[Bullseye1100]

I just got a new RIA 1911A1 and the instruction manual recommends a break in period of 500 rounds. What does this mean? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

John

[Walkalong]

It means go out and shoot it. It also delays you wanting them to warranty it if you wait 500 rounds.

A "break in" should not be needed, but many times it helps to loosen up tight parts or wear down the occasional burr from machining.

It won't hurt a thing, and you need to practice anyway, right? :)

[Old Fuff]

I just got a new RIA 1911A1 and the instruction manual recommends a break in period of 500 rounds. What does this mean? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

It means that since your new 1911A1 pistol wasn't made to government specifications or blueprint dimensions, you should run 500 rounds of .45 ammunition through it (at your expense) to see if it works.

You do understand that each of the thousands of guns the Army bought during World War One and Two had to each be fired 500 times before they could be sent out to the troops... Sure they did.... :rolleyes:

Obviously the pistol you have isn't the same one that Uncle Sam bought, but it is better that you buy 500 rounds to be sure the gun works, rather then to expect them to bulid it right in the first place. :banghead:

[Lone_Gunman]

A properly made firearm doesnt need a break in. It should work out of the box. It is just a way for gun companies to delay having you send a gun back.

People who shoot their guns infrequently may well never get the gun "broken in", so they never send them back to the factory.

[MMCSRET]

Same attitude goes for new vehicle break in I suppose. Try not following "Break In" instructions on your new Caterpiller D9R and see how you voided your warranty. But, WTH, 1.5 Million is chump change anyway, RIGHT?

[jdc1244]

I just got a new RIA 1911A1 and the instruction manual recommends a break in period of 500 rounds.

No break-in mentioned in the Colt’s manual.

A properly made firearm doesnt need a break in.

Agreed.

[ulflyer]

John, I favor 1911's over all others and tho I don't own a RIA everything I've read on the various forums is that, for the money, they are good weapons and the company really
goes out of its way to stand behind thier products. As to "break-in", what I do with a new 1911 is slather some J.B Bore Cleaner paste on the rails and moving parts and manually rack the slide back and forth till my hand gets tired. This seems to polish up those sliding parts and makes thing work smoother. Give it a good cleaning, oil, and go shoot. Frankly, I couldn't resist shooting first, making sure the rails have a bit of oil, and if all goes well, you could by-pass the manual break-in. Enjoy it, I think you'll like it. Let us know how it goes. :)

[Bullseye1100]

Thanks for the replies. Maybe I shoulda mentioned that I put 150 rounds through it before I bothered reading the manual. I did field strip it and oil it before I took it to the range just to make sure it would work smoothly. And it worked great. I love this thing. :D I was just a little confused about what a break in period is. Thanks again.

John

[ulflyer]

I think this "break-in" stuff only come about in last few years. Used to be informal talk about how to break=in a rifle or pistol barrel, but not the whole gun. Seems to me
it started with handguns of lesser quality build (not necessarily the quality of materials used), the Kahr polymer's being one example, that needed a lot of rounds thru them before they became acceptably functional. Don't flame me Kahr owners...I own and carry a P45. In the case of RIA I'm thinking they're simply saying "after a few hundred rounds it will smooth out and be even a better gun"....or somesuch. Glad to hear its working fine for you. Gonna hafta to try one myself one of these days. :)

[bikerdoc]

All my guns worked smoother after a couple hundred rounds. And what better excuse to shoot that to " break in a new gun"
Enjoy and congrats

[CDH]

A properly made firearm doesnt need a break in. It should work out of the box. It is just a way for gun companies to delay having you send a gun back.

I'll respectfully disagree.

Even the best made guns need a period of break in. The good ones may not need as much as 500 rounds; maybe just a couple hundred or so. But they do need to be fired when new.

The specific issue is the (precision) machined surfaces that mate to each other such as slides and rails, but springs also may be "new stiff" and offer more resistance than a spring that's been fired just a couple hundred times.

Those very fine mill marks need to chafe against each other (wear each other) in order to seat and operate with less friction. For a properly made pistol, it doesn't take much to do that, but 500 rounds should be plenty for any pistol to "wear itself in".
Once broken in, those mating surfaces will operate with less friction, and those springs will settle down to their normal resistance and spring-back.

