Rex zero 1

[Michael777]

Has anyone else been watching military arms channel on YouTube?

He does a gauntlet test on all the major pistols; sig, glock, shield, etc...

The Rex zero 1 seems to be the only one who passes without getting gunked up.

Any chance this will be on roster?

https://youtu.be/LuPOqDlaX6U

[SkyHawk]

Sure there is a chance. Hell has a better chance of freezing over though.

[Michael777]

Ya. I figured. Major bummer. It's like a sig clone. Only costs 600 msrp and it outperformed everything else in the test.

[static2126]

Those tests are created as clickbait by simpletons.

I accidentally watched one. He threw a VP9 at a steel target.

Here's a real torture test. He fired 50,000 rounds through an HK over 8 months. Notated every malfunction, parts breakage, and when he cleaned it (went over 10,000 rounds between cleanings once). He lists each brand and quantity of the ammo he shot.

One of these tests took an hour and involved stuff that really doesn't have anything to do with reliability. The other guy shot more ammo in 8 months through the test pistol than the typical gun owner will shoot in a life time.

He also has done reliability tests on a G17, Springfield 9mm 1911, and others.

Don't fall for clickbait.

Truth

[BigPimping]

Glock.... nothing else even comes close. The proof is in the track record.

[Quiet]

The Rex zero 1 seems to be the only one who passes without getting gunked up.

Any chance this will be on roster?

Rex Zero 1 = Slovenian copy of a Croatian (IM Metallic) HS-95, which was an unlicensed copy of a SIG P-226.

Most noticeable differences from the SIG P-226, the Rex Zero 1 and HS-95 has a different control levers (manual safety, decocker, etc) and uses proprietary magazines.

Since the Rex Zero 1 does not have a magazine disconnect mechanism, chamber load indicator, and microstamping array; it will never be listed on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.

[fritztkatt]

Thanks for the link hopeton. The *real* torture tests are very rare.

[wl518]

Real talk would you really buy an REx Zero after watching all the other torture tests over any that did not pass?

[Nguyen]

Rex Zero 1 = Slovenian copy of a Croatian (IM Metallic) HS-95, which was an unlicensed copy of a SIG P-226.

Most noticeable differences from the SIG P-226, the Rex Zero 1 and HS-95 has a different control levers (manual safety, decocker, etc) and uses proprietary magazines.

Since the Rex Zero 1 does not have a magazine disconnect mechanism, chamber load indicator, and microstamping array; it will never be listed on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.

Something tells me having a magazine disconnect is more dangerous than not having one...

[Rifle ronin]

Refer to sig line...

[sloppy joe]

I would want to see a torture test of the Zastava CZ999.

[MrOrange]

Those tests are created as clickbait by simpletons.

I accidentally watched one. He threw a VP9 at a steel target.

Here's a real torture test. He fired 50,000 rounds through an HK over 8 months. Notated every malfunction, parts breakage, and when he cleaned it (went over 10,000 rounds between cleanings once). He lists each brand and quantity of the ammo he shot.

One of these tests took an hour and involved stuff that really doesn't have anything to do with reliability. The other guy shot more ammo in 8 months through the test pistol than the typical gun owner will shoot in a life time.

He also has done reliability tests on a G17, Springfield 9mm 1911, and others.

Don't fall for clickbait.

I've been working the ol' noggin trying to imagine a world where the average shooter in a self-defense scenario, or a police or military user, would be more likely to go through 50,000 rounds in 8 months than to drop their pistol in the dirt. Can't come up with one.

The long-azz mega-round tests are the ones that don't apply to reality, unless you're testing a race gun that might go 100,000 rounds a year or a candidate for SOC. A much more real-world abuse test would be to shoot it 100 rounds, hose it down with WD-40, then let it dry out while applying dust & lint. After alternatively letting it sit in a sock drawer and under a car seat for a year, then try it.

If I were looking for a cheaper Sig clone, I might get one, but for the propriety magazines. A lot of these off-beat brands go away after a short time, leaving owners in the lurch for parts. If you're not going to shoot the snot out of it, breakage might not be a problem, but mags get damaged and the springs wear out, and besides, you can never have too many magazines.

[Michael777]

All valid points. Long term durability as well as short term robustness.

[MrOrange]

It's a reflection of practical durability and reliability; will this gun break a year from now, 10 years from now? With regards to whether anyone will shoot 50,000 rounds in 8 months, the gun has no concept of time. It's more of a test as to what the gun will do over those 50,000 rounds.

More pertinent than "will my gun work if I run over it or throw it at a log pile".

I'm going to have to refer back to The Real World on this one. 50,000 rounds is probably 500 years worth of shooting for the average gun owner (or cop or service member, for that matter). Nobody who is buying a Rex is going to put it to constant use in competition, or in training to take out the next Osama Bin Laden.

The average gun owner, or cop, or regular soldier, is approximately 5.3 Kajillion times more likely to get their sidearm dirty in routine use then to put 50,000 rounds through it in their entire life. I don't know where you got the run-over/log pile thing, but let's stick to the subject and video at hand.

[DDM4556]

I didn't watch the Rex video. I only saw one he did on the VP9; he threw it at a steel target, some logs, and ran over it with a car. I decided I didn't need to watch any more of his videos. Most of these YouTube "reviewers" are really just the Billy Mays of the gun world.

You should really watch the video before commenting on it. There is a new test system in place that's much better. I'm not discounting the points you make - all are valid. But the difference between your vid and the MAC vid is reliability vs durability.

According to a range in Vegas, Glocks are the most reliable of their guns requiring the least maintenance and providing the greatest longevity. However, MAC's new durability tests reveal the G17 did not fair as well as I would have assumed. The Rex Zero is the only gun to make it through flawlessly. Again, that's testing durability only, not reliability.

Nevertheless, I want guns that are both reliable AND durable. I don't care that I'm not an operator dragging my guns through dirt or sand. I like knowing the answers to the "what if" questions and appreciate guns that provide peace of mind. I wasn't too happy to see that my M&P 9L turns into a paper weight if dropped in water...