View Full Version : How many rounds till YOU are confident?
I've got a few thousand rounds through my Glock 17 without incident, and around 800 through the VP9, so I'm feeling pretty good about the guns themselves.
But I just got a couple hundred rounds of 147 gr. HST to feed them with.
How many rounds of HD/carry ammo do you shoot before you're confident that the pair are sympatico?
I did a single mag dump with each gun... But I don't think that's enough... But m
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Me personally, a couple hundred rounds and I'll carry it.
Me personally, a couple hundred rounds and I'll carry it. I'm fine with a hundred rounds of SD ammo before something is a carry gun. In that same time it's probably a few hundred rounds of ball ammo as well just learning the pistol (trigger, recoil, POI/POA with non-adjustable sights). I've never understood the "buy it, slap a full mag in it, and carry it," types. We don't have many of them around here though.
Eurodriver
04-05-16, 06:25
Most firearms are so well made these days (if a quality manufacturer) that I find shooting it before carrying it pointless.
If it dry fires, that means it works. So that's what I do. I never really go to the range because its too loud.
Most firearms are so well made these days (if a quality manufacturer) that I find shooting it before carrying it pointless.
If it dry fires, that means it works. So that's what I do. I never really go to the range because its too loud.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160405/d2babe368d7688bc957f4c42b564e51b.jpg
Me personally I fill the two mags I'm gonna carry with the gun full of my prefered carry ammo (147gr Speer GD's) and make sure it can get through them then I'll put 200 rounds of FMJ of the same bullet wieght through it. If it eats all that without a problem then I consider it GTG for carry.
I've haven't had any issues with any of my carry or HD guns so far.
I've got a few thousand rounds through my Glock 17 without incident, and around 800 through the VP9, so I'm feeling pretty good about the guns themselves.
But I just got a couple hundred rounds of 147 gr. HST to feed them with.
How many rounds of HD/carry ammo do you shoot before you're confident that the pair are sympatico?
I did a single mag dump with each gun... But I don't think that's enough... But m
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
I would say that if feasible, then at least 50 rounds through each pistol with that 147 HST loading.
Myself, I have been predominantly using HK pistols, and even though the guns are extremely reliable; I will still fire at least 200-300 rounds of premium hollow point ammunition before I am confident with the pistol.
As an example, I purchased an HK P2000 SK, and have fired several boxes of Federal, Winchester, and Hornandy premium ammunition in weights ranging from 115 JHP to 147 JHP. At this point after around a total of 1500 rounds (mostly ball ammo) through the pistol, I am pretty comfortable in carrying it.
domestique
04-05-16, 07:29
I'm with Eurodriver, I personally don't subscribe to the idea that you need hundreds of rounds of expensive defense ammo through a modern pistol.
When I buy a new pistol, I first leave it locked open in the safe for 5-7 days. This is especially important for FN, HK pistols with really strong recoil springs.... during that week I dry fire the pistol everyday.
I then shoot a couple hundred rounds of NATO FMJ ammo, followed by ordinary FMJs, and sometimes cheap hollow points (pulled HST that I've reloaded) through the pistol to work out any tight tolerances. I then shoot around 2 boxes of my carry ammo (147gr. HST). If everything is 100%, then I feel confident.
Shoot it like you stole it, with a variety of reasonable bullet weights for 300-500 rounds.
Then qualify it with your desired carry ammo.
Shoot it like you stole it, with a variety of reasonable bullet weights for 300-500 rounds.
Then qualify it with your desired carry ammo.
Same here, 500rds, and 50 of carry ammo.
Most firearms are so well made these days (if a quality manufacturer) that I find shooting it before carrying it pointless.
If it dry fires, that means it works. So that's what I do. I never really go to the range because its too loud.
Well played....
Big thread here discussing the same subject.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?144441-How-many-rounds-until-a-malfunction-is-deemed-quot-acceptable-quot
Same here, 500rds, and 50 of carry ammo.