Until that happens, the cumulative effect of those things in a new "rough" pistol often leads to FTF's which is why many pistols that have problems when brand new all of a sudden turn into really sweet and reliable performers once they've been shot a bit.
And that is exactly why no defensive pistol should ever be carried and trusted until it's had a few boxes of rounds put through it. Not as much to "prove" the pistol's reliability, but to "make" it reliable.

[Old Guy]

The people I have met with their new (UNFIRED) carry pistol on their belts, not a lot, but enough! Crazy.

The Colt 45 pistols that would not feed hardball! The same pistols would not work with the little pointy 185g, target loads, I had two, my Glocks worked first time, all the time. The triggers seem to get better on Glocks.

Would I carry a Glock without firing it? NO WAY! Do they need a break in period? No. But I change the sights, sight them in, fit extended slide release (sorry, slide lock lever) and a butt plug.

[Lone_Gunman]

CDH,

I would agree with you that the first few hundred rounds will help a semi auto smooth up a good bit. But that is not what we are talking about.

What we are discussing is cases where the gun is having jams every few rounds. When you call the manufacturer, they tell you the gun needs to be broken in, and advise you to fire 500 rounds before calling them about it again. This has happened to me in several instances. I have never seen a semi auto pistol which was jamming once or twice every magazine ever smooth out after 500 rounds and magically become reliable. Have you?

I think if your gun is jamming once or twice per magazine, you have a manufacturing problem, not a break in problem, and all you are doing is wasting ammo with the 500 round break in.

[1911Tuner]

I think the issue here is that the term has come to mean two different things. We break a new car in to get things working up to maximum potential...but not to get it to run.

We break a gun in for the same reasons. Seat the recoil/locking lugs...smooth mating surfaces, etc...but not to (hopefully) give a malfunctioning gun a chance to fix itself.

If your new car or truck wouldn't start every 10th try...or the transmission refused to shift properly...or the AC wouldn't work, and your trip to the dealership got a response of:

"Well...Ya gotta drive it a few thousand miles to break it in before it'll run right."

You'd be a little...unhappy. Am I right? I thought so.

Breaking a gun in should mean the same thing. The gun was designed to function, and if it's built right, it will. It doesn't have a choice. It's a machine.

But nowadays, "break in" has come to mean:

"Oh, go play with your toy and stop bothering us."

To suggest that the consumer is responsible for expending several hundred rounds what is getting to be expensive ammunition before "bothering" the manufacturer with a complaint on its functionality is bordering on criminal, and it's unacceptable.

Whatever happened to standing behind a product? The attitude of:

"If it's not right, we will make it right...up to and including a free replacement and a letter of apology for the inconvenience."

Like the Craftsman guarantee.

"We don't care if you bought it before WW2. If it's worn out or broken, we replace it...on the spot...no questions asked."

[The Bushmaster]

I have been working with machinery all my life. Some light machinery and some heavy machinery. All new machinery needs to have a breakin period. Even new parts added to old machinery need a bit of a breakin.

Get 500 rounds and go to the range and shoot 100 to 150 rounds and clean the gun and repeat until you have gone through the 500 rounds and are sure that all is well with you and the gun. And as stated above. You probably need the practice anyway...

I just ran 500 rounds through a brand new Kimber and it did hic-up 5 times in the first 200 rounds. Two of the hic-ups were my fault though. I have sense ran another 1,000 rounds through that Kimber UCC II without one hic-up...I, also, needed the practice with the new gun...

Oh...And 1911tuner. The Sears Craftsman warrenty isn't all that good. First they are second rate tools and second they have not replaced some of my (Christmas gifts from loving family) Craftsman tools. I had one tool shop manager at Sears pull out a magnifying glass and inspect the tip of a cross head screw driver and tell me that I had used it in the wrong sized cross head screw and refused to replace it. Just one sample of Sears Craftsman warrenty. I'm retired now and I still have most (lost a few to car frames) of the S & K Wayne tools in my tool boxes and no craftsman.

[zammyman]

Depending on tolerances, some pistols may need a break in period before they're reliable, such as tight tolerance 1911's. The GI model 1911's were made with loose enough of a tolerance to not really have this issue; a lot of the newer models just need some rounds through them to break them in.

