Do you believe in "gun break in?"

[Bennyb747]

Glocks and AKs don't need to be broken in. Maybe that's why I like both so much

 

[Strahley]

No, and if I take a new gun out and it has lots of problems, I won't be keeping it. Been there done that. They should work 99% out of the box, otherwise I'm not interested

 

[jon_in_wv]

If your gun fails in the first hundred rounds or so(and it's not ammo or mags), it's a lemon plain and simple.

Fail once, even during break-in, and I consider the gun useless for self defense. Needing a break-in and I consider the gun useless for self defense.

Really? So the the failure to eject I had with my M&P 9c in the first 100 rounds somehow made it a lemon? What about the 5000+ problem free rounds I fired after that? The fact is any weapon could have small burrs or slight variations in machining or tight tolerances that will work out in the first few hundred rounds of firing. To say any weapon that has a failure in the first 100 rounds is a lemon is just not based in fact or a good understanding of manufacturing firearms. At least in the second quote it was stated as an opinion and if that is your opinion fine. But plain and simple it is not.

 

[bullbarrel]

My Colt 1991A1 Commander and my Springfield Loaded 1911 required nothing and never failed. However the dealer said the Sigma would require 4 boxes for breakin. I have fired 6 and it may be there. The theory is that the parts of some autos need a breakin to hone them out, and reliability follows. My fingers are crossed, and I do not carry it.