Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 21, 2018, 12:51:45 AM
Home Home Help Calendar Login Register
News:

Please support BullpupForum.com sponsors!!
. . . Midwest Industries . . . BullpupArmory.com . . . Shooting Sight . . . BullpupUnlimited.com . . . Homeland Guns . . . . . . . . . . . . AB Arms . . . GallowayPrecision.com . . . K & M Arms . . . . . . Geissele Automatics
+  BULLPUP FORUM
|-+  Bullpup Rifles (Auto & Semi-Auto Centerfire)
| |-+  Desert Tech MDR
| | |-+  Comments Thread for"DT Sponsored MDR Q&A thread"
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: Comments Thread for"DT Sponsored MDR Q&A thread"  (Read 1902 times)
mityno1
^
Sr. Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 388


« on: June 14, 2018, 05:42:24 PM »

I thought I would start this thread so we would have a place to thank or curse DT CEO Nick Young (ney1) and engage in whatever comments and banter that are not actual MDR questions and feedback.

Please don't junk up Nick's thread with comments that are not MDR technical questions. Let's do that here instead. If he has time, perhaps he will read and comment on this thread and if he doesn't then at least lets capitalize on the time he has to address MDR specific questions in his "DT Sponsored MDR Q&A thread"

So let me begin...

DT answers are long overdue so thank you very much for your time Nick to come here and addressing these many MDR questions we have been debating here with only our speculation and best guesses.

I myself am not pleased with how the "Group Buy" pre-orders here have been handled. The most devoted group of Bullpup fans and owners among the members of this forum and members of the GB here. Tee-Shirts were promised and to my knowledge are not being delivered.

I don't know what deal Jon made with DT, but it sure appears to me that MDR pre-orders placed long after the GB order was placed have been and continue to be fulfilled while the older GB pre-orders only get a trickle of MDR's here and there.

The Tavor T-7, while also delayed, promises an Olive Drab color option that is very enticing to me as it is my favorite color and compels me to contemplate switching my GB to an OD T-7 from Jon.  I would wait longer for an OD MDR if that option were in the works say later in the year.
Logged

Re: MDR Group Buy - official BPF list!
« Reply #360 on: January 04, 2015, 05:29:50 AM »
(Still waiting patiently on an FDE...)
coldboremiracle
Sr. Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 338


« Reply #1 on: June 15, 2018, 09:56:51 AM »

Tee-Shirts were promised and to my knowledge are not being delivered.
My understanding was the T-shirts were for those who pre-ordered through DT and paid in full. If you ordered through a dealer (and/or BPF GB), then I think its a no.
Logged

The first shot, is worth all the rest.

Follow me on FB, IG, YT

I work for Desert Tech, happy to help wherever I can.
kfeltenberger
^
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,950



WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2018, 07:41:28 PM »

Tee-Shirts were promised and to my knowledge are not being delivered.
My understanding was the T-shirts were for those who pre-ordered through DT and paid in full. If you ordered through a dealer (and/or BPF GB), then I think its a no.

And the comments that were made to us by DT regional sales management staff that we'd be "Taken care of" was so much talk?  I know that I was told by (forget his name) the region sales manager at the Great American Outdoor Show in 2016 that DT was very aware of the BPF GB and that we were going to be "taken care of".  Not being confrontational, so please don't take it that way, just a bit irked at what now appears to be a hollow promise.
Logged

Kurt
CabbitOne
^
Sr. Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 380


« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2018, 10:39:03 PM »

Tee-Shirts were promised and to my knowledge are not being delivered.
My understanding was the T-shirts were for those who pre-ordered through DT and paid in full. If you ordered through a dealer (and/or BPF GB), then I think its a no.

Sadly, we can't change the past. Though, I suspect if many of the GBers had known about the shipment priority and/or even the T-Shirts they might have switched to direct orders... or heck it would have been peechy keen to have the option to pay in full. Getting their guns sooner might have kept more of them from dropping from the GB. I could see it being disheartening joining the GB and having people who pre-order direct AFTER you have paid money towards the gun get it before you.

Tee-Shirts were promised and to my knowledge are not being delivered.
My understanding was the T-shirts were for those who pre-ordered through DT and paid in full. If you ordered through a dealer (and/or BPF GB), then I think its a no.

And the comments that were made to us by DT regional sales management staff that we'd be "Taken care of" was so much talk?  I know that I was told by (forget his name) the region sales manager at the Great American Outdoor Show in 2016 that DT was very aware of the BPF GB and that we were going to be "taken care of".  Not being confrontational, so please don't take it that way, just a bit irked at what now appears to be a hollow promise.

