User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 1:59:21 PM EDT
[#1]
You should PM Bookhound, he seems to have some information to validate your query. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 3:22:56 PM EDT
[#2]
So did they make a video of their test
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 3:34:38 PM EDT
[#3]
As I stated in another thread, the test Robert conducted with the G5 is a test I've seen done with SureFire and AAC cans. It is a test Robert did not dreap up. Rather, the military customer wanting a few cans requested the test.
Mark |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 3:41:29 PM EDT
[#4]
The thing I like best about Gemtech is they don't see the need to trash the competitions product to sell theirs...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 3:44:28 PM EDT
[#5]
Robert says there is a video that will be posted soon. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 5:23:57 PM EDT
[#6]
The Saga continues.
I'll take my M4-2000 Mod 7 and leave the gemtech cans to you guys that want them. I'm sure they are good cans but not as rugged as the AAC product. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 6:10:24 PM EDT
[#7]
Lorcin owners or manuf. can hardly trash Sig pistol owners or manuf., so does that make Lorcin the stand up company?
Exaggerating to make a counter point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 7:08:02 PM EDT
[#8]
It would make them seem MORE stand up to me, regardless if the trashing seems to them justified or not. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 10:21:47 PM EDT
[#9]
When the company is saying fully welded core, caught on film, then how is pointing out that there is no fully welded core, bashing on a manufacturer? I think it is just holding them to thier own specs.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=48DajwkIFOw |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/11/2007 10:37:09 PM EDT
[#10]
Ouch. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 4:23:51 AM EDT
[#11]
Double ouch. On a side note does anyone now how the lanyards are holding up? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 5:09:09 AM EDT
[#12]
GM, Ford, and Dodge are continually "trashing" each others products. What's the difference?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 7:48:20 AM EDT
[#13]
i own several gems including a g5 and have had no problem with them
the company stands behind their products while aac has proven it wont that is where the sale is made this thread is a waste of time aac has blamed their failures on "improper use" or "user error" without looking at the cans now they blow something up and people run to them as their saviors because of a few clowns who are in their pockets please lead us sheeple to the slaughter |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 8:08:32 AM EDT
[#14]
Our issue isn't with the fact that they were able to blow up a G5. Anybody can blow up any suppressor at any time given the right tools and motivation. Our problem is with Gemtech's lack of response to this thread, and the fact that they completely misrepresent this particular product. Check out the other thread about .mil spec testing that Bigbore started a couple threads down. In that thread are links to both Gemtech's website where the are blatantly lying, as well as Gemtech at Shotshow again blatantly lying about the construction of their suppressor. They have yet to make any statement regarding this, I'd hesitate to call this "standing behind their product." AAC's customer service issues are not in question here, what is in question, is the ethical repercussions necessitated by a company blatantly misrepresenting both the capabilities and construction of their product. Watch the video, then look at the pictures of the suppressor. There are exactly zero welds on the baffle stack of the suppressor, in fact, the only weld on the suppressor is a non-structural weld on the endcap to make sure that it is not removable. As far as I'm concerned, it's tantamount to consumer fraud, and God forbid any of our brave fighting men and women are relying on this tool with the expectation that it will perform the way that Gemtech has stated, only for it to fail when it's needed most. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 8:19:05 AM EDT
[#15]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 8:49:27 AM EDT
[#16]
Again thanks everyone for being professional here. I appreciate it.
I highly doubt that Gemtech will answer or respond do this. Why? Because it is not in their best interest. Would you answer? I know I wouldn't. The results are this: Would the G5 survive that test ... well it is plain that it didn't. Would an M4-96d ? maybe ... they are different suppressors, The G5 is a Ti and Steel stack, with an inconel blast baffle insert and the M4-96d is an all steel stack with some sort of inconel blast baffle. With out spin welding the material together, you can't really weld the two materials. Is the G5 fine for normal civilian use? Sure, because the normal Civilian isn't going to hammer it. Might there be better cans out there? Sure, everyone has their own opinion. It is what it is. If you are not happy with a company, any company, don't buy their products. They will either change or go away. ETA: As I understand it, the test that was done really is a torture test. Except for some cracking on the blast baffle, everything appears to be reasonably ok. It might just screw back together and be fine. I have seen other produsts that the same cracking / wear was evident in the same sort of test. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 8:59:16 AM EDT
[#17]
Let's see if I have this right, AAC puts a G5 through a very abusive test and it falls apart, they report on it, people cry foul, and now there's a demand for GemTech to come explain themselves?
