SIG Talk banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,303 Posts
Didn't watch it but isn't he the guy that CZ paid for all expenses to take a trip out to CZ land recently overseas and then use his review (maybe compensated him for?) of the P 10-C on their website?

I have a bit of a problem believing he is unbiased but entertainment is entertainment and I personally put no validity in his test results or methods.

I will say though I feel the P07 is a good pistol and loved shooting it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,408 Posts
Didn't watch it but isn't he the guy that CZ paid for all expenses to take a trip out to CZ land recently overseas and then use his review (maybe compensated him for?) of the P 10-C on their website?

I have a bit of a problem believing he is unbiased but entertainment is entertainment and I personally put no validity in his test results or methods.

I will say though I feel the P07 is a good pistol and loved shooting it.
Well...if he is 'biased', then I'd be fascinated in hearing theories on just how he's sabotaging his review samples to fail predictably...or better yet, how he made some pistols more reliable than they should be. :p

But seriously, I'm not surprised the P-07 did as well as it did as it is such a robust gun. I had one and liked it, but sold it to make room for a CZ PCR which is now one of my carry guns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DCowboysCR

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,303 Posts
Well...if he is 'biased', then I'd be fascinated in hearing theories on just how he's sabotaging his review samples to fail predictably...or better yet, how he made some pistols more reliable than they should be. :p

But seriously, I'm not surprised the P-07 did as well as it did as it is such a robust gun. I had one and liked it, but sold it to make room for a CZ PCR which is now one of my carry guns.
Seriously? It would be simple and could be as simple as not lubing a pistol properly before a "test" or even modifying a recoil/hammer spring to give it a big disadvantage going in or redoing/editing the "test" to get the desired results one way or the other. I am not saying that is happening but I don't believe his methodology is sound and leaves a lot to the human factor as in slathering on/pushing into the mud etc. Also curious he does not put mud into the barrel to see what happens. If one really did drop their pistol into mud there is a good change that mud could get into or plug the barrel.

The whole sample of one gives very poor accuracy in testing results and is why the military trials use dozens of samples and does the test over several times. It is not like he is an independent test lab who has no stake in the results or has any experience with their procedures.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,408 Posts
Seriously? It would be simple and could be as simple as not lubing a pistol properly before a "test" or even modifying a recoil/hammer spring to give it a big disadvantage going in or redoing/editing the "test" to get the desired results one way or the other. I am not saying that is happening but I don't believe his methodology is sound and leaves a lot to the human factor as in slathering on the mud etc. Also curious he does not put mud into the barrel to see what happens. If one really did drop their pistol into mud there is a good change that mud could get into or plug the barrel.

The whole sample of one gives very poor accuracy in testing results and is why the military trials use dozens of samples and does the test over several times. It is not like he is an independent test lab who has no stake in the results or has any experience with their procedures.
Do you really think he'd go to the effort to do that for just a simple reliability test? If anything, yeah his methodology of testing isn't the most scientific, but he says repeatedly that these 'tests' aren't meant to definitively assess the value or functional quality of the guns for everyone. He knows he only does these with a sample of one, etc.

When a Legion he tested failed miserably and the Arex did great, people here even hypothesized that he doctored them for those results because he sells Arex's and doesn't sell Sigs. But then a Sig P320 did very well....so..... (and again, I'd like to know how he modded the Arex to ensure that it would pass perfectly, etc....or should every pistol default to a perfect score through all that dirt/sand/mud if nothing is sabotaged......?)

Frankly, I think the problem lies more with the fragility of gun-owner egos than MAC's tests and results. It just seems more like an example of how elements can foul up certain models of handguns in particular ways. Heck, I even bought a Sig P226 Legion AFTER I saw the test he did with it and the Arex.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,466 Posts
Interesting video and the first test I have seen of that kind. I wonder how Sigs would do especially after having issues with one of the first ones I bought when I didn't oil it to Sig standards but the same way I did the G23 I had and it kept having feeding issues but none since I started lubing better
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,303 Posts
Do you really think he'd go to the effort to do that for just a simple reliability test? If anything, yeah his methodology of testing isn't the most scientific, but he says repeatedly that these 'tests' aren't meant to definitively assess the value or functional quality of the guns for everyone. He knows he only does these with a sample of one, etc.
You think? :lol:

I just find it interesting how many take these amateur backyard, low budget, sample of one as almost gospel.

Again I am not saying any funny business is going on but it would be SIMPLE to do and I certainly feel he has his biases/self interests.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,408 Posts
You think? :lol:
Again, he acknowledged that repeatedly and said it was never intended to be so.

I just find it interesting how many take these amateur backyard, low budget, sample of one as almost gospel.
And whose fault is that?

Perhaps MAC's for overestimating gun-owners' sensibilities.

Again I am not saying any funny business is going on but it would be SIMPLE to do and I certainly feel he has his biases/self interests.
And again, simple or not (never mind, how simple would it be to mod a gun to be more reliable....boring out the slide rail channels to loosen tolerances, and so on...?...or just clean up and start the whole video if a gun had a hiccup until it did it perfectly throughout)....for what purpose? Has he been known/proven to commit any shady business practices before? I don't know him or anything, but I really do think the 'shadiness' lies more with owners of guns that didn't do as well in something that shouldn't have that much meaning to them in the first place.

I mean....seriously? Even if you're not saying he's doing it, it may be simple, but how plausible?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,408 Posts
Sorry man, not trying to start an argument defending or persecuting MAC. :D

But some people still think the moon landing was staged!:p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
Huston's a hack...
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top