My guess is it was sales reps talking out of their ass at a trade show. That, and/or those who made the promises lacked the authority to do so and/or are no longer with DT.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2018, 10:41:43 PM by CabbitOne » Logged
hillbillyjim
^
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2018, 09:02:33 AM »

I liked the mdr so much I stuck with the group buy up until last month.  The issues people were posting made me back away.  I’m glad for the q&a shows they still have a heart beat.  If they fix those issues I might even revisit acquiring one.  Right now not enough positive reports to bother I don’t like being a guinea pig

And my thoughts on the group buy.  I think dt treated us like 2nd class citizens especially holding our money for over two years.  But when I see the problems people are having might have been a good thing
Logged
whitetail
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2018, 09:29:52 AM »

Quote
HK G3, this is the hardest recoiling .308 win I have ever shot, I love the G3 it is 100% reliable all the time with everything due to it being a extremely heavy steel receiver rifle which allows it to have one setting which is extremely over gassing the ejection.  They can do this because they have an extractor claw that has substantially more engagement than other rifles, that is why their over gasing doesn't rip the rims. As a result it feeds everything but kicks the snot out of you.  It also folds brass in half when it hits the ejection port and flings it 20+ yards in front of you.

Wow, It's a good thing this guy is just a CEO and not a firearms designer. His statements above make me seriously doubt this statement he made below.

Quote
I have personally owned an HK 91, 93, 94, SP89, 53, PSG1, and MSG90 so I am very familiar with these rifles.

If he's very familiar with these rifles, perhaps he can explain how a rifle with No gas system is over gassed?
Logged
Dwill
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2018, 10:34:48 AM »

Quote
HK G3, this is the hardest recoiling .308 win I have ever shot, I love the G3 it is 100% reliable all the time with everything due to it being a extremely heavy steel receiver rifle which allows it to have one setting which is extremely over gassing the ejection.  They can do this because they have an extractor claw that has substantially more engagement than other rifles, that is why their over gasing doesn't rip the rims. As a result it feeds everything but kicks the snot out of you.  It also folds brass in half when it hits the ejection port and flings it 20+ yards in front of you.

Wow, It's a good thing this guy is just a CEO and not a firearms designer. His statements above make me seriously doubt this statement he made below.

Quote
I have personally owned an HK 91, 93, 94, SP89, 53, PSG1, and MSG90 so I am very familiar with these rifles.

If he's very familiar with these rifles, perhaps he can explain how a rifle with No gas system is over gassed?

Not to mention that the reason that the rims don’t get ripped off is because the chamber has flutes that allow some of the gas to seep back between the case and chamber wall to allow the case to “float” for easy extraction.  Plus sending the ejected case forward was a specific design feature IIRC (something about firing from inside a vehicle so the cases land outside, I think).  As for denting the cases, it’s a MILITARY weapon.  No one who it was designed for cared about reloading their brass.

The whole list of badmouthing other guns is very poorly done.  Comparing to 50+ year old guns like the G3 and FAL, and complain that they are heavy, don’t have rails for scopes, and the ergos aren’t great?  They were made in a completely different era when design requirements and manufacturing methods were different and lightweight materials weren’t readily available.  One wonders how either of these guns were the massive successes that they turned out to be.

Some of the other stuff seems unbelievable.  Two SCARs, and one shoots 36 MOA?  Who’s ever had one of those?  By DT’s logic, you have a 50-50 chance of getting a decent one or one that literally couldn’t hit a broad side of barn.  HK MR762 mag problems?  First I’ve heard of that.  One wonders how how they’ve found success with military operators as the HK417.  Must be a big cover up.  RFB failing to eject every single time?  Ken-Tecs may have a sometimes spotty QC record, but I’ve yet to see one that bad.  DT must have been supremely unlucky in getting the one-in-a-million worst samples of all of these guns, because there is a mound of experience that says otherwise.

Some of the other complaints like sniper rifles are heavy, using proprietary mags, controls aren’t ambidextrous, and have to move head to operate charging handle on ARs (which doesn’t seem to have hindered sales of millions of AR type guns in the last 50 years) just seem like petty comments.  Also, which Tavor did he test?  The Tavor 7 isn’t out yet, and it will have a different gas system with a 4 position AGR than the 5.56 versions, so comments about the earlier versions may not apply.

I just don’t buy any of this.  Except for the RFB, the guns listed have been military tested and battlefield used with success by many different operators, as well as many having been made and sold in massive quantities.  Call me when the MDR can make that claim.
Logged
rtp
^
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 906


« Reply #7 on: June 16, 2018, 12:23:53 PM »

I liked the mdr so much I stuck with the group buy up until last month.  The issues people were posting made me back away.  I’m glad for the q&a shows they still have a heart beat.  If they fix those issues I might even revisit acquiring one.  Right now not enough positive reports to bother I don’t like being a guinea pig

And my thoughts on the group buy.  I think dt treated us like 2nd class citizens especially holding our money for over two years.  But when I see the problems people are having might have been a good thing

Does anyone know for a fact Jon sent all $ to DT, or just pre-order #s and $ as they said they had them to finally deliver?

