AR Sponsor
Posted: 7/7/2012 9:40:16 AM EDT
|
This was posted on TOS and thought it was an interesting article.
Drop Test If this is a repost, my apologies. |
|
Quoted:
Interesting. I guess the polymer would absorb more shock. I also wonder if the fact the MBUS doesn't lock played a part too. The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking a non locking BUIS is a good thing....... Those were exactly my thoughts when reading the article. I'm guessing that the fact the MBUS will fold when hit would transfer some of the impact force around? At any rate it is only a sample of one which is not even close to conclusive, hopefully more tests like this will be done. That said, I'm still impressed with the MBUS's. I opened the link fully expecting them to have failed (not bashing Magpul, they are what I run on my SBR) but was pleasantly surprised with the result. Quoted:
Very nice post, I think im still gonna stay with my LT fixed sight. Thanks. I don't think you can go wrong with that (this was in no way meant to start a polymer versus iron sight war, just posting some more info for people to consider) 
|
|
I hope more testing is done so there will be more conclusive evidence to support the information at hand. Such as, 3 sets of each sight, but until then this was very good info.
I ran MBUS on my last rifle and while I liked everything about them except the site picture I did have my rear sight break where it tightens down on the upper. I may have had it over torqued, but when I dropped it about 3' off my workbench it decided to crack. The sight still worked and held its original zero. Just did not trust it to take much more abuse. |
|
Quoted:
I hope more testing is done so there will be more conclusive evidence to support the information at hand. Such as, 3 sets of each sight, but until then this was very good info. I ran MBUS on my last rifle and while I liked everything about them except the site picture I did have my rear sight break where it tightens down on the upper. I may have had it over torqued, but when I dropped it about 3' off my workbench it decided to crack. The sight still worked and held its original zero. Just did not trust it to take much more abuse. pics?? I'm sure if you contacted Magpul they might exchange it fro a new one. The test would have been better if they had more makers in it. I run the MBUS on one of my rifles, but if it fell it would hit the light mount and scope and not the buis. |
|
I'm just happy people may finally stop giving me crap for putting hundred dollar sights on a fifteen hundred dollar carbine.
ETA: This is something that the author of the original article linked in the OP posted on another site: One thing I did not mention in the post which was sent to KitUp (due to word count limitations) was that after dropping the MBUS twice, I picked the rifle up, held it over my head like the maul I used to split seasons' worth of firewood while growing up in Alaska, and swung it down on a concrete shooting table, with the MBUS taking all of the impact. It did not break or shift POI by anything more than 1MOA.
I'd say that's pretty definitive for the Gen2 MBUS (everybody knows gen1 mbus had mount issues, even magpul readily admits this) |
|
Quoted:
I'm just happy people may finally stop giving me crap for putting hundred dollar sights on a fifteen hundred dollar carbine. ETA: This is something that the author of the original article linked in the OP posted on another site: One thing I did not mention in the post which was sent to KitUp (due to word count limitations) was that after dropping the MBUS twice, I picked the rifle up, held it over my head like the maul I used to split seasons' worth of firewood while growing up in Alaska, and swung it down on a concrete shooting table, with the MBUS taking all of the impact. It did not break or shift POI by anything more than 1MOA.
I'd say that's pretty definitive for the Gen2 MBUS (everybody knows gen1 mbus had mount issues, even magpul readily admits this) Interesting. Could you link a source for that? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm just happy people may finally stop giving me crap for putting hundred dollar sights on a fifteen hundred dollar carbine. ETA: This is something that the author of the original article linked in the OP posted on another site: One thing I did not mention in the post which was sent to KitUp (due to word count limitations) was that after dropping the MBUS twice, I picked the rifle up, held it over my head like the maul I used to split seasons' worth of firewood while growing up in Alaska, and swung it down on a concrete shooting table, with the MBUS taking all of the impact. It did not break or shift POI by anything more than 1MOA.
