RN50

>load your gun with sketchy ammo
>blow up your gun with it and almost die
>inventor of gun does his own research with remains of gun and proves factory ammo would not cause an explosion like this
>original guy has to have a round specifically loaded WAY over pressure to get a similar result to the original explosion
>morons on the internet STILL blame the gun

There was even a guy who tested the RN50 with the barrel in dirt to try and replicate what happened, and he couldn't do it with normal, factory ammo.

?t=247

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >>load your gun with sketchy ammo

    yes, I watched this video and that was such a stupid move. Why? Why would you do this? With rounds that powerful why play engineer and think you know better?

    of gun does his own research with remains of gun and proves factory ammo would not cause an explosion like this

    yeah, no shit.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      ok

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      The gun should've been able to handle actual .50 SLAP and the guy unfortunately bought dangerous handloads without knowing what they were

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's even funnier than that. The inventor, who is supposedly an engineer, contacted some random guy in Ukraine to do some calculations and just said "yep, that proves it nothing wrong with the gun case closed."

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >doubting a Ukrainian
        Careful, that's how you catch a ban around here.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          You obviously can't read.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          lol good one

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah the threaded end of his rifle literally only had 3 threads holding it. Any moron could look at it and know it needed like another inch of threads

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          The first 3 threads provide approximately >70% of the strength, the 4th being <85%, 5th >90% and 6th being hypothetical 100%.
          >Machinery's Handbook and other resources

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            NTA, but "thread strength" as typically discussed, is different from the threads' resistance to stripping. Longer thread engagement always makes the threads harder to strip away, but after a certain amount of engagement, the threads can withstand more tension than the body of the fastener can after the theoretical %100 thread strength threshold, the fastener is the weaker feature.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The first 3 threads provide approximately >70%
            so it's 30% weaker than if it were to be made properly

  2. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why is this a thread? People who make their own guns and do it poorly often have bad outcomes. My dad knew a guy who made his own shotgun and was taking it to work to show the guys at his shop. He had to stop quickly and the gun came off the seat and discharged, killing him.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      The guy in the pic didn't make the gun or the ammo, he bought some unobtanium meme rounds that when tested were found to have been loaded to like three times max pressure.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >buy super duper rare, awesome ammo
        >load into cheapest goddamned rifle ever chambered in this cartridge

        Honestly the rifle doesn't even matter because Serbu isn't some fly by night israelite trying to make a quick buck, he has a decades-long business to keep going and liability insurance for a gun manufacturer is tremendous. People jump on it being the guns fault because it's the cheapest 50 but every gun has to at least hold the rated pressure. They can have shake awake like the P320, Cross, and 700, but they can't blow up with normal ammo.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Serbu isn't some fly by night israelite trying to make a quick buck
          frick off Mark
          no one cares about your pipebombs

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >bubba's pissier hotter SLAPloads

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Bubba's Pissing Hot Super SLAPpy rounds
          >When you need to shoot through the front of an IFV and have it exit out the back after passing through the passengers*
          >*Gun may Glocknade

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        BREAKING photograph of the handloader found.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          lmao
          >hand load ammo dangerously over the limit
          >sell it to gubtuber homosexuals
          >epic troll

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        > Too bad, 47. The target's now alerted.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Would a Barrett withstand that?

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          maybe but I can't say for sure. the M107 being a gas operated gun relieves a lot of the back pressure that a bolt action just can't do

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't think so. Peak pressure is reached before the bullet passes the gas port.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              the M107 still has a buffer tube and recoil spring that would mitigate a similar catastrophic failure

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                If all the bolt lugs all sheared off , which would be analogous to the RN50 failure, the spring/buffer would likely prevent or mitigate injury. They do nothing to relieve chamber pressure. Also, I would like to correct both you and myself. The M107 is recoil-operated, so gas system not a factor.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                You're absolutely moronic. If the lugs on a 50bmg fail you're head is next to a 55kpsi explosion. The only thing that recoil assembly is doing is adding to the shrapnel going through your body you absolute fricking mongoloid.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                show me a single piece of information supporting your assertion

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                You're too fricking stupid to understand anyway if you think a recoil spring is going to help if your locking lugs catastrophically fail

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Not that anon, but I have seen pictures of an M107 that detonated out of battery and I think no one was injured. It nuked that Barrett, though.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                It was some Central or South American military I think. I remember seeing pictures of the shooter. It was a hangfire and he had his face right by the ejection port clearing it. When it detonated he got a nasty laceration on his jaw from the extractor blowing out.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Interesting. I also recall one where supposedly the soldier induced a double feed and then tried to hammer the bolt home and caused a tip-to-primer ignition.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                How stupid can a person be? Was he high? Drunk? Tired? Mad at his wife? Might I be that stupid one day? What would it take? A bad concussion? Had I better stick with single shot designs for larger calibers?

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                I think you overestimate the critical thinking skills of the average soldier. The point is a Barrett is a good enough rifle to protect the user from profound moronation. So users who aren't moronic are exceptionally safe.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              i don't think an m107 has a gas port. it's short recoil operated. the whole barrel and bolt move together and a tab on the lower unlocks the bolt from the barrel

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, thank you. I was typing my correction when you replied. For some reason I was thinking of Serbu's automatic .50

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think that serbu just posts these threads from time to time in hopes that people will stop associating their product with that Kentucky guntuber blowing his throat out…. You probably have to get to like page 5 of google results for them to find something that doesn’t mention it unless your looking at nra puff articles.. (no shit nra guy, the Barrett is a better rifle but the serbu is cheaper… real hard hitting journalism right their…)

  3. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    I dont care, I just want the BFG 50a to finally resume production

  4. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    I just don't buy guns designed and built by high school dropouts and drug addicts. Shrimple as.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      To be fair you don't have any guns.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Would never buy an M1 Carbine

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      So you don’t own any guns?

  5. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >he made some cool kino footage
    >he showed that safety glasses work

    You guys are over-analyzing everything else.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Norm abrams is pleased.

  6. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >put wildcat ammo in a shitty low quality rifle
    don't care, it's still a gigantic piece of shit of a rifle

  7. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >that armenian frick
    >literally some rich kid nepo baby whose family owns a bunch of businesses
    >just fricks around making gun tube videos
    >has been caught mulitple times faking videos or jazzing them up with fake explosives

    I think the Turks were onto something. Sneaky fricks.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      meds

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      what videos did he fake/embelish? I'm curious now because he's fricking lame

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        talking to yourself is gay

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          not talking to self, but it is gay of you to suck off a guntuber

          One vid he claimed he threw some grenades into a safe. The "grenade" were fake grenades you can buy from amazon. So he actually just aged it with other explosives.

          Like he still put explosives into a safe and blew it up, just jazzed it up.

          >now because he's fricking lame

          Yes, very.

          why did you at me twice? moron
          >still put explosives into a safe and blew it up
          so he didn't fake it? got it. fricking moron.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >so he didn't fake it? got it. fricking moron.

            The video was "we put grenades in a safe", and he was all dramatic throwing these very obviously fake grenades into the safe, then there's a cut, then a boom. Maybe he couldn't get actual military frag grenades or whatever, but he staged the video. Maybe he felt "we put some cheap explosives into a safe" wasn't cool enough?