[1 old 0311]

Military weapons don't need a break in because they are made with LOOSER TOLERANCES. Most higher end semi auto pistols are made with TIGHT TOLERANCES that's why they are more accurate, and shoot better groups.

[Jim Watson]

But nowadays, "break in" has come to mean:

"Oh, go play with your toy and stop bothering us."

To suggest that the consumer is responsible for expending several hundred rounds what is getting to be expensive ammunition before "bothering" the manufacturer with a complaint on its functionality is bordering on criminal, and it's unacceptable.

Oh, boy, did you ever hit the nail on the thumb.
I gotta disagree in one respect, the "break in" ritual must be acceptable in modern practice because it is widely accepted, people buy this stuff every day. They just don't know better.

Then they go on and on about "good customer service." Which, when you read the description, turns out to be the maker's willingness to sell a defective product, combined with a smooth line to make you think they are doing you a favor by fixing it. Or trying to.
There was a post on another board describing a customer's frustration with ineffective "customer service". He got a reply to the effect: "That is unacceptable, a name brand 1911 ought to be reliable after only one trip back to the maker."

That sort of stuff sells a lot of Glocks to people who think they are entitled to a new gun that works. And it gives a lot of people funny ideas that a new 1911 is just a starting place for a lot of work to get it going.

Edit to add for zammyman and 1 old 311

There is a difference between tolerance in manufacture and clearance for foul operation. I think one problem with current 1911 knockoffs is that the makers are reducing the clearances below what they can do on the tolerances. A couple of parts intended to be a snug fit by design might be too tight to function at the high side of their tolerances.

[1911Tuner]

Military weapons don't need a break in because they are made with LOOSER TOLERANCES.

1. Looser tolerances don't guarantee reliability any more than tight is a guarantees accuracy...and as far as reliability is concerned...too loose is as bad or worse than too tight.

2. 1911 pistols built to match toleranes is essentially out of spec.

3. If you've ever handled an old USGI pistol that hadn't been worn out or wearing non-original parts...you might be surprised how little slop they were built with...even WW2-era pistols, which had been loosened up quite a bit from the originals. I have a very old, original, and nearly pristine 1911 pistol. When the gun is dry, you have to pull on the slide hard to detect any play...side to side or up/down. If there's a drop of oil in the rails...you can't feel any. Zip.

The gun shoots into 3 inches at 50 yards with ball. It feeds hollowpoints and lead SWCs as cleanly as hardball, and it does it from the old GI magazines...and no. It hasn't been smithed, buffed, polished, tweaked, tuned, or altered in any way. The only non-original parts are the springs.

[Old Guy]

A few years ago I used to live quite close to the main Para Ordnance factory.

I had cause to visit for a investigation I was doing for a Crown attorney (RE as an expert in firearms, wow aye!) very impressive operation, spotless facility.

I met a Dr. who worked for an Insurance Company at the S&W facility in New England, I had been invited to participate in a program.
Claude was shooting a self defense course, nice guy, he took my business card and over the years became friends.

On being invited to his wedding, I clean up not so bad, my Wife and I stayed at the Wedding Hotel. One night (the boys night out was a non drinking one at a local range!) I got to fire his wedding present from his new bride (Are you taking note on how to pick a Wife guys?) A para .45 stainless model, not sure of the exact designation, Carry? Weighed a ton!

The pistol would not fire a full magazine! bullet would nose dive into the feed ramp, even with hardball! His phone call prior to me firing it "You are most likely limp wristing it" Well I wasn't, same problem after a return to plant, second return to plant, still the same.

Have not spoken to him in a while, will call him and see what results were arrived at.

[MM]

When I initiate a breakin on a new weapon, it is for the sole purpose of achieving some degree of reliability beore I introduce the gun into my daily carry rotation. The weapon MUST run trouble free with my choice of ammo for 300-500 rounds to be considered reliable.
MM

[Loggerlee]

Agreed MM
How can you count on a weapon you have not put 500rds through?
Most guns would get the benefit of the doubt,but if you want to KNOW it's reliable you need to shoot the darn thing.
Lee

[1911Tuner]

When I initiate a breakin on a new weapon, it is for the sole purpose of achieving some degree of reliability beore I introduce the gun into my daily carry rotation.

