the UTS-15 shotgun

Discussion in 'Firearms' started by CATO, Jan 7, 2013.

  1. CATO

    CATO Monkey+++

    Pretty spiffy looking. It would be great to have one of these . . . put slugs in one side and 00 in the other.

  2. CATO

    CATO Monkey+++

    I noticed NutnFancy gave it a thumbs down:

    UGRev likes this.
  3. jasonl6

    jasonl6 Monkey+++

    I was going to post nutnfancy's review too. Maybe he got a bad one but looks pretty crappy.
  4. CATO

    CATO Monkey+++

    Yeah, looks like a POS. My "spiffy" comment had to do more with the ability to switch ammo types. Hopefully the designer with improve the action. It would also do well to have an adjustable stock.
  5. Tikka

    Tikka Monkey+++

  6. Witch Doctor 01

    Witch Doctor 01 Mojo Maker

    kellory likes this.
  7. UGRev

    UGRev Get on with it!

    Love nut's reviews.. that one was just devastating.. crushing..
  8. gunbunny

    gunbunny Never Trust A Bunny

    I actually watched Nutnfancy's video the whole way through. I never saw one of his videos before. I'm not even a fan of shotguns (I do own a few, they have their place) and am not planning on owning a UTAS or a KSG. Amung the promising newstarts would be the Turkish M1919 shotgun based on the Rem 1100 action, modifed to use box magazines and use the furniture off of an AR-15. That would reduce the need to memorize where everything is, and the weapon would feel firmiliar in your hands (that is, if you shoot AR's with any regularity).

    I did like how he conducted his tests. Maybe a little childish in his language, but above that, he was just honestly trying to see what this thing could do. They actually bought the shotgun, it wasn't prepped by the factory with special tweeks on it's known flaws, but as I would have it if I bought one off the shelf at the local gun shop.

    The UTAS seems to me to be designed by people who sit at their desks all day playing first person shooter games. Some of the flaws in the shotgun's design were apparent to me long before Nutnfancy stated it. The magazine tubes being open to collect debris- that I noticed first when the shooter dropped the UTAS on the snowy ground in disgust and it became packed with snow. Try loading it now.

    Does your Mossberg 500 or Rem 870 have holes in the magazine tube? NO? Why is that? So crap doesn't get in there. I once tried to use a polymer follower in the magazine tube of a Remington Model 48 Sportsman, and it jammed up. That was in ideal conditions, let alone trying that when it was in the field.

    That topcover having sharp edges on it- come on, you should have some kind of pad there. It seems to me that this shotgun was designed to be carried about to look menacing, and fired from the hip while screaming obsenaties at the target. Just like in Dark Ops Extended Tactical Wetwork Etc, or whatever game the designers play.

    Nutnfancy was big on the amount of rust present on the firarm, I can't say that I disagree with him. After seeing what the weapon is like, and not just a profile picture of it in a magazine somewhere, I can honestly say that I am not suprised. Manufacturing with cheaper materials and the bypassing of semi-noncritical components (metal coatings, dry film lubricant, etc) is all too common in today's industry.

    So it seems that a lot of manufacturers forgo any kind of exhausting tests of their products before bringing them to market. The P-22 by (Umarex) Walther immediatly comes to mind. Granted, all of the P-22's that I've shot operated like any other .22lr pistols, there are scores of people that have had problems with them. (Umarex) Walther just sort of brushes them aside and continues to produce the P-22 without updating any of the design features to eliminate some small design flaws. For ten years of production, no less.

    One would think that Walther (Umarex) would care more about the products that it sells and the name it has aquired over the years. Ever since Umarex bought Walther, this has been the norm. The gun grabbers don't have to disarm us all at once; if they can wait long enough, the manufacturers will give us such shoddy equipment to buy that we won't be able to use them except in a heated, enclosed range under controlled conditions.

    For $1100 for the UTAS you would expect more, wouldn't you? It seems that like the Bushmaster ACR, The FN SCAR, and such you are paying a premium to just OWN it, not that it is anything special or does anything better than other brands.

    I guess it does come down to what Nutnfancy was saying right at the end wheras the industry is more apt to spend money on advertising rather than the substance of the weapon itself.

survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary