Watched this video at lunch today.  This is one of the channels that I watch regularly. 

While the gun content in this particular video was of interest due to my interest in the P320, the "sometimes we're our own worst enemy" part in the end about the NRA as well as those to choose to nitpick or play know-it-all on these types of videos also was along that line of thinking.  Yeah, online forums are really helpful to learn, especially for newbies.  That's how I learned a lot about firearms, particularly ARs. However, online forums are also prime breeding grounds for know-it-alls who just want to find fault in anything and everything they see.  Then there are the curmudgeons who while many times are quite knowledgeable, tend to turn off many folks with their approach. 

There's a LOT of valuable knowledge and experience here, those who still post. 

Anyways, here's the video.  And if this were to happen to my personal gun, I would say cosmetic and keep on shooting.  Though 1000 rounds in 13 minutes?  Dayum. 

Of course any polymer gun would melt at high temp. In a realistic situation u can't be able to fire 1000 rounds all at once in  13 minutes in a gunfight lol impossible. That was an inappropriate test just to bash on sigs p320. IMPO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of course any polymer gun would melt at high temp. In a realistic situation u can't be able to fire 1000 rounds all at once in  13 minutes in a gunfight lol impossible. That was an inappropriate test just to bash on sigs p320. IMPO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Haha.  Yeah, not a realistic situation except for doing it to answer "what if". 

I actually didn't watch the original test video yet, but while he definitely has his preferences, he's usually pretty fair when it comes to evaluating guns.  At least seems to me. 

I shot over 1,000 rounds in 5 days with my P320.

No damage, no stoppages, no problems at all.  I didn't clean it between each day for fear of causing problems and to test the gun's reliability.  It was my first time shooting my P320.

The only damage was to my hand -- the very last day, taking the NV CCW test, somehow I was bitten by the slide as I loaded my last mag for the course.  Good timing!   

Most I've done for handgun is about 600-700 over 4 days, but that was a two day pistol and then two day rifle.  I've shot my ARs to the point where they where the handguards were uncomfortable without gloves, but nothing really in danger of melting there.  I've seen videos where the Magpul handguard started burning up, but that's pretty extreme.  Kind of like this video. 

Now AKs on the otherhand.  I've shot my AK to the point where it was uncomfortable to handle without gloves and that was just maybe 100 rounds in like 20 minutes.  Was thinking something was wrong with the heat shields on my AK, but someone with the exact same gun said the same thing.  100 rounds in 20 minutes is pretty easy to do in a class setting let alone something like an open shoot. 

Kind of like the concept of what InRangeTV does in the mud tests. Find any possible failure points in the gun in a case when it does fail and in this case, trial by high volume of fire.
I wouldn't call any torture test "useless" even if it's bizarre as shooting 1000 rounds in a very short time frame because information is information, especially if it's putting a piece of equipment in extremely high stress so we can see it's max durability.

Kind of like the concept of what InRangeTV does in the mud tests. Find any possible failure points in the gun in a case when it does fail and in this case, trial by high volume of fire.
I wouldn't call any torture test "useless" even if it's bizarre as shooting 1000 rounds in a very short time frame because information is information, especially if it's putting a piece of equipment in extremely high stress so we can see it's max durability.

I think if they could fire repeatedly to various stopping points and look for the damage from the heat after each shooting round, it would be more useful than "somewhere less than or equal to 1000 rounds." 

If it starts to show wear/damage at 400, 600, or 800, that's more useful for average shooters.  Then you know to stop and let the gun cool off after rapidly firing X rounds.

Some may make too much out of this.  Mac is correct that at this point it is primarily cosmetic.  There is no alteration to function of the weapon and it does not appear that it is even close to causing the weapon to fail from a functionality point.  To draw any conclusions about functionality, the test would really need to go to a point of failure and until that is done everything is just pure conjecture.  I would surmise that the weapon could take much more severe testing and still keep on functioning as normal.  My bigger concerns with the P320 is over the beach or introducing sand / debris into the action.  There are some seriously small springs where even fine objects might be detrimental to function.

....

Didn't MAC do a elements test where he dunks the handgun into water, sand, dirt, and mud? Surely this only represents the reliability on a short term and not a to-hell-and-back kind of service like the M9 which we'll find interesting, knowing that parts aren't replaced regularly in the military

Kind of like the concept of what InRangeTV does in the mud tests. Find any possible failure points in the gun in a case when it does fail and in this case, trial by high volume of fire.
I wouldn't call any torture test "useless" even if it's bizarre as shooting 1000 rounds in a very short time frame because information is information, especially if it's putting a piece of equipment in extremely high stress so we can see it's max durability.

Didn't MAC do a elements test where he dunks the handgun into water, sand, dirt, and mud? Surely this only represents the reliability on a short term and not a to-hell-and-back kind of service like the M9 which we'll find interesting, knowing that parts aren't replaced regularly in the military

MAC does similar endurance tests with dirt, water, mud, etc.  I recall one they did with the VP9 and PPQ (again, both guns that I own or have interest in).  Not sure he did one with the P320 (just haven't looked yet).

It's it realistic or practical?  Maybe not for the "average" gun owner, but I still find it somewhat interesting investigating the "what ifs".  I surely wouldn't call the tests useless.  At least for me.   

