How many Pow'R balls need to be fired from a 1911 to ensure reliability

[flip180]

Hello, I'm going to put in an order tonight for a fex boxes of Pow'R ball 165 gr.+P for my .45 Kimber Stainless Compact for carry ammo. The gun has been reliable feeding FMJ's except for a box of American Eagle ammo, which caused three FTF's in the first 50 rds due to the bullet being seated farther down in the case causing the round to be shorter. How many rounds of this stuff should I fire through the gun to ensure reliability. If it is supposed to feed like an FMJ, I should know pretty quick if it will cause any FTF's, correct? I was thinking of shooting 80 rds through the gun and setting 14 aside for my two 7 round Wilson Combat magazines for concealed carry.

Thanks, Robert.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Each gun is different and your mileage may vary. Shoot & test, shoot & test until you are assured of its 100% reliability.

 

[Kodiak AK]

Personaly .Unless it is fmj ammo . I will not carry with out testing at least 200 rounds thru the gun it will be carried in .

Sometimes later on I find out something that makes me change from the round I have selected . A case in point would be the Federal hydrashock I shot a few months ago with zero expanshion . I am still looking for a replacment round .

 

[Preacherman]

I agree with Kodiak: I won't trust the reliability of a gun/mag/ammo combination unless I've tested a minimum of 200 rounds of that ammo, in those magazines, in that gun. Any malfunction at all - even if on round 199 - and the 200-round test starts again from zero.

There are a few exceptions to that rule for me. If I had to pick up someone else's gun to defend myself, I would tend to trust Glocks and the Beretta 92/96 series to function first time, every time, with any standard ammo. I've never had a gun-related failure with either - only defective ammo.

Obviously, these comments don't apply to a revolver. Those will function with just about anything. All that I'd watch carefully is to ensure that I don't have a trigger job done where the hammer spring is lightened so much as to give unreliable ignition.

 

[sm]

I agree with Kodiak: I won't trust the reliability of a gun/mag/ammo combination unless I've tested a minimum of 200 rounds of that ammo, in those magazines, in that gun.

I agree.
Key points: that , those, and that. worth a second read.

 

[Orion]

yup, what he and they said. The worst thing in the world is to find out that your gun,mag,ammo combo is 80% effective by trying this after you've carried for 6 months.

Spend the money now and feel better later.

 

[R.H. Lee]

American Eagle ammo, which caused three FTF's in the first 50 rds due to the bullet being seated farther down in the case causing the round to be shorter.

Huh?

.45 ACP headspaces on the mouth of the brass. How could a "short round" cause a FTF??

 

[Preacherman]

Headspace isn't the point at issue here - we're talking about overall length of the cartridge. The .45 ACP - as any semi-auto cartridge - has a specified minimum length. If that is not observed, the round may not follow the correct pathway from the magazine to the feed ramp. It may, for example, kick its nose up higher than usual and jam on the top edge of the chamber, instead of making contact inside the chamber (which would direct it down the barrel).

 

[Quintin Likely]

I don't trust any handgun until I've run at least 200-300 rounds through it in one sitting. After that, I try as hard as I can to get to the range every weekend afterwards to put another 50 or so through it just to rotate my carry ammo, ensure that it works, and to try and get better at shooting the thing, then form my reliability judgment from that. Initial reliability is one thing, but long term is important too.

 

[Doc]

shoot as few as YOU are comfortable staking you life on...

i shoot at least 500 rounds of THE ammo thru THE mags in THE gun

then i replace the magazine springs;

call me paranoid, but MY life is worth a case of ammo

(besides, it's not like it's punishment to shoot up
a bunch of high quality ammo)

as for it being TOO expensive to shoot :banghead:

 

[El Tejon]

Doc, I'm writing this down, so, you are saying that ammunition is not just for admiring, but for shooting?

flip, have you shot that stuff at night yet?

 

[Doc]

El T:

SOME ammo is for shooting!

but I like just letting those silver bullets
out just to be polished, then carefully put
back into the glass case

two words, just two words: Ichiro Nagata

 

[El Tejon]

Alright already! Geez, just because I don't pour over every photo, man, tough room in here tonight.

 

[Doc]

went to the range friday with the Mrs. Doc
(actually played hookey, go figure!)
ONLY took 500 rounds, forgot who i was with!

she decided that she doesn't like the glock 21
which i got her for her birthday
(Mrs. Doc and Clint Smith decided it would fit
her hands better than the model 30 she already stole,
i mean inhereted from me)

but NOW she like's my Les Baer TR better...[SIGH]
i think jewerly would be cheaper.
at least I got to put the 500+ rounds thru the 1911
for 'reliability testing'

 

[El Tejon]

Another validation of multiple copies of the same weapon. Hey, I look like a genius again, which, for me, is tough to do once!