            The point is that youtube gays spin, exaggerate, and try to create "content". It's not reality and sure as hell not scientific.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            ur still gayer

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              frick you got me. please say sike.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                no.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                frick. I'm fricking gay

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                and not the fun kind
                The whiny libshit kind

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >the fun kind
                pause

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        One vid he claimed he threw some grenades into a safe. The "grenade" were fake grenades you can buy from amazon. So he actually just aged it with other explosives.

        Like he still put explosives into a safe and blew it up, just jazzed it up.

        >now because he's fricking lame

        Yes, very.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >fake grenades
          Thats what the sarkesian dude does with his mexican camera man

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      You’re a moron - Kentucky ballistics isn’t Armenian- he’s literally as American as white bread.

      His original job was a cop, then he grew his YouTube channel. Out of all Guntubers he’s the least moronic

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        He's the most sane too

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          And the leading edge in the war on tables.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            his shit is fun as frick to watch

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Out of all Guntubers he’s the least moronic
        Actually incredible to find someone as moronic as him in the wild. I've never seen a single vid of his that provided any useful info, a single one that made me feel like it was worth my time. I mean, I guess if you get slammed on [INSERT CHEAP BEER HERE] and watch whatever the algorithm shoves at you... I guess I'd pray you have better taste than that.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >nepo baby
      youre a Twitter homosexual

  8. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Guy is a moron
    .50 BMG pipe rifles are also moronic

  9. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >morons on the internet STILL blame the gun
    Hasn't it been known pretty much since the day it happened that it was caused by bubbas pissin hot homemade SLAP?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yea, the point has always been that unlike a better designed gun, the thing's failure method was to pipebomb instead of just shooting the bolt out the back or any less lethal failure point.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        there is no safe failure method for a gun. there is no safety margin in a gun. there never has been. a safe gun would be useless.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >there is no safe failure method for a gun.
          Yes there is - or at least, more unsafe failure methods exist. Think about the Ross rifle bolt going into face-eating mode if you look at it wrong. The Rn-50 is another example: those two protetive ears can become shrapel if the locking system fails. That's a bad idea.
          >there is no safety margin in a gun
          Yes there is you idiot. At the very least it's the margin between normal spec ammo and proof loads.

          Under NORMAL failure circumstances, the gun wouldn’t have failed like it did. Putting a stick of dynamite in your gun changes things.

          Under normal failure conditions, the failed cap would still have torn off the ears behind said cap. Funny thing is that the solution to this problem is simple: don't remove as much material, just leave the material between the cap and the receiver extension. This would reduce machining time and make the gun safer in a potential failure, although a bit heavier and maybe the hammer would be harder to wiener (in which case you make a hammer extension, for example like the EABCO Contender ones).

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            no, there is not a safe failure method. if a gun is safer than another gun in failure, it is because of incidental facts of its design which are not something worth building a gun around.

            there is no safety margin. proof loads are what a gun is rated to take. they are not rated to take more than that. fall harnesses for a structural welder are designed to catch 1000lbs falling. that's a 4:1 safety margin. there is no gun in existence that can survive a 2:1 load. there's no 9mm that can take a 20 grain load. there probably isn't one that can take a 15 grain load.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              >if a gun is safer than another gun in failure, it is because of incidental facts of its design which are not something worth building a gun around.
              User safety is always worth it - why alse would we have manual safeties? Glock dinguses? Drop safe guns? Some margin of safety can be intentionally added providing a tangible benefit that is indeed worthwhile - failsafe operation being one of them. All it takes is a simple FMEA and maybe taking away some of the more worrisome potential outcomes.

              > proof loads are what a gun is rated to take.
              And those are a margin above what normal rounds are supposed to be, e.g., CIP puts the proof load at 120% of maximum ammo pressure. That's a 1.2:1 safety margin. Yes, the margins are smaller than in other industries, but there's still a margin that is defined as such. Some people even take advantage of this margin and push it further (e.g. 9mm Major handloads). And yes, you can probably build a 9mm gun that can take twice the rated pressure (70KPSI). Hell, I'd be willing to bet I can do it with less than 2K in pre-built parts.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >User safety is always worth it
                not with guns. that's why it's not a significant design factor.

                >proof loads are what a gun is rated to take.
                and not more than a proof load.

                any gun can still fail with a regular load at any time because it's a inherently unpredictable event.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >and not more than a proof load.
                And yet guns still survive with above-proof loads because design strength usually exceeds what they're proofed at.

                >any gun can still fail with a regular load at any time because it's a inherently unpredictable event.
                A regular gun with a regular load does not fail. Only broken guns and bad loads do. If it wasn't a broken gun or a bad load - why would it fail? There's no reason to.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                if they survive with more than a proof load, it's an accident of design, not by design, and any and every manufacturer will tell you this in explicit terms.

                >A regular gun with a regular load does not fail

                they do on a very regular basis. correctly made guns have killed people by failure in great numbers. they fail because firearms are inherently dangerous and can not be designed to not fail and still be useful as firearms.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >correctly made guns have killed people by failure in great numbers.
                Then they were not correctly made or designed.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                yes, they were. they were in spec, and they failed. happens all the frickin time.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Then the specifications were bad.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >they fail because firearms are inherently dangerous and can not be designed to not fail and still be useful as firearms.
                Dumbass
                >yeah we made the Mauser 98 action stronger than the 96 for the lulz

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >standard powder load
                >standard projectile
                >standard casing
                >standard primer
                >standard chamber
                >standard barrel
                >standard bolt
                >unpredictable
                Did you somehow miss out on the refinement of mass production techniques in the last 150 years? Failure rate of guns in general relative to use cycles is absolutely marginal compared to cars, planes, ladders, chainsaws, and a hundred other things that people (rightly) consider "predictable."

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >user safety isn't worth it
                Found the SIG employee. How do you feel about seatbelts?

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              Are you telling me you've never seen a vent hole or safety lug before? Are you newguns or noguns? Do you only own one AR and a glock?

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              Why did he insist on using the cheapest 50 possible when he could have easily got something better?

              You dumb motherfricker, most bolt action rifles are designed to vent gas away from the shooter in the event of a catastrophic failure. Do you seriously not know that?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >someone planted a bomb in my car engine and I lost a leg when it went off
            >why would (car brand) create such an unsafe design??!?!!

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              Nice strawman. Funny thing is, cars are actually designed for relevant failure scenarios: crashed. You wouldn't expect a car to hold up to a bomb, but you would expect it to hold up to a crash in a somewhat safe manner. You would not expect a gun to hold up to a car crash, but you would expect it to hold up against an internal explosion.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Nice strawman
                >You wouldn't expect a car to hold up to a bomb
                That’s kind of my point, you fricking moron. When you introduce something a vehicle or gun was NOT meant to survive, any sort of safety precautions you take during manufacture don’t mean much.

                As far as the gun itself goes, you wouldn’t expect ANY gun to survive firing a round loaded as far over pressure as the cartridge in question was, but you also wouldn’t load a round that hot anyway unless you were trying to blow the gun up. If you want to frick around with suspect ammo, it’s YOUR fault if something goes wrong.

                And if it’s such an unsafe design, why couldn’t the guys in OP’s video recreate it despite plugging the barrel? All they were able to do was blow the barrel itself, the cap and ears never moved. The only recreation KB himself was able to achieve of the accident was by using a .50 cartridge specifically loaded to a ridiculous pressure point, which again, is not what factory ammo would ever come close to producing.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >When you introduce something a vehicle or gun was NOT meant to survive, any sort of safety precautions you take during manufacture don’t mean much.
                It's not about the product surviving, but about the person using it. Car crashed are rarely intentional, as is loading the wrong ammo (no matter how stupid).

