Armory Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Interesting MSAR malfunction (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 11/12/2010 1:42:21 PM EDT
|
On the USAAUG.com boards there appears to be a trunnion separation on a MSAR. Well here is the thread.
http://www.usaaug.com/showthread.php?t=1403 |
Glad he's ok.
|
Quoted:
He needs to read the post by MSARWEBGUY on cleaning his rifle before he returnes it. 
Joking aside he is INCREDIBLY lucky he noticed that. That was a KB waiting to happen. I have never seen that before! even in destruction testing. It does not look like his trunnion was machined to fix the bad casting that was talked about here last week or so. Either this casting had a crack and it somehow got through XRAY screening, it was assembled incorrectly (preloading it with too much stress), or he was using reloads. He claimed he didnt, but who knows. I am astonished at that failure....I spent a good deal of time trying to get catastrophic failures at MSAR....never got anything like that |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
He needs to read the post by MSARWEBGUY on cleaning his rifle before he returnes it.
Joking aside he is INCREDIBLY lucky he noticed that. That was a KB waiting to happen. I have never seen that before! even in destruction testing. It does not look like his trunnion was machined to fix the bad casting that was talked about here last week or so. Either this casting had a crack and it somehow got through XRAY screening, it was assembled incorrectly (preloading it with too much stress), or he was using reloads. He claimed he didnt, but who knows. I am astonished at that failure....I spent a good deal of time trying to get catastrophic failures at MSAR....never got anything like that Any idea's about the charging handle guide rod and the grooves in it ? |
|
Quoted:
A lot of stupid going on in that thread. The "threads" are for the forward assist on "gen I" stocks and I can assure you that they came that way from MSAR. Someone already registered on that forum should post that Yea there are some haters in there for sure. The forward assist is mentioned though. That failure looks legitimate. I have really been looking at those pictures and I don't see any signs of abuse. The break looks clean all the way around. I would expect to see different coloring of the fracture if the crack had been there for a while. It's no secret around here I haven't been happy With MSAR. But my issues were petty compared to this. Thank goodness he noticed, if he pulled the trigger 1 more time.... yea my MSAR is not my favorite but I still got one. It's one of the favorites when I take the kids shooting...Just great. |
|
Quoted:
A lot of stupid going on in that thread. The "threads" are for the forward assist on "gen I" stocks and I can assure you that they came that way from MSAR. Someone already registered on that forum should post that Ive never seen a forward assist carrier before and im sure many others havent either. So i guess im stupid . 
|
|
Quoted:
That wasnt really directed at you or anyones failure to notice what they were for. It was people commenting that they didnt come that way from factory. sorry, i may have over reacted but there was only two questions about the rod, " whats up with the threads on the rod " and the reply was " it came from MSAR that way" . I didnt see any other comments made about it other than asking the op if he had an earlier model with forward assist. We still dont know , but he does have an earlier carrier and bolt sleeve. Also round count and what the fired casing looks like are unknown. Could a over pressure round do this ? Could the proof loads from the factory have weakened a poor trunnion assembly ? If its a poorly cast trunnion how many more could be out there ? Lots of questions we may never know the answer too. |
|
Can someone post the text of the original post at USAAug not just the link? I have been "banned for life" from USAAug for saying "I am tired of all the MSAR BASHING shit, and this is my last post on this popcorn stand". Now I can't even log in and see what the OP wrote. MadDog 
|
|
Quoted:
Can someone post the text of the original post at USAAug not just the link? I have been "banned for life" from USAAug for saying "I am tired of all the MSAR BASHING shit, and this is my last post on this popcorn stand". Now I can't even log in and see what the OP wrote. MadDog I dont think you have to be logged in to read the posts , unless they REALLY banned you from even reading them. |
|
Quoted:
Can someone post the text of the original post at USAAug not just the link? I have been "banned for life" from USAAug for saying "I am tired of all the MSAR BASHING shit, and this is my last post on this popcorn stand". Now I can't even log in and see what the OP wrote. MadDog In your IE (browser), go to tools tab, internet options and clear your cookies. That way the forum won't recognize your computer when you reload IE. close your browser and reopen it and you should be able to read the posts then. You may need to reboot the computer. 
