[Double Naught Spy]

Originally posted by James P -
"When somebody does a real test involving several thousand rounds and can post eyewitness accounts of performance and before/after pictures (to show whether springs are kinked or not) then I will believe that there is "NO BENEFIT" to a flgr. Running a few boxes through them isn't a test.

Also, I seriously doubt that an extra ounce in a guide rod is going to make the difference between life and death. This comment is often made by the same people who think they have to have a steel mainspring housing and extended mag well. Where's the sense in that?"

Dude! Chill out. They are just guide rods! While I appreciate some of the points you made, especially your call for "real tests," and that you fail to believe anything contrary to your opinion without real tests, do notice that your opinion is just that, an opinion. So why the condenscending attitude to people with whom you don't share the same opinion? The attitude you expressed in the first half of this thread seems very different than the attitudes of other moderators in the Forum.

At least I took the time to address the issue in a methodical manner. I realize that you don't feel my test was valid, but you haven't actually produced any better information for or against the use of FLGRs.

Instead of stating your opinion as some form of hard fact that exists until proven otherwise by tests you sanction, how about you doing those tests and let us know the real truth about FLGRs based on data and reproducible results? I will gladly wait for the data sheets, pictures, and eyewitness accounts you gather to be posted.

 

[James]

What do you mean "chill out"?

I simply made a statement that a few boxes (or should I have said magazines) isn't any kind of valid test.

Also, I simply made the statement that I doubted that the extra ounce is the difference between life and death. I have dealt with people firsthand who want to save the weight on the guiderod and add all kinds of other weight with steel mainspring housings, mag wells, heavy grips, etc. You didn't mention these so obviously I wasn't talking about you.

And finally, based on my experience, it is going to take a test as I describe to convince me to change my OPINIONS based on my experience with far more than 4 magazines worth of testing. I am basing my opinions on thousands of rounds with many pistols with and without FLGRs. I know what a kinked spring looks like and I also can tell you that a spring can kink on you quite quickly even if you do change your springs evry 500 rounds (whether necessary or not).

I never claimed to be proving any facts. And saying that you went out back and shot a few magazines is far from proof of hard facts. Definately not enough for you to make this comment: "To be honest, there is little that a FLGR can do to help with the actual functioning of the gun." Any arguments that I may have made for them are probably contained in one of the other hundred threads on this topic.

Now I didn't intend to get into a pissing match with you and this is nothing more than a clarification of my OPINION. As far a me doing a test, I am not going to waste a bunch of time and money to prove something that, in my OPINION, I already know. I really don't care whether I appear wrong or right on this topic so take from it what you want.

I would recommend that you take your own advice and "chill out." If you can't handle people disagreeing with your testing methods or OPINIONS without tearing into them then don't post it. I went back and read the thread and I really can't find this condescending attitude. Feel free to point it out to me.

 

[shane45-1911]

Hey DNS,

I don't think James was specifically targetting you in his last post.

I believe his point is valid, in that there has been no proof one way or the other about the effectiveness of FLGR's one way or the other. I agree. I also use them - I THINK they help. They work in my guns. They work in yours too apparently. There may never be proof - round, round we go...........

CRAP, did I mention in the closed thread that I had made my last post EVER about FLGR's???? OK, this time I really, REALLY mean it. I'm done. I can't keep going thru this every couple of weeks. I WILL NEVER POST AGAIN IN ANY THREAD THAT CONCERNS FLGR'S.

 

[shane45-1911]

OK, maybe he was targetting you DNS. (My typing must be slower than James')!!!

 

[James]

I don't think "targeting" is appropriate. There is a little disagreement. We are clarifying or working out the "kinks" if you will.

 

[shane45-1911]

Originally posted by James P:
There is a little disagreement

Yes, some will always agree to disagree on this topic - maybe we should put FLGR's on the taboo topic list in this forum?

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Oh, I don't think he was targeting me anymore than anyone else, but I also did not get the impression that he was simply presenting a different perspective.

I see where James P is not going to waste time proving something he already knows. And this is the problem I had with his comments. The issue is one of epitsemology. He knows what he knows based on experience and so he has formed his opinions that he knows to be true and dissenting opinions are not correct.

You know, my little test may or may not be valid because the sample was admittedly small. That however, does not mean the results were wrong. They may be wrong, but not because of the sample size.

The condenscending attitude I was refering to pertained to your comments such as "Proof to me they do something" in reference that FLGRs would do something harmful. So you demand proof for opinion contrary to what you believe. Then when you define kinking and close with "It's not a theory" Note that you don't exactly offer any proof your self of extensive testing.

Then there is my post where I did my little test and your comments about not changing your opinion until somebody does a "real test." That of course suggests that the test I did was not "real" in some way because you have such higher standards of demanding thousands of rounds, eyewitness accounts (that I would love to see), and pictures. That I did find condescending. The reason why is that while my sample was small, all the hallmarks of a systematic test are there. The test was real, not extensive.

The part I really liked was where you weren't going to be bothered with such testing about which you already know the truth. Now isn't that something of a double standard? You challeged to "proof" you wrong, but when you get challenged for said proof, you can't be bothered with wasting your time or money.

Of course, you seriously doubted that an ounce would make the difference between life and death and that the comment was often made by the same people who think they have to have a steel main spring housing and extended mag well and you ask where the sense was in that. So because I made a comment based on laws in physics regarding momentum and energy that may cause drawing to be slower but follow-up shots faster, and because the weight was small, you have somehow decided to group me in with people you apparently don't think well of because they want senseless additions such as steel mainspring housings and extended mag wells. Now that wasn't very nice - and I don't even like extended mag wells and as far as the mainspring housing, I don't care what they are made of as long as they work!

I have no problems with differences of opinion. That is what makes this forum interesting. If you differ with what I have written, there is no need to try to devalue my work as somehow not being "real" or classifying me in with people that you obviously feel don't make sensible decisions. And if you are going to demand proof on a topic about which you have a contrary opinion, then don't be taken back when someone asks the same of you.

 

[dsk]

Personally speaking, I'm finding this constant argument by members over a $20 piece of metal rod ridiculous. I'm closing this one too before it becomes a flame war.

------------------
D. Kamm
USGI M1911/M1911A1 Pistols Website
http://www.geocities.com/M1911_M1911A1