Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Page / 65
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 5/6/2019 8:49:14 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thehun06:
I doubt 4140 was the available blanks...FAXON makes the barrels...their barrels are either 4150CMV or 416R...so 4140 had to be spec'd out...just saying. FAXON does not use 4140 in anything with their name on it except in their BCGs (carrier key and cam pin).
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thehun06:
Originally Posted By barnbwt:

The chrome-molybdenum family of steels are only incrementally different from each other; it's not like the DT barrels are made of pig-iron, or something. The Vanadium adds a little more hardness (ie reduces erosion) but the nitride finish hardness increase dwarfs that. No need to be a drama-queen about their choice of a perfectly good barrel steel. It's not as though they're sticking it to customers; 4140 is likely just what was available for blanks at the time the barrels were being made. Nitride is what I'd complain about if anything (well, that and the *probably* mis-cut chambers on many barrels), but because it's one of the cheapest barrel-worthy finishes there is & is not the most rust-proof either, not because it's improper or no-good for the application. "Mil-spec" is not a material anyway, and the MDR has no "mil-spec" in any case. Now, if that's how they're marketing their stuff, that'd be another area to complain about.

*booming metal music* "Made to mil-spec, from the specs we submitted to the military before we were rejected for further review..." doesn't seem nearly as compelling, lol
I doubt 4140 was the available blanks...FAXON makes the barrels...their barrels are either 4150CMV or 416R...so 4140 had to be spec'd out...just saying. FAXON does not use 4140 in anything with their name on it except in their BCGs (carrier key and cam pin).
So you're accusing them of making Faxon deviate from their standard processes...why again? Once more, it isn't like they had Green Mountain cut the barrels (not that there'd be anything wrong with than anyhow) so why the umbrage? Just because they claim to be highest quality when they are really just good quality. OMG just watch me faint in shock at a marketing-heavy company exaggerate slightly.
Link Posted: 5/6/2019 8:54:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/6/2019 8:55:59 PM EDT by thehun06]
You can’t comprehend can you.

I stated that FAXON is not known nor does produce 4140 barrels. Therefore, DT spec’d 4140...which is the cheapest option in barrel material...

It is really not that hard to understand...

You might think it’s ok to chose the cheapest materials while asking premium price. I’m the opposite. I expect premium when a premium price is charged. Pretty simple. Don’t care what brand it is.
Link Posted: 5/6/2019 9:44:45 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thehun06:
You can’t comprehend can you.

I stated that FAXON is not known nor does produce 4140 barrels. Therefore, DT spec’d 4140...which is the cheapest option in barrel material...

It is really not that hard to understand...

You might think it’s ok to chose the cheapest materials while asking premium price. I’m the opposite. I expect premium when a premium price is charged. Pretty simple. Don’t care what brand it is.
View Quote
And yet Faxon doesn't do that material...so how can that be? I think verification is in order, just to make sure there isn't a mistake on the ad-copy or something.

If Faxon's tooled up to run the other alloys, that means it likely isn't cheaper to switch stock material...especially when we're talking low quantities. An off the shelf 30 cal blank available from a ton of vendors that run the gamut is far less expensive. My point is your claim they are maliciously cheaping out 1) doesn't hold water, and 2) isn't even an issue since 4140 is a fine barrel material. 4150V is 'premium,' and an asset in select fire applications, but unnecessary in this application. Unless DT is passing off their 4140 barrels aa 4150V, I don't see the dishonesty, or the problem. It'd be like complaining they used someone other than "premium" FailZero to do nickel-boron plating, when it was still applied properly. Who cares? Are we seeing unacceptable barrel erosion figures because of the material, or is it stuck cases from (guessing here) poorly cut chambers? I know I wouldn't be happier with also-miscut 4150V barrel, or explosion-welded Stellite for that matter, lol.
Link Posted: 5/6/2019 9:52:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By barnbwt:

And yet Faxon doesn't do that material...so how can that be? I think verification is in order, just to make sure there isn't a mistake on the ad-copy or something.
View Quote
It's easier to point and accuse than verify.
Link Posted: 5/6/2019 10:22:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/6/2019 10:28:31 PM EDT by thehun06]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By barnbwt:

And yet Faxon doesn't do that material...so how can that be? I think verification is in order, just to make sure there isn't a mistake on the ad-copy or something.