                I would not expect any gun to survive the extreme overpressure situation that started this whole discussion. All I am saying is that if there is a blatant design aspect that causes a relatively more unsafe failure, which can be easily remedied, maybe one should consider fixing it.
                >If you want to frick around with suspect ammo, it’s YOUR fault if something goes wrong.
                That's the way every manufacturer covers their asses (or at least their lawyers do): put it in the manual that you have to use (SAAMI) spec ammo, which this was not. Although it's a great way to cover your ass legally, that does not mean you shouldn't reduce machining time to make the design safer if you know it could be a lethal failure point.

                >And if it’s such an unsafe design, why couldn’t the guys in OP’s video recreate it despite plugging the barrel?
                Because the core design of the RN-50 is quite sound: it takes an incredible amount of pressure for it to fail in the way that it did. I am not complaining about the core design, I am saying that the ears can be tweaked to be a bit safer (saving time and money too) should they ever fail again.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >When you introduce something a vehicle or gun was NOT meant to survive, any sort of safety precautions you take during manufacture don’t mean much.
                It's not about the product surviving, but about the person using it. Car crashed are rarely intentional, as is loading the wrong ammo (no matter how stupid).

                I would not expect any gun to survive the extreme overpressure situation that started this whole discussion. All I am saying is that if there is a blatant design aspect that causes a relatively more unsafe failure, which can be easily remedied, maybe one should consider fixing it.
                >If you want to frick around with suspect ammo, it’s YOUR fault if something goes wrong.
                That's the way every manufacturer covers their asses (or at least their lawyers do): put it in the manual that you have to use (SAAMI) spec ammo, which this was not. Although it's a great way to cover your ass legally, that does not mean you shouldn't reduce machining time to make the design safer if you know it could be a lethal failure point.

                >And if it’s such an unsafe design, why couldn’t the guys in OP’s video recreate it despite plugging the barrel?
                Because the core design of the RN-50 is quite sound: it takes an incredible amount of pressure for it to fail in the way that it did. I am not complaining about the core design, I am saying that the ears can be tweaked to be a bit safer (saving time and money too) should they ever fail again.

                The car analogy would work if someone replaced their airbag propellant with lead azide and wondered why it turned it into a frag grenade
                >Inb4 Takata antipersonnel airbags
                In the end it's the same as with pipes, pumps and other shit mean to handle certain pressure/rpms that still kill a lot of people if handled wrong and it's too expensive/ makes it too heavy etc to further improve it.
                I can absolutely see manufacturers not giving a shit about a problem that won't affect 99% of the user base but adds weight that could screw it over in a procurement process.
                That said, this shit isn't a heart pacemaker and could be easily done as a aftermarket part.
                Frick if I'd fancy shooting ol'drunk bubbas pissin hot handloads I'd be PrepHoleing a guard instantly

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Unless they changed something, the lower is from one of their other guns and those ears are just welded on. I remember the guy who built it saying it was a way to keep costs down.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              Why would they ever do that? It
              s much easier to machine the ears on. The bar stock is right there... it actually saves on time. They don't even have another lower that matches this design (but without the ears), so your story is BS.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Under NORMAL failure circumstances, the gun wouldn’t have failed like it did. Putting a stick of dynamite in your gun changes things.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >shooting the bolt out the back
        This took Mauser's eye. I don't know why you would think it's safer. Unless... noguns.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >shooting the bolt out the back
        >on a .50 rifle
        >less lethal failure method

        Black personbrained cretin.

  10. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's not a zero sum gain. It probably was a combination of dangerous ammo and a .50 caliber rifle that was built to be as cheap as possible with almost no regard to safety past reasonable expectations for normal ammo. I absolutely do not think a TAC-50 would've caused this much bodily harm with this ammo being used.

  11. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Guys… I loaded +p+ 45 lc into my Grampa’s colt peacemaker and it blew up in my face… how could colt do this?

  12. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Hey guys, I put some Buffalo bore 45-70 in my old antique trapdoor rifle and shit got real when I fired it…

  13. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    .50 SLAP isn't even safe in M2 brownings and has maimed multiple servicemen and isn't used unless they absolutely have to fricking know they HAVE to penetrate heavy armor, punch straight through buildings, or stop vehicles in a situation where they can't get anything better than a browning mg and that if it doesn't punch through, people are going to die anyways, so might as well use SLAP ammo.

    .50 sabots are inherently unsafe and there's no real way to make them safe and nobody should use them unless you're in a situation not using them guarantees you're getting fricking rekt, even if they're genuine product.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      They are safe when engineered to a standard and specification by a manufacturer, maybe not with Bubba's pissin hot 50 BMG frick you megaloads

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        .50 slap is not safe when engineered to a standard and specification by a manufacturer as is evidenced by the dozen or so guys that had it blow up an m2 browning in their hands. sabots in small rifles are not safe. period. even the ones done right.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >as is evidenced by the dozen or so guys that had it blow up an m2 browning in their hands
          Is there any documented cases out there of this actually happening? I know there's an SOP that you shouldn't fire saboted rounds through a muzzle brake (e.g. M107) but that's all I know.

  14. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    The AR-50 chambers 50 BMG and is about three or four grand

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      My favorite looking commercially avaliable 50bmg. Peak goofy 90s aesthetic.

  15. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    The 50 BMG has been used inside rifles to shoot down military helicopters in Mexico, as well as fire through ground vehicles and glass.

    The standard round is about three dollars per round. The sabot and tungsten have more armor piercing capability. Of course being able to down helicopters, it can pierce multiple armor plates.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      are you a fricking idiot or a bot

      helicopters can be pierced with a fricking knife

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Please try to pierce the armor of a KA-52 wienerpit with a fricking knife.

  16. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    I mean yeah, don't shoot SLAPP rounds out of a .50 bmg rifle that's built such that it's basically a pipe bomb without the cap on one end. There's nothing really wrong with the gun or the ammo there was just something wrong with the dumbass using the gun and ammo. Dumbass nearly died, didn't, and now sells meme t-shirts about that time his dad almost got to watch him bleed out and die for a youtube video. It's a funny blip in the gunosphere and a good example to morons to not be morons beyond their own ability to handle the consequences of being moronic.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >it's basically a pipe bomb without the cap on one end
      Strictly speaking most guns are pipe bombs with one open end, it's just that some are made better than others. It's not the the threaded idea doesn't work, it's just that the ammo indeed was faulty.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        You can absolutely buy a .50 bmg rifle that would be safer to fire SLAPP and other moronic loads out of than a serbu, the issue is why is someone being so stupid as to need or want to shoot SLAPP or pissin hot handloads? There's no good reason for it and it's all just dumbfricks chasing clout with a camera in their face trying to make the biggest boom on camera and if you're gonna do that then get some ballistic shields and sit behind a car yanking a string instead of holding it like you're fricking Knoxville on Jackass. If you're broke as frick and need a .50 bmg then a serbu is a fine enough rifle since the hottest thing you will be shooting out of it is some of the hunting loads for some of the bigger game which are all within enough of a safety envelope that you won't be risking having a grenade go off in front of your neck. The whole thing happened because of and thankfully only hurt one moron, don't be moronic with guns and they don't blow up and maim you.

