What can a break-in period cure?

[I6turbo]

I'm not tolerant of guns that won't run, so when they start malfunctioning I either fix them, or if I decide I can't fix them or won't respect them even if I get them fixed, they're goners. I don't invest 300-500 rounds of ammo wondering every shot if they're going to screw up, and hoping they'll magically fix themselves. I've been building cars, engines, bikes, and other mechanical things for about 50 years. I haven't had much success waiting on broken mechanical devices to fix themselves. YMMV, but my luck hasn't been that good.

 

[eldon519]

When it comes to Glocks vs 1911s, I am a Glock guy. I actually don't even really like 1911s. Yet the reality, however inconvenient or convenient it may be, is that both my Gen 3 G26 and my Gen 4 G19 had jams in the first 500 rounds that went away never to return after a "break-in". My G26 in particular failed the spring replacement test of slowly letting the slide return to battery in a vertical orientation. After a few hundred rounds, it no longer failed. You think the spring magically got stronger or the parts got mated to one another?

Neither has malfed in thousands of rounds since. I would have been a fool to sell them because of those early issues.

 

[Shaq]

Cameron, seriously man, please stop. You really are not helping your argument.

Take it from someone who has spent the better part of 53 years working on all manner of mechanical devices (especially cars and bikes), break in is necessary.

The problem with modern automotive manufacturing, they began playing to the lowest common denominator and doing part of the break in prior to sale. Cause people would not read the owners manual or listen to the sales guy if he was smart enough to explain break in to them.

You are splitting hairs & misinterpreting what M-Cameron is saying. He's not saying cars don't need a break in to run better or smoother; he's saying the car should still start whether it's broken in or not. If it doesn't start, breaking it in won't help.

No new car I've ever bought refused to start because it wasn't broken in.

 

[tark]

After carefully reading the back and forth posts between Harleytoo and M-cameron, I must agree with Harleytoo on every point. He is a gentleman who was trying to reason with a jackass. I pondered using that word, but I suppose it is no worse than "moron"

M-cameron all you have accomplished with your snotty, condescending, and insulting posts is to demonstrate your overwhelming arrogance. You obviously know it all and the rest of us are just plain stupid if we don't agree with you.

I will try to explain to you what a 'break in period' will accomplish.

To begin, you are correct that a gun should not need a "break-in" period to function properly, it should do that right out of the box. BUT....firing a few hundred rounds will smooth up things more often than not. A slightly sticky safety might be easier to engage and disengage. On a hard fit 1911 like a Les Baer, the slide will be a little easier to rack. (I have some experience in this matter, I worked for Les for 21 years) The trigger pull will probably lose a half pound or so and be even smoother than it was. Any bad magazines will be weeded out... And so on.

My new car worked fine from day one, but it shifts smoother and has gained two more miles per gallon after I drove it for ten thousand miles. That is called a break-in period.

If you can't understand that concept...well....I guess you are just a ....never mind. I won't call you that.... but I will proudly admit that I....too....am a moron. Yes....I am...

Now excuse me while I renew my MENSA membership...

 

[Reloadron]

In another thread I mentioned my 1911 I just got that doesn't seem to feed well. The suggestion is to take it to the range, and I plan to - I just haven't had the time yet.

However, I find it hard to believe that a break-in period will fix the issue I'm having. Can you guys share some of the things you've seen a break-in period fix?

I think this will help me feel better about taking it to the range as it is.

I can likely tell you more things a break in period will not fix than things it will fix when it comes to feeding issues. As a side note I clearly recall when my father bought a brand new 1956 Pontiac and that car had a break in period with break in oil. The first 600 miles the car should not be driven over 60 MPH. Following 600 miles the "break in " oil was changed and regular oil used. So much for automotive break in nonsense.