|
|
Bean,
Yes the proof rounds could have weakened it, but it should have failed at that point if it were going to. Another over pressured round could have helped that. Like I said these castings are supposed to go through a 100% x-ray inspection. And if it didn't, or it did and the void was missed, then this isn't a fault of MSAR, this is the vendor's fault. I don't think round count had anything to do with it unless there were repeated over pressured rounds going down the tube. The trunnion is held in place by the bushings that the BCG run through. When fired however, the barrel's lugs essentially make the trunnion an extension of the barrel, much like an AR. This explains the failure method shown in the pictures...separation from the bolt's locking lugs back. My money is on a bad casting which should have been exposed on the factory proof rounds. Stranger things have happened though I guess. |
|
Quoted: He claims he wasn't running reloads, but if he hadn't said that it would have been my first guess as to what happened. and/or a squib. I saw the pics that were posted. I thought there was more material joining the face of the trunion with the rest of the body. Glad he's ok. |
|
Quoted:
Bean, Yes the proof rounds could have weakened it, but it should have failed at that point if it were going to. Another over pressured round could have helped that. Like I said these castings are supposed to go through a 100% x-ray inspection. And if it didn't, or it did and the void was missed, then this isn't a fault of MSAR, this is the vendor's fault. I don't think round count had anything to do with it unless there were repeated over pressured rounds going down the tube. The trunnion is held in place by the bushings that the BCG run through. When fired however, the barrel's lugs essentially make the trunnion an extension of the barrel, much like an AR. This explains the failure method shown in the pictures...separation from the bolt's locking lugs back. My money is on a bad casting which should have been exposed on the factory proof rounds. Stranger things have happened though I guess. I can say from personal experience that x-ray testing is not an magic tool. I have seen a weld joint get x-rayed twice, by mistake. The first x-ray showed nothing, the second one rejected the weld. It depends on the angle that it was shot, and who is reading the film. If the flaw was to small to see with the naked eye it would be missed any way. I thought MSAR tested a STG556 to destruction and it took 40 poof loads? The bc broke, another casting? I am not a fan of using casting. Looking at the porosity on my STG556 bolt carrier does not give me a warm fuzzy filling. Niether does that pic of the broken trunnion. |
|
Quoted: Looking at the porosity on my STG556 bolt carrier does not give me a warm fuzzy filling. Niether does that pic of the broken trunnion.
Warm and fuzzy left with Dave Robertson. My STG556 is a dedicated range novelty toy now. I've thought about selling mine all day after seeing those pics. |
|
Quoted:
So glad I was out of my mind for worrying about this exact same thing.  This is the first anyone has ever seen of such a failure. Until we know exactly what happened, Im not too worried about it. There were signs things were wrong and the shooter identified the problem. Had it actually KB'd you would be no worse off then if an AR went off in front of you. |
|
Quoted:
Interesting. An RFB breaks a gas piston, and it is a "KABOOM" An Aug clone blows the locking lugs clear out of the trunnion, and it is a "malfunction"? . Exactly, neither are correct. They are both considered failures on a large degree but a kaboom is never as nice looking as that trunnion separation. If he had been able to fire again with that breakage, that would have been a kaboom. |
|
Quoted:
Interesting. An RFB breaks a gas piston, and it is a "KABOOM" An Aug clone blows the locking lugs clear out of the trunnion, and it is a "malfunction"? . And Kel-tec always seems to get the benefit of the doubt and MSAR gets drawn and quartered by hateful peasants with torches and pitchforks. |
|
Quoted: Interesting. An RFB breaks a gas piston, and it is a "KABOOM" An Aug clone blows the locking lugs clear out of the trunnion, and it is a "malfunction"? . IIRC, the author of that thread (if I'm thinking of the same one) was taken to task quickly for calling it a "KABOOM" by most of the posters who replied. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Interesting. An RFB breaks a gas piston, and it is a "KABOOM" An Aug clone blows the locking lugs clear out of the trunnion, and it is a "malfunction"? . And Kel-tec always seems to get the benefit of the doubt and MSAR gets drawn and quartered by hateful peasants with torches and pitchforks. Sorry. But that MSAR owner was one trigger pull from a hospital visit the way I see it. The latest threads about kaboooms Are full of KT comments. But really the pictures provided only show a crappy and disappointing range day for some RFB Owners. FN bullpup's bashed with no evidence. Your right I am not thrilled with MSAR for their business practices and false promises. The only thing is now I'm scared to let my kids shoot it. If that component is in fact forged on a Steyr but cast on MSAR... |
|
Quoted: And Kel-tec always seems to get the benefit of the doubt and MSAR gets drawn and quartered by hateful peasants with torches and pitchforks. Not in my experience. (And I mod the KT forum as well. )In just the past 48 hours I read a post here somewhere (re: the RFB) that said "Well, if any bullpup is going to explode in your face it will be a Kel-tec" or some such crap. Plenty of KT hate here and, in my experience, it is far more than what I've seen WRT MSAR... of course, KT has been making guns longer and has a wider variety of models for the haters to hate. |
|
Ruffled a few feathers did I?