If Faxon's tooled up to run the other alloys, that means it likely isn't cheaper to switch stock material...especially when we're talking low quantities. An off the shelf 30 cal blank available from a ton of vendors that run the gamut is far less expensive. My point is your claim they are maliciously cheaping out 1) doesn't hold water, and 2) isn't even an issue since 4140 is a fine barrel material. 4150V is 'premium,' and an asset in select fire applications, but unnecessary in this application. Unless DT is passing off their 4140 barrels aa 4150V, I don't see the dishonesty, or the problem. It'd be like complaining they used someone other than "premium" FailZero to do nickel-boron plating, when it was still applied properly. Who cares? Are we seeing unacceptable barrel erosion figures because of the material, or is it stuck cases from (guessing here) poorly cut chambers? I know I wouldn't be happier with also-miscut 4150V barrel, or explosion-welded Stellite for that matter, lol.
View Quote
You really suck at reading.

I stated 4140 is subpar compared to others. Many manufacturers charge much less than what DT is charging for the MDR with way better materials and overall quality. I stated that at the price point I expect top notch barrel material SO SORRY TO EXPECT QUALITY...

Second I also stated that either DT is building them out of 4140 or their marketing company messed up once again.

If you think it’s cool to get the cheapest barrel in an expensive firearm...cool. I DON’T CARE.

If it is 4140...that’s a nail in a coffin for me...100%...just shows cheapness...period. I don’t care if you agree or not. Some people actually care what their tools are made of vs how they look at the range all dress up as Rambo.
Link Posted: 5/6/2019 11:53:47 PM EDT
The hallmark of the "poseur Rambo" or "gear queer" is chasing an appearance or similar non-practical.characteristic --blindly chasing "mil spec" without knowing what it means is a classic example. (Even considering a 2500$ rifle is another, lol). I explained how 4140 is both suitable and not likely a cost saving measure, you say it screams cheap because..? It doesn't have a "5" or a "V" stamped on it? Because past that, the practical difference is negligible in this application.

Now, if you want to use the choice of alloy as another excuse to pass on the gun, fine, but it's the same as complaining about the polymer texture or something similarly minor. I agree that at this price, the barrel should be maraging steel or some shit, lol, but there's plenty else to take issue with, without having to exaggerate personal preferences into supposed deal-breakers.
Link Posted: 5/6/2019 11:55:56 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kfeltenberger:
It's easier to point and accuse than verify.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kfeltenberger:
Originally Posted By barnbwt:

And yet Faxon doesn't do that material...so how can that be? I think verification is in order, just to make sure there isn't a mistake on the ad-copy or something.
It's easier to point and accuse than verify.
Hell, I'm bored so I'll ask 'em. I'll be sure to tell ya'll if they say they'll get back to me in two weeks, though
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 12:04:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/7/2019 12:06:13 AM EDT by That_Guy_MA]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thehun06:
You can't comprehend can you.

I stated that FAXON is not known nor does produce 4140 barrels. Therefore, DT spec'd 4140...which is the cheapest option in barrel material...

It is really not that hard to understand...

