gahunter12 said:
I have only had 1 failure out of about 95,000 rounds the last 4.5 years
OK, here's some quality data we can work with. Thanks gahunter12.
1 failure out of 95,000 gives us a failure rate of .0000105263.
Using Remington's production rate from 1992 (Post #14) of 1,500,000,000 rounds, that means that if Remington shipped less than 15,789 bad rounds in 1992 then they were producing better quality ammo than gahunter12. That's 315 boxes with a bad round for every state in the union, and you'd still have a better chance of getting a misfire from gahunter12's ammo than you would from Remington factory ammo.
Anybody have any reject rates from a major manufacturer? Figuring 235 working days per year, that means that in 1992 Remington could ship 67 bad rounds per day and still be producing better quality ammo than gahunter12.
No reflection on gahunter12. I've got 90,000 small pistol primers sitting in the closet right now. They've been shipped from who knows where in the back of several different trucks, subject to all kinds of vibration, bumps, and other handling factors. I would not be the least surprised if at least one had a cracked primer pellet that no amount of examination and checking will find. Loaded into a cartridge it's just going to produce a "click", no "boom". No big deal, that's why they make dummy rounds and in any decent weapons class it seems like you spend half your time practicing malfunction drills.
I can recall 1 misfire (at a GSSF match - did a tap-rack-bang and kept going) in the last couple of years out of about 4,000 rounds a month of handloads that I fire. So the quality of my loads is about the same as gahunter12's. The cartridge had a primer strike that looked perfectly normal. What happened? Who knows, bad primer, slow strike from a dirty firing pin, chamber dirty and the round didn't quite seat, whatever. I'm still not going to claim better quality than someone making BILLIONS of rounds per year unless I have some real data on a large sample of their product's performance.