Concrete Challenge: Drop Testing AR15 Rifle Magazines to the Limit!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 май 2024
- We have had people ask how durable AR15 magazines are compared to our Quattro 15's QMAG 53 magazines.
Subscribe to our Newsletter! lp.constantcontactpages.com/s...
Join our Membership! / @deserttechut
At Desert Tech we love firearms innovation, we are always going against the grain and bypassing traditional designs. We are always doing amazing and fun stuff on the range and hope you enjoy this video!
Follow us on our other channels:
FACEBOOK: / deserttechhq
INSTAGRAM: / desert_tech
TWITTER/X: / deserttechhq
RUclips: / @deserttechut 
Спорт
I'm glad you took the time to address this. The TGC video was of some concern to me, as I have 5 quattro mags and was considering getting some more. Glad you highlighted your production quality is improved from those test versions. This is actually a good thing having you guys do your own testing in response. This helps highlight some potential weak points that can be improved even further going forward.
all production mags are the same build as these we just tested for you. The writers had preproduction versions that we new weren't strong enough to drop and we told them that but unfortunately he dropped them anyway.
Granted you did in fact inform the negative video creators of the incomplete condition of the provided mags, It's only right that they use their platform to clarify the situation.
Regardless you've earned my respect.
👍🏾
I appreciate that you guys are handling this well. I’m going to address this on TGC News next week so that more people are aware of this testing.
Thanks, I really appreciate that!
Desert tech is for sure a great company and not scared to show everything and answer everyone. Wish you all the best,thank you for been who you are and doing what you do.
You’re welcome and thanks for your support!
Very professional response and I appreciate y’all’s video.
Sucks that he didn’t mention y’all’s instructions
Look forward to being a customer 👍
Appreciate that, I'm sure he forgot. Or maybe he didn't receive the instructions directly and we gave them to his assistant. Stuff happens.
Perhaps laser engraving "PRE-PRODUCTION" or "PROTOTYPE" on future samples that are handed out would help in the future. Great response guys
I like that you guys were honest in your testing and showed that some of the Quattro mags failed. You didn’t try to highlight the good one and hide the others.
This was probably the best response video I’ve seen in a long time. Super professional and well done. I don’t think this mag system is for me, but I respect the innovation. Still love my MDRX.
I definitely like seeing you guys do this after tgc news showed them dropping these mags. I hope the mags keep going strong!
Thanks, yeah that was a goof dropping the pre-production mags, welcome to new product launch challenges.
@DesertTechUT awesome I'm glad to hear it guys! Love your work!
Very professional, matter-of-fact response. It really feels like TGC did you guys dirty on this one, but I'm impressed by your willingness to put it aside and just address the product. I'm definitely looking into Desert Tech for my next 10/22 build.
A+ for transparency. Also worth noting that the QMAG 1/2 full and full drops are absorbing nearly twice the energy of the others (due to the higher round counts) and still hanging in there- well done! Is there any provision for a windowed or steel-lipped version in the future?
We don’t know yet.
Thank you, I suspected so much, love your products and the way you support them! The Quattro is awesome, people need to get one in their hands to appreciate how cool it is.
Anyone bitching about damaged mags dropped on concrete while fully loaded rides the short bus. Mags are consumables. Shit happens. Buy more and move on with your day. DT has big stones to do this. Respect.
It's nice that while he explains the reviewer's mistake he says it in a generous non-critical way, btw it would be a good idea to make an ARstock with a compartment sized to fit the stanag adapter.
I swear I saw a video that one was shot and busted up pretty good, and it was still functioning.
It’s one of our shorts
Next time I would recommend just labelling the pre-production status on the stuff in bold, red letters so they can't miss it.
Great idea!
As soon as you said TGC...that was ALL I needed to know!
The one thing I have always loved about PMags is the dust cover. I always assumed it would help if dropped while installed. I never tested it though, and if DT tests it and it helps I hope you consider for future generations. Unfortunately I may never bother getting a Quatro.
Wow
Had you considered some sort of dimpled surface, spyder webbing or other geometric pattern that could perhaps deflect some of the stress during drops and perhaps improve the strength of the magazine? Also, is it possible to enfuse even a small amount of glass fiber in the resin? Yes…I’m an engineer, but out of my discipline.
I'm not even sure why i would have an AR15 that doesn't use the quattro 15 lower at this point. I'm mostly a AK guy but still. Damn shame we won't be seeing those mags in the bullpuppy.
I need a q53 for the wolverine btw in .308
TGC's a great channel, but certainly liable to make mistakes like anybody else. I'm surprised not to see a comment from Jon here with this vid already 10 hours old, but hopefully he'll be posting a retraction/clarification soon on his channel.