  17. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    SLAP rounds are perfectly fine for most guns.
    They are within the pressure spec for 50 bmg. Some guns with tight throats will have issues with the sabots profile but the M2 and other milspec guns won't.

  18. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Case head separation i sufficient to blow the RN50 with normal pressure ammo.
    It is a flaved and dangerous design.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Weird how there are literally ZERO other documented cases of an RN50 failing in this way.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        The RN50 is not "idiot proof" which also happens to be "Oh shit" proof.

        Design a pressure vessel for a catastrophic failure, and ensure it blows apart away from the operator. The gun is cool, and just like any AR meltdown test, the way it broke was fricking stupid; but the fact remains. It is a "Catastrophic fail deadly."

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          every single gun is catastrophic fail deadly. a gun can't fail safely. that's not even a design factor. beretta, remington, bushmaster, colt, ruger, glock, sig, smith and wesson, taurus, FN, none of them have a part of their design process where they say, 'ok, when (not if) some of these fail for whatever reason, will it be safe?'.

          if someone suggested they try to design the gun to 'fail safe' their lawyers would tell them that they're smoking crack.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >beretta, remington, bushmaster, colt, ruger, glock, sig, smith and wesson, taurus, FN, none of them have a part of their design process where they say, 'ok, when (not if) some of these fail for whatever reason, will it be safe?'.
            I can guarantee you each and every one of these manufacturers will do exactly that. It's called FMEA analysis, and it's industry standard at this point, especially in the explody part of the engineering industry which this happens to be. If anything, it's the lawyers that force this.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              devils advocate, it's prohibitively expensive to intentionally blow up these .50s that don't operate on super high margins as is. one dude in his shop making maybe 20 a month can't reasonably afford that kind of extensive R&D.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                You don't do FMEA by actually testing untill destruction generally, that is only used to validate in case you have plenty of resources or very high demands (which one could argue this is).
                You could very well just sit together with a couple of engineers and a case of beer and ask the question ''What if X breaks?''. Logically speaking, you would have found that if the cap fails and gains some form of momentum, given that the shear stress needed to break the ears off is probably less than the shear stress needed to break off the cap, breaking the cap likely means breaking off the ears, too. That means the ears should be redesigned. You try to look at every part, and see what happens if it fails. I think Serbu did this to an extent, because you cannot close the rifle it the cap is too loose (=out of battery), because that would be bad, hence the position of the ears.

                There is a reason why things are tested to and beyond (catastrophic) failure conditions. This to gauge the damage in the event of an unexpected failure, this is not too hard to understand.

                Serbu did not do this because he builds moron guns for morons in his shed and has never heard of any form of stress testing and safety protocols.

                Serbu is a moron with a thousand red flags and anyone buying anything from him deserves whats coming to them. Still does not warrant serbu not testing his guns exstensively.

                >There is a reason why things are tested to and beyond (catastrophic) failure conditions.
                This is not always done though, destructive testing has it's place but simulation and analysis are equally, if not more valuable tools.
                >This to gauge the damage in the event of an unexpected failure, this is not too hard to understand.
                The catch-22 here is that unexpected failures are alwasy unexpected, even with destructive testing. You're not trying to catch that 0.1% though, but rather the majority of all possible and dangerous failures, multiplied by the possible extent of their dangers (which happens to be rather severe with firearms).

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                I think a hot load on a handloaded gun is somewhere in the top 3 of 'things you want to test' before handing them over to customers. Even then I doubt serbu would have done and failure simulations.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Or just write a disclaimer of responsibility if handloads are used instead of testing every single possible combo of cartridge powder. This is a user error not of the gun. If I'm designing a car I'm going to make sure it survives a car crash or two. I'm not going to bother designing it to survive a fall off a 100 ft cliff. Neither should Serbu bother designing his gun to survive Bubba's pissing hot handloads instead of stock .50

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Cars are less designed to survive crashes, and more designed for the occupants to survive crashes. Maybe you are a good driver, but not all factors of driving are under your control, so you have a seat belt. You can blame hand loads all you want, but kabooms also occasionally happen with factory ammo. It's a reality that Mark Serbu has hand-waved away.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                That's true, but how likely would SAAMI spec ammo blow your gun and your face up, compared to handloads of a likely higher pressure? Anything can happen, but some things can happen more often than others. Heart attacks and shark attacks can happen, but guess what's the #1 killer in America, maybe the world? I wouldn't expect Serbu to design his gun off of non-spec ammo, outside of proof loads, unless he explicitly chose to do so.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Nobody expects Serbu's gun to accept out-of-spec loads without mechanical damage. But someone may expect that if they get that one bad cartridge in a million, because cartridges are made by the million, that they are not killed as a result. Case ruptures are a reality of self-contained ammunition, even SAAMI spec ammunition. Exceedingly rare nowadays, but they have been factored into gun design for well over 100 years, ever since Paul Mauser shot his own eye out with his own gun. The design of the RN50 is such that if a case head ruptures, it would push the thread cap beyond proof-load stress even with a SAAMI-spec load. The design is also such that there is absolutely no attempt to stop it from killing the shooter in that scenario. Serbu's rifle requires everything to be right every time. Other rifles require multiple things to go wrong before injury is even possible.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                nah. serbu's rifle is designed about as well as safe a rifle possibly can be. significantly over spec locking surfaces and barrel. it's not a question of gassing off a light lockup away from the shooter it just doesn't function safely as a significantly overpressure pipebomb and nothing ever will or can.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, it's not. There are plenty of other designs with superior design features that prevent and mitigate injury to the shooter in the inevitability of an ammunition defect. In the RN50, the locking surfaces are the only layer of engineering between the shooter and death. As I mentioned before, the breech is engineered so poorly that a case failure actually increases rather than decreases the stress on those surfaces, beyond the stress of a proof load. As you pointed out, the rest of the pressure components are so over-engineered that the threads become an uncontrolled failure point.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                in other weapons the weapon fires a bolt into your face as well

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Other bad weapons. Been over this already. Paul Mauser's own rifle he designed and built shot the bolt into his eye. He then decided a gas vent and a safety lug were good ideas. Other smart designers, not Mark Serbu, realized he was right, and the frequency of bolt guns blowing the shooter's eyes and/or brains out considerably decreased. This is just one example of good gun design.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                at pipebomb pressures, gas vent would vent gas while shearing safety lug and shooting bolt into eye.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                The bolt would fly out diagonally instead of straight back through the stock though.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                possible, the whole receiver's going boom though

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                what do you gain from spewing shit on the internet backed by absolutely nothing

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                anon the energy required to shred all of the threads and lugs on an RN50 is more than enough to shred the bolt lugs and receivers on any rifle.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                true, but unlike with the RN-50 the average bolt gun won't send shrapnel straight back into your neck even when it blows up, because it's not the path of least resistance.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Just your wrists and face right?

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yep, not great, but not life threatening

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                there was no path of enough resistance anon. you'd have to stick your rifle in an artillery barrel to support that amount of pressure.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                I've seen a video of a Desert Tech bolt gun firing an intentionally overcharged .338 Lapua round stuffed full of pistol powder. Estimated at something like 120-130k psi. He had to use a board to whack the bolt handle to get it open and the bolt head was fricked but the rifle was otherwise fine and didn't explode or spray shit everywhere.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                See normal guns shatter at the reciever and lacerate your wrists killing you that way.