 

[tc300mag1]

I also agree with Min of 200 rounds though that gun with those mags and that ammo and if your really nitpicky the same lot # of ammo

 

[flip180]

How about 185gr.+P Golder Sabers

Those were my second choice for defense ammo, which seems to be popular with the 1911 crowd. I've found an on-line site that sells the stuff for right at 12.00 for a box of 25 rds.. I figure I can get 225 rds shipped for about 120.00. The Pow'R ball's are about 16.00 for a box of 20 rds.

Robert.

 

[Doc]

shoot whatever you like,
better yet, shoot whatever the GUN likes!

any of the standard defensive rounds meet the need
you must decide low mass high velocity or high mass low velocity:
ie: 230gn at 900 fps or 185gn at 1100 fps

my 1911 likes the gold dot, my glock likes golder saber

some day i am gonna try the pro load 230gn +P at 1200 fps
and see if any of my guns shoot it well enough to bet my life on...

 

[raz-0]

i shoot at least 500 rounds of THE ammo thru THE mags in THE gun then i replace the magazine springs;

This isn't the first time I saw something like this stated, and I find it really odd. You put a bunch of money into testing something's reliability, then you go and replace a part that should be nowhere near the end of the service life, and replace it with a completely untested component.

What is the logic in this? If you had confidence in an untested barnd new part, why bother testing the component in the first place?

Personally, I'm with the people who say 200-300 rounds. However, I'd try and make them different lots, and I'd use them in a few smaller batches spaced with cheap ammo to dirty up the gun. No need to use up the pricey stuff to see if it keeps cycling it when the gun is less than pristine. 200 would be about the minimum for making me happy over a course like that. For the gun itself, 500 rounds tends to be the number that makes me feel some confidence.

 

[geekWithA.45]

I'm with the 100-200 crowd, but only AFTER the gun's been properly broken in with whatever I'm using for target ammo, say, 500-1000 rounds, to get all the parts friendly with each other.

Some guns can misbehave during their break in period, and it'd be a shame if the fighting loads wrongly got the blame.

 

[flip180]

Well, I took the plunge

I just ordered 225 rds of 185 gr.+P Golden Sabers. I hope to get them in by Friday if they ship tomarrow. I also ordered a 20 round box of 125 gr.+p .38 SPCL to try in my 642. The total came out to just over 140.00 after shipping. I hope they work out alright. Otherwise I'll be stuck with all of these bullets . I'll let you know how it works out.

Robert.

 

[cpileri]

reliability algorythm

Here's a way, take it for what its worth.
Scroll down to the post by robear for the final working attachment.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?threadid=36003&highlight=reliability

My advice: read all the comments below the initial post and keep in mind its not the infallible final word on the matter.

I got tired of the flames on the original post and don't want a repeat here- just sharing info.
thx,
C-

 

[Hawkman]

For assurance of absolute reliability it is imperative that you shoot EXACTLY 827.3 rounds.

 

[roo_ster]

"For assurance of absolute reliability it is imperative that you shoot EXACTLY 827.3 rounds."

LMAO...still more LMAO.

So...does the last round (the 3/10ths of a round) have to feed from the mag (.3), but not fire (.3), eject (.3) or make that tinkly sound brass makes when it hits the pavement in movies (.1)?

*******************

Just checked out cpileri's algorythm. Not bad, for what it was intended. What was really hilarious was the responses.

Here's a hint: cpileri was not attempting to provide a rigorous proof of the Unified Field Theory, the Meaning of All Life, or the existence/non-existence of G-d.

**************

Guy with an Idea:
I have this new tool. It's called a "hammer" and is used to drive small pieces of metal into wood. Y'all are free to make use of it. I'll even produce it in two formats.

Naysayer #1:
Why isn't it a wrench?. 'Cause that's what I'd like it to be.

Naysayer #2:
What if I were to use it underwater, holding my breath, after eating a large bowl of pasta, and I got cramps from swimming too soon after dinner? I don't know it would be much help to me in THAT situation.

Naysayer #3:
Ha! How useful would your little tool be if, as you were about to swing your "hammer," you were hit by a small meteorite and blown to bits? No, I don't think this tool is all you crack it up to be...

Naysayer #4:
Will it end World Hunger or usher in World Peace and an era of no-height-limitation-at-MCDonald's-playgrounds?

Guy with an Idea:
Uh, I just thought I'd share a simple tool that might be of use. Never mind...

 

[Doc]

i shoot at least 500 rounds of THE ammo thru THE mags in THE gun then i replace the magazine springs;


This isn't the first time I saw something like this stated, and I find it really odd. You put a bunch of money into testing something's reliability, then you go and replace a part that should be nowhere near the end of the service life, and replace it with a completely untested component.

FYI, by the time i put ANTOHER 500 rounds thru the magazine, the springs
really aren't new and probably are getting near the end of their service life
FOR MY CCW weapon and mag's.

i use the magazine springs in my range magazines until they don't lock the
slide back. Then I stretch them and use them again until they don't lock
the slide back. THEN i replace them.

But in my CCW magazines, i replace the magazine springs about every couple
thousand rounds. I don't really have a concern with a new spring failing.
I am concerned with a fatigued spring failing (but that means not locking the
slide back, not a failure to feed).