Here is one example. I do not see it as a break in period as "period" sort of refers to a unit of time like hours, days, weeks and you get the idea. Maybe break in rounds as defining a number of rounds? If you have a magazine problem, a common cause of feed problems in the 1911, you can run a thousand rounds through the gun and it still will not reliably feed. Break in will not make that gun shoot better. Finding a new reliable magazine will. You don't mention the specific failure to feed issue? Exactly where and how does the gun jam? How about extractor tension? If the extractor has incorrect tension you can shoot or try to shoot the pistol for a thousand rounds and it will not fix the problem and is the extractor properly beveled? The list goes on but I would not be overly optimistic that taking the gun to the range and running a break in period will fix much of anything.

The 1911 guru around here is 1911turner and hopefully he will see this thread. He is one of the few members I would place stock in and one of the most knowledgeable 1911 people here. There are several others. I would suggest those answering your post attempt to focus on the 1911 pistol and quit the nonsense BS about engines built 50 or 60 years ago or last week as it won't help.

The 1911 design should shoot fine when held inverted. If the barrel is not correctly aligned or the lip of the feed ramp off again, shooting the gun will not make it better. I have no clue what you have but a cheap 1911 can be a crap shoot. Some work fine right out of the factory and some have issues that a break in will not cure.

Ron

 

[M-Cameron]

After carefully reading the back and forth posts between Harleytoo and M-cameron, I must agree with Harleytoo on every point. He is a gentleman who was trying to reason with a jackass. I pondered using that word, but I suppose it is no worse than "moron"

M-cameron all you have accomplished with your snotty, condescending, and insulting posts is to demonstrate your overwhelming arrogance. You obviously know it all and the rest of us are just plain stupid if we don't agree with you.

experience has shown this this is correct more often than not......you can call me arrogant....you can call me a jackass...because yeah i probably am.........but i dont really care, because i am also right.

and yes....of course things will smooth out with use......i never disagreed with that....

reread what i said, i am and have been talking about FUNCTION...

i dont care about smoothing out......all things considered, "smoothing out" is petty....

but if you need to "break in" your gun to get it to FUNCTION......then its crap.

 

[Hangingrock]

I believe that Break In Number Of Rounds To Be Fired are established by certain manufacturing entities have been established by the sales/service principles of WAG (Wild Ass Guess) and CYA (Cover Your A**). QC procedures under ISO still allow entities to produce junk but it is extremely will documented.

On the other hand I've never purchased a weapon that I have not fired extensively to check functionality especially semiautomatic weapons, related magazines and self-defense ammunition.

 

[gc70]

Some problems, such as rough surfaces, tight springs, or slight imperfections in parts fit, are resolved by repetitive use during a break-in period.

Other problems simply cannot be corrected through repetitive use. An extractor that is far too loose to function properly will not miraculously become tighter as a 1911 is shot more. One of my 1911s functioned, but it put a slight bend around a third of the rim of every case fired through the gun. There was a tiny ridge at the juncture of the breech face and breech wall; 1911Tuner said it was probably the result of a chipped cutter head. Whether the gun was shot 500 times or 500K times, shooting was not going to remove the ridge or correct the way the ridge was damaging brass.

 

[Warp]

I don't know how they built engines 53 years ago. But the end user can't "break-in" a real engine.

Car engines use very soft rings and even the finest car engines out there are pathetic farm tractors offering mediocre performance. The rings will be seated and broken in before the car even leaves the factory. The suggestions in the manual are there mostly so ya'll take it easy and give the engine time to sling off any mess inside so the filter can catch it. And so that warranty defects don't kill anyone driving too fast. Hopefully the car falls apart during the "break-in period" before such.

Real engines can only be broken in on the dyno or load bank. Or something that offers 100% load, like full speed in a marine application. I won't sell a race engine without dyno testing it, to run it in and properly seat the rings first. Even though I offer ZERO warranty anyways.

That's right, absolute 100% full throttle is the only way to properly break-in an engine. Even my DDC MTU 4000 3 megawatt mills get load banked at 100% load immediately.

