RTI Arms safety statement about the Priest
- Thread starter Erik
- Start date
I am so happy to RTI post this. Shows that they did their homework and backs up my assessment of the gun in many ways. RIGHT ON RTI!!!
Upvote 0
I like the looks of the gun, if they upgraded the shroud design it might even be on my list for next gun to get.
Upvote 0
It's like I said to the guy that was posting about the Dutch reviewer who started this rumor, just because someone says something and sounds convincing, doesn't make it true.
There are always going to be people who think they know engineering better than the manufacturer and in some cases, maybe they do but.... that reviewer should have asked for this info from the manufacturer before positioning themselves as an engineering expert and telling the world that this gun will kill their families.
Even if if it was just to make it balanced, they could have said "this is why the manufacturer thinks it's safe" and here's why I think they are wrong. If you are going to write the first official review, you have a responsibility to do at least that much if you plan to make claims like that.
As far as I know, the safety of HPA products is tested through some kind of stress test in a controlled environment. An example would be the hydro test used on our scba tanks. The initial test they do to confirm the specs involves increasing the pressure further so they can see at which point it breaks. It's scientific and data based.
I'm not sure if it is possible to do a meaningful test by visually inspecting the components without knowing the strength of the alloys and the level of stress they are under. I do know that you need actual data to make absolute statements.
There are always going to be people who think they know engineering better than the manufacturer and in some cases, maybe they do but.... that reviewer should have asked for this info from the manufacturer before positioning themselves as an engineering expert and telling the world that this gun will kill their families.
Even if if it was just to make it balanced, they could have said "this is why the manufacturer thinks it's safe" and here's why I think they are wrong. If you are going to write the first official review, you have a responsibility to do at least that much if you plan to make claims like that.
As far as I know, the safety of HPA products is tested through some kind of stress test in a controlled environment. An example would be the hydro test used on our scba tanks. The initial test they do to confirm the specs involves increasing the pressure further so they can see at which point it breaks. It's scientific and data based.
I'm not sure if it is possible to do a meaningful test by visually inspecting the components without knowing the strength of the alloys and the level of stress they are under. I do know that you need actual data to make absolute statements.
Upvote 0
When people feel the need to use terms like highly technical engineer, red flags ought to fly up. All engineers are highly technical. Why would someone feel it necessary to reaffirm that. Is it the reader of their posts they are trying to convince or themselves? To Leo's credit he isn't the one who made that claim but many people on that bandwagon did. I work in a field where many safety factors are 1.15. When the voltage gets real high the safety factors do go up yet arc flashes still happen and if you have ever seen one you would agree that the possible hazards/risks are on the same level as hpa, ie death. To see a safety factor of 9 is super high.
Upvote 0
It's called freedom of speech for a reason! There's always guys who think they know more then someone else or their word is superior, cut it! The Priest is an exact copy with a few differences. Let me guess it just happenes to look like the impact?
Upvote 0
^this guy. Lol.
How you going to yell freedom of speech then demand I cut mine because of your hurt feelings? You make strong claims and give no evidence. Little hint, "what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" hater gonna hate.
Upvote 0
Topcat, spare yourself the embarrassment and look at this video, the priest ON THE INSIDE is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT RIFLE. It's what's on the inside that counts. Please know what you're talking about before opening your mouth and showing everyone how little you know...
Upvote 0
I can't remember saying anything about it smart guy. If that's not your video explaining to me the differences then I'm not interested. Still wait g on a answer from one of the 2 stooges about the looks of the rifle. Oh, are you sure it's a priest that reads your rights? I could be wrong since I don't know much
Upvote 0
I'm supposed to agree with a guy who is from the same country the rifle is made? Are you kidding me...lol shaking my head..kids!
Upvote 0
Then don't listen, watch.... But since you obviously have no interest in learning about what you're talking about I could point something out for you. The Priest and the Impact doesn't even have the hammer system in the same part of the gun, so how is it an exact copy?
Upvote 0
Speculations on who was first: FX or RTI are all based on nothing. Nobody out here probably knows the right answer. And suing isn't going to help anyone here, I still don't understand why some people always like to sue everybody and everything they don't like???
FX's best designs are still the Royale and Boss series. Great pieces of kit!
Just to set some things straight about Leo: He never said that it is going to kill someone! I haven't read the complete english translation but since I know who translated it I think he didn't mentioned that too. I've read the dutch version of the review again, Leo is concerned about some construction structures that have some weaknesses when taking it apart and assembling it again several times for regular service. That's the reason he doesn't trust the gun anymore.
The 800 bar they've applied as test is something a lot of airguns won't withstand so kudos for that! The EN norm that Leo mentioned is one that can't directly be applied in this case because the material that's used aren't seamless cold drawn tubes anymore because they're machined. Because they're machined (and damaged as can be seen in the pictures) the formulas and strength calculations do not apply anymore. He knows that and mentioned it clearly in his review!
The problems with the venting holes and weaver dimensions are only minor issues which can be fixed rather easily, the constructional problems might need a good redesign.
Again, I'm not bashing the product and I'm not trying to stop you from using it, I'm just setting things straight. I really like the approach RTI has used by not building a conventional gun. I know, building something new isn't the easiest thing to do but I think they'll find their way
But be warned (and this holds for basically every airgun): if you're (re)assembling your gun and you don't trust something because it's damaged of crippled, make sure you change it for your own safety. Materials degrade over time and safety margins will shrink over time.
FX's best designs are still the Royale and Boss series. Great pieces of kit!
Just to set some things straight about Leo: He never said that it is going to kill someone! I haven't read the complete english translation but since I know who translated it I think he didn't mentioned that too. I've read the dutch version of the review again, Leo is concerned about some construction structures that have some weaknesses when taking it apart and assembling it again several times for regular service. That's the reason he doesn't trust the gun anymore.
The 800 bar they've applied as test is something a lot of airguns won't withstand so kudos for that! The EN norm that Leo mentioned is one that can't directly be applied in this case because the material that's used aren't seamless cold drawn tubes anymore because they're machined. Because they're machined (and damaged as can be seen in the pictures) the formulas and strength calculations do not apply anymore. He knows that and mentioned it clearly in his review!
The problems with the venting holes and weaver dimensions are only minor issues which can be fixed rather easily, the constructional problems might need a good redesign.
Again, I'm not bashing the product and I'm not trying to stop you from using it, I'm just setting things straight. I really like the approach RTI has used by not building a conventional gun. I know, building something new isn't the easiest thing to do but I think they'll find their way
But be warned (and this holds for basically every airgun): if you're (re)assembling your gun and you don't trust something because it's damaged of crippled, make sure you change it for your own safety. Materials degrade over time and safety margins will shrink over time.Upvote 0
It's not about who was first, it is the fact that this guy thinks they are similar enough to be copies of each other. He needs to learn that there is more to a gun than the outside looks
Upvote 0
Agree to that! But some people just don't get it. And I especially hate that suing culture that he's promoting
Upvote 0
Why are people assuming that FX owns the rights or has patents or anything equivalent on guns made to look similar to the AR15? They don't.
The AR look is one of the most copied across all types of guns. Most people think it's a good thing to be able to use universally compatible grips and stocks etc.
FX were not even the first to use the AR style on a air gun but even if they were, the can of worms a successful legal case would open would hurt them far more than it might help.
Why? Glad you asked. Because almost all tube and bottle guns looks similar. Maybe Kalibrgun should explore legal action against FX because the Wildcat stock looks very, very, very similar to the original skeleton Cricket stock.
Or maybe the guys over at swivel machine should take action because they beat FX to making an AR style PCP bottle gun with caliber switching and external regulators by 20 years.
Maybe Daystate should consider action because the Streamline is not entirely dissimilar to the Huntsman.
Does anyone really want to live in a world with no competition for each type of air gun?
FX has never been shy about applying for patents on anything they make that is genuinely unique so believe me, if they could have patented the AR look for air guns, they would have done it already.
I can't think why anyone here would want that. If they did it and won... and the Priest had to stop being made... and no more AR compatible PCP bottle bullpups could be made, how would that benefit anyone here?
Will a lack of competition make you richer? Will it make air guns cheaper or improve quality? If any airgun category would benefit from competition to make them up their game, it is this category.
What is this really about as I am assuming we don't have any FX shareholders here? A form of Stockholm syndrome? Or maybe it's frustration and post Impact purchase regret casued by the release of another take-down style PCP bottle bullpup for half the price and with fewer quality issues? I would probably feel frustrated myself but the Impacts problems are not RTI's fault.
It's all just business. Competition is a good thing. After all, we're not communists!
The AR look is one of the most copied across all types of guns. Most people think it's a good thing to be able to use universally compatible grips and stocks etc.
FX were not even the first to use the AR style on a air gun but even if they were, the can of worms a successful legal case would open would hurt them far more than it might help.
Why? Glad you asked. Because almost all tube and bottle guns looks similar. Maybe Kalibrgun should explore legal action against FX because the Wildcat stock looks very, very, very similar to the original skeleton Cricket stock.
Or maybe the guys over at swivel machine should take action because they beat FX to making an AR style PCP bottle gun with caliber switching and external regulators by 20 years.
Maybe Daystate should consider action because the Streamline is not entirely dissimilar to the Huntsman.
Does anyone really want to live in a world with no competition for each type of air gun?
FX has never been shy about applying for patents on anything they make that is genuinely unique so believe me, if they could have patented the AR look for air guns, they would have done it already.
I can't think why anyone here would want that. If they did it and won... and the Priest had to stop being made... and no more AR compatible PCP bottle bullpups could be made, how would that benefit anyone here?
Will a lack of competition make you richer? Will it make air guns cheaper or improve quality? If any airgun category would benefit from competition to make them up their game, it is this category.
What is this really about as I am assuming we don't have any FX shareholders here? A form of Stockholm syndrome? Or maybe it's frustration and post Impact purchase regret casued by the release of another take-down style PCP bottle bullpup for half the price and with fewer quality issues? I would probably feel frustrated myself but the Impacts problems are not RTI's fault.
It's all just business. Competition is a good thing. After all, we're not communists!
Upvote 0