VP9 Torture Test: Fail
- Thread starter DMR
- Start date
Well then I guess the risk of your gun jamming due to volcanic sand getting in it is pretty slim. Unless the gun laws are more lenient in Polynesia.
HK with hammer = flawless. Always.
HK with no hammer = potential problems. P7s and VPs have proven that.
About the same goes for FN models (besides the 5.7, which they seemed to get right with a mix of striker/hammer)
HK with no hammer = potential problems. P7s and VPs have proven that.
About the same goes for FN models (besides the 5.7, which they seemed to get right with a mix of striker/hammer)
I am kinda surprised it did so poorly.
After deer season is over I may go out to the farm and beat up on my G19 a little and see how it does. Might be fun,
After deer season is over I may go out to the farm and beat up on my G19 a little and see how it does. Might be fun,
Kind of hard to break a gun that looks like this:
Attachments
I'm honestly very surprised it did that badly. But it sort of confirms my feeling that the VP9 is way over engineered. I sold my VP9 for two reasons. 1) the slide stop lever was poorly positioned for my normal hand placement, resulting in frequent failures to lock. And 2) it was too large to carry, relegating it to range toy status.
With that being said, I didn't think the trigger was anywhere near as good as people claimed, especially compared to the PPQs I had owned or my M&Ps with Apex kits.
With that being said, I didn't think the trigger was anywhere near as good as people claimed, especially compared to the PPQs I had owned or my M&Ps with Apex kits.
How is being over engineered a bad thing?that us ally means it is way over built and can handle anything.
To me this shows that they didn't quite do enough testing...
Regardless though it is rather troubling. My m&p core has me thinking some crazy thoughts.
I don't think he meant it in the sense of making a bridge that will carry a higher maximum load than will ever be on it. I think he was thinking about things like the red indicator on the back that serve no purpose.
I was referring to the complexity and number of small parts used in the gun. Complete disassembly is a serious undertaking, almost impossible for most owners. All that complexity, to achieve the same results as a Glock or M&P? That's the definition of over engineered to me. In this case, the number of moving parts in the fire control appear to be a contributing factor to the early failures during the test.
Like ditching 45 and joinig the rest of the normal people?
In the punk rawk world we call that selling out.
Jeezuz, are you the guy I saw with the "monster" logo on his arm? I wanted to punch that guy in the cunt.
