M1A Torture Test -- Sad

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

McKnife

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
168
Location
Texas
Just got done watching Guns & Ammo TV on the Outdoor Channel where they did a "torture test" on a brand new M1A from Springfield Armory. This 'torture test' was basically a 30ft. military crawl through some THICK & NASTY MUDDY water.

After the crawl:
1. Fired Once
2. FTF, cleared with rack.:confused:
3. Fired Once
4. FTF, trouble with chamber, eventually cleared.:eek:
5. FTF, gun will not operate. "This gun is done." -- too much gunky mud.:what::banghead:

Nonetheless, I was HIGHLY disappointed in the M1A's performance. Basically, my dreams of owning "the best battle rifle ever" got smashed. I don't think I would ever have to do that to one of my own, but I'm still sad.

I wonder what would have happened to an AR-15. Any AR-15 (M4) torture tests out there?
 
Couple of things come to mind:

1) Understand that the rifle Springfield Armory is selling is not an M14, the "best battle rifle ever".... it's a copy.

2) Who knows the condition of the rifle beforehand? Brand new out of the box? It might not even have functioned reliably BEFORE the mud. Not a very good test I'd think.
 
I wonder what would have happened to an AR-15. Any AR-15 (M4) torture tests out there?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, Probably the same thing.

Sad but I doubt & hope my M1A never has to go through that abuse. I wonder what would have happened if it were quickly washed with water from a canteen or plastic bottle?
 
From my understanding, it was brand new out-of-the-box... i assume they test fired a few rounds...

they sprayed a some CLP-like substance all over barrel and chamber before the crawl.


Certainly not a scientific test, but still interesting.
 
Yea doesn't springfield make match only M14's? They are not true to the original blue prints, or are they?
 
Just got done watching Guns & Ammo TV on the Outdoor Channel where they did a "torture test" on a brand new M1A from Springfield Armory. This 'torture test' was basically a 30ft. military crawl through some THICK & NASTY MUDDY water.
Click to expand...

:confused:

Are you sure it was an M1A? The test I saw a while back was the one where they chained it to the back of a jeep, drove about a half mile down a dirt road through the rocks and mud, hosed it down and punched the bore. That rifle then fired the rounds they had loaded in the magazine. There was no mud left on it and they had nothing but praise for it. Are you sure this wasn't the test they did on a Marlin?
 
No, I saw it and they specifically said it was an M1A. So, YES, it was an M1A and YES YES YES it was very sad. I think that the gun was defective though...
 
Yea doesn't springfield make match only M14's? They are not true to the original blue prints, or are they?
Click to expand...

They make rack grade and super match rifles . I had one that was ALL TRW parts but the rec. The one I have now has an 50's SAK .GOV barrel .

Look a little harder before you speak .


As for the test , any weapon will jam when dragged thru thick mud ......duh . Plus an M1A out of the box could use a little break in , as all weapons do . BEFORE you trust you're life on them .

KIDGLOCK


This is a Springfield Armory M14

M14pics010.gif

Yes a REAL FULL AUTO M14 .

M14pics002.gif
 
That segment is my least favorite parts of the show. Not only a waste, but that time could spent on something more worthwhile.
 
Nonetheless, I was HIGHLY disappointed in the M1A's performance. Basically, my dreams of owning "the best battle rifle ever" got smashed. I don't think I would ever have to do that to one of my own, but I'm still sad.
Click to expand...

What makes you think any rifle would have past that test? How a rifle performs after dragging it through thick mud would not be the deciding factor on how I would decide if it was a great battle rifle.
 
Nonetheless, I was HIGHLY disappointed in the M1A's performance. Basically, my dreams of owning "the best battle rifle ever" got smashed. I don't think I would ever have to do that to one of my own, but I'm still sad.
Click to expand...

More for me.

Torture tests are interesting, but I am not sure how important they are.

All companies put out a bad apple. My HK USP Tac has been a POS. What seperates SA from many companies is that they stand behind their products 100%, be they LE/Military, or privately owned.

I just got a SA M1A Standard Loaded, stainless/synthetic. While I haven't dragged it through the mud, I've ran about 300 rounds through it without problems and my initial impressions of the rifle are very favorable. It shows great attention to detail through and through, and in overall construction. It is a rifleman's rifle--well balanced, accurate, and ergonomic, it is easy to hit with, and mine has been, thus far, 100% reliable.
 