You might think it's ok to chose the cheapest materials while asking premium price. I'm the opposite. I expect premium when a premium price is charged. Pretty simple. Don't care what brand it is.
View Quote
I know nothing of the current situation with Desert Tech, but I think the idea of "Premium Materials" is kinda silly. You design for certain performance goals, and you select materials that fulfill them. Maybe 4140 has the need attributes, maybe not, but it's not an inherently "bad" material. I can certainly see potential advantages to 4150V making it a better choice for a "precision battle rifle" barrel, but every design choice comes with a trade off.
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 12:35:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/7/2019 12:40:34 AM EDT by thehun06]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By That_Guy_MA:
I know nothing of the current situation with Desert Tech, but I think the idea of "Premium Materials" is kinda silly. You design for certain performance goals, and you select materials that fulfill them. Maybe 4140 has the need attributes, maybe not, but it's not an inherently "bad" material. I can certainly see potential advantages to 4150V making it a better choice for a "precision battle rifle" barrel, but every design choice comes with a trade off.
View Quote
Want to ask...how is it silly? If you are asking a premium price tag...shouldn't you have premium materials (I certainly think so)...or did we become so brainwashed that attention to detail and quality doesn't matter anymore?

If you buy a $2000 optic...you want it to be better than a $500 one...correct? Why can't we expect the same from the MDR....it should be built with higher quality materials than a freaking $400 DIY AR15...

This is seriously the only platform I have found where people are so open to being mediocre and OK...
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 10:46:45 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thehun06:

Want to ask...how is it silly? If you are asking a premium price tag...shouldn't you have premium materials (I certainly think so)...or did we become so brainwashed that attention to detail and quality doesn't matter anymore?

If you buy a $2000 optic...you want it to be better than a $500 one...correct? Why can't we expect the same from the MDR....it should be built with higher quality materials than a freaking $400 DIY AR15...

This is seriously the only platform I have found where people are so open to being mediocre and OK...
View Quote
Well, when the bar to be passed is "the rifle actually functions"... weird things seem to happen. Arguing about pointless details when the rifles themselves are, so far, far from generally reliable is overall quite silly.
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 11:35:37 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thehun06:

Want to ask...how is it silly? If you are asking a premium price tag...shouldn't you have premium materials (I certainly think so)...or did we become so brainwashed that attention to detail and quality doesn't matter anymore?

If you buy a $2000 optic...you want it to be better than a $500 one...correct? Why can't we expect the same from the MDR....it should be built with higher quality materials than a freaking $400 DIY AR15...

This is seriously the only platform I have found where people are so open to being mediocre and OK...
View Quote
I know nothing about Desert Tech beyond that they make nice bolt guns and shipped some bullpups that don't work, popped into this thread because of the InRange videos.

"Premium materials" is a silly idea. There is no fairy dust that gives a steel a magic aura of quality. At a broad level, only two questions matter for material selection, does it meet the requirements, and are the requirments high enough. A "premium" product should demonstrate some advantage over its competition. That may take the form of barrel life, mechanical accuracy, limiting thermal drift, ect. which may require new materials.

It's completely possible that 4150V barrels are needed to meet the MDR's performance goals, or that those goals should have been set higher ( Although this issue is irrelevant compared to them shipping unreliable guns).
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 11:54:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/7/2019 11:56:02 AM EDT by RDTCU]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By That_Guy_MA:
"Premium materials" is a silly idea. There is no fairy dust that gives a steel a magic aura of quality. At a broad level, only two questions matter for material selection, does it meet the requirements, and are the requirments high enough. A "premium" product should demonstrate some advantage over its competition. That may take the form of barrel life, mechanical accuracy, limiting thermal drift, ect. which may require new materials.
View Quote
As someone that buys a crapload of tool steel, I will say that steel makers include things like "superior" and "premium" in their product naming and grading. Bohler-Uddeholm especially.
It's all back to what specs they meet and how they were processed, even for the same alloys.
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 12:02:51 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RDTCU:

As someone that buys a crapload of tool steel, I will say that steel makers include things like "superior" and "premium" in their product naming and grading. Bohler-Uddeholm especially.
It's all back to what specs they meet and how they were processed, even for the same alloys.
View Quote
This makes sense, especially within the same alloy for calling out tighter tolerances for process and quality control.
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 1:14:19 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By pyotr_k:
Well, when the bar to be passed is "the rifle actually functions"... weird things seem to happen. Arguing about pointless details when the rifles themselves are, so far, far from generally reliable is overall quite silly.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By pyotr_k:
Originally Posted By thehun06:

Want to ask...how is it silly? If you are asking a premium price tag...shouldn't you have premium materials (I certainly think so)...or did we become so brainwashed that attention to detail and quality doesn't matter anymore?