When I put a new camshaft and valve-springs (and other stuff) into my Z28 awhile back I looked a lot into the "break in" for the new valve-springs. People had all this "idle only for a heat cycle, only X,000 RPM until Y number of heat cycles"...then people would say "when the pro shops do installs, they warm it up and put it on the dyno". Kinda makes you go hmmm about this supposed break in.

So I put my cam and springs in, drove it around easy (mostly to make sure I did it right!) until it was up to temp, and that was that. Problem free tens of thousands of street miles and years of all four seasons.

Break in? I think it should just work.





But then when my last new pistol had a FTRTB in the first 150 rounds I didn't have a stroke about it. Over 2k rounds now and when I think back to that one malfunction I kind of write it off as "during break in" since it was so early...





I mostly use the "break in period" as a "let me just test this to personally make sure it works"

 

[silicosys4]

To me a "break in" period for a handgun should smooth things out, but IMO a gun shouldn't need a "break in" after leaving the factory for it to function properly and reliably.
If a gun fails to function reliably for a few hundred rounds after it leaves the factory, at a rate high enough that a "break in" is recommended, I tend to feel there is a gap in quality control at the factory, and the gun left prematurely.
A gun should leave the factory functioning reliably. If a company can't make a reliable gun out of the box, they should tweak their manufacturing/quality control departments. It shouldn't be up to the customer to "finish" manufacturing the gun to the point of reliability by smoothing out burrs and such from shooting an expensive amount of ammo through it.
I do understand some of the tightly fitted guns needing to wear in, so to speak, but I think a lot of the break in periods recommended, especially on the inexpensive CNC'd guns, are there to accommodate a lack of finishing after CNC'ing out parts, or shoddy/lack of fitting.

In the case of my experience with Kahr and their 200 round break in period, I was pretty disgruntled that I spent 30% of the cost of each one I bought in ammo to "break in" each gun,
Only to have each them remain unreliable at the same rate as prior to the break in, and have one actually break during the break in.

 

[Jim Watson]

Since the OP's "issue" given in his other thread is that he doesn't like the way it hand cycles snap caps, discussing what "break in" effect he might see seems premature.

 

[Reloadron]

Since the OP's "issue" given in his other thread is that he doesn't like the way it hand cycles snap caps, discussing what "break in" effect he might see seems premature.

You are kidding? The gun in question has not been live fired? I asked the actual problem a number of post back. I assumed the failure to feed were during live fire.

Saw the other thread where he mentions:

I just got a RIA 1911 in 9mm (specifically, The M1911A1 Tactical 5" model), and it doesn't seem to want to feed. I've tried with snap caps and with live rounds, and both have the same issue. These are pointed and/or rounded cartridges, so I know it's not because they're JHP or flat-nose rounds.

Ron

 

[JTQ]

Break in often allows springs to take a set.

From Wilson Combat's magazine instructions...

http://www.wilsoncombat.com/instructions/47Series.pdf

Like other mechanical devices, your Wilson Combat® magazine may be a little stiff when first used. This is normal and should not effect its feeding capabilities, however you will notice that as you use your magazine it will become easier to load and seat in your pistol and it will function even more smoothly over time. If you wish to expedite the break in process simply leave your new magazine loaded to capacity for a day or two, this will pre-set the spring to normal operating tension.

Apparently springs are also an issue with other guns too. Reports of problems loading all 17 rounds in a Glock 17 mag when new, are common, as are reports of problems with Glocks (primarily Gen 4, 9mm guns) and HK's having difficulty feeding lightweight/low powered ammo when new. All these problems seem to go away once the gun is "broken in".

 

[Jim Watson]

Ron: Your quote
"I just got a RIA 1911 in 9mm (specifically, The M1911A1 Tactical 5" model), and it doesn't seem to want to feed. I've tried with snap caps and with live rounds, and both have the same issue. "
is from post #1 on 4/24.

He did not shoot the gun until post #57 on 4/30

So I took it out.
About the 6th magazine went with no failures to feed.
Halfway through the 7th magazine the safety fell off. I went home.