Agreed. Half a case and a box of carry ammo without any explainable issues, GTG.
Eurodriver
04-05-16, 09:18
You know, my post was made in jest but because this isn't TOS I'll expand on it.
I wasn't being totally facetious. A modern Glock, HK, Sig, etc is going to be pretty reliable (assuming you get a "known" quantity gun and not something released yesterday or whatever Sig's weirdo designers put out these days)
Of course, I will fire the gun before carrying it. Ensure that it is zeroed, cycles, and is accurate (how frequently POA/POI and accuracy are left out of these conversations. Everyone seems to focus on cycling only...) but I don't see the need to spend $150 on ammo in order to do it.
If I go to the range and shoot a few rounds (this usually means 150-200) and a couple of mags of carry ammo I consider it good to go. This is based on my experience and I've never once had a gun shoot a few hundred rounds flawlessly and been unreliable as time went on. I would suspect that the time you are most likely to see failures will be the very first few magazines of the gun as things settle in anyway...
With that said, I have had issues with things other than function (i.e. Gen2 G19 shooting like 12" low at 25 yards, front sight falling off) that would make me not comfortable carrying the gun. These are the main reasons I shoot the gun first - not to test its reliability, but to test its capability.
For me, I use 500 rounds as my minimum. So at least 400 rounds of one or more brands of ball and 100 rounds of defensive JHP. Pretty much any malfunction during that period is grounds for disqualification unless the issue can be definitely traced to an issue with the ammo, a specific magazine (which is why I number them) or just plain ol' user error. If it can't be than the gun would need to get through *another* 500 before I trust it for carry, assuming I bother to keep it.
Most firearms are so well made these days (if a quality manufacturer) that I find shooting it before carrying it pointless.
If it dry fires, that means it works. So that's what I do. I never really go to the range because its too loud.
I am just the opposite in a different respect. I don't trust a damned one because a mechanical device can and will fail, however, its like some folks with a car that they drive to and from work, but it wont make the long trips. 300 miles is 300 miles, regardless of you putting them on 50 at a time. same applies for a gun. 50 rounds at a time or not, something will fail. its not the if, its then when.
My xd9 made it 1300 rounds and then I had a stove pipe. Got rid of it. M&P 9, out of battery detonation, fixed it, got rid of it. too many to list. when they crap up once, I don't trust it at all.
I do carry a G19 though and do practice a few times a month. usually different brands of ammo, different weights and such.
I'll generally try a total of 300 rounds, of various manufacture and bullet weight. Some pistols like some ammo better than others. My M&P doesn't like WWB for some reason, but loves gold dot.
Unless it's a 1911. In that case I run around 300 rounds of heavy ball before I even begin to look at defensive ammo.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
500 ball, then 50 of my carry ammo with it dirty. That'll likely show any issues and let me get comfortable with it if it's a new type of gun for me.
Other than a sight falling off an M&P I had on shot number 3, I've never had any real issues with this 'break in'.
I'm actually doing it with my G19 MOS tomorrow.
Nightstalker865
04-05-16, 10:04
I personally will shoot 50rds of NATO pressure loads followed by 200rds of what ever range ammo I have on hand. I will follow this up with running 50rds of what ever SD ammo I am planning on using in it. That gives me 300rds through the gun on multiple types of ammo. If it makes it through that without issue, it goes in my carry rotation.
I agree with Euro to an extent though, nowadays guns seem to run just fine out of the box. I'm just kind of stuck in my ways of breaking one in I guess. Plus this method gives me a chance to get familiar with it.
brickboy240
04-05-16, 10:47
With my Glocks, I try to run at least 200-300 rounds of my carry ammo through the gun before I will trust carrying the piece.
My xd9 made it 1300 rounds and then I had a stove pipe. Got rid of it. M&P 9, out of battery detonation, fixed it, got rid of it. too many to list. when they crap up once, I don't trust it at all.
I do carry a G19 though and do practice a few times a month. usually different brands of ammo, different weights and such.