First off, after speaking with Robert, I realize that while he has a slant (AAC) he's not in this in a malicious way. He simply likes to take things to the limit and past it at times for both fun and to gain knowledge from the tests. In my opinion a competitor posting failures of competing products brings too much into question to put my faith behind 100%. This isn't saying it would not fail a neutral test, but I'm much more inclined to believe a neutral test. As to AAC, obviously they stand to gain from sharing Roberts testing and pointing out all the problems found. Being who they are, with the history they have, it doesn't surprise me. * Did GemTech misrepresent the suppressor? That's an issue that does have to be worked through, but calling for Dater to jump into a pool full of sharks is not the way to go about it. I would recommend someone calling them to get an answer or having one of their dealers do it on everyone's behalf. Keep in mind that often at SHOT products are shown off that are changed when they are put into production, this is common place since people want to see the latest and greatest. The video needs to be taken in that context. I would like to see a clarification on this as I have a pair of G5s (zero problems), but I understand why they would stay away from this thread. In the best interests of everyone, refrain from taking this thread down with an abusive rant against one side or another. * ARF history with AAC and their "tactics" on promoting their products by bashing competitors. In addition several people mentoned AAC is more difficult to deal with then GemTech in terms of customer satisfaction. (The infamous shiv issue.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 9:05:01 AM EDT
[#18]
deny, deny, deny and fire back with counter accusations. it's much easier to do that than to admit defeat or that you've made a mistake. There is no disputing that the can failed and that there were no welds like Gem has said they used. every company makes mistakes at one point. now would be a great time for Gem to stand up and fix the problem for their customers. that kind of service would, of course, be raved about for years to come....how Gem took care of everyone by fixing their cans or giving them new ones. it would definitely hyper-differentiate them from aac is the CS department. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 9:25:23 AM EDT
[#19]
That video is from SHOT Show 2007. I believe the G5 debuted at the 2006 show, and would have been in production for around a year at the time of that video (bigbore mentioned that it's been in production for about 18 months). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 10:05:27 AM EDT
[#20]
* ARF history with AAC and their "tactics" on promoting their products by bashing competitors. In addition several people mentoned AAC is more difficult to deal with then GemTech in terms of customer satisfaction. (The infamous shiv issue.)
The infamous shiv issue, I assume you mean the one that after mr Shiv swore up and down he did not abuse the product AAC repaired it to like new condition for no charge. Yes service like that should not be tolerated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 10:22:08 AM EDT
[#21]
Again, AAC's customer service is not the issue here. The issue is Gemtech misrepresenting the G5. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:08:19 AM EDT
[#22]
No, the issue is that AAC, through the ST web site, is claiming that Gemtech has misrepresented the G5. I find it fascinating that so many people here are willing to believe every word that Robert or AAC says, every frame of video they may post, as gospel truth, when they have a clear financial motivation for making their claims. How's this for a resolution: --Everyone who believes AAC makes the best products, keep buying them. --Everyone who believes Gemtech makes the best products, keep buying them. --And everyone who blindly believes everything you read or see on the internet, buy AAC. Their products are a good match for you. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:11:27 AM EDT
[#23]
So you're saying that Robert Photoshopped the pictures? Because I can guarantee you that didn't happen, I saw the silencer before the pictures were even taken!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:17:21 AM EDT
[#24]
Tony,
What do those people who bought a G5 based on the knowledge that it had a welded core do? I don't have a G5 but I have friends that do and I think it is a valid question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:19:48 AM EDT
[#25]
So you're saying that Gemtech saying that the G5 has a welded core, and then Robert showing pictures of it proving that information incorrect, in no way proves that Gemtech misrepresented the construction methods of their product? I still fail to see how the fact that it was AAC matters at all when it comes to empirical data. Again, Gemtech says one thing, it is proved to be untrue. Who proves it really doesn't matter as there is evidence backing it up. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:23:14 AM EDT
[#26]
I am saying that it is impossible for anyone to be 100% objective when the results of a test will determine how much they will have to spend on groceries that week.