If you buy a $2000 optic...you want it to be better than a $500 one...correct? Why can't we expect the same from the MDR....it should be built with higher quality materials than a freaking $400 DIY AR15...

This is seriously the only platform I have found where people are so open to being mediocre and OK...
Well, when the bar to be passed is "the rifle actually functions"... weird things seem to happen. Arguing about pointless details when the rifles themselves are, so far, far from generally reliable is overall quite silly.
It's petty; "so we're tired of talking about all the functional issues, and at least lately it seems they're starting to get their shit together, so let's find something else to complain about." I've been as hard on DT and even the MDR concept as anyone; barrel alloy is a really nit-picky thing to complain about. Carp about the chosen twist rate or something more significant at least, sheesh.
Link Posted: 5/7/2019 1:18:53 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RDTCU:
As someone that buys a crapload of tool steel, I will say that steel makers include things like "superior" and "premium" in their product naming and grading. Bohler-Uddeholm especially.
It's all back to what specs they meet and how they were processed, even for the same alloys.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RDTCU:
Originally Posted By That_Guy_MA:
"Premium materials" is a silly idea. There is no fairy dust that gives a steel a magic aura of quality. At a broad level, only two questions matter for material selection, does it meet the requirements, and are the requirments high enough. A "premium" product should demonstrate some advantage over its competition. That may take the form of barrel life, mechanical accuracy, limiting thermal drift, ect. which may require new materials.
As someone that buys a crapload of tool steel, I will say that steel makers include things like "superior" and "premium" in their product naming and grading. Bohler-Uddeholm especially.
It's all back to what specs they meet and how they were processed, even for the same alloys.
Exactly; and a 308 semi-auto isn't a particularly hard-use case. Now, for even something as 'barrel-burny' as Creedmoor or shooting nickel-alloy-jacketed bullets? Maybe a good idea to roll with a more resistant material, like a Vanadium alloy steel. 5.56 is probably rougher on the throat than 308, so it makes sense that it's the go-to for M4 barrels.

Thinking back, the one thing I could see 4150V being advantageous for here; the MDR has a REALLY short gas system, so the gas port will naturally be subject to more erosive forces than we generally see. For that, the tougher alloy would be somewhat helpful (though a replaceable port orifice like the SCAR made from an even harder steel would be even better).
Link Posted: 5/17/2019 7:09:15 PM EDT
InRangeTV has their 5.56 conversion:

Link Posted: 5/17/2019 7:36:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2019 7:36:58 PM EDT by pavlovwolf]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MAC21500:
InRangeTV has their 5.56 conversion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sApEXizzuvw
View Quote
The 5.56 conversion looks great, and appears to work great. More reviews with more rounds are needed.

The only thing I don't like is the mag catch. It just looks too flimsy, small, and easily lost or damaged with repeated changes. If they'd toss one extra in per caliber that would allay my fears.

Now if they get normal production .308 guns running that well consistently, and the standard production conversions doing the same, they have a winner.

I want to see Rob Ski get one off the shelf and run it through his 5,000 round hard use test, and then convert it and run that through. If it survives that, I'll be sold.
Link Posted: 5/17/2019 10:22:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/17/2019 10:34:43 PM EDT by barnbwt]
Notes from the video;

Desert Tech makes good on its promises? That's gotta be a *very* selective memory he's got.

"Some bugs" plaguing any new design includes failing to run more than one or two rounds without tearing cases? I think the R51 is the most recent example of a new firearm having such a serious degree of issues warranting immediate design changes out of the gate.