I'd say that's pretty definitive for the Gen2 MBUS (everybody knows gen1 mbus had mount issues, even magpul readily admits this) Interesting. Could you link a source for that? As requested... http://vuurwapenblog.com/2012/07/08/buisoptic-drop-test/ |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm just happy people may finally stop giving me crap for putting hundred dollar sights on a fifteen hundred dollar carbine. ETA: This is something that the author of the original article linked in the OP posted on another site: One thing I did not mention in the post which was sent to KitUp (due to word count limitations) was that after dropping the MBUS twice, I picked the rifle up, held it over my head like the maul I used to split seasons' worth of firewood while growing up in Alaska, and swung it down on a concrete shooting table, with the MBUS taking all of the impact. It did not break or shift POI by anything more than 1MOA.
I'd say that's pretty definitive for the Gen2 MBUS (everybody knows gen1 mbus had mount issues, even magpul readily admits this) Interesting. Could you link a source for that? As requested... http://vuurwapenblog.com/2012/07/08/buisoptic-drop-test/ Thanks for the link, I really wish they had published all of that in the KitUp article. Makes for a much more interesting read. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Still doesnt make me trust MBUS's. i've seen a few posts of them snapping in half, yet not a TROY. Links to those posts? Not doubting you, just want to read about them Sorry my membership has run out for now and my search ability isn't that good. But i will try. |
|
Thanks for taking the time to find those. Looks like one was definitely due to over-tightening (a problem that's supposedly been addressed with the new gen ones?) and the other just looks like it could be but not for sure. I'm curious to see how well the Gen2's hold up. |
|
What annoys me with this test, is that they said they dropped the MBUS again and it didn't change POi, yet they didn't do the same for the TROY or Diamond?
Quoted:
Thanks for taking the time to find those. Looks like one was definitely due to over-tightening (a problem that's supposedly been addressed with the new gen ones?) and the other just looks like it could be but not for sure. I'm curious to see how well the Gen2's hold up. There was many posts of people claiming they have broken them, or snapped them in half, but i only linked to posts with picture evidence. |
|
Magpul has gone on record multiple times to remind people that most MBUS breakages people have seen are either:
A: Gen1 over tightening issues B. People that have been sold airsoft MBUS clones that were passed off as being genuine. There is another thread from almost a year ago now I was in where a magpul rep stated that Ithey have had one non torque related warranty repair on a pair of MBUS and that was a "wing" that had broken off a front sight, and the sight was still fully functional. Also I LOVE the logic here "hey umm these sights apparently really do hold up, and those other sights you defend don't hold up as well" "well because I like these the test is obviously wrong, plastic sights still suck" I don't have a problem with people having preferences, but ignoring evidence is a bit ridiculous. I hope someone repeats this experiment with a larger sample size. Then again I shouldn't be surprised, there are still people on here that maintain that all polymer pistols are inherently unreliable and that steel and aluminum are the only material a handgun should ever be made from. |
|
Quoted:
Magpul has gone on record multiple times to remind people that most MBUS breakages people have seen are either: A: Gen1 over tightening issues B. People that have been sold airsoft MBUS clones that were passed off as being genuine. There is another thread from almost a year ago now I was in where a magpul rep stated that Ithey have had one non torque related warranty repair on a pair of MBUS and that was a "wing" that had broken off a front sight, and the sight was still fully functional. Also I LOVE the logic here "hey umm these sights apparently really do hold up, and those other sights you defend don't hold up as well" "well because I like these the test is obviously wrong, plastic sights still suck" I don't have a problem with people having preferences, but ignoring evidence is a bit ridiculous. I hope someone repeats this experiment with a larger sample size. Then again I shouldn't be surprised, there are still people on here that maintain that all polymer pistols are inherently unreliable and that steel and aluminum are the only material a handgun should ever be made from. Well the testors dont have my trust as the MBUS appears to have sustained the most damage, none of them held zero, yet the drop only the MBUS again. Dropping each once is a real comprehensive test to draw conclusions from. |
|
Quoted:
I hope more testing is done so there will be more conclusive evidence to support the information at hand. Such as, 3 sets of each sight, but until then this was very good info. I ran MBUS on my last rifle and while I liked everything about them except the site picture I did have my rear sight break where it tightens down on the upper. I may have had it over torqued, but when I dropped it about 3' off my workbench it decided to crack. The sight still worked and held its original zero. Just did not trust it to take much more abuse. This issue was over torque of the mounting screw during installation. We resolved this with a new screw that stops this from happening. Send us back the old sight and we will replace it. Site picture on the MBUS2 should be close to that of a A2 |
