Decided on a Glock 21...

[f.2]

So people who maintain a low round count should have the pick of the litter with regards to firearms purchases. They don't bother me one bit though. Every purchase supports the 2A and I say good on ya.

[Slater]

I really don't know anyone personally who puts an extreme number of rounds through their guns, although I wish I had the ammo budget to do so.

I would hazard a guess that many casual shooters may go to the range once a month or so, fire a box or two of ammo (maybe more, depending), and then go home.

[ToddG]

So people who maintain a low round count should have the pick of the litter with regards to firearms purchases.

In a very real sense, that's true. I'm picking up my new Ruger LCP tomorrow. Do I expect it to be a 10,000-round gun? No. It'll get a couple hundred rounds of Gold Dot through it for function testing, another 300 or so rounds of ammo through it to prove that it works, and then odds are I'll shoot a box of ammo per month through it on average. If I demanded the pocket backup to be as durable as my primary, I'd pretty much have to carry another primary.

[WRAM1]

I do believe that round count matters. I don't have the mega round count through mine, especially considering the pistol's age but I have at least 12,000 rds through it. Nothing beats the test of time. Now, if Glock will only make a long slide version of the 21...

[Stickman]

Not picking on you in particular, but just a thought for folks in general:

How long you've owned a gun is not much of an indicator of its reliability. Have you put 1,000 rounds a year through it, or 10,000 or just 50?

I'm at 98k through my G21. I'll agree that its rounds through a weapon, not total time sitting in a drawer that establishes reliability.