A picatinny gasblock rail is a desirable feature again? I guess on a bullpup with a removable barrel it really is a bit more compelling, but it sure does look outdated when the gun's all taken apart Also, what 'optic' uses a single picatinny slot to mount to? I think even MBUS sights take up about 3 slots.

Gotta use a hammer for even simple takedown on your 2500$ +however much the 556 kit is, polymer firearm receiver? And a wrench to get the front handguard off to access the gas system? Good thing it never malfunctions...

The barrel looks not one bit less difficult to install than any bolt-in SCAR type firearm; that's considered a quick change? Compared to an AR I suppose it is.

A 556 carbine that's the same size & weight as a 308 is apparently a good thing, now...granted, HDD sells 800$ aluminum SCAR17 lowers that do exactly that, plus the added weight of the metal lower (it really is just a wallet measuring contest with those SCAR guys, lol). I assume the purpose of the swap is to save money buying a second MDR? I do hope they come out with a 9mm conversion; having the trifecta in one platform that can be fairly-easily reconfigured does seem kind of cool, in a Dan-Wesson kind of way.

You have to remove the two side-panels completely to remove the BCG assembly? Good thing they're captive like those takedown pins so you won't lose them...I guess you won't need to worry so long as you don't bring a big wooden takedown-mallet into the field with you, though.

I hate to nitpick, but I've been irritated by the slobbery coverage of this gun by InRange since the beginning; it stands out so badly because they are generally more even-handed when it comes to these sorts of things. It's very obvious that the novelty & brand, not the features, or potential, let alone actual function, color the reception of this gun on that channel. It's not that hard to separate those concepts to give an honest report; hell, Ian does it constantly for videos on old, terrible designs that have legitimately cool or interesting features to them. The neato ejection is truly neato, but it's also the only real point of innovation here, and one of the most problematic aspects of the gun. Where have we seen that pairing of traits before? All sorts of forgotten weapons that show up on Ian's programs.
Link Posted: 5/17/2019 11:06:36 PM EDT
I don't think they've been following the MDR through all the issues like this thread or Bullpup Forum has, so I'll excuse some of their enthusiasm for the company's "quick response".

Karl has stated that he doesn't really even like bullpups, so it would seem that they are just trying to evaluate if this most recent take on the bullpup can live up to the hype and be as good as an AR.
Link Posted: 5/18/2019 7:32:44 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By barnbwt:
Notes from the video;

Desert Tech makes good on its promises? That's gotta be a *very* selective memory he's got.

"Some bugs" plaguing any new design includes failing to run more than one or two rounds without tearing cases? I think the R51 is the most recent example of a new firearm having such a serious degree of issues warranting immediate design changes out of the gate.

A picatinny gasblock rail is a desirable feature again? I guess on a bullpup with a removable barrel it really is a bit more compelling, but it sure does look outdated when the gun's all taken apart Also, what 'optic' uses a single picatinny slot to mount to? I think even MBUS sights take up about 3 slots.

Gotta use a hammer for even simple takedown on your 2500$ +however much the 556 kit is, polymer firearm receiver? And a wrench to get the front handguard off to access the gas system? Good thing it never malfunctions...

The barrel looks not one bit less difficult to install than any bolt-in SCAR type firearm; that's considered a quick change? Compared to an AR I suppose it is.

A 556 carbine that's the same size & weight as a 308 is apparently a good thing, now...granted, HDD sells 800$ aluminum SCAR17 lowers that do exactly that, plus the added weight of the metal lower (it really is just a wallet measuring contest with those SCAR guys, lol). I assume the purpose of the swap is to save money buying a second MDR? I do hope they come out with a 9mm conversion; having the trifecta in one platform that can be fairly-easily reconfigured does seem kind of cool, in a Dan-Wesson kind of way.