Some may make too much out of this.  Mac is correct that at this point it is primarily cosmetic.  There is no alteration to function of the weapon and it does not appear that it is even close to causing the weapon to fail from a functionality point.  To draw any conclusions about functionality, the test would really need to go to a point of failure and until that is done everything is just pure conjecture.  I would surmise that the weapon could take much more severe testing and still keep on functioning as normal.  My bigger concerns with the P320 is over the beach or introducing sand / debris into the action.  There are some seriously small springs where even fine objects might be detrimental to function.

The part of "people making too much of it" was the main reason why I chose to post this video.  The video of itself was interesting to me, but the "related" topic of those people just trying to find fault in anything he does, or anyone who posts videos for that matter, is what caught my interest.  Then the part at the end with regards to the NRA.  Yeah, the NRA doesn't have the best reputation nor people have had the best experiences with them, but I agreed with MAC that we've been asking for opportunity for change and now is time to seize that opportunity.

Getting back to the P320, which really is my passion here, that gun is almost the perfect gun to take this test to see if the gun will fail due to heat deformation.  Since the frame can be readily replaced for about $40-50.  Well, if someone is willing to put 1000 rounds through a gun in that short amount of time, $50 shouldn't be too hard to come up with.  Haha.  I was never one to purposely torture test my guns, but I am still interested in "what ifs", especially if others want to put their guns through those kinds of tests.  I put my guns through a fair amount of use and as long as they perform fine, I'm happy.  Though it's good to know that they've gone through a lot more and still "keep on ticking". 

Regarding the getting debris into the breach or action, do you think that a function of the P320's design where mostly everything fits within the small assembly that is the "actual firearm"? 

As far as eventually getting a P320, that day may be sooner than I had previously thought.   

Of course any polymer gun would melt at high temp. In a realistic situation u can't be able to fire 1000 rounds all at once in  13 minutes in a gunfight lol impossible. That was an inappropriate test just to bash on sigs p320. IMPO.

I believe the AK became inoperable when the bbl "drooped" after 700 rnds, a bit after the wood caught on fire.
All still praise the AK.
Maybe because he could smack it against a picnic table to straighten the bbl and make it "operable" again. 

I believe the AK became inoperable when the bbl "drooped" after 700 rnds, a bit after the wood caught on fire.
All still praise the AK.
Maybe because he could smack it against a picnic table to straighten the bbl and make it "operable" again. 

The AK Operators Union (or something like that) was going some updates on a recently released AK.  I think there was a video on 1000, 2000 and 5000.  I think they noticed something with the finish or something like that.  They also do goofy things like doing pull ups from the sling with the gun hanging from a tree from the mag.  They don't seem to shoot anything like 1000 rounds in 20 minutes, but they seem to shoot the guns a lot.  Again, taken with many grains of salt, I still find that stuff interesting.  Like MAC, they seem to just report what they see and let the viewers decide, without going too much into diatribes on their personal opinions.

The part of "people making too much of it" was the main reason why I chose to post this video.  The video of itself was interesting to me, but the "related" topic of those people just trying to find fault in anything he does, or anyone who posts videos for that matter, is what caught my interest.  Then the part at the end with regards to the NRA.  Yeah, the NRA doesn't have the best reputation nor people have had the best experiences with them, but I agreed with MAC that we've been asking for opportunity for change and now is time to seize that opportunity.

Yep, I know what that is all about when it comes to trying to find fault in video's.  Actually some very stupid people with little knowledge will try to challenge and have no clue wtf they are talking about, but will make disparaging remarks.  I know Tim from way back and when he first started his forum to support his channel he had invited me to participate on his forum.  I did for a bit.  He had good intentions and did a good job, but I admit I don't watch him or anyone else really for that matter.  The youtube "gun community" was never something I could take seriously and avoided "shout outs", affiliations, or interviews for their channels when I used to run across them at SHOT or just on the training circuit.  I am still mostly uncomfortable with it. 

Getting back to the P320, which really is my passion here, that gun is almost the perfect gun to take this test to see if the gun will fail due to heat deformation.  Since the frame can be readily replaced for about $40-50.  Well, if someone is willing to put 1000 rounds through a gun in that short amount of time, $50 shouldn't be too hard to come up with.  Haha.  I was never one to purposely torture test my guns, but I am still interested in "what ifs", especially if others want to put their guns through those kinds of tests.  I put my guns through a fair amount of use and as long as they perform fine, I'm happy.  Though it's good to know that they've gone through a lot more and still "keep on ticking".

Yep, easy swap and if need be. 

Regarding the getting debris into the breach or action, do you think that a function of the P320's design where mostly everything fits within the small assembly that is the "actual firearm"?

I know the guy who is the SME that the Army commissioned to defended the Army v. Glock thing.  He is a very well known SME on ballistics etc and if anyone knows forums, they will know his online name.  We had an interesting and long phone conversation.  You also know my ties here so you will need to hit me up in person.   

As far as eventually getting a P320, that day may be sooner than I had previously thought.   

I love mine, but if I'm going to nasty places I have a different choice.

I love mine, but if I'm going to nasty places I have a different choice.

What would that choice be out of curiosity?