Just saw the segment, and yes, it was an M1A. If you noticed though, there was so much mud in the action that it wasn't going into battery fully. After the first couple of shots the chamber had so much mud in it that it wouldn't go into battery far enough to fire. The thing is, if he had rolled over and swished it around in the water a couple of feet away, it probably would have worked just fine. I can't think of another rifle that wouldn't have had the same problem, and some that would have simply blown up after the first shot.

Sad? Nah, just an extreme test with a NIB gun. At least they were honest and didn't try to cover up any problems. The first test they did where they dragged an M1A behind a jeep, they used a garden hose to wash off the mud before they fired it. Try either test with an AR. I wouldn't.

(I distinctly remember ambush drills jumping out of a deuce and a half with M-16's, and invariably one or two guys would eventually come up with the front half of an M-16 after breaking off the stock by hitting it on the ground. Now that's a torture test.)
 
not a valid test

again its not the items design flaw.
Any THR member worth his salt would first clean up
the action/splash some water, then wipe his face as he reacquires the target,
get in the proper shooting stance, sling, and squeeze off the shot.
What malf?:D se®iously!
 
Sounds like a useless test to me. Testing a single example of a rifle is not a very scientific test.

Without having several M1As to test, as well as other makes of rifles to test for comparison, their little experiment is nothing more than entertainment. We don't even know if the rifle worked properly right out of the box.
 
LOL...the apologists come out.


Look, no one needs to make excuses based on M1A vs. M14. The action and basic design is the same. There isn't some magic dimensional difference in the M14 that would make it work in that pure mud sludge on Shooting Gallery where the M1A failed miserably.


This is just a wake up call for people. Guns are not the super-duper ultra reliable weapons the Internet makes them out to be. If you get them dirty, they will fail.


I try to tell AK zealots that, but they want to believe they are buying 100% reliability. There's no such thing. I've seen plenty of AK's fail with a lot less mud and debris than the test on Shooting Gallery. Many of the internet "torture tests" of the AK show people throwing mud near the recoil spring, not near the bolt/carrier or breach face. Get sludge on the lugs or in the recesses and the bolt won't close. It's that simple. They have good clearance, but there's a limit to that.


Face it. When you get that much stuff in or near the action, you're asking for problems. Even the mighty M1 Garand had massive failures on the beaches of the Pacific. Saltwater and sand created huge problems for all American arms. ALL of them. It isn't the design, it's the environment. You can't completely seal a firearm. It has to have some sort of openings for ejection, levers and switches, trigger etc...


Morale of the story? Don't get your weapons that dirty. Nothing is 100% reliable.
 
C'mon. Of course it's not gonna fire. It's got mud in it's chamber. This is simple logic. No one here would try to fill a nut with concrete and screw a bolt into it. It wouldn't work. The same principle works here.

The Springfield M1A/M14 is based heavily on the U.S. Rifle M14, and there is no major design difference that would make a huge impact on the rifle's reliability in extreme conditions, as one poster pointed out.

The rifle tested was basically the rifle that was used in Vietnam. Vietnam was a jungle. Jungles have ponds and mud in them. I don't remember ever hearing about widespread problems with the M14/M14A1-M15 design in the jungles of South East Asia.

That was kind of an unfair test.
 
Guns are not the super-duper ultra reliable weapons the Internet makes them out to be. If you get them dirty, they will fail.
Click to expand...

PRECISELY! Please don’t think that my dreams of owning one have gone away…. Just smashed, lol. A little disappointed is all.

I guess I expected more out of it… I still think it's the greatest battle rifle ever.

The test was very stupid… like sacp81170a said earlier….if he gave it a little bit of water; it would have probably worked fine.
 
About 99% of the tests done by that Guns & Ammo torture test are stupid.

Of course its only an M1a. Nothing special.
 
Those torture test segments on Guns and Ammo TV are in my opinion worthless.
I watched as the played baseball with a Ruger 22/45 and that was stupid as all get out. I see no real test in these segments and I agree that time could be spent better elsewhere.
The Springfield M1A rifle is a fine firearm that functions reliability when reality is applied.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Redlg155
  • Locked
Worse gun torture test you have ever done?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
3K
AK_Maine_iac
A
Cosmose
  • Locked
Ever done your own torture testing???
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
JeepDriver
J
S
  • Locked
Another AK torture test....sort of
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
okiewita40
O
S
  • Locked
Kel-Tec 223 CA SU 16
Replies
1
Views
488
Oleg Volk
O
M
  • Locked
What's everyones opinion on this test ?
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
briansmithwins
B
Back
Top