May have commented after you, but he did leave this comment -
"I appreciate that you guys are handling this well. I’m going to address this on TGC News next week so that more people are aware of this testing.
"
Great info. Thanks!
Please talk to the export dealers, Germany and some other places want a "non-military" looking Wolverine that can be certified there.
All it needs is a handguard with no cooling holes or top and side Mlok slots. Remove as much material as possible, but no look-through except for the gas port adjustment slot and maybe the bipod on the bipod-versions. Bottom row of Mlok is fine. Then just attach a muzzle brake with no flash hider and voila, an EU compliant gun that totally looks not militaristic.
Dumb rules be dumb, but at least compliance with them is easy.
We will do this.
@@DesertTechUT thanks
You should do a pure double stack version of the quad mag for large calibre rounds,
Maybe a double stack 458 socom or 50 bw or a version of the super short ultra magnums but as a double stack,
DesertTech 4TW!!! ❤ haha
Any thoughts on metal reinforcement in/on the feed lips? Just pondering further product development.
Send the lower receiver and magazines to do a full government test and then publish the report. We will then see if your QMAGs will function in all environments and pass all drop test on concrete and in a rifle.
You do it
You don't really think military testing is "end all, be all" do you?
@@RyTrapp0 No but they do a large amount of tests on the magazines by dropping in multiple angles and surfaces, in multitude of simulated environments and will multiple chemicals to check chemical resistance and CBRN cleaning. It's not the end all be all but it's one of those test that can help an civilian when choosing a magazine.
It may be saying to not drop test, may have left the idea for a drop test in their head. Imagine three months receiving emails and mags..."hay john wasn't there somthing about drop test in the email?" "Oh we should do that thanks for the reminder!" That wpuld be my guess.
I agree that is highly likely.
Is there like a theoretical maximum for how many columns of ammunition can fit in a magazine? Like is it possible to have 5, 6, 7 ,8? Just curious.
I think it comes down to the form factor that is ergonomic to manage, the more columns the more complex the mechanisms. I think quad stack is the best form factor to high capacity option that allows a simple single follower system rather than the surefire nested followers that were terribly unreliable. Of course there are very large belt boxes which have a very poor form factor.
This was an excellent response. I think it was a mistake to ship inferior pre-production magazines to reviewers establishing a reputation for your product. If you're going to put your name on and release into the world other items that aren't up to your production standard, you should at least clearly mark them as pre-production samples inferior to what will be offered for sale.
While this video for me wipes out any doubt stirred by the TGC video, the reputational damage done to the QMAG-53 by that TGC video will likely linger for years, even if TGC were to issue a video apology. A bad first impression is hard to undo. Reference the damage to the M16's reputation for reliability because of a few mistakes in a short time upon adoption that weren't the rifle's fault (bad ammo not to spec, no cleaning kits, misleading "self-cleaning" claims). The problems were the fault of administrators and marketing and quickly corrected, but the rifle still became afflicted with a reputation of unreliability that has lingered to this day, despite decades of evidence of excellent reliability.
I believe it was stated in the TGC video that they tried to contact Desert Tech before finishing the video but couldn't reach anyone. That appears to be another big mistake. If they'd spoken with you, you would have told them they had a fragile sample and that would have at least been mentioned in the video. It might have prevented the upload of the video. TGC may have requested full-quality production samples to drop test instead.
I think this situation is TGC's fault for not followinf instructions and misrepresenting what they were testing. But Desert Tech could have avoided this unfair reputational damage to their product by not representing themselves to gun media and influential product reviewers with inferior samples and by making themselves available to answer questions from gun media and influential reviewers.
This is as good a response as one could possibly hope for, and it's a convincing rebuttal. I believe that your magazine is durable, I believe there's no evidence to the contrary, and any remaining doubts I have are simply because it's a new first-gen product without a long track record that has to defy the bad reputation of a century of mostly unreliable quad-stack and drum magazine designs. If your magazine continues to perform well, I will likely eventually come to trust it as much as any other.
But no matter how you respond to TGC's claims, already much damage has been done to the reputation of the magazine. Some potential buyers will hear rumors of unreliability and refuse to ever buy the magazine. Others will be persuaded to wait for a second-generation of the magazine to fix flaws that may or may not exist.