                Okay, buddy.

                anon the energy required to shred all of the threads and lugs on an RN50 is more than enough to shred the bolt lugs and receivers on any rifle.

                Force is not the same as energy.
                Good bolt guns release some of that energy in a marginally safe direction

                Tell you what, put enough powder into a cartridge to match the same pressure point it took to blow KB’s RN50, load it into a Mauser, and record what happens when you shoot it with a string attached to the trigger.

                I’m confident the results will shock you.

                You have no idea how pressure, volume, energy, and force relate to each other.
                And since you asked, an Arisaka rifle ( a Mauser action) in good condition would accept a compressed load of Bullseye powder without even coming apart.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >marginally safe direction
                they release it in every direction at once

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >IT IS SAFE BECAUSE IT ONLY FAILED ONCE

                Quite literally, yes. If the ONLY way to induce a catastrophic failure in a firearm is to do so intentionally and with ammunition specifically loaded to do so, the gun is, by any and all definitions, safe to shoot.

                >but the ammo might n-
                Again, find me ANY other example of this EXACT kind of failure happening ANYWHERE ELSE that wasn’t being done ON PURPOSE.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                See normal guns shatter at the reciever and lacerate your wrists killing you that way.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Tell you what, put enough powder into a cartridge to match the same pressure point it took to blow KB’s RN50, load it into a Mauser, and record what happens when you shoot it with a string attached to the trigger.

                I’m confident the results will shock you.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              they design it to be a good gun at a given price point. they do not design it to fail safely. because, it is impossible, and would open them to catastrophic legal liability, if they made an effort to design a gun that 'didn't hurt someone when it breaks' which of course all guns will.

              go ahead. ask them. they will specifically tell you, no, if this gun fails, someone is likely going to be seriously injured. the engineers would be fired if they even suggested making a gun that 'fails safe', they would be fired for the legal team, because manufacturers are not responsible for people injured by guns that failed.

              you imagine that they're making the guns fail safe. they are 0% doing this in any way. they try to make a gun that doesn't fail more than its price would indicate it should. that's their only motivation. that's generally enough and that's good enough.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >a gun can't fail safely
            >the Mauser 98 and Lee-Enfield actions don't exist

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >every single gun is catastrophic fail deadly. a gun can't fail safely
            you fricking moron

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Design a pressure vessel for a catastrophic failure, and ensure it blows apart away from the operator.

          Alternatively: don’t use non-factory ammo that you know nothing about and didn’t load yourself. Especially .50 BMG.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Would you shoot a gun knowing you could die if there is something wrong with the ammo? I do not think so. It is a stupid line of reasoning to expect ammo always to be in good order.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              I’ll agree with you if you can find me a single documented case of an RN50 failing the same way it did in the original KB video that wasn’t intentionally done.

              (Hint: you can’t)

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                IT IS SAFE BECAUSE IT ONLY FAILED ONCE

                moronic line of reasoning. Just because it only failed once does not mean it wont fail again. Even more it failing once shows theres a very reasoable probability one will do in the future without proper conduct. (ofcourse the chances are now less likely because every owner would be notefied but thats a shotty way of handleing a object with potentially critical flaw). Tbh they should be recalled at the user their disgression and modefied.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Then all firearms need to be scrapped and remade at a fundamental level. You can find documented cases of ALL makes of firearm failing once for various reasons.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yea the only difference is THE REST DIDNT SHOOT A FRICKING PIECE OF METAL THOUGH THE USER THEIR THROAT

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                it's happened plenty of times before, actually. guns kill people and sometimes they kill the operator. if you don't like it don't shoot guns. that's the reality of it.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Theres no reasoning with morons like you. If you never want to move the status quo to a more safe environment around firearms then go ahead blow yourself up but normal people try and learn from design flaws and try to reduces the inherent risk associated with firearms.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                if the manufacturer says "hey moron don't use ammo this hot" and then a moron uses ammo hotter than that, I don't see it being the fault of the designer

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                why do you think pharmaceutical manufacturers make child proof packaging for medicine? Its clearly displayed the medicine must be kept away from childeren why would you bother with a extra failsafe? moron.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >failsafe for children to not get into pills
                >manufacturer warning for firearm specifically made for adults to not use ammo that is triple the maximum pressure the gun is recommended to be used at
                you dumb fricking moron. it's not the manufacturer's fault if I fill up a round full of unstable explosive and shrapnel hits me in the face. safety labels exist for all kinds of mechanical equipment where negligence can lead to death. plenty of glocks explode and maim their users. machines operating with high pressures are inherently dangerous and need to be operated with a baseline level of understanding that fact

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Do you think glocks would sell more or less if their failures threw metal at peoples throats?

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                exactly the same since their critical failures currently turn your hand into hamburger meat

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                how are you so slow?

                Would you rather have your hand blown off or have your neck blown off?

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                if my right hand was unusable I'd kill myself, so I'd rather just bleed out in 10 seconds

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Understandable if your right hand is all you have, what would you do if you couldnt jack off to serbu any more?

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                I'd be shocked if you own a single gun, let alone ever even shot one

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                this is /k/ringe

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                lol
                lmao even

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                this is also cringe and demonstrates to me that you spend all day on the computer and do not have sex or make money and are not a 'man'.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                not him but bait and cringe

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vng8MIRx5WM

                is this you

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                no

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                That's not a glocknade injury you disingenuous cretin.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/GoTUT21.png

                exactly the same since their critical failures currently turn your hand into hamburger meat

                Glock even improved their design after these failures, serbu cant seem to swallow his pride and make his design safer because it will hurt his integrity, and we all know that he values that greatly...

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Why post this garbage?
                Two completely unrelated images. The hand was from a medical journal detailing reconstructive surgery after a motorcycle injury in India.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >IT IS SAFE BECAUSE IT ONLY FAILED ONCE

                Quite literally, yes. If the ONLY way to induce a catastrophic failure in a firearm is to do so intentionally and with ammunition specifically loaded to do so, the gun is, by any and all definitions, safe to shoot.

                >but the ammo might n-
                Again, find me ANY other example of this EXACT kind of failure happening ANYWHERE ELSE that wasn’t being done ON PURPOSE.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Quite literally, yes. If the ONLY way to induce a catastrophic failure in a firearm is to do so intentionally and with ammunition specifically loaded to do so, the gun is, by any and all definitions, safe to shoot.

                actually, guns fail under normal operating conditions on a pretty much regular basis, catastrophically, causing injury.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Cool. Find me some examples of those kinds of failures with the RN50 that weren’t intentional.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                i don't care about the rn50 in particular. im sure it's a fine gun. my point is that firearms fail, often catastrophically, even when they're treated with respect. any failure of a firearm that involves the gun coming apart is potentially fatal.

                what you people who think that firearm manufacturers design 'fail safes' into their guns is that the only thing you could do is decide where it comes apart from, which is a decision that exposes them to hellfire litigation. if the RN50 was designed with a weaker barrel so that the barrel burst instead of the breech, and then someone died because the barrel burst, they would be directly responsible and open to being sued. gun manufacturers ABSOLUTELY do not design guns to 'fail safe'. this is an oxymoron in gun terms anyways. there's no safe failure mode. just different failure modes.