Eventually you'll be replacing that G19.
The pistol that I've experienced the most malfunctions is my issued G22. Not because it's unreliable, but because it gets shot the most.
Find an issue, diagnose and replace the component that causes the failure, carry on.
You know, my post was made in jest but because this isn't TOS I'll expand on it.
I wasn't being totally facetious. A modern Glock, HK, Sig, etc is going to be pretty reliable (assuming you get a "known" quantity gun and not something released yesterday or whatever Sig's weirdo designers put out these days)
Of course, I will fire the gun before carrying it. Ensure that it is zeroed, cycles, and is accurate (how frequently POA/POI and accuracy are left out of these conversations. Everyone seems to focus on cycling only...) but I don't see the need to spend $150 on ammo in order to do it.
If I go to the range and shoot a few rounds (this usually means 150-200) and a couple of mags of carry ammo I consider it good to go. This is based on my experience and I've never once had a gun shoot a few hundred rounds flawlessly and been unreliable as time went on. I would suspect that the time you are most likely to see failures will be the very first few magazines of the gun as things settle in anyway...
With that said, I have had issues with things other than function (i.e. Gen2 G19 shooting like 12" low at 25 yards, front sight falling off) that would make me not comfortable carrying the gun. These are the main reasons I shoot the gun first - not to test its reliability, but to test its capability.
Not only agreed, but this is the exact same method I use.
Whether it's my Taurus PT-22 or the Glock 26, or a Self Defense AR, I give it a good clean/function check (after reading the manual to make sure it doesn't have a shattering transfer bar [or anything else that could break] if you dry fire anything), I will run 200 rounds through it (working on POI/POA and operation) and a box of SD Ammo for reliability.
I do this for all my firearms, the only one I haven't is my Marlin .30-30 from the early 60s; and not because I think it couldn't handle it, but it's in great shape and shoots straight for it's age. No need to run a nice 'ol hunting rifle through extra paces when it's not called for.
I usually factor initial ammo expense into the purchase cost. For example, I had factored in the monies required for 2 boxes of WWB and 2 boxes of SD ammo when I purchased my Canik TP9 and Glock. 200 FMJ to feed it and help the break in period, 50 rounds of defense ammo to know it feeds. I tear off the lot# and top on the box, so I know what has been tested and works with the gun, and put it in with my range bag/gear for the firearm. The other box, hopefully matching lot#s, I load for SD and have some extras if i ever need to rechamber, as any bullet that enters a chamber and exits without ignition gets put into the range pile.
Thankfully I rarely find a reason or need to cycle my arms once they're loaded and on my persons.
Averageman
04-05-16, 13:17
I've been amazingly lucky with handguns.
My Glock pistols were purchased within 6 months of one another two G17's and a G26, I have run a large variety of ammunition through them, shot IDPA with them and they've never failed me.
I've got a few more pistols, but the only one that gave me any issues was a Colt 1991 that didn't like anything but ball Ammo until it went off to have some work done to it.
It's been my experience that most failures I have seen or personally had were based on crappy magazines, that is of course with the Colt being the exception.
Edit to add;
I think the Laws loosening up for Concealed and Open carry created market pressures for more reliable pistols to be manufactured and sold. In no small part I think Glock was pretty instrumental in creating those market pressures.
Eventually you'll be replacing that G19.
The pistol that I've experienced the most malfunctions is my issued G22. Not because it's unreliable, but because it gets shot the most.
Find an issue, diagnose and replace the component that causes the failure, carry on.
Youre probably right. I need to commit and carry on with what Ive got.
Any big issues will show up almost immediately. I'm happy with 2-3 boxes. I usually have WAY more problems with ammo quality than I do with guns.
When I get a new gun, I'll shoot maybe 150-200rds of FMJ just for fun and familiarization, and then I'll test it with a mag of my chosen carry ammo just to make sure there's no issue with feeding JHPs.
I never understood shooting 200-500rds of expensive carry ammo to trust a gun.