And when objectivity is impossible, results are suspect unless they have been independently, objectively verified. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:29:37 AM EDT
[#27]
It is something that owners should take up directly with Gemtech. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:45:01 AM EDT
[#28]
You might be right. That doesn't change the fact that it costs far more then what would be a better suppressor, and last but not least, they are bald face lying about how the can is made. Not good business IMHO. I'm not sure I agree that not answering is the best business choice either. They are losing customers too this issue, theirs no doubt about it. I'm guessing alot of people are seeing how this will play out and are basing their choices on the outcome. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:49:26 AM EDT
[#29]
And I'm saying that the members both taking part (GaLEO on ST) and the witnesses (the rest of the gun range) negate the proctor of the assessment as there are enough checks and balances present. With someone of the caliber of character of GaLEO, the veracity of the test is without question. I guess in the end the Kool-Aid drinkers won't be convinced no matter how much evidence is presented to them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 11:50:33 AM EDT
[#30]
Oh so that's how it went... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 12:03:50 PM EDT
[#31]
This is simply a religious war between two factions. Those in AACs camp will claim a perfectly neutral test, unquestionable outcome, and damning facts. Those in GemTech's camp will claim typical AAC BS, non-neutral testing, and nothing proven except they blew up a can doing who knows what to it. For a test to be true you need to know what this thing was subjected to not just DURING the test but before it. You also need to look at outside influences on the test, ie the person testing it and for what purpose. The problem is there are multiple issues in this thread alone trying to dump on GemTech. Worse than that, this attitude and all these accusations will most likely keep a response from happening. Everyone is telling their "interpretation" of what they "heard" and thus full of opinion. Robert laid down the test, so it should be easy to reproduce by a neutral party and should yield the same results if it's accurate. This isn't a statement doubting that the suppressor will achieve equal failure, it's a doubting of those pushing a business agenda. I'm not about to shred mine and have AAC crying foul from their forums. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 12:20:22 PM EDT
[#32]
You, Tony_k, are absolutely correct. Though it is interesting to note that arfcom management isn't in a position to be 100% objective on this matter either. A quick look at the *paying* industry partners will clarify that. www.ar15.com/forums/forum.html?b=2&f=246 Obviously if robert was full of crap it would be very wise for Gemtech to stand up, take some photos of their fully welded core and cry foul, but they haven't. That only leaves us with the evidence we have. 1> Gemtech states its welded, 2> the photos prove otherwise. Obviously if Robert/AAC is pulling some sort of crap here and misrepresenting the G5 it would be quite easy for GT to put all the doubts to rest with a photo of a fully welded core like they have said they have. Phil? Are you out there? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 12:42:44 PM EDT
[#33]
Robert should have kept this test to himself initally. This would be a COMPLETELY different situation, had Robert sent the can back to Gemtech for warranty work, with a note questioning its construction. After Gemtech had a chance to reply/resolve the issue, that would have been the time to go public with all vids/pictures and correspondence. I'd be interested to see if this G5 could be repaired. Has anyone attempted to send this suppressor back? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 12:54:42 PM EDT
[#34]
Just to be clear . . . . what are the issues?
1. The test was invalid because RSlvers and the AAC boys rigged it somehow? 2. Gem-Tech's can would stand up to the military test regime and that can that RSilver's blew up was a statistical fluke? 3. Gem-Tech is the issue: They said the can was welded and the can obviously is not welded? 4. Goatboy and company hate AAC? 5. AAC and company hate Goatboy? 6. AAC camp hate the Gem-Tech Camp? 7. The test should be duplicated by someone who hates both AAC and Gem-TEch products and would have to buy a new AR-15 to test the Gem-Tech can because he only lets SWR products be mounted on his M-16s? I'm just trying to figure out the real underlying issues in this thread? The test is what the test is. The Gem-Tech can came apart under load. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 12:58:41 PM EDT
[#35]
Going over all the documentation I cant find any text that the G5 is welded. The HALO, and M402 mention they are welded, but no such copy regarding the G5. Call me naïve, but I believe whoever is speaking in the video at SHOT, made an honest mistake in stating the G5 was fully welded. Whoever that person is, I’m sure they are not in a good place for giving the competition something they have successfully blown way out of proportion. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:02:00 PM EDT
[#36]
The real question for me is twofold:
1. Did Gem-TEch claim the can was welded? 2. What is the intended use for the can? If #1 did not happen, then you move to #2 & the questionb becomes whether the test exceeeded the specificaitons for the can or exceeded the state purpose/use of the can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:12:35 PM EDT
[#37]
This thread has nothing to do with AAC outside their sharing of test results which damage a competitor. The issues in this thread are getting the same test done by a neutral party to verify it and if GemTech did mislead people by stating information about the G5 which are not true. I think everything here has been blown out of proportion by individuals on both sides.