Either way, yes, DT has treated the GB with people committing very early on quite shoddily IMO, including the 'you'll be taken care of' mess.  A free red dot would have been more appropriate, or even a gas plug that seems like it should have come factory in the first place. 


Logged
HBeretta
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Online Online

Posts: 905



« Reply #8 on: June 16, 2018, 01:08:32 PM »

Quote
HK G3, this is the hardest recoiling .308 win I have ever shot, I love the G3 it is 100% reliable all the time with everything due to it being a extremely heavy steel receiver rifle which allows it to have one setting which is extremely over gassing the ejection.  They can do this because they have an extractor claw that has substantially more engagement than other rifles, that is why their over gasing doesn't rip the rims. As a result it feeds everything but kicks the snot out of you.  It also folds brass in half when it hits the ejection port and flings it 20+ yards in front of you.

Wow, It's a good thing this guy is just a CEO and not a firearms designer. His statements above make me seriously doubt this statement he made below.

Quote
I have personally owned an HK 91, 93, 94, SP89, 53, PSG1, and MSG90 so I am very familiar with these rifles.

If he's very familiar with these rifles, perhaps he can explain how a rifle with No gas system is over gassed?

Not to mention that the reason that the rims don’t get ripped off is because the chamber has flutes that allow some of the gas to seep back between the case and chamber wall to allow the case to “float” for easy extraction.  Plus sending the ejected case forward was a specific design feature IIRC (something about firing from inside a vehicle so the cases land outside, I think).  As for denting the cases, it’s a MILITARY weapon.  No one who it was designed for cared about reloading their brass.

The whole list of badmouthing other guns is very poorly done.  Comparing to 50+ year old guns like the G3 and FAL, and complain that they are heavy, don’t have rails for scopes, and the ergos aren’t great?  They were made in a completely different era when design requirements and manufacturing methods were different and lightweight materials weren’t readily available.  One wonders how either of these guns were the massive successes that they turned out to be.

Some of the other stuff seems unbelievable.  Two SCARs, and one shoots 36 MOA?  Who’s ever had one of those?  By DT’s logic, you have a 50-50 chance of getting a decent one or one that literally couldn’t hit a broad side of barn.  HK MR762 mag problems?  First I’ve heard of that.  One wonders how how they’ve found success with military operators as the HK417.  Must be a big cover up.  RFB failing to eject every single time?  Ken-Tecs may have a sometimes spotty QC record, but I’ve yet to see one that bad.  DT must have been supremely unlucky in getting the one-in-a-million worst samples of all of these guns, because there is a mound of experience that says otherwise.

Some of the other complaints like sniper rifles are heavy, using proprietary mags, controls aren’t ambidextrous, and have to move head to operate charging handle on ARs (which doesn’t seem to have hindered sales of millions of AR type guns in the last 50 years) just seem like petty comments.  Also, which Tavor did he test?  The Tavor 7 isn’t out yet, and it will have a different gas system with a 4 position AGR than the 5.56 versions, so comments about the earlier versions may not apply.

I just don’t buy any of this.  Except for the RFB, the guns listed have been military tested and battlefield used with success by many different operators, as well as many having been made and sold in massive quantities.  Call me when the MDR can make that claim.

for Nick to bash kel-tec even if it is justified is ironic considering the problems members are having here with theirs. 
Logged
mityno1
^
Sr. Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 388


« Reply #9 on: June 16, 2018, 01:14:18 PM »

If he's very familiar with these rifles, perhaps he can explain how a rifle with No gas system is over gassed?

Not to mention that the reason that the rims don’t get ripped off is because the chamber has flutes that allow some of the gas to seep back between the case and chamber wall to allow the case to “float” for easy extraction...

The whole list of badmouthing other guns is very poorly done... 

Some of the other stuff seems unbelievable.  Two SCARs, and one shoots 36 MOA?  Who’s ever had one of those?... 

We could pick apart, challenge, argue and debate the points Nick was trying to make all day.

Like the G3/HK91/PTR91 is a roller delayed BLOW BACK action (that is also used on the MP5) and that makes it an apples to oranges comparison that is hard for any gassed gun to match in reliability, longevity, and functionality, especilaly the longer you go without cleaning your rifle. The G3 was designed first to be a fully automatic machine gun with a semi-auto selector switch.

Or the SCAR H was also designed first to be a fully automatic machine gun with a semi-auto selector switch. The length of the gas system is tuned to the large heavy mass of the BCG that includes the solid mounted direct to BCG reciprocating charging handle that I prefer over indirect control of the BCG. I don't see how the tuning length of the SCAR gas system is relevant to the length of the MDR gas system since they are very different designs. The 36 MOA problem may have been induced by a "canted barrel" incorrect barrel install. Because the SCAR is a modular design, it's barrel is mounted much like the MDR's barrel. But the SCAR's barrel mounting screws can be tightened with the barrel skewed or "canted" to one side or the other. Some SCAR's have shipped from the factory with canted barrels! Simply loosen/remove the barrel attachment screws, remove and reinstall the SCAR's barrel straight instead of canted, torque the barrel screws and you will be good to go. Takes about two minutes, probably about the same time as the MDR.

But all of that is beside the point.  

The point Nick was making is that we can criticize every firearm design there has ever been, including all of those rifles that are battle proven. And our criticisms are sometimes based on inaccurate information or a misunderstanding of the firearms design.

I'll bet you this, Nick probably just Googled and did cut and pastes for his critical comments about the G3 and SCAR platforms. I say this because what he posted were very common misconceptions about these rifles.  And if he didn't and posted what he understood to be complaints about them, he was likely only repeating the same chatter we have all heard over the years.

I'm not trying to defend or challenge the accuracy of Nick's comments about interweb criticism of all firearms, because again that was NOT the point he was making.

The point Nick he was making is people on the internets b!tch about EVERYTHING!!! And this makes it is difficult, if not impossible, to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I too have added to chaff with my own speculative MDR theories posted here. And I blame Nick for that because there was no one from DT responding directly to this forum and most social media.

Hopefully with Nick taking the time to address many of the MDR online complaints, whether real, imagined or exaggerated, we can put all of that speculation behind us and move on into the 21st Century with new modern modular firearms designs that advance the state of the art.  
Logged

Re: MDR Group Buy - official BPF list!
« Reply #360 on: January 04, 2015, 05:29:50 AM »
(Still waiting patiently on an FDE...)
thehun
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 524


« Reply #10 on: June 16, 2018, 01:23:49 PM »

Quote
HK G3, this is the hardest recoiling .308 win I have ever shot, I love the G3 it is 100% reliable all the time with everything due to it being a extremely heavy steel receiver rifle which allows it to have one setting which is extremely over gassing the ejection.  They can do this because they have an extractor claw that has substantially more engagement than other rifles, that is why their over gasing doesn't rip the rims. As a result it feeds everything but kicks the snot out of you.  It also folds brass in half when it hits the ejection port and flings it 20+ yards in front of you.

Wow, It's a good thing this guy is just a CEO and not a firearms designer. His statements above make me seriously doubt this statement he made below.

Quote
I have personally owned an HK 91, 93, 94, SP89, 53, PSG1, and MSG90 so I am very familiar with these rifles.

If he's very familiar with these rifles, perhaps he can explain how a rifle with No gas system is over gassed?

Not to mention that the reason that the rims don’t get ripped off is because the chamber has flutes that allow some of the gas to seep back between the case and chamber wall to allow the case to “float” for easy extraction.  Plus sending the ejected case forward was a specific design feature IIRC (something about firing from inside a vehicle so the cases land outside, I think).  As for denting the cases, it’s a MILITARY weapon.  No one who it was designed for cared about reloading their brass.

The whole list of badmouthing other guns is very poorly done.  Comparing to 50+ year old guns like the G3 and FAL, and complain that they are heavy, don’t have rails for scopes, and the ergos aren’t great?  They were made in a completely different era when design requirements and manufacturing methods were different and lightweight materials weren’t readily available.  One wonders how either of these guns were the massive successes that they turned out to be.

Some of the other stuff seems unbelievable.  Two SCARs, and one shoots 36 MOA?  Who’s ever had one of those?  By DT’s logic, you have a 50-50 chance of getting a decent one or one that literally couldn’t hit a broad side of barn.  HK MR762 mag problems?  First I’ve heard of that.  One wonders how how they’ve found success with military operators as the HK417.  Must be a big cover up.  RFB failing to eject every single time?  Ken-Tecs may have a sometimes spotty QC record, but I’ve yet to see one that bad.  DT must have been supremely unlucky in getting the one-in-a-million worst samples of all of these guns, because there is a mound of experience that says otherwise.

Some of the other complaints like sniper rifles are heavy, using proprietary mags, controls aren’t ambidextrous, and have to move head to operate charging handle on ARs (which doesn’t seem to have hindered sales of millions of AR type guns in the last 50 years) just seem like petty comments.  Also, which Tavor did he test?  The Tavor 7 isn’t out yet, and it will have a different gas system with a 4 position AGR than the 5.56 versions, so comments about the earlier versions may not apply.

I just don’t buy any of this.  Except for the RFB, the guns listed have been military tested and battlefield used with success by many different operators, as well as many having been made and sold in massive quantities.  Call me when the MDR can make that claim.

for Nick to bash kel-tec even if it is justified is ironic considering the problems members are having here with theirs. 

