You guys are rich, I just run a mag or two and call it good.
You guys are rich, I just run a mag or two and call it good.
#RESIST
Gun is field stripped and well lubed--
Back in the day with a 1911. 200-300 rds of 230 FMJ or RNL + 100 230 SD ammo with an eye toward also figuring out if the gun liked Wilsons/Chip McCormick's or Cobra Tripp mags.
With a Glock, about 1/2 that with 115-147 9mm and 165-180 G .40 cal. ammo as appropriate.
These days w a Glock- I would make sure every carry mag would lock back a few times each (15 rds), I would run the carry mags full up and fast (50ish rounds). I would likely repeat with SD ammo and call it good such that it would be 130-150ish rounds fired. Broke in without being broken.
Like many things these days that are reasonable well made, if the do not puke in the first few uses/cycles etc, they are unlikely to do so for the foreseeable future.
YMMV greatly.
I am not your attorney. I am not giving legal advice. Any and all opinions expressed are personal and my own and are not those of any employer-past, present or future.
I used to subscribe to the 500 rounds for break in and x-number of rounds of duty ammo to call a gun, good. Since then I've matured. I've witnessed far too many "vetted" firearms choke at let's say 600, 700, 800 or 1,000 rounds. Do these stoppages/failures north of 500 render a firearm "unreliable?" No. There isn't a magic number, if you buy a known quality firearm and employ a known quality brand of ammunition. The key point is to first determine if the ammunition cycles and IMO, two magazines is sufficient to determine whether or not a specific round with reliably feed. Any more than this is IMO a waste of money.
I have a fleet of pistols deployed for law enforcement duty use and I simply cannot afford to "vet" a number of pistols by Interwebs standards. Upon new issue, we shoot a box or two of ammunition through the guns to first qualify and then to familiarize the officer. That's it, the guns are then put into service. I can't image a civilian CCW holder requiring any more vetting, unless you go buy Gecko45.
With the recent issues getting ammunition, I’ve pretty much settled on 200 or so rounds of range stuff followed by 50 of carry. It meets my personal comfort level.
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
LOL, pretty much sums it up for me and sometimes I skip this step entirely and just give it a good greasin' and some hot carry ammo from Doc's list that has what appears to be an appropriate shape for feed reliability. A man can't live too clean at times...Originally Posted by LittleLebowski
I am emotionally wedded to the 500 ball, 200 duty load concept from the days of yore, but I've had 2 glocks fail in on duty shooting incidents after vetting that far exceeded that...so I have no basis for it anymore.
The "bathtub model" of reliability testing indicates that you should test past the point of tolerance stacking, incorrect assembly and parts "infant mortality", but there is zero guidance in firearms testing.
I did have a Glock 30 that would not feed a full magazine of Winchester, Remington or Federal JHP that I was constrained by policy to carry. But that showed up immediately.
I dunno...skip the ball and just test X duty loads? Do 100 successful tests equal a < 1% chance of failure?
How did the Glocks fail?
I’m comfortable with a box or two of ball and a magazine or two of duty ammunition, which seems to be accepted by some in the thread. I remember when the Gen4 Glock issues were at the forefront of forum discussion, some had the ejection/extraction issues after a few thousand rounds expended, which should be considered for any blanket recommendation…
When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk. -Tuco
Today is victory over yourself of yesterday... -Miyamoto Musashi
I use the 50/500 numbers (hp/fmj) for simplicity but I really find any numbers somewhat arbitrary. I tend to trust them until they give me a reason not to, for modern pistols from common makers.
"...we suffer more in imagination than in reality." Seneca, probably.
Context matters.
I need to go check - if it’s a carry gun 300-400 and a magazine of JHP.
If it’s a gun for fun?
A magazine honestly would probably do just fine.
ETA:
Yep, he said carry. I’d up it to two magazines of JHP.
Guys used to say 2,000 without a malfunction.
God Bless,
Brandon
I’ve gone back and forth on this. Most guns have run well, even the KelTecs. OTOH, I had a gun with a good market rep that didn’t make it through 200 rounds before both magazines were non-functional.
Based on that experience, I prefer to test them a bit, regardless of their reputation, because my specific gun might or might not actually work.
Reply With Quote