What the test proved was a failure outside of normal test conditions, give me any can and I'll get you a failure too. What exactly does that prove? I just want to get info like everyone else and am a bit more conservative when the failure info is coming from AAC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:13:39 PM EDT
[#38]
1. Yes, Gemtech claimed the core of the G5 was welded. They said so in several instances, both at Shot Show as well as in private e-mails to several individuals. 2. A "high-speed, low-drag" suppressor "made for those that demand the apex of performance." That's the intended use, but I can't see anybody who relies on one of these while in harm's way, actually trusting it to survive any serious firefight. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:13:51 PM EDT
[#39]
Bigbore, you are naive. :)
Now that that is done, it isn't an honest mistake to state that your product (of which you only produce less than 30? 20? 10?) is red when it is in fact blue. Welded Core != Welded Endcap. On top of the 2007 SS video (which clearly shows a Gemtech Employee misrepresenting the G5 honestly or dishonestly doesn't matter) that RSilvers claims to have emails from Phil stating that the G5 has a welded core. Bottom Line: Gemtech SHOULD respond to this (and I believe they will at some point because this thread will not, and should not, die down without their response... unless of course it "disappears") and state whether or not the G5 has a welded core. If it does, then AAC bought a "bad can" that slipped through Gemtech's quality assurance program. If it doesn't have a welded core, then they should (and I believe WILL) replace or repair anybody who asks them to. I honestly see this as GREAT advertising for Gemtech. Right now they have GREAT customer service with a good silencer. This "event" could make them known for the best service in the industry (yes, we screwed up but LOOK we are willing to fix our screw up even though it costs us thousands of dollars). Semper Fidelis, P.S. the issue for me is ONLY that the G5 isn't corewelded when it was said to be corewelded. I don't give a shit about GT vs AAC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:15:40 PM EDT
[#40]
Agreed. I also agree that a mistake at SHOT, on the floor where multiple products are discussed every minute, isn't something you can hold them accountable for. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:17:13 PM EDT
[#41]
Well I'm going to get a G5 and beat the shit out of it for awhile and see how it does.
We have Halo's, HVT's and M4-02's... we have done just about everything they (Gemtech) recomend you NOT do to their cans and so far all is well. We have run the M4-02 on a 10" full auto and made it glow orange sevral times, we mounted the HVT on an M-60 and the things we've done to that poor Halo are just plain wrong...they all still work and have not gotten noticbly louder. Not saying Gemtech is perfect,. but so far I've gotten more then my money's worth out of their products. I'll post the results of our G5 tests.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:27:56 PM EDT
[#42]
Please videotape it!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:28:45 PM EDT
[#43]
Please do post your results. I know that it's asking a lot to destroy a brand new can, but I think the besst course of action would be to exactly repeat Robert's test if the desire is to see how it holds up. If you don't want to risk destroying a brand new can, it's understandable. If you do decide however, I'll gladly come watch and I will testify to the procedure of the test. I'd also be happy to take pictures of it if you'd like. I'd very much like this to be a fluke and another test of the same procedure would go a long way. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:32:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Like I stated before, I would REALLY like to see the way the mount was put on the 416. Not that I think it will make any difference, I just want to see a pic or video of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:34:10 PM EDT
[#45]
I dont have dog in this fight but I will be happy to support the unsurpassed HSLD Uber welded super silence of a G5 or an M4-2000. Depending on which shows up at my local C3 dealer for me first. Kevin or Dr. Dater PM for shipping address.
 ETA I finally own a page! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:36:19 PM EDT
[#46]
Don't shoot any cows with it! 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:36:36 PM EDT
[#47]
Actually, my partner and I would be the perfect candiates for this test:
He likes and sells the Gem-TEch cans. I like and sell the AAC cans. We both have post sample M-16s and both of us would put a 10.5" upper together for the test. Now, we just have to get Dr. Dater and Kevin to form 5 an M4-2000 and a G5 to us for testing. I'll even buy the cases of ammo! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:42:27 PM EDT
[#48]
Actually, if you look at the Gemtech Shot Show video you can see exactly how it mounts. GaLEO said the spacer used on their 416 during testing looked exactly like the one on the Gemtech 416 in the video.
Ahh, you've gotta buy current ones straight from the shelf though, otherwise you open both companies up to sending ringer cans!!!! You should both order one and not tell either company that you're gonna try and fry them. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:47:04 PM EDT
[#49]
I still want to see if the basic question whether it is welded or not answered....
That would be nice if its possible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2007 1:50:39 PM EDT
[#50]
Great minds think alike I run an M4-96D on a very short Micro Galil. Kel told me flat out that gun was too short for his can. I still ran the crap out of it and it's still just fine. I may send it in to convert it to a G5. Mostly I run the Halo and also have had no issues. Haven't abused my HVT like you, but I'll get around to it
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
