(from an email sent by my good friend Baxter)
Instruction From The Editor To The Journalist: Frangible Arms just bought a four page color ad in our next issue. They sent us their latest offering, the CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer. I told Fred to take it out to the range to test. He’ll have the data for you tomorrow.
Feedback From Technician Fred:
The pistol is a crude copy of the World War II Japanese Nambu type 14 pistol, except it’s made from unfinished zinc castings. The grips are pressed cardboard. The barrel is unrifled pipe. There are file marks all over the gun, inside and out.
Only 10 rounds of 8mm ammunition were supplied. Based on previous experience with a genuine Nambu, I set up a target two feet down range. I managed to cram four rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber. I taped the magazine in place, bolted the pistol into a machine rest, got behind a barricade, and pulled the trigger with 20 feet of 550 cord. I was unable to measure the trigger pull because my fish scale tops out at 32 pounds. On the third try, the pistol fired. From outline of the holes, I think the barrel, frame, magazine, trigger and recoil spring blew through the target. The remaining parts scattered over the landscape.
I sent the machine rest back to the factory to see if they can fix it, and we need to replace the shooting bench for the nice people who own the range. I’ll be off for the rest of the day. My ears are still ringing. I need a drink.
Article Produced By The Journalist:
The CQB MK-V Tactical Destroyer is arguably the deadliest pistol in the world. Based on a combat proven military design, but constructed almost entirely of space age alloy, it features a remarkable barrel design engineered to produce a cone of fire, a feature much valued by Special Forces world wide. The Destroyer shows clear evidence of extensive hand fitting. The weapon disassembles rapidly without tools. At a reasonable combat distance, I put five holes in the target faster than I would have thought possible. This is the pistol to have if you want to end a gunfight at all costs. The gun is a keeper, and I find myself unable to send it back.
Bwaa-ha-ha-ha!!!
And they charge $4.95 per issue for these unbiased reports!!!!!!
($8.95 in Canada)
Todd – That’s it. I officially love this site. While sad, this humorous write up is all too true. Thank you for posting it. Not to mention I laughed out loud. Perhaps one day you will become a Glock fan, and thus achieve “Action Hero” status in my book 🙂
say fellas i hate to do this but i’m going to have to call shenanigans on this. i just spent the better part of 4 hours trying to find the frangible arms website and it just ain’t there. i called buds and they have never heard of the CQB MK-V tactical destroyer or frangible arms. i did find a fobus for the CQB MK-V tactical destroyer though so i’m not sure what’s going on. until i have a confirmation i will just stick to what is a proven weapon system and keep the hipoint c-9.
Thank goodness we have the internet 🙂
Can it be fitted with a Picatinny rail and laser?
Just kidding. I knew it was a fake because the review wasn’t for a 1911 .45 ACP costing over $6700. Everyone who reads gun mags know that there are no other pistols on Earth.
Actually that model is just a single shot .410 judge in disquise.
A reporter for the Times askes “When will the 40mm version be coming out?”
Senator Frumple demands that it be part of the SOCOM testing (since Frangible Arms in his district can now donate unlimted funds to his campaign)?
Frangible Arms marketing after extensive focus group sessions has decided to market the gun to the shooting sports as the DQ Quick Permanent Mark I.
Classic!
Will this be in the “Special Handgun issue” of Handguns Magazine?
I get American Rifleman because of my NRA membership but dread reading the reviews, or any gun mag reviews for this reason. Every gun they test shoots better than I will ever shoot and “didn’t experience any malfunctions during the 300 rounds we fried.”
Will Sig offer it in an Equinox or Elite version?
This is the saving grace of “Gun tests”, they write things like “this gun gets an F because parts fall off it every time it is fired”.
Or “this gun works fine, but is 8 times the price of these other guns that work just as fine.”
Of course they don’t have ads (visible anyway) and therefore are constantly pleading for money, even when your subscription has 11 months left to go.
Speaking of Gun Tests;
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs4.htm
GUN TESTS Magazine Unqualified to Evaluate Personal Defense Ammunition
I liked the AR writeup on pocket pistols. The math of their protocol was great; “almost 100 rounds” worked out more like 60 on my calculator. None of the guns made it through that demanding regimen.