I've never questioned a Glock or HK.
A 1911 and pretty much any Gen 3 or earlier Smith gets skepticism.
My sole Kimber took some FLGR removal and a while of shooting before I deemed it good. But I don't really CCW it.
ColtSeavers
04-05-16, 15:21
I just bought my first semi auto yesterday (Beretta 92a1) and I plan on running the three factory 17rd mags first with one round in each and then each fully loaded. After that, provided there are no problems, I'll shoot until the wife and I get bored or run out of ammo.
I'll trust a handgun if it can get through 1000 rds with zero stoppages or 1500 rds with a single stoppage. Two hundred of those rds must be my specific carry load, and no stoppages are allowable with that load.
If it can't get through that routine, and I can't quickly and inexpensively find and correct the cause, and verify it's corrected, then the gun goes away. Sold a Gen 2 G19 bought used a few years ago because it couldn't pass the test. I ended up spending more in ammo trying to verify that gun's reliability than the gun cost me. I don't want to make that mistake again.
I log all my shooting and maintenance: gun, round count, specific ammo, specific magazines( they're all marked), stoppages, changing springs and other parts, etc.
titsonritz
04-05-16, 15:36
With my Glocks, a couple hundred rounds (just a normal outing anyhow), including a 2 or 3 mags of my carry ammo, if I have zero malfunctions I trust it o carry. Something like a Kahr or 1911 I'd want to put some more rounds through it.
And with this logic, can anyone refute the S&W SD9VE? Sorry, I am such a cheap b-tard, but not Hi-Point cheap. Just tossing that one in the pot.
Dionysusigma
04-05-16, 16:31
Shoot it like you stole it...
Shoot it like it's unit-issued equipment from a QM with impeccable inventory control... :D
There have only been two times I've ever had less than 500rd through a weapon before I trusted it: first was a Mossberg 500 that I purchased new, studied every diagram and read every negative review of, and had it as an apartment gun in a not-so-great area. Never fired it, because at the time, no ranges within 50mi allowed shotguns of any kind, and I didn't know anybody with land. Got sold off for a loss of $20. The second was a Canik/Tristar T-120 that was also purchased new, and I ran ammo through it that nobody else at the time really wanted (so they gave it to me to "use up"). With the exception of two dud primers, the thing ran everything and functioned perfectly, and was accurate too. Sold it off for a "better gun," an M&P, that I got to 600rd before I couldn't take its inherent inaccuracy any more, and sold the M&P off to fund a VP9. The Hk now has 1,050rds of various ammo through it, and the only reason I've bought another handgun since then is because you don't pass up an unfired German Sig P220 for $500.
And with this logic, can anyone refute the S&W SD9VE? Sorry, I am such a cheap b-tard, but not Hi-Point cheap. Just tossing that one in the pot.
Man honestly, I don't know about the SD, but my first auto pistol was an SW40VE. That gun has a couple thousand rounds through it and no shit, it has NEVER malf'd. I have no doubts about that guns reliability. I never shoot it anymore because of the limousine trigger pull, but yeah, it's proved a shooter.
I do hate shooting it tho...
Man honestly, I don't know about the SD, but my first auto pistol was an SW40VE. That gun has a couple thousand rounds through it and no shit, it has NEVER malf'd. I have no doubts about that guns reliability. I never shoot it anymore because of the limousine trigger pull, but yeah, it's proved a shooter.
I do hate shooting it tho...
I might pick one up for the hell of it
I'm carrying a P239 right now that I've never even shot. Mine went back to Sig for a dead front sight, I'm just assuming that the loaner works.....
I've never questioned a Glock or HK.
A 1911 and pretty much any Gen 3 or earlier Smith gets skepticism.
My sole Kimber took some FLGR removal and a while of shooting before I deemed it good. But I don't really CCW it.
3rd gen Smiths? Really? I don't have much experience with them but from the little that I do have and the amount of positive reviews I've read about them from, cops to competitors, they seemed to be good solid guns
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
And with this logic, can anyone refute the S&W SD9VE? Sorry, I am such a cheap b-tard, but not Hi-Point cheap. Just tossing that one in the pot.
