JohnhenrySTL
Member
If something broke they will likely check everything else out. I would trust it.
Exactly...Just because it worked the last time doesn't mean it will the next time. Sometimes you need a little faith. In the OP's case, I would likely shoot a mag or two and put the gun back in service.100, 300, 500, a few hundred...........
It seems many like to pick an arbitrary number that magically ensures reliability, when I imagine the gun that broke had met those numbers.
Any mechanical device can break at any time, and more use makes it more likely.
Quote:
It seems many like to pick an arbitrary number that magically ensures reliability, when I imagine the gun that broke had met those numbers.
BSA1
Your problem with that is what?
The "problem" is there is no logic behind it.
If the gun fires the first magazine without malfunctions, it will likely continue to function as long as the ammo performs as it should, and there are no operator errors
Thinking it takes "X number of rounds" to become "reliable" makes little sense.
This whole voodoo around treating a gun as if it's tainted by evil spirits if it ever hiccups - even after the problem has been resolved - just smacks of nonsense to me.
Fix it, put a couple boxes of ammo through it, and then carry on.
The "problem" is there is no logic behind it.
If the gun fires the first magazine without malfunctions, it will likely continue to function as long as the ammo performs as it should, and there are no operator errors
Thinking it takes "X number of rounds" to become "reliable" makes little sense.
The "problem" is there is no logic behind it.
Wow!There is logic behind it. See http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost....6&postcount=76
Wow!
A whole fraction of a percent of theoretical advantage.
It doesn't change my mind at all