 11:22 PM
It was a little over the top, but looked fine to me. I agree that it makes me want an AimPoint more than a DD though.

hipoint
September 3, 2011, 12:55 AM
I wasn't there, so I don't know. The only people who know were the people who were there, and most of them have some sort of stake in the outcome of that. One thing's for sure though, it sure isn't an AK-47 ;-)

That said I personally believe the video, because none of that stuff they did really seemed that harsh, I'd do any of it to my 10/22 and still expect it to function (aside from a possible broken plastic stock). Almost any well made gun can survive quite a bit I put my poor babies through all kinds of heck. However if the point is to find the "toughest" firearm, well, I don't think anyone can argue the Ak takes it hand's down.

Looks like a nice weapon though, and if I weren't poor I'd like to have one. Anyone want to start a charity of "help the poor hipoint owning hillbilly"? :D

dbro822
September 4, 2011, 05:41 PM
All that being said, it was a interesting test to watch, real or faked. I own a DD and it has proved to be nothing but great. If you have seen any other tests from other makers the same commets can be said for them, they all are trying to sell you something.

HammerheadSSN663
September 5, 2011, 01:19 AM
The 'test' is stupid. I expect ANY AR-15 to pass that test.

1. how many people have ever dropped a gun from 30 feet on the grass?
2. get shot by birdshot and your gun is the last of your worries
3. explosion???...see #2
4. who drags their gun through the mud like that?

Show me a torture test that fires 15000 rounds non stop. That is a torture test.

The stuff in this ad is just plain silly.

Aiko492
September 5, 2011, 01:29 AM
The 'test' is stupid. I expect ANY AR-15 to pass that test.

1. how many people have ever dropped a gun from 30 feet on the grass?
2. get shot by birdshot and your gun is the last of your worries
3. explosion???...see #2
4. who drags their gun through the mud like that?

Show me a torture test that fires 15000 rounds non stop. That is a torture test.

The stuff in this ad is just plain silly.
I would be curious to get feedback from members with multiple combat tours how silly or out of realism the scenarios may be. Maybe other forums that cater more to active military would be a better place to post the question.

ugaarguy
September 5, 2011, 01:59 AM
I would be curious to get feedback from members with multiple combat tours how silly or out of realism the scenarios may be. Maybe other forums that cater more to active military would be a better place to post the question.
See post #51 by Chindo18Z. He's been vetted by the THR mods as an actual US Army MOS 18Z (http://www.us-army-info.com/pages/mos/special/18z.html). He probably has a combat tour a three ;) .

sixty7chevy
September 5, 2011, 09:56 AM
Sarduy... dude. It obviously endured in that test a lot more than any rifle will in its lifetime. Looks pretty darn tough to me. You sound like a teenage girl arguing about what he said she said, give it a rest, I can't believe this thread is on THR.

Zerodefect
September 5, 2011, 10:54 AM
If they are intentionally misrepresenting their product, that's exactly what they are... regardless of years served in any branch of the military. That said, I don't care either way. I've never heard of DD until I saw this thread.

Vickers and DD are the real deal. If they say it's good to go. it usually is. Did anyone expect a decent AR to fail any of these tests?

As for the tape on the barrel. It's standard operating procedure to wrap your flash hider with electrical tape sticky side out to keep barrel obstructions out when treking through the woods. Or if you leave your Ar in a truck, boat, tool bag etc. I wrap my AR's flashhider with tape after I clean it so that when it's in my Larue range bag nothing will roll into the barrel and blow my fingers off in the first stage of comp or class. If I have a chance I'll pull the carrier and eyeball the bore, but that would have screwed up this test video.

While torture tests are a bit silly. The DD rifles are good stuff. And Vickers is a credible source. (At least a whole lot more credible than the Spongebob and My Little Pony watching noobs in this thread :neener:)

C-grunt
September 5, 2011, 12:31 PM
The 'test' is stupid. I expect ANY AR-15 to pass that test.

1. how many people have ever dropped a gun from 30 feet on the grass?
2. get shot by birdshot and your gun is the last of your worries
3. explosion???...see #2
4. who drags their gun through the mud like that?

Show me a torture test that fires 15000 rounds non stop. That is a torture test.

The stuff in this ad is just plain silly.
Az someone with a couple tours in Iraq I gotta say when an IED goes off next go you, how your rifle performs after is VERY important. As for falling, I have fallen down a hillside when the ground gave way along a river and had a friend fall through the second floor of an Iraqi house. I've also been hit by fine shrapnel when my buddy shot a door with his M203.

So as a man who has been through combat, I'd say these tests can replicate real world experiences.

Aiko492
September 5, 2011, 01:00 PM
Az someone with a couple tours in Iraq I gotta say when an IED goes off next go you, how your rifle performs after is VERY important. As for falling, I have fallen down a hillside when the ground gave way along a river and had a friend fall through the second floor of an Iraqi house. I've also been hit by fine shrapnel when my buddy shot a door with his M203.

So as a man who has been through combat, I'd say these tests can replicate real world experiences.
Thanks for your service. While designed to sell rifles, the point of the DD test is to simulate the situations you and countless others experience(d) in combat and prove their rifles were up to task. Thanks for replying.

Mike1234567
September 5, 2011, 01:15 PM
Not to impugn the testers nor the test itself but I've seen videos of Hi-Point pistols that took FAR worse beatings than those "visually impressive" tests.:)

If you enjoyed reading about "daniel defense torture test" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!