How can you count on a weapon you have not put 500rds through?

That's not break-in. That's proving the weapon.

Again...If break-in is defined as allowing everything to seat...good enough...but the gun shouldn't choke during that period. It should run.

If break-in is defined as continuing to shoot a malfunctioning weapon in hopes that it'll somehow work itself out...then there was a problem with the gun to start with, and it'll be back sooner or later. It may be as simple as a bad magazine, or as complicated as bad feed and barrel ramp geometry and chamber dimensions.

[Old Fuff]

I think there is a vast divide between older members who remember the days when Colt was the only maker of commercial 1911 design pistols, and today when it seems that just about everybody has gotten into the act.

Older Colts, made either for the military services or for commercial sale, did not need to be broken in or extensively tested for reliability. The same can be said about those produced by government contractors during World Wars One and Two. These guns were right from git-go, and nobody questioned they’re reliability. Notice that they seldom show up on the forums with complaints about how they are working.

Today’s makers do not make pistols that match the government’s requirements concerning materials, specifications, blueprint dimensions nor inspection procedures – and it shows.

To cover up their sloppy workmanship and equally poor quality control procedures – some don’t even 100% test fire their products – they have convinced younger folks that the old warhorse needs to be shot for so long before it can be considered to be O.K. While the claim is perhaps true concerning what they are selling, it doesn’t apply to the guns that made the pistol’s reputation. Obviously they can fool those who lack long-term experience, but not those who have been there and done that.

[Z71]

I think that a new gun probably does need a break in period where a few stoppages are to be expected.

However, a Jam-O-Matic is a Jam-O-Matic! If a pistol thats new consistantly jams on ball ammo, something is likely out of whack.

A lot of pistol owners won't fire 500 rounds out any particular gun in a lifetime.

[1911Tuner]

a new gun probably does need a break in period where a few stoppages are to be expected.

Assuming a clean gun, good magazines, and decent ammo? I don't think so...

[Ky Larry]

Tuner, I beleive we have had this discussion before. We're compairing apples and oranges. No one I know of is currently making a true 1911 pistol. All current manufacturers are building 1911-type pistols. They are not built to the original spec's, out of the original materials, and firing the called-for ammo. They do not get the hand-fitting and attention to detail that the originals recieved.I have handled and shot a lot of current high-dollar .45 autos(Wilson, Brown,etc) and they are, as a group, very well made pistols. However, I recently had a chance to handle an unfired commercial Colt .45 auto made in 1932. The fit, finish, trigger, and overall "feel" put every .45 auto I've seen to shame. 1911-type pistols may need a breakin period. The real deal probably didn't. Start the flames.

[1911Tuner]

No one I know of is currently making a true 1911 pistol.

Thassa fack, Jack...and it's sad that true statement has perpetuated the myth that the 1911 is a finicky, unreliable autopistol that requires a good gunsmith before it can be trusted.

Those of us who have had our mitts on a real one can only chuckle.

[mopar92]

I bought a new .40 Springfield XD and I put 1,000 rounds through it in one week. I wanted to beat it and put it through the test. I was doing a review for a local gun shop that I know very well. I agreed to buy the gun ( I wanted one anyway) and he'd supply factory FMJ ammo. I literally put 1,000 rounds of factory ammo through the pistol with 0... count em, 0 failures or stove pipes. I never cleaned it, only fired it. We took it apart and inspected it and it was very dirty. That's it. Nothing bound, nothing jamming, etc. I have a few 1911's and HAD a Glock, and there is no way they would shoot 1,000 rounds with out a hiccup. I am not saying your 1911 wont, but non of my 3 would. 1 of them is a custom pistol, the others factory. The only other pistol I have put a gazillion rounds through and don't remember a single jam is an old Ruger P97 stainless in .45. That was a great pistol, just huge, ugly, and double action...

[Old Fuff]

They do not get the hand-fitting and attention to detail that the originals recieved.