The MDR has the design 100% to be a battle rifle contender (it will need a NATO chamber to do so if it ever wants to be adopted by a military unit)...but first...the MDR needs to function flawlessly at these price points...until then...the MDR is nothing but a boutique gun that looks cool bench shooting. I think we only have one user with 700+ of flawless function...that is simply not enough.
Logged
reason
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 245


« Reply #11 on: June 16, 2018, 01:52:04 PM »

Folks, I am as disgusted with my whole experience with DT’s preorder and product release as anyone. I mean, I wish the MSBS Grot would come out before the 223 MDR at this point...However, I think its a waste of time to comb over the comments Nick made on the other weapons given his tentative qualification of his intentions in giving them.

“ Now I am not sure if you have fired all of the rifles you have listed above but we have and I would like to give you some insight on what we have experienced with them.  I am not by any means bashing their products but reporting actual results we got and for fun I will be evaluating them with the same level of scrutiny that many are giving the MDR.”

1). They were either a report of his own experience with those weapons

or

2). An admittedly exagerated level of scrutiny that he sees as commensurate to what others have given the MDR.

So, if you see his qualitative evaluations as hyperbole, it was meant to be. Besides that 1). Is something that can only be challenged in the form of an unsuportable charge of “liar”... and I dont see that getting anywhere.

Just think that we can extract positive use from this thread by actually asking questions of Nick that relate to making our experience with the process of getting and using the MDR, more pleasant than it is... Just realized this is not the QnA thread....
« Last Edit: June 16, 2018, 01:59:07 PM by reason » Logged
Blackandwhiteknight
^
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2018, 03:18:40 PM »

If he's very familiar with these rifles, perhaps he can explain how a rifle with No gas system is over gassed?

Not to mention that the reason that the rims don’t get ripped off is because the chamber has flutes that allow some of the gas to seep back between the case and chamber wall to allow the case to “float” for easy extraction...

The whole list of badmouthing other guns is very poorly done... 

Some of the other stuff seems unbelievable.  Two SCARs, and one shoots 36 MOA?  Who’s ever had one of those?... 

We could pick apart, challenge, argue and debate the points Nick was trying to make all day.

Like the G3/HK91/PTR91 is a roller delayed BLOW BACK action (that is also used on the MP5) and that makes it an apples to oranges comparison that is hard for any gassed gun to match in reliability, longevity, and functionality, especilaly the longer you go without cleaning your rifle. The G3 was designed first to be a fully automatic machine gun with a semi-auto selector switch.

Or the SCAR H was also designed first to be a fully automatic machine gun with a semi-auto selector switch. The length of the gas system is tuned to the large heavy mass of the BCG that includes the solid mounted direct to BCG reciprocating charging handle that I prefer over indirect control of the BCG. I don't see how the tuning length of the SCAR gas system is relevant to the length of the MDR gas system since they are very different designs. The 36 MOA problem may have been induced by a "canted barrel" incorrect barrel install. Because the SCAR is a modular design, it's barrel is mounted much like the MDR's barrel. But the SCAR's barrel mounting screws can be tightened with the barrel skewed or "canted" to one side or the other. Some SCAR's have shipped from the factory with canted barrels! Simply loosen/remove the barrel attachment screws, remove and reinstall the SCAR's barrel straight instead of canted, torque the barrel screws and you will be good to go. Takes about two minutes, probably about the same time as the MDR.

But all of that is beside the point.  

The point Nick was making is that we can criticize every firearm design there has ever been, including all of those rifles that are battle proven. And our criticisms are sometimes based on inaccurate information or a misunderstanding of the firearms design.

I'll bet you this, Nick probably just Googled and did cut and pastes for his critical comments about the G3 and SCAR platforms. I say this because what he posted were very common misconceptions about these rifles.  And if he didn't and posted what he understood to be complaints about them, he was likely only repeating the same chatter we have all heard over the years.

I'm not trying to defend or challenge the accuracy of Nick's comments about interweb criticism of all firearms, because again that was NOT the point he was making.

The point Nick he was making is people on the internets b!tch about EVERYTHING!!! And this makes it is difficult, if not impossible, to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I too have added to chaff with my own speculative MDR theories posted here. And I blame Nick for that because there was no one from DT responding directly to this forum and most social media.

Hopefully with Nick taking the time to address many of the MDR online complaints, whether real, imagined or exaggerated, we can put all of that speculation behind us and move on into the 21st Century with new modern modular firearms designs that advance the state of the art.  