You have to remove the two side-panels completely to remove the BCG assembly? Good thing they're captive like those takedown pins so you won't lose them...I guess you won't need to worry so long as you don't bring a big wooden takedown-mallet into the field with you, though.

I hate to nitpick, but I've been irritated by the slobbery coverage of this gun by InRange since the beginning; it stands out so badly because they are generally more even-handed when it comes to these sorts of things. It's very obvious that the novelty & brand, not the features, or potential, let alone actual function, color the reception of this gun on that channel. It's not that hard to separate those concepts to give an honest report; hell, Ian does it constantly for videos on old, terrible designs that have legitimately cool or interesting features to them. The neato ejection is truly neato, but it's also the only real point of innovation here, and one of the most problematic aspects of the gun. Where have we seen that pairing of traits before? All sorts of forgotten weapons that show up on Ian's programs.
View Quote
InRange is pretty much at DT's back pocket...but what do I know...nothing...as I stated on BPF...lets see how this pans out...I do like the conversion...but both the 308 and the 5.56 have the oddest recoil impulse I've seen from a modern firearm...its wicked...wonder how scopes will hold up...its worst than a SCAR.
Link Posted: 5/18/2019 8:29:56 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MAC21500:
I don't think they've been following the MDR through all the issues like this thread or Bullpup Forum has, so I'll excuse some of their enthusiasm for the company's "quick response".

Karl has stated that he doesn't really even like bullpups, so it would seem that they are just trying to evaluate if this most recent take on the bullpup can live up to the hype and be as good as an AR.
View Quote
I think that many who have "followed" the MDR in the forums have lost objectivity regarding the rifle and anything DT does for it as evidenced by the comments. Videos come out that show it's working and the reviewers are called shills, in the pocket of DT, and so on. I'm not saying that it never had issues, but I do believe that people are not accepting that DT has improved the rifle, has done it at their own expense and with no questions asked when the updates are rolled out, and has turned around the project to the point where with the 2019 updates it's a reliable rifle.

But that's just me, I've been called a shill, fanboy, deluded, and many other things attacking my credibility, so what do I know?
Link Posted: 5/18/2019 9:41:31 PM EDT
I agree, they have made several improvements which seem to have the rifles up and running. Yes, some still have issues but DT has been listening it seems and is doing a good job at trying to make the rifle right. It is apparent that there are some out there who truly do want them to fail and will scoff at attempts to make things right. I was one of the early adopters of the rifle and followed it from it's first announcement.. I have skin in the game and have been patient and am glad to see they are standing by their product. It might be time for a more flattering title change to this thread.
Link Posted: 5/19/2019 12:50:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/19/2019 12:54:41 AM EDT by doty_soty]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kfeltenberger:

I think that many who have "followed" the MDR in the forums have lost objectivity regarding the rifle and anything DT does for it as evidenced by the comments. Videos come out that show it's working and the reviewers are called shills, in the pocket of DT, and so on. I'm not saying that it never had issues, but I do believe that people are not accepting that DT has improved the rifle, has done it at their own expense and with no questions asked when the updates are rolled out, and has turned around the project to the point where with the 2019 updates it's a reliable rifle.

But that's just me, I've been called a shill, fanboy, deluded, and many other things attacking my credibility, so what do I know?
View Quote
For once, I agree with most all of this. I HATE most every facet of the MDR by now, its release, its issues, its development, how DT handled (handles) the whole thing. But I 100% agree that the rifle has tremendously improved (not that that’s saying much), and that most people have formed a perhaps irrevocable opinion on the rifle by now, myself included.

Which honestly is a shame, it was such a promising rifle. Actual years ago (2014?) it was going to be the best thing since sliced bread. I can’t even put into words how much I wanted a c model (that I doubt will ever exist) and the .308 was just icing on the cake. One day I hope they make an official “MDR 2” update and it gets a fresh start. I want this to be a viable rifle, and for all of us to have more quality choices.