In my limited experience, they run great with decent accuracy.
The triggers don't feel good, but I didn't find them holding me back, and apex has a fix.
Keep in mind it may not be cheap once you figure in mags, holsters, sights, etc.
556BlackRifle
04-05-16, 21:54
Me- I like to shoot a few hundred rounds through it then another 50 or so of my SD load of choice.
SavageBrew84
04-05-16, 22:12
I am just the opposite in a different respect. I don't trust a damned one because a mechanical device can and will fail, however, its like some folks with a car that they drive to and from work, but it wont make the long trips. 300 miles is 300 miles, regardless of you putting them on 50 at a time. same applies for a gun. 50 rounds at a time or not, something will fail. its not the if, its then when.
My xd9 made it 1300 rounds and then I had a stove pipe. Got rid of it. M&P 9, out of battery detonation, fixed it, got rid of it. too many to list. when they crap up once, I don't trust it at all.
So in essence, using your car analogy, you're saying that you'd sell your car if you got a flat tire? My wife got 70,000 miles out of her last set of tires, i put a new set on and 10 days later she picked up a screw and had a flat when she came outside the next day. Needless to say, I fixed the tire, I didn't sell the car. My point being, what if you had 7548 completely "flawless" rounds through your weapon but on the 7549th round you had some sort of malfunction. Wouldn't you try to diagnose the problem instead of just saying **** it, and selling it off that day? Seems a little foolish to sell something because they had malfunctions that could have been user induced. Then again, looking at what you sold you probably made the right choice anyways. Hopefully you made out on top of the deals when you got rid of them.
3rd gen Smiths? Really? I don't have much experience with them but from the little that I do have and the amount of positive reviews I've read about them from, cops to competitors, they seemed to be good solid guns
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
A well tuned, comped Smith classic can (or could) be a decent PPC/Bullseye gun.
They can be accurate. Damn accurate.
BUT
A Smith 4586 was my first duty weapon and at times it made a better bludgeon than a sidearm. There were two big problems...One was the magazine followers and springs. They came in green and orange but, you wanted black. These weren't new issue guns. The second big issue is that they were like a Swiss watch inside. Lots of levers and lots of teeny parts. I had the DAO which omitted the manual safety. Heavy trigger.
I remember my night sights dying and extractor going bad and the armorer was a bit of a....different person. I couldn't get through a mag without tap rack bang. He finally believed me and replaced said parts.
With Zero or WWB it could still occasionally hang up. But with +P Rangers it was noticeably better.
There's still nostalgia for the pistol but it wasn't without flaw. Especially if you got gigged for keeping your gun sopping wet with lube. Apparently the gun should be "inspection ready" because of "professionalism".
So I'd wipe it bone dry before inspection then take rod and reel oil to it like a total MFer in the car.
It wasn't a 'bad' gun. But you had to be on your toes to keep it reliable. I always had a Glock back up.
I've debated getting a personal one just to have but I really wouldn't want it to be a mandated choice again.
It did look pretty. It screamed "Police". It certainly had heft.
It was like M14 vs M16. Both are good but one is nostalgia and one is for practicality.
I'm a bit colored but it would take some range time to want to ever use one again.
Glock or HK. Meh pick up and shoot. I would include Sig of yesteryear maybe but lately you couldn't give me a Sig.
There are other quality guns (Walther, FN) but I have no knowledge or history with them so...bleh. Would want to test them first.
As always YMMV
joshrunkle35
04-06-16, 00:59
I do the 2,000 round test. 2,000 rounds without cleaning, shouldn't have any malfunctions. I do all 2,000 with practice ammo, and then about 100-200 with carry ammo. Then I clean it and inspect it, and I would carry it after that.