Which is another myth. Does anyone believe that during a World War the contractors were doing a lot of extraordinary hand fitting? :scrutiny: :scrutiny:

Commercial guns got a higher polish finish, but under the skin they were all the same. How do I know? because after literally detail stripping hundreds of pistols I've noticed that the original finish (blue, parkerizing, or whatever) is only polished off in a few places - and breech face isn't one of them. Never saw a USGI gun that was new (or newly rebuilt) that had polished slide and frame rails. The only guns Uncle Sam did any trigger pull work on were met for bullseye target shooting.

However the USGI guns were inspected by both company and army inspectors, during part manufacture, and after the guns were fully assembled. It isn't that mistakes weren't made, but rather that they didn't get shipped out.

[lechiffre]

I have never seen a semi auto pistol which was jamming once or twice every magazine ever smooth out after 500 rounds and magically become reliable. Have you?


i have. i own one. a walther (interarms) .380 blue ppk. when i first got it (about 15 years ago) it was a jam-o-matic. had two failures to feed on the first magazine. at least one per magazine for the first 200 rounds. then it gradually got better over the next couple of hundred. have not had a problem since. i would say it needed a 400-500 round break in period.

either that or it took that long to gouge a channel through the web of my hand.

[Z71]

My experiences with brandnew 1911 style pistols have not been all that good!

First gun was a very popular, currently made model of standard 1911A1. I hesitate to mention brands on this one for fear of being barbequed! It was not a Colt, or a Springfield. Ask, and I will tell though.

This particular pistol I bought brandnew. Along with a couple of boxs of Winchester USA 230gr ball. My very first .45acp pistol.

Immediatly upon purchase, I headed for one of my fathers farms to fire the thing. Preformance as far as jams was ok, it didn't jam at all in 50 shots. The ammo was dirty though, leaving lots of unburned powder in the gun and on me and my glasses.

I went to take the gun apart, and it could not be field stripped! You could remove the recoil spring and slide stop, however the slide would not leave the frame. Took the gun back to the store the next day to gripe. Store owner had his on premisis gunsmith look at it. Gunsmith beat it apart with a soft mallet! The frame had peened over trapping the link and link legs of the barrel in the frame. Gunstore owner accused me of shooting hot reloads until I produced my box full of empty brass, and the full box, plus my receipts from the day before. The gunsmith sided with me on the deal. I got full credit for another purchase. Frame was obviously soft for whatever reason, like the frame missed the heat-treat step!

The next 1911 A1 was an early Norinco. The gun I used my credit from the first bogus 1911 to buy.

It too functioned relatively jamfree, had a few bobbles not returning to battery at first, but didn't peen itself stuck in 50 shots. It did soon start getting the mag stuck inside the gun! Requiring the mag to be physicaly ripped from the gun with effort! The follower of the empty mag was getting stuck on the slide stop. The Chinese mags were junk!

It had a few bobbles at first, and required new mags to function properly. However once broken in and with better mags than the factorys was a good preformer.

The next 1911 was another very popular make, a Springfield Armory Milspec 1911A1. This gun was purchased brandnew by my father in law. He had premature slide lock issues from the gitgo. The gun working well, however the slide would lock back with ammo still in the mag. New mags, and borrowed mags(from my 1911) didn't cure it. I bought the gun from him, and he bought himself something else non-1911.

I installed a new slide stop, and still have the pistol.

Used guns have been a fifty/fifty deal for me. A stainless Randall being a total waste of money! A Sistema Colt being a superb gun.

Ideally, I suppose a new 1911 should work perfectly. But thats in an alternate universe that I don't live in or have access to!

So, at least from my perspective, out of 5 1911A1 style pistols, 1 worked perfectly and it was a used gun.

[VegasOPM]

I know that most of the custom built 1911's need a few hundred rounds to runn with 100% reliability. The closer tolerances on highly accurized pistols usually need to be "wear lapped" prior to perfect operation. Lower cost pistols tend to have less finish work done on the slide rails and feed ramp, so they also need to be worn in a bit.

Like an engine, firearms tend to work better after use.



Of course, you could just buy a GLOCK and not worry about if it works.:neener:

[Mad Magyar]

Like an engine, firearms tend to work better after use.


I kinda wish that analogy would somehow disappear. The workings of an internal combustion engine & a pistol is like......well, you get the point...:(

[The Bushmaster]

Mad Magyar...Machinery is machinery is machinery...It never hurts to break it in before taking it to sea or street wars...