If they’d have handled things back then how they handle themselves now, I think this thread would have taken an overall radical different course. I think DT learned a lot of hard lessons with the MDR.
Link Posted: 5/19/2019 9:52:51 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By doty_soty:
I think DT learned a lot of hard lessons with the MDR.
View Quote
I *HOPE* they learned - frankly I'm still unconvinced. Yes, there appears to be forward motion - but even the folks in this thread in line for upgrades are saying it's not moving ahead very quickly and communication seems to be still spotty. (Maybe not to Silencerco Promotion levels of shitty communication, but...)
Link Posted: 5/19/2019 3:52:46 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By doty_soty:

For once, I agree with most all of this. I HATE most every facet of the MDR by now, its release, its issues, its development, how DT handled (handles) the whole thing. But I 100% agree that the rifle has tremendously improved (not that that’s saying much), and that most people have formed a perhaps irrevocable opinion on the rifle by now, myself included.

Which honestly is a shame, it was such a promising rifle. Actual years ago (2014?) it was going to be the best thing since sliced bread. I can’t even put into words how much I wanted a c model (that I doubt will ever exist) and the .308 was just icing on the cake. One day I hope they make an official “MDR 2” update and it gets a fresh start. I want this to be a viable rifle, and for all of us to have more quality choices.

If they’d have handled things back then how they handle themselves now, I think this thread would have taken an overall radical different course. I think DT learned a lot of hard lessons with the MDR.
View Quote
I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE...100%....100%....100%
Link Posted: 5/19/2019 8:16:18 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By doty_soty:
For once, I agree with most all of this. I HATE most every facet of the MDR by now, its release, its issues, its development, how DT handled (handles) the whole thing. But I 100% agree that the rifle has tremendously improved (not that that’s saying much), and that most people have formed a perhaps irrevocable opinion on the rifle by now, myself included.

Which honestly is a shame, it was such a promising rifle. Actual years ago (2014?) it was going to be the best thing since sliced bread. I can’t even put into words how much I wanted a c model (that I doubt will ever exist) and the .308 was just icing on the cake. One day I hope they make an official “MDR 2” update and it gets a fresh start. I want this to be a viable rifle, and for all of us to have more quality choices.

If they’d have handled things back then how they handle themselves now, I think this thread would have taken an overall radical different course. I think DT learned a lot of hard lessons with the MDR.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By doty_soty:
Originally Posted By kfeltenberger:

I think that many who have "followed" the MDR in the forums have lost objectivity regarding the rifle and anything DT does for it as evidenced by the comments. Videos come out that show it's working and the reviewers are called shills, in the pocket of DT, and so on. I'm not saying that it never had issues, but I do believe that people are not accepting that DT has improved the rifle, has done it at their own expense and with no questions asked when the updates are rolled out, and has turned around the project to the point where with the 2019 updates it's a reliable rifle.

But that's just me, I've been called a shill, fanboy, deluded, and many other things attacking my credibility, so what do I know?
For once, I agree with most all of this. I HATE most every facet of the MDR by now, its release, its issues, its development, how DT handled (handles) the whole thing. But I 100% agree that the rifle has tremendously improved (not that that’s saying much), and that most people have formed a perhaps irrevocable opinion on the rifle by now, myself included.

Which honestly is a shame, it was such a promising rifle. Actual years ago (2014?) it was going to be the best thing since sliced bread. I can’t even put into words how much I wanted a c model (that I doubt will ever exist) and the .308 was just icing on the cake. One day I hope they make an official “MDR 2” update and it gets a fresh start. I want this to be a viable rifle, and for all of us to have more quality choices.

If they’d have handled things back then how they handle themselves now, I think this thread would have taken an overall radical different course. I think DT learned a lot of hard lessons with the MDR.
Reputations are earned, and you only get one first impression. DT had over a multuple years of consistently bad performance when it came to every aspect of this gun.