                Do you think glocks would sell more or less if their failures threw metal at peoples throats?

                essentially all catastrophic gun failures cause injury. the cases where they do not are cases where someone just got lucky.

                the text here is that a malfunction where it fails to fire or jams is not catastrophic, but a malfunction where the gun does ignite the fuse in the cartridge, and then disintegrates to some degree, is catastrophic, and almost always causes injury, which is why we wear PPE. and, a malfunction where the gun jams can also be fatal, in a deadly confrontation, which is why there is NOT a safety margin built into guns.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              you can ALWYS die when you shoot a gun, because something can ALWAYS be wrong with the ammo, and no, your gun may NOT be able to handle it, and it may FAIL CATASTROPHICALLY IN A DANGEROUS WAY.

              this is unavoidable and it's delusional to think you're not taking a small but real risk every time you touch off a cartridge. even if you do everything right.

              I think overly hot loads on a hand loaded gun is very much a concern that is extremely reasonable to take in to account. Its a gun made for tinkering morons, it should be moron tinkering proof.

              you're an idiot to consider that. guns operate as close to a 1:1 failure margin as possible because overbuilding a gun to be 'safe' is inherently a more dangerous compromise due to the purpose of a gun.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                I can produce a similar catastrophic failure on any firearm ever created you dumb frick. when a round is made to explode a gun, don't be surprised when it explodes a fricking gun

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                rounds that aren't designed to blow a gun up blow guns up all the time

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                yeah, we should probably scrap any gun that's ever been produced in 556 because a 300 blackout will catastrophically fail and you might catch a piece of metal in your eye

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                you don't have to put the wrong bullet in a gun for it to fail. you can do everything right and a gun can still fail. literally: many such cases.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                the level of failure brough on by bubba's nuclear pissin handload is seldom found in any other firearm, let alone mechanical objects in general

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                how many of those cases flung a piece of metal at the user their troat and how many blew off peoples hand? How do you fail to see the problem?

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                >how many of those cases flung a piece of metal at the user their troat and how many blew off peoples hand?

                about 50% of all gun failures do something along these lines.

                this is just an accepted part of firearms. it's not a problem, it's just unfortunate.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                theres a difference between (fatal and not fatal) the two but ive come to the realization your brain is already working overtime to no avail so i wont try and explain it again.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                the difference is luck and the rapidity of medical attention, technically. any firearm malfunction that causes catastrophic failure (the gun comes apart) has the complete potential to cause death. they often do.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/4/268

                "National estimates of non-fatal firearm related injuries other than gunshot wounds"

                >An estimated 65 374, or an average of 16 300 per year, non-fatal, non-GSWs were treated in American hospital emergency departments during the four year study period.

                >how many of those cases flung a piece of metal at the user their troat and how many blew off peoples hand?

                sixty five thousand three hundred and seventy four of them.

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                you truly dont know how to interpet data do you? 1 of 1 of rn50 resulted in critical injury (100%), how many of normal firearm failures related injuries are critical?

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                you run that critical failure against the number of guns sold and determine that it's an extremely safe gun

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                okay show me the sales instead of making it up

              • 10 months ago
                Anonymous

                Most of them you mouth breathing troglodyte. That's the norm for how firearms catastrophically fail.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Modern ammo rarely has case head separations.

  19. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >buy .50 "SLAP" rounds from some chucklefrick's auction (>90% of these are handloaded)
    >actually load it into a gun and fire it

    This moron deserved everything that happened to him.

  20. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    I never understood why serbu was the household name in affordable 50s when there are like 3 other manufacturers within 10 miles of serbu that don't have dumbshit moronic ways to load the gun and are priced either close to the same or less expensive

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Such as?

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        big kahuna for one. that's where I got mine and I'm pretty happy with it. safety harbor has one as well, mccutchen is also in the same zip code

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >big kahuna's design is bolt action
          holy fricking shit what a massive improvement

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          Do you like it?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            I love mine. they're a low volume shop so the owner will personally call you and spitball what specs you want in regard to barrel length. it feels and looks way better than the serbu pipe gun since it attaches to an AR lower. I have maybe 120 rounds through mine and it's so much fun to shoot. she's a big b***h though and kicks like a Clydesdale

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >big kahuna for one
          Do they also have tasty hawaiian burgers?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            I love when Jules finishes his drink, they know they’re gonna die.

  21. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    There is a reason why things are tested to and beyond (catastrophic) failure conditions. This to gauge the damage in the event of an unexpected failure, this is not too hard to understand.

    Serbu did not do this because he builds moron guns for morons in his shed and has never heard of any form of stress testing and safety protocols.

    Serbu is a moron with a thousand red flags and anyone buying anything from him deserves whats coming to them. Still does not warrant serbu not testing his guns exstensively.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >someone planted a bomb in my car engine and I lost a leg when it went off
      >why would (car brand) create such an unsafe design??!?!!

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        overly hot ammo is more similar to putting diesel in a benzine car, would you buy a car that explodes and kills you if you put in the wrong fuel?

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why would you put the wrong fuel in your car to begin with?

          If YOU do something stupid to something you own, the manufacturer is not liable for what happens. RTFM.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            But if the car killed you because you did so they would be recalled instantly as there are still ample morons around who do.

            you can ALWYS die when you shoot a gun, because something can ALWAYS be wrong with the ammo, and no, your gun may NOT be able to handle it, and it may FAIL CATASTROPHICALLY IN A DANGEROUS WAY.

            this is unavoidable and it's delusional to think you're not taking a small but real risk every time you touch off a cartridge. even if you do everything right.

            [...]

            you're an idiot to consider that. guns operate as close to a 1:1 failure margin as possible because overbuilding a gun to be 'safe' is inherently a more dangerous compromise due to the purpose of a gun.

            It is a significant risk, and thus needs to be adressed (hence it got so much attention)

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              >they would be recalled instantly
              No, they would slap some fine text in the car manual saying not to use the wrong fuel or your warranty is void and they accept no fault. Can't fix stupid, why bother

  22. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >RN50
    >RN
    >Royal Nonesuch

    I think that particular gun wasn't designed by Serbu but by this guy. He was a sorta popular guntuber like 7 yrs ago, made famous for his homemade pipe shotguns and disregard for safery. He eventually started working under Serbu

  23. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Also I do not know if Serbu has done this but it is 1 thing to divert blame away from yourself but it is another thing to swallow your pride and go back to the drawing board to make sure if someone loads and overly hot load in to their gun their head would not be decapitated next time. Is he planning to keep on selling the design or is he considering safety improvements, if not he can suck it.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      I don't think you understand the magnitude of operator moronation to blow that gun up. if you loaded a 556 full of dynamite, a similar outcome would occur. it's like designing a car to withstand a 100 mile an hour head on collision. you need to focus on mitigating 45-60mph crashes. at a certain point, it's just not your fault

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        I think overly hot loads on a hand loaded gun is very much a concern that is extremely reasonable to take in to account. Its a gun made for tinkering morons, it should be moron tinkering proof.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          It's not made for tinkering morons it's made to shoot .50 rounds cheaply. The only moron is Kentucky. You don't change a gun's design because it has been used contrary to it. If someone sticks a barrel up his ass for pleasure, do I as a designer change the shape to be more pleasurable? More curves, bumps, thickness? Or do I tell him to frick off for being a weirdo and keep making money?

  24. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    The serbu rn-50 is fine in terms of strength of the action. It won't explode with normal ammo, that shit was crazy. BUT, if it *DOES* explode, the failure mode is super unsafe, with the "safety" lugs being projected at your body, which is enough to make me not want it.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Don’t use handloaded ammo that you didn’t load yourself.