So now he has a different problem. The ambi safety fell off and he cannot figure out how to reinstall it.

 

[C0untZer0]

Halfway through the 7th magazine the safety fell off.

That gives new meaning to the phrase "Break In Period"

 

[Reloadron]

Jim

So now he has a different problem. The ambi safety fell off and he cannot figure out how to reinstall it.

The gun from hell? I agree it gives new meaning to break in period. A Google of "1911 install ambidextrous safety" brings up a few videos which beat attempting to explain how to do it. Thanks for the channel check Jim.

Ron

 

[Steve S.]

What was cured with my LB PII was the easing of the force necessary to rack the slide - about 1,200 rounds later. When first purchased, extremely difficult (to sometimes impossible) to move the slide out of battery - however, the gun has never failed to feed and fire. After 1,200 rounds, still a very tight gun but racking the slide now takes only reasonable effort.

 

[BSA1]

So now he has a different problem. The ambi safety fell off and he cannot figure out how to reinstall it.

How the heck does the thumb safety fall off?

Is this a new gun or used Bubba Special?

 

[Schwing]

I have been reading this thread since it started but kept my mouth shut until the safety fell off

IMHO, any gun I add to my collection had better function well shortly out of the box. I am not talking about taking it out of the box and shooting several mags through it and expecting 0 failures. I am talking about a gun that has been thoroughly cleaned and lubed and has a couple of hundred rounds through it and then has been thoroughly cleaned and lubed again.

I agree with some of the points being made about things slicking up with time but, in my experience, any firearm that has a lot of FTFs after the first 500 rounds will still have a few here and there down the road without being worked over, regardless of the model. It might get better, but not enough that I would trust it.

Once I have multiple FTFs and the safety falls off, it's time to go back to the manufacturer.

How the heck does the thumb safety fall off?

I would have to say manufacturing flaws coupled with gravity

 

[stchman]

I've never subscribed much to "break in" periods, at least not past 50 rounds.

The most a gun should fail in the first 50 rounds is maybe an FTE or FTF. After 50 rounds, the gun should run 100% assuming no ammo or magazine malfunction.

I understand some high end 1911s (Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Les Baer) require at least 500 rounds before dis assembly.

 

[Shaq]

I've never subscribed much to "break in" periods, at least not past 50 rounds.

The most a gun should fail in the first 50 rounds is maybe an FTE or FTF. After 50 rounds, the gun should run 100% assuming no ammo or magazine malfunction.

I understand some high end 1911s (Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Les Baer) require at least 500 rounds before dis assembly.

The literature that came with my Wilson CQB said it was tested 50 rounds.

 

[stchman]

The literature that came with my Wilson CQB said it was tested 50 rounds.

For what a Wilson Combat 1911 costs, they should run flawless out of the box with good ammo, cheap ammo, whatever.

 

[Warp]

For what a Wilson Combat 1911 costs, they should run flawless out of the box with good ammo, cheap ammo, whatever.

I don't think it is reasonable to expect ANY semi automatic firearm to run reliably and consistently with poor quality, inconsistent ammo.

 

[hemiram]

I haven't had any major issues at all since I stopped buying 1911s!!

Seriously, I've seen more issues with them than all other handguns put together. My last half dozen guns were perfect from the first shot, except my Taurus PT111 G2, which hung up on the third shot, and then has gone on to almost 1200 rounds without a single problem. My only complaint is the sights need a little help, and I will be adding a new front sight soon. The other perfect guns:

SAR K2 45
Canik TP9V2 9mm
S&W Shield 9mm -Sold already, I just didn't like it as much as the Taurus.
FNH FNX9-Gone too, got a nice price for it and it didn't "grab me".
Tristar/Canik P-120 9mm. Too big to carry, but my favorite of all of this bunch.

Last dud:
Taurus 809. It was "strike two" for Taurus, if the PT111 wasn't a keeper, I would have been done with Taurus, like I am with Colt.