 Nick was obviously upset with the perception of unfair criticism of his MDR.  I would take a guess that Desert Tech actually got their hands on a bunch of different guns and took them out to shoot when conceptualizing the MDR.  Some of the comments about the other guns was of course hyperbole, but some of them very valid.  DT has said several times the specific design features of the MDR were in response to failures of other guns, the ergos in relation to the Tavor is a good example.
  I've said this before but I think the prototype MDR's probably performed much better than the production guns, and Nick is disappointed the production guns are struggling.  If you look over the list of problems on this forum, almost ALL of them are tolerance or manufacturing failures, no design issues.  I still think they knew about the need for the 6 position plug way before they started shipping rifles but felt pressured to ship rifles so they sleeved the 3 position plugs and hoped it would work.
  I think everyone should cut the guy some slack.  For Mr. Young, the CEO of the company, to come onto a forum where he know people want to tar and feather him shows he cares about his customers, and the MDR.
Logged
Dwill
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #13 on: June 16, 2018, 04:51:15 PM »

I’ll have to disagree that the comments were just to prove that all guns, even successful ones, have things that people can complain about. 

It’s one thing for people to have complaints about design features and things like weight and ergos.  Yes, you can compare different guns on that all day because a lot of that is personal preferences.  And yes, even very successful guns can have features that annoy some people.

However, most of the issues people seem to have with the MDR are not as a result of the design features (which are good), but with reliability.  If DT wants to claim that reliability of HKs, FNs, LMTs, etc. are no better than the MDR, then prove that claim.  Throwing in comparisons about design features seems like an attempt to misdirect from what the main issue is: greater than expected reliability issues from what people expect from this expensive and much delayed gun.
Logged
reason
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 245


« Reply #14 on: June 16, 2018, 05:12:36 PM »

I would mirror what Dwill said on the nature of the complaints about the MDR.

The plain fact is that some complaints are personal preferences not being met and some are factual descriptions of a weapons failures to meet minimun standards.

Try finding the latter about some guns and you will be hard pressed to come up with a demonstrable example. Try to find manufacturer videos that contain self evident demonstration of their own weapon malfunctioning the way DT has and see what you come up with....

I dont consider a “break in period” acceptable of ANY weapon...
« Last Edit: June 16, 2018, 05:48:17 PM by reason » Logged
JesseJames38
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 185


« Reply #15 on: June 17, 2018, 02:46:38 PM »

Some earlier posted a good point about the HK roller delayed blow back rifles being just that, Blow back with no gas system.   And I read a few more of his comparisons, I am not sure if he was being serious or not. But after reading them I found a few things troubling.  As for quality brand ammo, that in its self is quite subjective in option, I must say I like what Bond arms did with the bullpup9.  They took and listed the ammo that they used and says is good with the firearm, that already takes all the guess work when a gun mfg. says "quality ammo"

When the mdr either can't fire or requires adjustment to fire some ammo without getting stuck cases that other rifles in the same category (Scar, MWS, Fal, G3,  Rfb, etc) do without issue is that not seen as a problem for what the mdr is advertised and sold as? I'm still sticking cases with the 6position plug on ammo that I've never had an issue with in other autoloaders.

To address this you are welcome to call me and I would like to get more details into the issues, their frequency, and what ammunition brands you have tested.  I will be available in our office at 3PM mtn time for your call. 801-975-7272. 

To answer your question in general I would say "yes the MDR should fire all quality brands of ammunition through it reliably".  But, not all ammunition is created equally and for many quality = cheapest bulk price ammunition they can find.  Now I am not sure if you have fired all of the rifles you have listed above but we have and I would like to give you some insight on what we have experienced with them.  I am not by any means bashing their products but reporting actual results we got and for fun I will be evaluating them with the same level of scrutiny that many are giving the MDR.  Now understand the results I post are 100% honest but I will list a sarcastic hyper scrutinized list of what people would be saying if they evaluated these rifles the same way some people are evaluating the MDR.

1. FN SCAR, we tested two scars against the MDR.  Both scars were flawlessly reliable in feeding "quality" ammunition through them as was our MDR test guns with the same "quality" ammunition.  However one of the two scars would not stabilize match ammunition in our accuracy tests and at 100 yards we could only get three shots on a 36"x24" target board and those three shots formed an group over 18".  The other SCAR shot 1.5 MOA regularly.  In our bore obstruction testing then the SCAR's lower receiver blew up like a grenade. 
Now lets do the fun MDR scrutiny test:
a. All scars should stablize the same ammunition right (>36" accuracy groups is unacceptable)  Why would one SCAR stabilize match ammunition and the other not?
b. The lower receiver shouldn't grenade on a bore test that is unsafe
c. The charging handle should be non reciprocating
d. The folding stock should not be clumsy and cheap feeling
e. It should use SR25 mags that are widely available
f. The trigger is one of the worst factory triggers on the market why do I have to buy a replacement trigger to fix it.
---- MDR trigger is far from being the a crisp 4.5lb pull.  And we (MDR Owners, should not have to buy a replacement either to fix it)