So in essence, using your car analogy, you're saying that you'd sell your car if you got a flat tire? My wife got 70,000 miles out of her last set of tires, i put a new set on and 10 days later she picked up a screw and had a flat when she came outside the next day. Needless to say, I fixed the tire, I didn't sell the car. My point being, what if you had 7548 completely "flawless" rounds through your weapon but on the 7549th round you had some sort of malfunction. Wouldn't you try to diagnose the problem instead of just saying **** it, and selling it off that day? Seems a little foolish to sell something because they had malfunctions that could have been user induced. Then again, looking at what you sold you probably made the right choice anyways. Hopefully you made out on top of the deals when you got rid of them.
I always make out like a bandit! Ots a littlr different when i have something to protect me and my family. But youre right, and alot of it is firearm ADD
A well tuned, comped Smith classic can (or could) be a decent PPC/Bullseye gun.
They can be accurate. Damn accurate.
BUT
A Smith 4586 was my first duty weapon and at times it made a better bludgeon than a sidearm. There were two big problems...One was the magazine followers and springs. They came in green and orange but, you wanted black. These weren't new issue guns. The second big issue is that they were like a Swiss watch inside. Lots of levers and lots of teeny parts. I had the DAO which omitted the manual safety. Heavy trigger.
I remember my night sights dying and extractor going bad and the armorer was a bit of a....different person. I couldn't get through a mag without tap rack bang. He finally believed me and replaced said parts.
With Zero or WWB it could still occasionally hang up. But with +P Rangers it was noticeably better.
There's still nostalgia for the pistol but it wasn't without flaw. Especially if you got gigged for keeping your gun sopping wet with lube. Apparently the gun should be "inspection ready" because of "professionalism".
So I'd wipe it bone dry before inspection then take rod and reel oil to it like a total MFer in the car.
It wasn't a 'bad' gun. But you had to be on your toes to keep it reliable. I always had a Glock back up.
I've debated getting a personal one just to have but I really wouldn't want it to be a mandated choice again.
It did look pretty. It screamed "Police". It certainly had heft.
It was like M14 vs M16. Both are good but one is nostalgia and one is for practicality.
I'm a bit colored but it would take some range time to want to ever use one again.
Glock or HK. Meh pick up and shoot. I would include Sig of yesteryear maybe but lately you couldn't give me a Sig.
There are other quality guns (Walther, FN) but I have no knowledge or history with them so...bleh. Would want to test them first.
As always YMMV
Thanks for a different perspective. Like I said, my experience with them is casual. I had a 5906, 4506 and a 4566....the DA/SA version of your 4586. They were all very reliable and that's pretty much all I've ever read about them. Even with all the little parts inside I've never heard of one actually breaking. From my understanding a bad extractor would indicate some serious mileage on the gun!
I sold all of mine eventually. The 4566 was the last and it went shortly after new years.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
BuzzinSATX
04-06-16, 07:50
You know, my post was made in jest but because this isn't TOS I'll expand on it.
I wasn't being totally facetious. A modern Glock, HK, Sig, etc is going to be pretty reliable (assuming you get a "known" quantity gun and not something released yesterday or whatever Sig's weirdo designers put out these days)
Of course, I will fire the gun before carrying it. Ensure that it is zeroed, cycles, and is accurate (how frequently POA/POI and accuracy are left out of these conversations. Everyone seems to focus on cycling only...) but I don't see the need to spend $150 on ammo in order to do it.
If I go to the range and shoot a few rounds (this usually means 150-200) and a couple of mags of carry ammo I consider it good to go. This is based on my experience and I've never once had a gun shoot a few hundred rounds flawlessly and been unreliable as time went on. I would suspect that the time you are most likely to see failures will be the very first few magazines of the gun as things settle in anyway...
With that said, I have had issues with things other than function (i.e. Gen2 G19 shooting like 12" low at 25 yards, front sight falling off) that would make me not comfortable carrying the gun. These are the main reasons I shoot the gun first - not to test its reliability, but to test its capability.
