Take the HK P7 challenge...

[Mr.Glock]

Why is that? If you divide malfunctions into feeding malfunctions and extraction/ejection malfunctions, then someone designs a pistol (the P7) that will extract and eject WITHOUT an extractor, you then have a very reliable weapon. My gun can function without an extractor. Can yours? My gun will function with a broken extractor hook. Can yours? My gun will function with a weak extractor spring--or with no extractor spring. Can yours? Do you see my point? Extraction issues are quite common, even among allegedly reliable guns. The P7 has no such issues.

To ask a person to deliberately take a functioning part out of a pistol to prove it's unreliability or reliability is silly.

 

[ldp4570]

I guess if someone had a Walther CCP, then a test between the two would probably be fun to watch, since both are the same except for the grip operation.

 

[Mr.Glock]

I guess if someone had a Walther CCP, then a test between the two would probably be fun to watch, since both are the same except for the grip operation.

Yep. You know the differences well.

 

[Razur]

If they are so great why aren't they still being made?
What if something else breaks on it? Can I find replacement parts easily?
Silly thread is silly.

 

[JD8]

This challenge is no worse than torture tests or 1000 continuous round claims that we see here. Some may think it's silly but it proves a point, IMO.

 

[druryj]

If they are so great why aren't they still being made?
What if something else breaks on it? Can I find replacement parts easily?
Silly thread is silly.

Mostly for the same reason S&W isn't making the ultra-reliable and oh-so-good 3913 anymore either.

 

[ldp4570]

Mostly for the same reason S&W isn't making the ultra-reliable and oh-so-good 3913 anymore either.

There's just something about those 3rd generation S&W's!!

 

[druryj]

Yep, but they aren't making them anymore; more money in polymer pistols I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mightymouse]

To ask a person to deliberately take a functioning part out of a pistol to prove it's unreliability or reliability is silly.

This challenge is no worse than torture tests or 1000 continuous round claims that we see here. Some may think it's silly but it proves a point, IMO.

Okay, I'll fess up. This thread was started as a tongue-in-cheek response to the 1000 round Glock vs. 1911 thread, and only GMThunder seems to have got it. I think that we can all agree that guns are tools, and I don't know about some of y'all, but I don't mistreat my tools. I have no interest in shooting 1000 rds thru my P7 without cleaning it, or burying it in the sand, or freezing it in a bucket of water, none of which have anything to do with the long-term reliability of a given weapon. My P7 will work when I need it to because I keep it clean and oiled. It is a tool and I care for my tools. All of that torture test nonsense is silly.

 

[KurtM]

Just a general observation, after two magazines through a P-7 at a rapid rate, the pistol becomes to hot at the trigger guard to maintain a proper grip. Also extended drills heat the frame up to the point that you must set it aside to cool. Any firearm that you cant practice with extensively isn't what many would consider a practical gun to carry due to lack of training time on the platform.

As for reliability, both the 9mm Glocks and the venerable old 1911 will function underwater for magazine after magazine....yes first hand knowledge....not so the Orbendorfer. They tend to "come apart".....also first hand knowledge. Everything has its strengths and weaknesses, but a gun that gets too hot to hold has too much of the weak.