Well, let's look at the facts. The locking lugs blew clear out of that weapon. Since this happened while firing, it is a safe bet that 40k psi gas was vented into the receiver when the case head failed. The owner stated that he had some other damage as well. The weapon is no longer safe to shoot. That qualifies as a "blown up weapon". Thankfully the good engineering in that weapon system allowed the high pressure gas to vent in a safe direction. Great design, and a good weapon. I have "blown up" more than a couple of AR type rifles (intentionally for testing) and generally a ruptured case head from overpressure blows the magazine guts out & may bend the mag catch. I never had a locking lug failure doing that test, even though the test load was hot enough to bend the extractor every time from the swelling of the case head. If a Glock pistol splits the barrel on the underside at the sharp corner & blows the magazine out the bottom - it is called a "kaboom" around here. Same goes for an overloaded 40 S&W rupturing a case head. I have to count that rifle as "blown up". 
FYI, the headspace checked just fine in that rifle after that test - and passed MPI too. Lem |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
And Kel-tec always seems to get the benefit of the doubt and MSAR gets drawn and quartered by hateful peasants with torches and pitchforks. Not in my experience. (And I mod the KT forum as well. )
In just the past 48 hours I read a post here somewhere (re: the RFB) that said "Well, if any bullpup is going to explode in your face it will be a Kel-tec" or some such crap.
Plenty of KT hate here and, in my experience, it is far more than what I've seen WRT MSAR... of course, KT has been making guns longer and has a wider variety of models for the haters to hate. My point is that RFB failure after RFB failure has been met with the, "don't worry, it's minor, KT will fix it"...and then everyone and their uncle seeming to say that the gun is ok and that there's nothing to worry about. There's hate for both, no doubt, but it seems everyone jumps to the worst case scenario with MSAR. MSAR and whoever is running the show over there aren't my favorite people at the moment and I hope they don't expect a Christmas card from me this year  because I'm slipping passed pissed off regarding my mags. But that's how I view the management, not the product. MSAR's product seems be be tarnished by the current issues with management.
There are a lot of reasons how this could have happened and negligence isn't one that I'm willing to sign onto at the moment. |
|
Back on topic. This is important for all MSAR owners, round count needs to be determined and I personally would
like an answer from any of the (I count 4) ex MSAR employees about steyr vs. MSAR trunnion composition or manufacture. The relevance of that question is due to MSAR owners opinion of safety and durability based on how long the AUG has been around without catastrophic failure. |
|
Nobody piggybacks the AUG safety track record to the MSAR. The designs being similar though they both offer the same levels of protection if something does go wrong. This is one guy. One rifle. Out of what 20,000 or so plus? It was only a matter of time before we saw something like this at some point. We've seen FNH FS2000 and other high quality rifles that someone has had a catastrophic failure with. Given time someone was going to do something like this with an STG. |
|
I studied the A3 extensively when we got one in the shop. There were a lot of things I liked, disliked etc. But I did not take notice of trunnion construction. I noticed that there was only 1 guide bushing, but did not take notice on how it was made. Ill look at the comparison thread that is tacked, but not sure Ill be able to make a determination.
ETA: that thread is no longer stickied? anyone have a link? |
|
Quoted: I studied the A3 extensively when we got one in the shop. There were a lot of things I liked, disliked etc. But I did not take notice of trunnion construction. I noticed that there was only 1 guide bushing, but did not take notice on how it was made. Ill look at the comparison thread that is tacked, but not sure Ill be able to make a determination. ETA: that thread is no longer stickied? anyone have a link? http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=43&t=299305 |
|
To be quite honest the receiver/trunnion casting of the A3 looks like shit compared to the MSAR. If the A3 receiver is better made or stronger then the MSAR it is hard to tell from the comparison pictures. MadDog ETA: The A3 carrier looks like it is machined and the MSAR looks cast. |
|
Quoted:
Interesting. An RFB breaks a gas piston, and it is a "KABOOM" An Aug clone blows the locking lugs clear out of the trunnion, and it is a "malfunction"? . If you want to make a new thread and call it a KABOOM then please be my guest. I have never even given the thought of owning a RFB much less post about it. I called it a malfunction because things are still unclear about how this occurred, especially early on. I chose not to post any incendiary comments, just passing along information. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Interesting MSAR malfunction (Page 1 of 2)
Armory Sponsor