Totally agree with this post. And I'll add I'm much more concerned with the magazines working well than the gun. I think once you've put a couple boxes of range and a few mags of carry Ammo through a gun, it's probably good to go. But stick in a bad mag, and you get issues.
Just my $0.02.
So for those of you who have established an acceptability threshold of 200, 300, 500, 2,000 or however many rounds without a failure, is there a basis for that number? Assuming that initial problems (sights off, or falling off, or other issues out of the box) were identified within the first box or so of ammo fired, what other criteria led to establishing a particular threshold?
And still can't understand the idea of testing without cleaning and/or lubricating. Assuming, that is, that the test goes beyond some clean/lube recommendation set by the manufacturer. Isn't that kind of like not changing the oil in your car at the recommended interval, and then wondering why the engine starts showing premature wear signs?
Just curious. Thanks.
For me, and I have no data to support this, but it seems 500rds is a good number to bring out any manufacturing flaws, or typical feeding issues, and wI'll get the gun "broken in" if there is such a thing thsee days. Its also enough rounds for me to be 100% confident in my usage of the gun as well.
The 50 rds carry ammo is to find any potential feeding issues and it's 1 box which is convenient.
So for those of you who have established an acceptability threshold of 200, 300, 500, 2,000 or however many rounds without a failure, is there a basis for that number? Assuming that initial problems (sights off, or falling off, or other issues out of the box) were identified within the first box or so of ammo fired, what other criteria led to establishing a particular threshold?
And still can't understand the idea of testing without cleaning and/or lubricating. Assuming, that is, that the test goes beyond some clean/lube recommendation set by the manufacturer. Isn't that kind of like not changing the oil in your car at the recommended interval, and then wondering why the engine starts showing premature wear signs?
Just curious. Thanks.
For me, that's the minimum number of rounds it takes to get thru several different manufactures of ammo.
Most modern guns, if there is an inherent defect, it will manifest itself early. Plus it gives me some time with the gun.
As I stated earlier, 1911's are different.
So for those of you who have established an acceptability threshold of 200, 300, 500, 2,000 or however many rounds without a failure, is there a basis for that number? Assuming that initial problems (sights off, or falling off, or other issues out of the box) were identified within the first box or so of ammo fired, what other criteria led to establishing a particular threshold?
And still can't understand the idea of testing without cleaning and/or lubricating. Assuming, that is, that the test goes beyond some clean/lube recommendation set by the manufacturer. Isn't that kind of like not changing the oil in your car at the recommended interval, and then wondering why the engine starts showing premature wear signs?
Just curious. Thanks.
Unless it's some sort of target gun it really shouldn't need to be cleaned or lubed prior to checking.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Unless it's some sort of target gun it really shouldn't need to be cleaned or lubed prior to checking.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Thanks. Actually, though, I was thinking of a sustained initial evaluation test that goes what a manufacturer would consider the normal maintenance/lube cycle. (But, come to think of it, I've seen new-in-the-box guns that ranged from dripping wet to dry . . . as well as those where the manufacturer said not to lube/clean until firing X number of rounds).
For me, and I have no data to support this, but it seems 500rds is a good number to bring out any manufacturing flaws, or typical feeding issues, and wI'll get the gun "broken in" if there is such a thing thsee days. Its also enough rounds for me to be 100% confident in my usage of the gun as well.
The 50 rds carry ammo is to find any potential feeding issues and it's 1 box which is convenient.
Aside from the fact most duty ammo civies purchase comes 25 to the box, we are talking 60.00.
I'm cheap - I'm really really concerned about the first two rounds, and the last round. So I load the last round as a duty, the ones in between as practice, the first two as duty. I do out of battery reloads so I ensure the first and second rounds feed and I ensure the last carry round lock the slide back. I'll rep that a couple times and if it works it is good to go.
I think some of you are overly worked up about 'vetting for duty or carry.' Hopefully you practice, hopefully you maintain your gear, and hopefully you started out with a good quality weapon in the first place.
I don't switch carry guns often, so I don't have a prescribed test.