      There, now you never have to worry about it exploding literally ever.

  25. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's been how long and randomly this thread pops up? Threads more slidey than a greased up metal slide.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >slide thread
      >thread about a weapon with engaging conversation
      >on a board about weapons
      /k/ - Ukraine news

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        This entire thread has been made with damn near the exact conversations tenfold. Even down to making fun of serbu.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          that happend way before the incident aswel

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        That in no way excludes other varieties of slide thread you numb gigger.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          what exactly do you propose is being suppressed by this slide thread if not current events? someone else's thread about weapons?

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          Long as it slides an off topic ukraine thread idc. If a weapons thread gets slid, that's just the name of the game. Everything else is fair game

  26. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Even if you load the gun with fricking C4, it should explode in a way that doesn't throw shrapnel BACKWARDS. It's not the RN50 fault that it failed. But HOW it failed absolutely is its fault.
    Ironically the problem is actually that the gun is TOO strong. If it had weaker walls, it would have exploded sideways and not put the shooter in so much danger.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Even if you load the gun with fricking C4, it should explode in a way that doesn't throw shrapnel BACKWARDS.

      this is fricking delusional and it's never going to happen with any gun. every single fricking gun that has ever been fricking made can kill you even if you don't do something stupid with it.

      you're fricking moronic if you think that any gun is made to not injure the operator if it comes apart.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        It will injure the operator, yes. But it should blow his hand off, not send shit backward into his chest and neck.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          actually, that's incorrect. your thinking is delusional and childlike. nobody will EVER take responsibility for how a gun violently disintegrates. nobody does. every single gun might blow your eyes and jugular out if it blows up. period.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            glock did, reenforced their polymer frame

            serbu does not because he is a avid moron and no professional ever takes him seriously

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              how the frick would you know

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              the polymer isn't what causes the injury. post guns

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              WHY WOULD SERBU NEED TO FIX ANYTHING WHEN THE REASON THE GUN FAILED WAS BECAUSE OF EXTEMEM OVER PRESSURED AMMO YOU FRICKING moron

              LITERALLY JUST DONT BE A moron AND LOAD SUSPICIOUS AMMO AND YOU’LL BE FINE

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >so you DESIGNED the gun to blow my clients hand off?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Even if you load the gun with fricking C4
      Stopped reading here.

      If you willingly do something you know is dangerous with your firearm and it maims or kills you, that’s YOUR fault.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Unless a gun is meant to use c4 you should not load it. If you do that's on you. Manufacturer is not liable for user error

  27. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >HOW COULD OUR DEAR OVERLORD SERBU POSSIBLY KNOW SUCH A THING WOULD HAPPEN, THIS IS ALL THE USER THEIR FAULT, MARKS GUNS ARE PERFECT IN EVERY WAY YOU ARE JUST USING THEM WRONG

    Holy frick you guys might just be as moronic as the man himself

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >T.moron

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >still can’t post other examples of the RN50 failing like this
      Sad!

  28. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    I always found funny how Serbu made a video boasitng how HIS ABSOLUTE GENIUS IDEA of using threads for the locking surfaces allowed him to cut down on materials and production times (i.e. kiking out on critical parts) just a week before this happened
    still, fuddlorey ballistics is a huge morono

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      there's nothing wrong with the rn50. all guns are dangerous when they fail. period. any of them can and will kill you if they come apart. the rn50 is a stronger design then pretty much any other anyways, and there's no telling what would have happened if a barett for example had taken that cartridge and come apart, it could have sent a piece of metal through his forehead instead. this shit just happens with guns.

      if you feel otherwise you're just frickin stupid and probably shouldn't be playing with firearms.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >there's nothing wrong with the rn50

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      ?t=880
      >"I had a negligent discharge with one of these in the shop, almost killed my employee who was too stoned to notice. Not too stoned to weld on my garbage guns though!"
      Really though, the whole video is hilarious. At one point he talks about how it isn't designed with the safety margin of other guns, it's just designed to be "good enough."

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >We like gun parts to be 3 or 4 times stronger than they need to be. This is more like 2 times or maybe 1 1/2 times. It's strong enough, just not excessively strong.
        Right around 7 minutes in. What a fricking moron.

  29. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    god what i would to burst burst my endcap and explode my hot ammo in her neck

    btw notice how shes not holding the rn50, he doesnt even trust it enough to give to his daughter.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      what do you mean? I can't see any indication of her not holding it

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        thats not an RN-50 anon. thats a BFG-50A

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          oh, lmao I was looking for some kind of clever photo trick of it being on a table or something

  30. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    What's the reason for why SLAP rounds are so prone to causing gun failiure? Does the plastic cause friction with the barrel?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Light projectile requires a very fast powder.
      Very fast powder results in a big chamber pressure spike.
      Also, the sabot and muzzle brakes sometimes don't play nice together.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        I see. How much lighter is the tungsten penetrator?

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >M903 SLAP / 355 gr (23 g)
          >M33 Ball / 706.7 gr (45.8 g)

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Light projectile requires a very fast powder.
      Very fast powder results in a big chamber pressure spike.
      Also, the sabot and muzzle brakes sometimes don't play nice together.

      Anyway this 100% wasn't a true SLAP round but some bubba handload SLAP, gunbroker is full of these grifter homosexuals and their "totally genuine AP load, no guarantee tho, shoot at your own risk" ammo.

  31. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Would the old BMG rifles like the Maadi-Griffin and the Iver Johnson AMAC-1500, the one where you have to remove the bolt with every reload, handle SLAP rounds any better?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      No.

  32. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know why the frick people try to cheap out on a .50 BMG of all things. Years ago these shit sticks made by Hesse/Vulcan/Blackthorne were blowing up semi-regularly and a few people lost fingers and eyes to them.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      because 50bmg is insanely expensive and artificially marked up exclusively due to it being a primarily military contract cartridge. there are a handful of companies that make affordable, high quality guns that run sub 2 grand. there are a lot of dudes that see a gap in their collection but don't want to shell out 8k minimum for the companies that have an oligopoly in the market

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >because 50bmg is insanely expensive and artificially marked up exclusively due to it being a primarily military contract cartridge

        You're moronic. Proportionally to materials used, they're not really all that more expensive than .308 Win.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          I meant the guns that use 50 BMG as a cartridge are wildly marked up

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Proportionally to materials used, they're not really all that more expensive than .308 Win.
          Are you high?

          A 50-count can of .50 BMG is $150 minimum.
          A 50-count box of .308 Win is $46 minimum.

          Source: Ammoseek

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Are you moronic? Or do you just lack reading comprehension?

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              >proportionally
              Now compare the amount of brass, copper, lead and gunpowder used in each, dumb frick.

              None of that matters when you buy it, dipshit. It’s whatever the seller decides to charge, and most sellers are charging the prices I listed.

              >b-b-but proportionally
              Frick off, complain to the stores or make your own ammo. Don’t blow your face off like KB.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's actually pretty cheap proportionally speaking. There's about 4-5x the raw materials in a loaded.50 BMG round vs. a .308.

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            >proportionally
            Now compare the amount of brass, copper, lead and gunpowder used in each, dumb frick.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Can't you amerifats just buy a 14.5mm rifle like PTRS instead? Works better and gives you bragging rights for having the biggest boom stick.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          I'm sorry we don't speak non moon lander

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            You expect my poor Eastern-European micronation to have its own space program?