The transparency and responsiveness your company has shown, such as through videos like this addressing concerns, continues to make you credible. This video doesn't make claims about offering an invincible magazine, just an innovative first-gen quad-stack magazine that seems to be about as tough as it's competitors. I can believe you've pulled that off. With further refining tweaks to design and materials, the magazine will only get stronger and more reliable. The polymer double-stack magazines have had decades of design refinement at this point, and that building upon previous steel and aluminum STANAG designs. Your 53rd mag is a new design, but it has the advantage of having the lower designed around it, rather than having to fit polymer into a magwell designed for thin aluminum magazines. I've been very impressed with your magazine.
Thank you for the video. It was helpful and will certainly alleviate many doubts.
They didn't try to contact us. I believe TGC grows his channel by creating controversy. If you look at his video feed then the majority of his videos are instigating it, but that is my personal observation and I don't want to make any accusations that are unfair so to each his own.
Hey Patton read the instructions. Edit, I love my MDRX.
Wow @TheGunCollective time to own up to your mistake, I can definitely respect that,though I'm thinking if you are gonna review something & your told its for function only then forget and then bring negative shame to a company and man who seems pretty humble in his response ,is messed up,especially when that is your job. DesertTech thanks for doing this, cool to see you guys on top of concerns & neglectful reviews from professionals such as TGC. Reminds me that you gotta be all in and watch what you do and say. Cant wait to talk my father into owning a rifle he wants, with this amount of care from @DesertTech. Good stuff guys!!!
Have you attempted working with carbon fiber or titanium feed lips? I know that would increase the cost but if folks want "bullet proof high capacity mags they're going to have to be willing to pay more for them. That could be an optional upgraded version... I will say that building the entire mag out of those materials would make for exorbitantly expensive mags so there likely wouldn't be a market for them.
I don't want you to be in competition with KE Arms, but any chance you partner with them to do a Qutro KP15 polymer lower?
good to know it was pre production magazines that broke
Quatro mag lower ,6max solgw m4-89 upper with 80 grain 6max ap ammo❤😂
Yes please
@khanthuam dude i wanna see 6max 4200fps i know thats unsafe but the mp7 is sick feet per second numbers
@@NoahBranch503 103gr at 3000fps in 10.5 would b a do it all for me
@@khanthuam call it the thumper
You're trying way too hard
Thanks bishop.
Any time
DT certainly is taking marketing and YT content to the next level. I'm torn on the DT brand though, I own an MDRX 308 FE, it's.. finicky. I do recognize the effort, and iterative engineering design improvements. The recent lifetime warranty bomb was distasteful too. It makes me think DT is spending too much on fixing "old" product (I think mines been repaired 3 times now with fewer than 1000 rounds throughit), and DT's finances were sinking bc of the constant warranty claims, so I understand why, but it deters me from buying more DT products bc what if the next hot product lands in the same boat? Give me fair trade in value for my MDRX towards the newer design to restore my faith. If one person says something, many more were thinking it. Businesses walk a fine line between investors and customers, if either loses faith...
I guess a lesson for the future, allthough what are the chances you'll encounter this again, write tye instructions on the mag. "PROTOTYPE, DO NOT DROP"
props
❤❤I Love Desertek,and i think the gun collective could re review what they tested and give the correct mags a chance ,,,,and i think if D.T sends out anything that may not comeup to scratch ,,and is sent out for review ,,like these mags ,,they should have had printed on the mag or item sent out "not drop test safe ,for function test only " printed on the mag and or printed on any item tbat may not be the final product thats been tested ,,its both D.T's fault and gun collective ,so i hope the G.C get a chance to review the final product .
Are there any plans to come out with an extended magazine for the Quattro 15 in the future?
What extended capacity did you have in mind?
@@DesertTechUT 70 to 80 range. I buy all my ammo from true velocity so the weight is very manageable. As a customer I can and will say you can mark up the price considerably on them and I will pay the extra. Worth it if they remain high quality.
Would be good if you get them the better mags I trust the channel
Just called it STANAG 5.56 please.
My magpul 30 round magazine is pinned to 5 rounds 😔 lol
Sad!
TGC has really built a lot of credibility with me over the years, this was really dissapointing. I hope there is clarification or apology from Jon Patton.
Make steel q mags
Metal performs worse in drop tests because it bends and jams polymer is elastic and bends back after the drop. The metal GI mags performed the worst in all drop tests we did.
@@DesertTechUT Titanium. I see no reason why a mag shouldn't cost more than a car.
@@freeze1305 carbon fiber mags lets go!!!
@@user-hk5fs8re6z Carbon fibre is still held together by resin, but also an option. If the resin is more brittle you still get the same problem.
But it also depends on the kind of metal. Aluminium is cheap, but not ideal. So is mild steel. Spring steel could be more resilient to drop tests, but production is more challenging with the heat treatment.