NSWC Crane MLOK vs Keymod Test Results

File: IMG_1526.png (464KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 2048x1536px

MLOK has way less POA shift

File: IMG_1533.png (2MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x1536px

KeyMod suffered quite a bit of damage in the drop test

>>33867012
Its not even up for discussion lmao

File: IMG_1530.png (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

In failure load testing which attempts to pull accessories from the rail from 90 Deg off-axis, Crane noted an increase of 215% in average sustained load of M-LOK over KeyMod.

File: IMG_1524.png (502KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 2048x1536px

Granted, the sample size of this testing is limited. However, for SOCOM, the conclusions were clear enough to choose a path forward. This test concludes that M-LOK is a more robust and more stable system. In addition to repeatedly maintaining point of aim for mounted accessories during normal mounting and remounting, it also better maintained rail intagrity in spite of impacts. On the other hand, testing shows that KeyMod suffered significant POA shifts during both repeated mounting and remounting as well as after impacts. Additionally, while both systems noted cracking under impact, some KeyMod rail samples lost integrity with fracturing between slots.

Damn keymod might just be BTFO.

Hopefully Magpul releases the Trademark on Mlok, but since they're fucking jews they probably won't.

>>33866985
Thank you fellow PowerPoint engineer.

This is good to know, will not be buying anything key lock anytime soon.

>inb4 you're a civilian, you don't need mlok REEEEEEEEE I BOUGHT KEYMOD AND I'M MAD.

>>33866997
>Aero
>MI
>Seekins

Fucking why?

>>33866985
waiting on sig sauer to get rid of all they shitmod rails zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

>>33867169
Because not everyone is retarded tripfag?

>>33867074
dont they license it royalty free? i read somewhere in one of their bits of documentation that they want to spread their tech around so magpul industries makes it super easy to get ahold of.

>>33867012
That sounds like a lot. How exactly are accessory slots causing such a drastic difference in point of impact?

>>33867261
aim, point of aim, the front sight is displaced each time it is unmounted-remounted

>>33866997
>Not even considered for the SOCOM tests
Geissele forever BTFO'd, how will Bill ever recover?

>>33867074
>muh trademark
kys jew

>>33866997
I'm surprised they didn't test more "mil-spec" stuff like KAC, Geissele, and Daniel Defense

>>33867169
>>33867303
Honestly I think they chose mid-tier rails because
1) The MLOK and Keymod models were very similar to each other outside of the mounting points
2) They knew they might end up breaking the handguards during these tests so they didn't want to spend too much on them

If they want to adopt a fancier rail, they're probably going to do a separate test for them

>>33867261
>>33867012
Is it mount/dismount POA shift?

File: firefox_2017-05-05_09-34-37.png (565KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 960x720px

>>33867347
Yes

>>33866985
Link to pdf
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3k5QLIgMILLekg2Rll5U1FSdkE/view

>>33867370
How did they remove the rail without removing the laser first?

>>33867235
Yes, it's totally free. All you have to do is get the product evaluated by Magpul to make sure it meets their specs. Magpul does this so every fly by night accessory manufacturer doesn't run the Mlok name in the ground by making shitty out of spec Mlok rails. If it has the Mlok logo on it, it's been licensed by Magpul and meets their specifications.

>>33867012
Holy fuck, that's no small difference.

>>33867286
who thought it was a good idea to put the front sight on a quickly removable section? If I was going to get a free float I would get something with the rail fixed on top or screw in sections.

>>33867074
Yeah because after a huge endorsement like this, Magpul should release the trademark on it. Because that makes sense, right?

>>33867341
They had to choose rails that had identical keymod and mlok versions. DD and Gessielle don't make rails that fit that criteria, so they were out of running from the get go.

This also isn't a test of the rails themselves, no one is under the impression that a MI rail is superior to a URX4, it's just a test of the mounting systems

Jesus Christ, are you rubes considering this even remotely scientific? Not a p value or confidence interval within sight. Terribly small sample size. Would have been nice if they had a quad rail control group for comparison.

This is YouTube channel tier "study". I like mlok more than keymod but holy shit Is this what passes for science in the military?

>>33869397
Dude, look at the material between the slots in: >>33867034

That's a pretty fucking small cross section.

>>33870463
Wtf? Am I the one you meant to respond to?

>>33867370
>>33867012
>picatinny rail section represents the the zero holding of keymod/mlok

This is the kind of shit that makes this suspect as fuck.