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              yes

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          anything larger than 50 cal is a restricted class of weapon called a destructive device and is entirely non viable for the average citizen

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            I thought .50 cal is also a destructive device.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              Only over .50. .50 BMG is only restricted in California AFAIK. Federally .50 cal is fine. Shotguns have a special exclusion so they're also fine. They're sold like any other gun. Anything over .50 (without a special exemption, which is mostly for historical old guns and most shotguns) is a destructive device and you have to pay a tax stamp for transfer ($200).

              As a side note, muzzleloaders can be whatever caliber you want since they're not legally guns (and don't have to be transferred even at a retail store).

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, no thanks. It's always these affordable, """high quality""" .50s that you see mangling people. Something like an AR-50 isn't that much more and you don't have to wonder if you're going to walk away with all your body parts intact every time you shoot it.

  33. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >catastrophic failure is not planned into the design of the gun
    >reciever struts insuring the breach is fully locked become shrapnel in case of catastrophic failure

    If this happened on a properly made rifle KB wouldn't have almost died. The shrapnel from the cap shearing off those struts is what almost killed him. The cap itself just broke his orbital bone.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Do you have any examples of an RN50 failing the same way it did in the KB video that wasn’t intentional?

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        of course not

  34. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >obtain loads that are standardised to be pissin' hot and intended to be only fired from a specific model of heavy machine gun
    >shoot them through cheapest, most light-weight single-shot you can find
    even if it hadn't turned out to be a bubba's mystery surprise round .50 SLAPs were officially considered unsafe to be fired from anything but the M2 and even then considered to be of such a dubious level of safety that they were effectively completely discontinued from use
    just because the caliber matches the gun does not mean you should or can fire it and this is common knowledge
    pure operator error

  35. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    This thread only exists because that one guy who had an autistic hatred of serbu remembered serbu exists

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      He's one of those gays who will make the same thread over and over for like 10 years. I struggle to comprehend how someone gets that buttblasted over anything that didn't effect them personally, but that type seems very common here, maybe a bit more than they used to be.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        It's like that guy who would make those sigger threads every three months and then spam the board whenever someone smarter than him would say something.

  36. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    My biggest gripe with his following "catastrophic failure" videos is that he always throws a squib in the barrel when using the ultra-high pressure rounds. I not only want to see if the gun could theoretically handle that once, but I also want to know what kind of speed a .50 BMG packed with pistol powder is putting out. That's untouched territory.

  37. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://archive.org/details/Maadi-Griffin_50_Cal._Rifle_Plans

    https://archive.org/details/Browning.50_Target_Rifle_BMG_GunMetal_Designs_Blueprints

  38. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Even if ammo was over pressure the design of the breach is fricked breach cap easily expanded off the thread with a overpressured round. Look at any cannon or muzzle loader breach plug and they thread into the barrel not the outside. The design on the serbu is like a fricking Gatorade cap compared to what you would even find on a blackpoweer muzzle loader.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      yeah serbu is a moronic Black person

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Great point not to be overlooked. Worthy of an email to serbu himself.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Some moron loads 180000 psi instead of 50 000-60 000. How would inside treads help . You can try and add more threads but at a certain point you stop adding threads , or add a type of "cap shield" but then you risk more shrapnel if it does blow. Its a 50 bmg, if it blows up, it is mighty dangerous, semiautos ussually do better during catastrophic malfunctions simply due to the recoilsprings, guiderails/rods ecc. and the enormous shell around everything As well as space behind the breach.
      >If you make something moron proof, nature will provide a better moron.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        >how would inside threads help
        Because the cap isnt thick enough thread depth isnt thick enough thread pitch isnt thick enough. So cap expand/stretches as its blown off the threads. So its not even using full thread strength. Should look more like pic related scaled down.

        • 10 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Not thicc/deep enough
          Fair enough.
          The hinge could help
          .
          Whats the difference between pic related and your pic except hinge and size?

          • 10 months ago
            Anonymous

            Like i already more thread length, ACME threads and thicker cap. Design above is respecting the fact it has too contain a explosion inside even though its using a powder that 3 times less powerful.

            • 10 months ago
              Anonymous

              Alright thanks bro.
              >this gif seems strangely apropriate for some reason

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        Good guns are designed to relieve pressure in a (marginally) safe direction, in event of a case failure. Paul Mauser learned this lesson the hard way in the 19th century, part of the reason Mauser actions were the gold standard for 50 years. Perfected Mausers had both redundancies and fail-safes.The RN50 has no fail-safe or redundancy in event of a case rupture. In the RN50 scenario, the case rupture causes an exponential rise in force against the breach cap that is only released by the bullet exiting the muzzle or the breach cap blowing off and skullfricking the shooter. Internal threads WOULD have reduced the degree that the force increased, but internal threads is not a whole solution.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why would Serbu even make this Black person rigged piece of shit when they've been making a cheap, properly designed single shot .50 for a long time?

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        they're both functionally the same gun save the only difference being the action

  39. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Serbu did nothing wrong

  40. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    He says multiple times throughout the video that he lays the blame squarely on the mystery meat ammo he bought on the internet. And that the problem was them being way too hot.

  41. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Gun blows up
    >Still unsure if it was due to nuclear ammo or a defect in the gun
    >Send remains of rifle to the ONE PERSON with an enormous bias towards the outcome and an enormous incentive to downplay any defect of the gun to save his business
    Of all the moronic decisions in this debacle that's the one that grinds my gears the most. Did he seriously not think of sending it to an unbiased third party? Did he lose some brain cells with the blast?

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      He suspected the ammo. Reviewing the footage indicated ammo problems due to increased and inconsistent muzzleblast,, when loading you have to at least catch a glance down the barrel so unlikeli an obstruction)
      >gun blows.
      Scott got another rn50
      >got told 180 000 psi was the limit for the threads .
      > Had at least one 50 bmg purposefully loaded to a calculated 190 000 psi
      (could be multiple rounds he tested that were loaded to specific preassures but im not watching it again).
      > Gun explodes in a similar fashion.
      If it is the gun.
      Both scott and serbu are lying through their teeth which is possible.
      it would not suprise me if serbu was because the reputation of his guns is on the line (he is no beretta but if rumors about your gats sploding your customers start going around,true/ or not, enough doubt will be created that people wont buy from you)
      >Or the very coveted slap round was counterfitted by bubba "just put more powder in" the fud so he can sell em at 100 dollarinos per round.

  42. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah I don't know if you know this but /k/ is full of moronic fudds. They also blame the P320 for cops shooting themselves. The fudd mindset is integral to autism and the love of guns.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      >They also blame the P320 for cops shooting themselves.
      Bait. A modern service gun shouldn't go bang from being struck.

      • 10 months ago
        Anonymous

        fudd detected

  43. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    As a proud owner of the BFG-50, I can safely say the RN-50 has zero reason to exist.

    It's not worth the small cost savings to have a sketchy screw-cap breach instead of a much more conventional and MUCH more satisfying to use bolt.

  44. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not buying your shitty guns you low IQ can't even graduate high school moron

  45. 10 months ago
    Anonymous

    Still won't buy your pipe-bomb-waiting-to-happen, Mark.

    • 10 months ago
      Anonymous

      you couldn't afford it schizo

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *