Does a gun take 600 rounds to break in?

[Jeff F]

Well, I have a No4 Mk2 Enfield that I got new in the wrap and unfired. It's just passing 450 rounds downrange and is just now settling down and getting very accurate.

I have a SS Colt Series 80 government model that was accurate out of the box but needed a hundred round or so of ball ran through it before it was 100% reliable.

 

[Hal Carter]

I've been told to break guns by Kimber, HK, and SW, but never Sig. I used to own a 232, and it was 100% reliable out of the box, although very tight. Send it back. I think Sig's quality is slipping in the last couple of years.

 

[B yond]

I had a ruger auto that came from the factory with a sharp burr where the feed ramp meets the chamber. Cases would catch there causing jams. 600 rounds may have smoothed it down enough, but a dremel was a lot faster and cheaper.

 

[the_skunk]

Disassemble the gun, small paintbrush with a dab of fine valve grinding compound inside the frame rails, and work it back n forth, till it begins to act right. Clean the compound off the rails and reassemble.

My problem is the breech face doesn't have a recess to hold the spent cartridge until it hits the ejector. The earlier Sigs, Makarovs, CZ=82s, PPKs are identical designs, and the all have this recess.

Apparently they are depending on the extractor to flip the shell out.

 

[the_skunk]

Thanks Mr Jeff

I always do a through testing on any carry gun .... Most problems are in the magazines. My Browning HP had a weak spring on the slide lock, but it was an easy fix.

This Sig P232 is a major malfunction problem. I am near the $1000 mark on this gun, and to think I could have had a Kimber Solo, or a Rorhbaugh, instead of this Sig Saur toy.

 

[Sky]

I have always broke the rifle or pistol down for inspection and cleaning as most of us do. I have never gone out of my way to do anything special other than check the weapon and lube with Breakfree CLP. I have never had a problem with a so called break in period. Have had a problem with wrong ammo and chamber for an match grade AR. Changed ammo fixed problem. Mags can and sometime do make a difference with a certain firearm but ( knock on wood ) I have not had the joy of those type problems. I think a pistol or rifle should shoot out of the box...will it get smoother and more reliable after a few hundred rounds; hope so but I do not expect it to be a jam-o-matic unless the mag, ammo, or gun is something I do not want to own.

 

[AK103K]

My problem is the breech face doesn't have a recess to hold the spent cartridge until it hits the ejector.

Im not sure I understand what youre trying to say here. The P232 doesnt have a button ejector like the one in your pic. The ejector is on the slide stop, or at least it is on my P230's.

What does the rifle bolt face have to do with this?

 

[Hal Carter]

Even though not what the op asked, there are so many small 9mm on the market now a 9 would be a better cc choice, IMO. Still there is something wrong with that gun. Sig might be resting on their reputation, and some of the highest quality handguns I've owned over the last 20 or so years have been sigs. About 3 years ago I got 1 of the sig 1911's soon after they came out. I had many jamming issues with it. Tried everything, including Wilson mags. Still malfs. My ffl guy complained to sig and they finally reembursed the full amount I paid minus taxes.

These days "breaking in" a gun can cost a good deal of money. Then if it still does not work, you are just out that much more. You would think companies would be glad to make their product good from the factory but if not at least want you to send it back.

Bad publicity on a forum like this goes a long way towards a companies reputation.

 

[Fleet]

"But a gun is also like a tool or piece of machinery. A car's engine requires a "break in" period."

The problem with this line of thought is that if your car's engine didn't do what it was supposed to do first time, every time, you'd take it back and expect the dealer to make it right...the first time, without question.

 

[LKB3rd]

I rode with him the 40 miles to take it back to the dealer he bought it from. First thing the dealer asked was whether or not he had put 500 rounds thru it. Said the factory would not accept it back til then. Three years later he still hasn't put 500 rounds thru it cause it frustrates him so every time he takes it to the range. I sometimes wonder if this is the reason some manufacturers require this, knowing full well most owners will trade it off before or never will fire 500 rou

He should go in there, and tell them he just hit 700 rounds and it is still doing it. They have no way of knowing how many rounds it has through it except from what he tells them. If it is truly what it needs, let them shoot more rounds through it on their dime.