That image won't budge easily in the minds of many.
Link Posted: 5/19/2019 8:20:24 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rsolomon:
I *HOPE* they learned - frankly I'm still unconvinced. Yes, there appears to be forward motion - but even the folks in this thread in line for upgrades are saying it's not moving ahead very quickly and communication seems to be still spotty. (Maybe not to Silencerco Promotion levels of shitty communication, but...)
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rsolomon:
Originally Posted By doty_soty:
I think DT learned a lot of hard lessons with the MDR.
I *HOPE* they learned - frankly I'm still unconvinced. Yes, there appears to be forward motion - but even the folks in this thread in line for upgrades are saying it's not moving ahead very quickly and communication seems to be still spotty. (Maybe not to Silencerco Promotion levels of shitty communication, but...)
Seems like the same slow, plodding, half-aborted progress we've seen all along, to me...it's just that they've finally gotten near the finish line. Yes, if they stumble long enough, the MDR will eventually be a decent weapon, but goddam --just how long are customers (especially those already out of pocket) supposed to wait on that before we can righteously say "screw these guys" and meme-up phrases like "friends don't let friends waste their time/money with Desert Tech?"
Link Posted: 5/19/2019 8:25:18 PM EDT
Don't forget...we haven't even touched the surface on their brittle polys and how the impulse of this rifle will or will not destroy optics...time will tell...I'd at least get a SCAR rated mount.
Link Posted: 5/20/2019 1:10:31 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thehun06:

but both the 308 and the 5.56 have the oddest recoil impulse I've seen from a modern firearm...its wicked...wonder how scopes will hold up...its worst than a SCAR.
View Quote
The recoiling mass isn't nearly as heavy as a SCAR 17, so it doesn't have that same "airgun" bolt slamming forwards type of impact; it's a rapid cycling, low mass needed to operate the ejection system.
Link Posted: 5/20/2019 9:42:42 AM EDT
For the almost 2 years that I've owned a mdr I've been through up and down varying levels of hopefullness and disgust with it.

I did some testing with the heavier guide rod and while it wasn't as extensive as I'd like it did seem to fully function without issue at higher AND lower gas settings than with the factory one. I have the fired brass marked and on my bench but I've been working so much the past few months that it's just not a priority. That said the threaded shank snapped on the heavier rod. Brittleness of tunsgsten I suppose. It was an experiment and it wasn't unexpected. Oh well.

I've contacted DT 2-3 times to get an RMA to send it back and see why the bolt carrier fit is so sloppy causing it to chew up the bolt and extension and at this point get the newest updates. The RMA email has never come. Like I said, varying stages of hopeful and disgust. Whatever.
Link Posted: 5/20/2019 11:19:52 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By newguy2k3:
For the almost 2 years that I've owned a mdr I've been through up and down varying levels of hopefullness and disgust with it.

I did some testing with the heavier guide rod and while it wasn't as extensive as I'd like it did seem to fully function without issue at higher AND lower gas settings than with the factory one. I have the fired brass marked and on my bench but I've been working so much the past few months that it's just not a priority. That said the threaded shank snapped on the heavier rod. Brittleness of tunsgsten I suppose. It was an experiment and it wasn't unexpected. Oh well.

I've contacted DT 2-3 times to get an RMA to send it back and see why the bolt carrier fit is so sloppy causing it to chew up the bolt and extension and at this point get the newest updates. The RMA email has never come. Like I said, varying stages of hopeful and disgust. Whatever.
View Quote
Dang...figured with yours...they would bend over backwards trying to get it done right...your MDR is the worst case of bad quality all around...at this point...they should just give you a brand new, 2019 rifle.
Link Posted: 5/22/2019 7:56:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/22/2019 7:57:11 PM EDT by mark5pt56]
I'm still trying to figure out why my head hurts.

In all seriousness, I had high hopes for this rifle, never picked one up and hope you guys find resolution.
Page / 65
Next Page Arrow Left
Top Top