I did, however, shoot a pistol match or two with my current carry gun (Gen4 Glock 26) and run a couple of magazines of my carry ammo through it before it became my constant companion.
I don't ever switch carry guns, I've been carrying the same G19 for quite some time. I shoot it regularly, the only thing I do not do is shoot lots of carry ammo. That's a pretty big money commitment in the long run, with quality HP's usually being 20-25 bucks for 25 of them.
I recently purchased a G27 to be my ankle gun at work, I shot about 100 rounds through it, qualified with it using duty ammo and called it good. I shoot it occasionally at the range to keep sharp, but it's certainly not a high volume shooter.
Aside from the fact most duty ammo civies purchase comes 25 to the box, we are talking 60.00.
I'm cheap - I'm really really concerned about the first two rounds, and the last round. So I load the last round as a duty, the ones in between as practice, the first two as duty. I do out of battery reloads so I ensure the first and second rounds feed and I ensure the last carry round lock the slide back. I'll rep that a couple times and if it works it is good to go.
I think some of you are overly worked up about 'vetting for duty or carry.' Hopefully you practice, hopefully you maintain your gear, and hopefully you started out with a good quality weapon in the first place.
All the ammo I buy comes in 50rd boxes, even duty ammo. Hst costs me about $25 per 50rds plus shipping.
Yes I practice, maitain gear, and purchase quality. I'll carry a gun with less than my preferred rounds through it if I have nothing else, it's just that my confidence isn't quite 100% until I have substantial time on the gun. I'm not going to argue with your method, it makes sense.
Edit to add: I bought a shield for my gf, and put 200 rds through it in 45 mins before I gave it to her. I trusted it after that, but I still "felt better" once she shot it some without issue.
Glock .... Trust it out of the box, minimum tho 200 rounds first x out
I've had pistols that worked fine during range testing that choked later when I was under the pressure of competition or qualifying. A few hundred rounds of varying bullet weight and shape is good to start but I don't consider it qualified to carry until I've run it under pressure successfully, odd things will come out, like a recent pistol that wouldn't eject a partial mag when I was running it on the timer, no prob on the range. But it was consistent in that quality so out the door it went.
A couple hundred. Odds are, if something isn't working or out of spec you'll see it within the first few hundred rounds. After that, gtg.
200 rounds. Given the cost it is rough to change to the latest thing in ammo.
If I have fired 300 rounds through a defensive pistol without a malfunction, I am reasonably confident it will be reliable. Once I have ascertained my defensive pistol is reliable, firing 40 to 50 defensive rounds without malfunctions is sufficient.
Ammunition is expensive, but it's less expensive than my hide.
Howdy,
With a quality handgun like a Glock I will field strip, clean and lube, run a load up all mags that come with the pistol and shoot them. Next I'll do the same thing with SD ammo then field strip, clean, inspect and lube. If I haven't had an issue its GTG.
I have a Taurus P-845 that's my work vehicle gun and a Kel-Tec PF-9 that I carry when I cannot carry a larger gun which isn't often but they went through a different process.
I fired 500 rounds through each of them and then a box of SD ammo before I trusted them.
I have a Canik/Tristar S-120 CZ clone that's just a range toy because I can reload 9mm for just a couple penny's more per round than I can buy .22LR but eventhough I'm not a 9mm fan I do carry it as a car gun every now and then and after 200 or so rounds I trusted it too. After +2,000 rounds it's been flawless.
Paul
In my limited experience, if there is going to be some kind of a problem, it'll show itself in the first couple hundred rounds. So I generally do 200 rds of ball and a mag or two of def HPs then call it good to go for carry. If I change something on a firearm that has the possibility to affect function (springs, etc), it'll get another couple hundred shake-down rounds before it goes back to "approved to carry" status.
I don't really see the point in shooting thousands of rounds without cleaning before I trust a firearm to carry. Sure, they do get thousands of rounds on them from training over time, but I'm confident in them well before that point.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.