How many rounds before you trust a semi-automatic rifle?

[Eddiesketti]

If the weapon breaks then I would consider it or at least the broken part unreliable. A dud round does not make the weapon but the ammo unrealiable. Training on said weapon system is an important factor to overcome human error and to fix or reduce failure. When you are comfortable with the ammo you have chosen, weapon system you choose to run and training for overcoming weaknesses from your platform choices, then you will be ready.

[doro19]

I shoot several drills with my rifle that consist of anywhere from fifty to seventy rounds every three months or so ( ammo is expensive ). I try to shoot a practical rifle match with it at least twice a year. So far, so good. No problems. I know I don't have 5,000 rounds through it, but I trust it to defend home and family.

[MBtech]

I remembered reading this when I was deciding on either SCAR or an AR platform in 308.

In July 2007, the US Army announced a limited competition between the M4 Carbine, FN SCAR, HK416, and the previously-shelved HK XM8. Ten examples of each of the four competitors were involved. During the testing, 6,000 rounds apiece were fired from each of the carbines in an "extreme dust environment". The purpose of the shootoff was to assess future needs, not to select a replacement for the M4.

During the test, the SCAR suffered 226 stoppages. Since a percentage of each weapons' stoppages were caused by magazine failures, the FN SCAR, XM8 and HK 416 performed statistically similarly. The FN SCAR ranked second to the XM8 with 127 stoppages, but with fewer stoppages compared to the M4 with 882 stoppages and the HK 416 with 233. This test was based on two previous systems assessments that were conducted using the M4 Carbine and M16 rifle at Aberdeen Proving Ground in 2006 and the summer of 2007 before the third limited competition in the fall of 2007. The 2006 test focused only on the M4 and M16. The Summer 2007 test had only the M4, but increased lubrication. Results from the second test resulted in a total of 307 stoppages for the M4 after lubrication was increased, but did not explain why the M4 suffered 882 stoppages with that same level of lubrication in the third test. (Wikipedia)

Just some interesting comparisons on round counts vs stoppages.

[DreadPirateMoyer]

I seem to remember that test not using the same magazines in each gun, though, correct? Seems to me it's not a representative study on the M4's stoppages if it's using USGI mags with USGI followers while the others are using PMAGs and proprietary mags with different followers.

BUT, that said, it's a very eye-opening test for when people talk about stoppages. In harsh, hard-use conditions, the gun's going to have stoppages regardless of its quality. Period. I trust my rifles after 500 rounds and a thorough inspection/test like MistWolf listed, but they're going to fail you at some point even if they're perfect. In the test above, there was a failure every 47 rounds in the best case.

Man, that's enlightening.

[HKGuns]

Two magazines, followed by my collective experience shooting the rifle over time. I don't obsess over reliability because I know $hit breaks all the time.

Every rifle is going to fail to do something at some point, you're going to get an out of spec round or an early magazine hiccup. If you shoot 500 rounds and call your rifle "reliable" and you run across an out of spec round on shot 501 did you just waste 500 rounds? Is your rifle now unreliable?

If you want something 100% reliable, get a baseball bat and throw it under your bed. 100% reliable, no over penetration and no hearing loss or flash blindness.

Sometimes I wonder what situation some folks think they are preparing for talking about using 7.62 rifles for "defensive" purposes and abstract round counts to determine "reliability." The military does what they do for good reasons, most of those good reasons don't "usually" apply to the computer based commando.

Perhaps its just too much Walking Dead on TV.......Heck, Tyrece was using an M1 carbine to defend his position at the prison.

Have fun and be safe.

[MBtech]

I seem to remember that test not using the same magazines in each gun, though, correct? Seems to me it's not a representative study on the M4's stoppages if it's using USGI mags with USGI followers while the others are using PMAGs and proprietary mags with different followers.

BUT, that said, it's a very eye-opening test for when people talk about stoppages. In harsh, hard-use conditions, the gun's going to have stoppages regardless of its quality. Period. I trust my rifles after 500 rounds and a thorough inspection/test like MistWolf listed, but they're going to fail you at some point even if they're perfect. In the test above, there was a failure every 47 rounds in the best case.

Man, that's enlightening.

You are correct about the magazines not being a total fair factor in the test and we aren't talking about entry level rifles here either, no matter the quality and preperation it is going to happen. Am I going to toss my SCAR out in the woods because it jams on me? Hell no I'm going to identify and correct as quickly as possible and roll on.

[MBtech]

If you want something 100% reliable, get a baseball bat and throw it under your bed. 100% reliable, no over penetration and no hearing loss or flash blindness.

I'll stick with bullets.

[Shao]

What about a crossbow? Sorry, I couldn't resist... someone brought up Walking Dead.

Anyway, nothing is 100% reliable. I used to break bats over my thigh to show off when I played baseball. Anything that isn't indestructible (in otherwords nothing) is capable of failure.

[MBtech]

What about a crossbow? Sorry, I couldn't resist... someone brought up Walking Dead.

Anyway, nothing is 100% reliable. I used to break bats over my thigh to show off when I played baseball. Anything that isn't indestructible (in otherwords nothing) is capable of failure.

Are you Bo Jackson? Breakin bats over your thigh lol, Sorry that's who came to mind.