2. Keltech RFB would not eject anything we fired through it, the bolt did not budge at all after each shot we fired through it and we had to hammer the charging handle back every single shot, when we did the bore obstruction test on the RFB it went off like a grenade (both upper and lower receivers). 
Now the fun MDR scrutiny test:
a. The RFB is unsafe with a bore obstruction
b. The RFB Pushpins are impossible to get in and out without a hammer
c. You can't safely inspect the RFB chamber without getting your finger dirty up the mag well.
d. The RFB buttpad is so short that the rifle constantly slips up all your shoulder and is very uncomfortable.
e. The RFB bolt release is slow to actuate
f. The RFB magazine release is slow to operate and mags didn't drop free for us.
g. There are not picitanny rails at 3, 6, and 9 o'clock positions on the RFB hand guard.
h. The RFB needs a cheekpiece because it burns and freezes my face when its hot and cold outside.
     ------- MDR magazine release is slow to operate due to being to stiff and having to remove your whole grip to push in the button-----

3. HK G3, this is the hardest recoiling .308 win I have ever shot, I love the G3 it is 100% reliable all the time with everything due to it being a extremely heavy steel receiver rifle which allows it to have one setting which is extremely over gassing the ejection.  They can do this because they have an extractor claw that has substantially more engagement than other rifles, that is why their over gasing doesn't rip the rims.  As a result it feeds everything but kicks the snot out of you.  It also folds brass in half when it hits the ejection port and flings it 20+ yards in front of you. 
Fun MDR Scrutiny Test:
a. The G3 is way too heavy
b. The G3 destroys brass (if you can even find it after it throws it into the next zip code)
c. The G3 has the most painful recoil of any other .308 win. 
d. You can't reach the magazine release on the G3 like an AR15 and mags don't drop free
e. The G3's charging handle is difficult to reach and requires too much force to actuate
f. The G3's controls are not ambidextrous
g. Mounting an optic to the G3 rifle is a joke because I have to mount it super high with a cheesy QD mount and I am limited on the length of scope I can mount because the charging handle is in the way so I have to turkey neck big time and lift my head high above the cheek piece to get a proper sight picture, and to fix that I have to buy a $500 adjustable stock that adds even more weight and bulk to the rifle.
h. The G3 needs a forward assist why do I have to spend $10K+ for a PSG1 with only a fixed 6x scope to get a decent DMR rifle with my HK?
I and not knocking the rifles I love HK, I have personally owned an HK 91, 93, 94, SP89, 53, PSG1, and MSG90 so I am very familiar with these rifles.


4. FN FAL, my FAL required me to adjust the gas port several times to get it to reliably function with different brands of ammunition.  Because I didn't have a tool I used screw drivers, fingers, and bullets to adjust it which was very difficult and painful at times to adjust it.  The locking lugs on the FAL is the rear of the bolt which hurts the accuracy because you have the entire length of the bolt collapsing like a spring under chamber pressure but that doesn't matter because you can't mount a scope on the rifle unless you by a new receiver cover with a rail but wait it is a slip fit floating cover not a stationary mounting platform.  It also doesn't have ambidextrous controls, not drop free magazine, not adjustable length of pull, I can add a bunch of accessories to help with that by why should I need to right?
fun MDR Scrutiny Test
a. the FAL is not compatible with great accuracy due to bolt and barrel design and bad scope mounting design
b. FAL rifle is too long
c. FAL controls are not ambi
d. FAL should be easy to adjust gas value by hand and not need a tool
e. FAL should have a forward assist
f. FAL controls are slow and not ergonomic and not ambidextrous.
----- MDR, Also requires tools to remove the hand guard and a tool to adjust the gas valve------
----- MDR, Also does not have a Fwd assist, But mostly the MDR needs a extraction assistance due to the cases.------

5. We tested two LMT rifles against the MDR a standard LMT .308 and an LMT Match rifle both rifles had accuracy groups over 2" and the match rifle actually shot the worse between the two.  They were reliable though but very heavy.
MDR Scrutiny Test
a. LMT accuracy was very poor
b. LMT rifle is way too heavy
c. LMT prone is uncomfortable with the collapsible stock, stock should also be collapsible to reduce carry length.
d. I shouldn't have to lift my head to actuate charging handle on LMT
e. LMT bolt stop release is not in optimal location
f. LMT controls should be ambidextrous out of the box and they aren't

HK MR762; This rifle is extremely heavy, accuracy was great (due to the heavy stove pipe barrel), we had multiple issues where it failed to strip the cartridges out of the magazines, this happened once every 20 - 50 rounds.
MDR scrutiny test:
a. MR762 is the most expensive battle rifle and very widely adopted by militaries how could it have an issue stripping rounds of the magazine?
b. MR762 weight of this rifle is in sniper rifle category, way too heavy
c. MR762 should have ambi controls
d. MR762 shouldn't require you to lift your head when charging the weapon
e. MR762 should fire standard SR25 round mags, especially since their proprietary mags don't work
f. MR762 should have side folding stock to reduce carry length

IWI Tavor, Accuracy was 5"+ at 100 yards, the ergonomics of the cheekpiece are too square, and the square butted makes the length of pull too uncomfortable.  There are way to many parts and fasteners all over this rifle.  The design of the Tavor's gas system deflects gases straight out of the ejection port and into the shooters face and eyes, etc...