[againstthagrane]

NO WAY! Do they need a break in period? No. But I change the sights, sight them in, fit extended slide release (sorry, slide lock lever) and a butt plug.

am i the only one that thought this was hilarious?

[Old Guy]

againstthagrane
Don't you go laughing at me, I am very sensitive you know!

The next 1911 was another very popular make, a Springfield Armory Milspec 1911A1. This gun was purchased brandnew by my father in law. He had premature slide lock issues from the gitgo.

When we first started shooting IPSC, Ontario Canada, 1980, we had no Gunsmiths who had a clue on getting .45 Colts to run well with the thousands of rounds we put through them.

Slide locks were cured by a wee indent being ground in to it, with a dremel, not sure who came up with that idea, but it was a must on all of the new guns after that. A right of passage was the hammer bite, prior to the extra pieces being added, or hammer spurs being ground off!

I still have the mark on the web of my right hand after some 28 years.

It is not an accident that Glock pistols work first time all the time right out of the box, there where no CNC machines in the those early Colt plants.

When you see 24 blocks of steel locked in to a CNC machine in the Glock plant in Austria, door closed, 6 hours later, 24 slides! To this old guy, magic.

[againstthagrane]

its all in good fun :). i knew what you meant

[makarovnik]

Pooh on the whole "break in period" thing. So I spend over $500 on a gun and they want me to spend another $150 to coax it along to the point where it is usable. Why don't they break the damn thing in. It shouldn't leave the factory until it's reliable.

[Walkalong]

I guess just a few of us lucky B******'s have all the 1911's that work 100%. :D

[tipoc]

Here's a challenge; drop by your local gunatorium (or look at your own collection) pick up a new S&W revolver and one made prior to the 1970s. Pick up a new Colt 1911 and one made prior to the 70s. Now look at these guns closely side by side.

On the old S&W note the beveled cylinder, note the radius at the rear of the barrel where it enters the frame, keep looking. On the Old Colt note how smooth it is all over. Now look at the new guns and try not to cut your hand on the sharp edges. One of the first things a fella needs to do with a new gun that you want to keep, is to deburr it.

Now back in the day at both Colt and S&W the assemblers were highly regarded and well paid. They made sure the guns that left were in spec and each part mated as it should. If not the part was rejected and a new one fit. Not only were the guns stamped by the inspectors but by the assemblers as well. This occurred during the war as well though during the war both firms discovered that cost cutting measures could be implemented. The manufacturing process was such that skilled assemblers were needed.

Modern manufacturing discounts the work of assemblers. It is designed to. Guns like the Glock and the Springfield XD and others of their kind were designed from the ground up to minimize cost and assembly. They are usually reliable.

When you remove skilled assemblers from the 1911 you loose something (and S&W revolvers). Not to mention that the specs were changed on 1911s.

tipoc

[The Bushmaster]

And yet you will spend the time to break in a $35,000 automobile...

[Jim Watson]

But as a previous post said, I expect it to RUN through the break in period.

"Break in" is gun companyspeak for "Go away and leave us alone."

[Old Guy]

How about the tried and true method, load the slide rails up with engine valve lapping compound, and slide the parts back and forth!

Just sit and watch the TV, back and forth.

Look at the high spots! Save 500 rounds?

[Quoheleth]

Ummm...and back to the OP...

I had a RI Tactical. The first couple hundred rounds, I had some problems: FTFs, FTRTB, no FTEs. I'll fully admit it could have been me - my first 1911 (style) gun, you know.

I don't care what you call it: break-in time, get-acquainted time, taking your gun on a date, whatever, but a 500-round, pre-carry benchmark is a good idea to assure you of it's reliability. Over at the forum.m1911.org board, there's a Rock Island/Armscor forum - lots of good help there. Some guys report that in addition to a good, thorough cleaning (apparantly Armscor uses some rather heavy rust/moisture barrier as packing lube) changing the factory springs to a Wolf set makes a big difference with feeding/return to battery issues.

If this is going to be a range gun, anyhow, then don't worry about what you call it (i.e. "break in") cuz you're gonna be shooting it anyhow! Oh - and over on the forum.m1911.org board, the NAmerica Armscor rep hands out there. If you ever - ever - have a problem, he'll be on it like fleas on a dog.