 

[the_skunk]

Im not sure I understand what youre trying to say here. The P232 doesnt have a button ejector like the one in your pic. The ejector is on the slide stop, or at least it is on my P230's.

What does the rifle bolt face have to do with this?

The sig 232 ejector is an extention of the slide stop, and the bolt picture just shows a typical recess. This breech area is universal to all guns

 

[the_skunk]

Yes sir Mr Carter

Bad publicity on a gun is a real 'no no'. You need to be one dis-satified customer.

I have spent up to 200 rounds tuning in a pistol. My Kimber only liked a certain ammo, and mags were crap .. but the basic gun was well built.

This Sig Sauer p232 has a major problem in the slide. I have written the executives at Sig that I want a refund.

 

[robmkivseries70]

I too have seen a lot of posts on this subject. In the past I would have said 'NO' , no break in period needed. I have since had some more modern manufactured pistols that were so well fitted (tight) that I do believe they needed some break in rounds. Any thoughts on the newer manufacturing processes yielding tighter pistols and then the "need to be broken in"?
Thanks,
Rob

 

[AK103K]

This breech area is universal to all guns

Umm, no, its not.

Most handgun breach faces look nothing like your rifle bolt pic, and more like the P230/232's.


You still havent ever said if someone else has shot the gun to eliminate you as the problem. As unlikely as it seems, sometimes it is user error, and you do need to confirm this.


I understand what youre going through, I recently had a lot of problems with a P238, and a lot of fiddling and about 700 rounds, things were never resolved. I traded it off and moved on.

That alone is a lot better for the blood pressure.

I will say youre doing yourself a disservice to assume that all SIG's are bad since your one gun was. Ive owned a number of them over the years, and all but the P238 were reliable and functional guns. Interestingly enough, my P238 worked like my last Kimber. Must be a "genetics" thing.

 

[kludge]

I always laugh at the people who buy a brand new "insert expensive brand of gun here" (Kimber is the biggest offender from the posts I've read), have problems, and then the MFR says... you need to shoot 500 rounds (or whatever) for the gun to break in.

So 500 rounds is what... $20/box of .45ACP, so that's $200 for ammo. And people are OK with this???

To stay competitive on price manufacturers have eliminated all the hand fitting that they can, some of them don't even touch the tooling marks that inhibit normal function, which in a mass production facility might cost what, $100 extra at retail?

Or the customer sends it back to the factory for $300 worth of "fitting" charges.

What would happen if a SA XD-40 out of the box didn't run though 500 flawless round right out of the box?

The gun snobs would say what a POS it is, that it can't be relied upon for carry, etc.

People sure do go through a bunch of nonsense to have a pretty gun.

 

[raz-0]

Should a gun need to break in to function? No.

Will a gun break in from the initial factory fit? Yes, even if it worked without function.

Will "breaking in" a gun make it work if it was malfunctioning? In my experience, unless the problem is a tight slide to frame fit, no. In the case of a tight slide to frame fit, you are probably better off cycling it by hand to break it in than burning up ammo.

Will "breaking in" a gun make it shoot better? In my experience, only bolt action rifles with less than stellar finishing to the rifling and pistols with overly tight slide to frame fit. In both cases, what youa re really getting is smoother more consistent behavior of the whole bullet/gun system when they interact during a shot being fired.

That's my experience anyway. I once had a pistol that took 750 rounds till it ran right, but that was a matter of troubleshooting and shooting ammo to determine it actually worked reliably. In reality, I could have shot thousands of rounds if I hadn't found what was the real cause, and the only reason I went that far is at the time a case of 9mm cost only slightly more than overnight shipping to have the manufacturer look at it.

 

[gym]

Get a glock you can load it right out of the box and it will shoot just as well as if it had a thousand rounds through it, . but if you are uninformed about guns in general, you should buy one that works out of the box like M&P, GLOCK,Ruger Sr9, Keltek-pf9, p11,lcp,lcr any bluddy revolver of decent heritage, or an h&k ,"p7", if you like classics, no guarantees other than a new taurus 44 mag, ruger 22, colt defender , an old colt 38 in detective special or lawman a s&w model 60 any Smith police auto,or cs series, a colt 45 series 70, most 80's a pocket light pony ,mustang. Or a taurus revolver in most any caliber along with a s&w model 19 ,29, s&w 60 chiefs special "many others". exactlly what was the question. what are you looking for? There are hundreds if not thousands of great guns out there. Why do you have to shoot all those bulletts again. Kimber is a pretty gun although he new ones are about 50% Crap. That's what happens when a comapny gets popular and can't keep up their QC standards. Sell the kimber and buy a gun that you can bet your life on. I would get an agent or a defender before one of those overpriced onaments. No direspect to you, they are very pretty. But I don't want the guy that shot me giving it to his mom for her birthday. Lovelly pistol son, thaks mom only the best for you, got a good deal on it. some fellow didn't have any use for it anymore. He just got finished breaking it in for you mom.
And yes I am kidding,

 

[goon]

I've never had a gun "break in" over time and just start working right if it malfunctioned straight from the box.
I do like to shoot several hundred problem free rounds for my own peace of mind before trusting a gun, but factory mandated break-in periods (at least for reliability) are BS.

 

[230therapy]

It's a 1911 thing that's bled over into general gun culture (or maybe it came from several guns).

http://10-8performance.blogspot.com/2010_05_01_archive.html

http://www.10-8performance.com/Reliability_Round_Counts.html

"It just needs to be broken in."
No it doesn't. Most of the time, this really just means that the gun was not built correctly and you are completing some of the final fitting by firing. Break in does not fix all the issues, so don't hope for the break in fairy to make an improperly set up weapon suddenly become right. Overly tight slide/frame/barrel fit, improper chamber finish, rough breech faces, etc. are better addressed on the bench than wasting precious time and expensive ammunition at the range. The only really legit break in that I typically see is related to guns getting tightened up after they get refinished with a coating that adds surface thickness, such as the spray and bake paint finishes. Usually the refinished gun will work ok, but needs to be kept very clean and well lubed during this initial wear in period. This break in can also be addressed on the bench instead.

 

[John Wayne]

Didn't read the replies in this thread, so this may have already been stated...

It's been my experience that if a gun doesn't work reliably out of the box, it won't do so after any magic number of rounds have been fired through it, either. I've had that experience with Kel-Tec and a few others.

A reliable gun may very well smooth out, however, and improve with use. Reliability does not increase, at least in my experience.

I have heard that Kahr pistols exhibit a few functional problems within the first xxx # of rounds and are reliable thereafter, but I have not fired one enough to know.

At any rate I would not trust any number higher than 100 rounds to break in a gun right out of the box...any more than that and something was wrong when it left the factory. The fact that it started working just means that you got lucky. YMMV.

 

[the_skunk]

The break-in period

That is total nonsense in today's CNC technology. I run 100 shells through a gun to check springs, magazines, and what ammo works best.

Today's normal buyer doesn't shoot 600 rounds in a year. A first class gun needs no break-in.

 

[AK103K]

Today's normal buyer doesn't shoot 600 rounds in a year.

I dont know what "normal" is, but I usually shoot 3-500 a week.


Hmmm.......

 

[Drail]

The most incredible thing about this whole policy "it needs to be broken in" has to be the huge number of people that believe it. And the car engine analogy is absurd.

 

[TheCracker]

I think there could be a some break in but that sounds like crap.

Today I raised the round count to 950 rounds out of my Ruger sr9c that I bought early February. 300 factory and the rest were my reloads if hollow points, fmj's and even 250 lead round nose.

ZERO MALFUNCTIONS, accurate and a pleasure to shoot!!!!

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Under no circumstances should any gun need 600 rounds to "break it in." Twelve boxes of .380 ammo would buy many guns. Ideally it should "run" out of the box, but a couple of sporadic stoppages in the first ~100 rounds can be forgiven, if it straightens out. In my experience, if a gun is suffering consistent stoppages in the first 100 rounds, no amount of shooting will make it any better.