|
Quoted:
Magpul has gone on record multiple times to remind people that most MBUS breakages people have seen are either: A: Gen1 over tightening issues B. People that have been sold airsoft MBUS clones that were passed off as being genuine. There is another thread from almost a year ago now I was in where a magpul rep stated that Ithey have had one non torque related warranty repair on a pair of MBUS and that was a "wing" that had broken off a front sight, and the sight was still fully functional. As explained above, the over torquing issue was resolved awhile back and was the case with the two links cited. As I have stated before, metal sights have their place but so do polymer ones. Over the last few years the MBUS2 sites have shown themselves to be just as functional as their metal counterparts for about half the cost- which is the mission they are intended for. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope more testing is done so there will be more conclusive evidence to support the information at hand. Such as, 3 sets of each sight, but until then this was very good info. I ran MBUS on my last rifle and while I liked everything about them except the site picture I did have my rear sight break where it tightens down on the upper. I may have had it over torqued, but when I dropped it about 3' off my workbench it decided to crack. The sight still worked and held its original zero. Just did not trust it to take much more abuse. This issue was over torque of the mounting screw during installation. We resolved this with a new screw that stops this from happening. Send us back the old sight and we will replace it. Site picture on the MBUS2 should be close to that of a A2 I actually contacted you guys about 8 months ago when the incident occurred and was notified to send them to you for a replacement, I just never got around doing so because I sold the rifle shortly after that happened. I appreciate your very respectable customer service and your amazing product line. I will be buying another set in the near future. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Magpul has gone on record multiple times to remind people that most MBUS breakages people have seen are either: A: Gen1 over tightening issues B. People that have been sold airsoft MBUS clones that were passed off as being genuine. There is another thread from almost a year ago now I was in where a magpul rep stated that Ithey have had one non torque related warranty repair on a pair of MBUS and that was a "wing" that had broken off a front sight, and the sight was still fully functional. As explained above, the over torquing issue was resolved awhile back and was the case with the two links cited. As I have stated before, metal sights have their place but so do polymer ones. Over the last few years the MBUS2 sites have shown themselves to be just as functional as their metal counterparts for about half the cost- which is the mission they are intended for. I have Gen 2 MBUS sights and I actually made that post in DEFENSE of MBUS sights, wasn't attempting to bash, was just making that clear. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Magpul has gone on record multiple times to remind people that most MBUS breakages people have seen are either: A: Gen1 over tightening issues B. People that have been sold airsoft MBUS clones that were passed off as being genuine. There is another thread from almost a year ago now I was in where a magpul rep stated that Ithey have had one non torque related warranty repair on a pair of MBUS and that was a "wing" that had broken off a front sight, and the sight was still fully functional. As explained above, the over torquing issue was resolved awhile back and was the case with the two links cited. As I have stated before, metal sights have their place but so do polymer ones. Over the last few years the MBUS2 sites have shown themselves to be just as functional as their metal counterparts for about half the cost- which is the mission they are intended for. I have Gen 2 MBUS sights and I actually made that post in DEFENSE of MBUS sights, wasn't attempting to bash, was just making that clear. I know that. I was just officially endorsing your statement. I should have been clearer. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Magpul has gone on record multiple times to remind people that most MBUS breakages people have seen are either: A: Gen1 over tightening issues B. People that have been sold airsoft MBUS clones that were passed off as being genuine. There is another thread from almost a year ago now I was in where a magpul rep stated that Ithey have had one non torque related warranty repair on a pair of MBUS and that was a "wing" that had broken off a front sight, and the sight was still fully functional. As explained above, the over torquing issue was resolved awhile back and was the case with the two links cited. As I have stated before, metal sights have their place but so do polymer ones. Over the last few years the MBUS2 sites have shown themselves to be just as functional as their metal counterparts for about half the cost- which is the mission they are intended for. I have Gen 2 MBUS sights and I actually made that post in DEFENSE of MBUS sights, wasn't attempting to bash, was just making that clear. I know that. I was just officially endorsing your statement. I should have been clearer. Thanks, now I have to go build another rifle so I can buy more Magpul stuff |
AR Sponsor