Now I am not saying the MDR is perfect by any means and I'm not bashing the rifles above, I am just trying to equalize the perspective that some people have had on the MDR.


If you tighten up the tolerances on the magazine catch retention bolt and the right side bore it will fix many of the magazine compatibility issues the mdr has which also. The excess clearance in that area leads to in/out play on the actual mag catch. It also is disheartening when the rifle is designed around sr25 pattern mags but it seems to be able to only reliably use 1 brand of mag. Even after I corrected that issue it still doesn't reliably function with Brownells aluminum mags. I haven't had time to inspect further but I believe it's a clearance issue at the back of the mag.

In development we ensured the MDR's functioned flawlessly with PMAGS, Lancers, and DPMS alloy mags.  We also built stops in the gun so that you can rest the rifle on the magazine on the ground (monopod the mag) and it will not cause any malfunctions.  There should not be any issues in using the other magazines.  If you call me we will discuss these issues in detail too.

Is anything being done to the trigger bar/trigger linkage? The current design is just a hook and the safety only prevents movement of the bar, not the actual trigger pack. Just looking at it the design doesn't seem safe in the event the rifle is dropped on the muzzle.

We have conducted several military drop tests on numerous MDR rifles and I can assure you that when the safety is engaged the rifle will not fire in any orientation that is it dropped in.  We will be sharing standard military testing videos of the MDR next week for those interested please stay tuned.

Always this are just my quick thoughts.  Like the rifle, like the concept.   I am sure if I just stick to .308 ammo life may be alright.  Nato ammo just seems to be a no go due to the .308 chamber cut they have. 
Logged
thehun
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 524


« Reply #16 on: June 17, 2018, 03:44:00 PM »

Wasn’t the MDR marketed to all of us as a battle rifle though? Hands down it is the most innovative bullpup design of the 21st century ...that means...it should function NATO M80 ball all day long with out a hint of hiccup.

Here is the little pickle I have...on their website its shows the MDR as .308 with an available 7.62x51 conversion (is that even released yet)...when I click order now...which takes me to rifle builder...the MDR is labeled as 7.62x51...not 308...and the 7.62x51 conversion is a whopping $999 dollars.... Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes ROFLMAO ROFLMAO ROFLMAO urinal
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 04:42:56 PM by thehun » Logged
kfeltenberger
^
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,950



WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 17, 2018, 06:51:47 PM »

Wasn’t the MDR marketed to all of us as a battle rifle though? Hands down it is the most innovative bullpup design of the 21st century ...that means...it should function NATO M80 ball all day long with out a hint of hiccup.

Here is the little pickle I have...on their website its shows the MDR as .308 with an available 7.62x51 conversion (is that even released yet)...when I click order now...which takes me to rifle builder...the MDR is labeled as 7.62x51...not 308...and the 7.62x51 conversion is a whopping $999 dollars.... Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes ROFLMAO ROFLMAO ROFLMAO urinal


What's so funny?  The conversion kit is there to convert a 5.56 rifle to .308 and has always been that way.  You can buy a complete rifle (.308 or 5.56) and then buy conversion kits to convert to other calibers.  How about letting Nick answer questions rather than nit picking and looking for things to mock or complain about?
Logged

Kurt
thehun
Bullpup Fanatic
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 524


« Reply #18 on: June 17, 2018, 07:13:35 PM »

Ok. I am talking about that the rifle is clearly been confirmed as a .308 chambered weapon but when you go to the order screen it shows it as a 7.62x51 and the conversion shows 7.62x51...

Don’t get your panties all over the place. This is the thread to respond to Nick’s answers...I am pointing out what he confirmed. MDRs chamber is 308 not 7.62x51...but their website contradicts that claim...so if they know it’s a 308 chamber why show it as 7.62x51...
« Last Edit: June 17, 2018, 07:20:50 PM by thehun » Logged
newguy2k3
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 79


« Reply #19 on: June 17, 2018, 08:25:34 PM »

What I want to know is if the BCG needed redesigning for the 223 mdr will the 308 mdrs moving forward have this new bcg and what does that mean for those of us that have adopted the mdr early on. Do we also have to buy a carrier in addition to the conversion kit if we want 223?

I'd hope they would figure something out but having to buy another gas valve to try to make a gun functional when it should have worked out of the box doesn't give me much hope.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!