Q

[tipoc]

Some one above said that two seperate things were being discussed and that seems true.

One is that any shooter that gets a new gun (or a new to them used gun for that matter) subjects the gun to a break in period of their own. This is where we check out the gun for reliability, fit and function. We do this with any firearm before we carry it for personal defense or take it hunting or trust it in a match. Shooters have done this for generations.

The other point made is that guns should come from the factory and be reliable out of the box. Some manufacturers have the sorry habit of explaining defects in their products by saying that the gun needs a "break in" or that the shooter is "limp wristing" etc.

I agree that guns should come from the factory and be ready to go. But it's also my experience that this is not all that common.

tipoc

[punkndisorderly]

With one exception, every firearm I've ever purchased either worked flawlessly out of the box, or it didn't, and no amount of break in made things better (usually it became worse). The one exception was my Glock 34, two jams in the first 100 rounds, then flawless over the next 2000+.


That said, the only pistol that I'm familiar with that has a stated break in period is Kimber (also 500 rounds). Generally, they fit them tighter than most other 1911's and many people seem to have a few problems out of the box and almost always seem to fix themselves between 200 and 300 rounds. I don't have a problem with it since that's about 2 range trips for me to hit 500 rounds. Add in 200 rounds of carry ammo, and I'd be feel comfortable with it in about a month. As long as I know what to expect going in, no biggie.

I've heard of a few people not following Kimber's break in (sending it back before the break in was over and/or not sticking to 230gr FMJ) and all were sent back a flawlessly functioning pistol.

For me, it boils down to this: I won't trust my life to a firearm I haven't shot at least 200 rounds of whatever I intend to carry it with with no stoppages. Call me lucky, but I've never had a problem doing that with any defensive firearm I've purchased.

The only two firearms I've had serious problems with were my Ruger MkIII (which required a 3 month vacation at the factory right out of the box) and my Remington 597 which jammed like crazy and was machine gunning (fixed by new magazines).

Interestingly, Honda also has a break in period. I was instructed to avoid cruise control and change up my speed frequently for the first thousand miles or so. That was the case with my 95 and 07 Civic's.

[Old Fuff]

I think that somehow people are missing the point.

First of all, pistols are not automobile engines.

Second; the reason the owner of a Kimber or similar pistol has to break it in by shooting is because the manufacturer didn't finish the job, and given the cost they should have. The need to fit them so tightly is questionable, but if they do, a final lapping in is called for, not asking the buyer to go to the expense of putting 500 rounds through the gun. They might do this anyway, but they shouldn't have to.

If one is so inclined this breaking in (better called "shooting in"), can be substantially reduced or eliminated with some of Tuner's slurry and elbow grease. Then you can use your 500 rounds for more useful purposes.

Tightly fitted 1911 pistols are nothing new. They have been the basis of bullseye target pistols going back to shortly before World War Two. But it used to be that the makers made sure they worked before they shipped them. Today the beta testing is left up to customers who have been duped into accepting the proposition. If today’s owners want to buy this bull that’s their business, but those of us that have been there and done that know better.

Last but not least, any pistol that is advertised and sold as being a weapon should not require any breaking (or shooting) in. Those that do are nothing but expensive big-boy toys.

[Drail]

Break in periods are a lame excuse for poor quality control standards. The only break in should be when the manufacturer test fires it and maybe makes a small adjustment. Expecting the final consumer to perform a break in is an insult.

[FoMoGo]

On the Armscor/Rock Island Armory guns, the 500 round break in period is NOT to push the customer off if they have an issue.
I have never seen a company so concerned over customer satisfaction as is Advanced Tactical, the retailer of these pistols in the US.
Ivan, with AT, browses M1911.com and will contact customers that he sees with an issue before they can contact him in some cases.
The customer service and warranty are the reasons I decided to buy their products.


Jim

[rfwobbly]

• It means that finish polishing (a very labor intensive effort) is one of the steps they dropped to keep their price competitive.

• It means before you fit low power springs and start shooting 700 fps reloads, run a couple of boxes of regular strength Winchester "white box' through the gun to loosen things up.