"You need to break it in with 500 rounds of ammo"

[TRX]

If the gun doesn't work out of the box, it is defective.

They should repair or replace it on their dime.

If you buy a new car, you're not going to put up with having it not start, or quitting in the middle of the freeway. Would you consider "Run 500 gallons of gas through and see if the problem goes away" to be a reasonable thing?

 

[gotboostvr]

I've only had one gun that had any hiccups with factory ammo out of the box.

A Glock 34 had 3 or 4 jams in the first magazine with +P 115gr silver tips. I then went through 200 rounds of some FMJ or another, and then another 83 rounds of the same silver tips without issue. I actually regarded that Glock as super reliable after that first magazine it was trouble free.

I find it's much more common for guns to develop problems "later in life" than to choke out of the box.

 

[Cooter Boolit]

In defense of Wilson Combat 1911s, they aren't made for ultimate reliability and shooting in horrible conditions. WC guns are precision made with VERY tight fitting tolerances. This precision assures accuracy. Nobody is going to buy a WC 1911 and actually take it into combat, guns that are made for that are FAR less expensive and readily available.

All in all, if someone buys a WC 1911, there's a 99.99% chance it's going to be a safe queen.

I think some of you folks are actually missing the point to what stchman was getting at.
I would have to agree, that nobody in their right mind is going to buy a tight target only pistol that was made specifically for killing paper, metal plates, bowling pin`s, and use it as a defense/combat weapon. If they do, then i dont want to be next to that guy during a shoot out... reliability factors come into play. The WC1911 is NOT a wise choice for a combat weapon, at least not to me when there are guns already out there that are specifically designed for that job. Do people carry a WC1911 ccw, sure they do, but its not our "civilian" choice to say what someone carries for a ccw weapon. I just know for a fact that i would NEVER buy a 1911 target pistol to carry everyday for self defense. STCHMAN is correct, a WC1911 is 99.99% of the time, is going to be a safe queen. At least for the educated crowd.

 

[Cooter Boolit]

I've only had one gun that had any hiccups with factory ammo out of the box.

A Glock 34 had 3 or 4 jams in the first magazine with +P 115gr silver tips. I then went through 200 rounds of some FMJ or another, and then another 83 rounds of the same silver tips without issue. I actually regarded that Glock as super reliable after that first magazine it was trouble free.

I find it's much more common for guns to develop problems "later in life" than to choke out of the box.

I`ll have to disagree slightly with your statement... the guns i had the most hiccups with, ARE glocks, (G19 3rd & 4th gen G26 4th gen G30s hybrid 3&4th gen) brand new out of the box, AND used glocks with issues galore. And they didnt get better with time, they got worse. It didnt matter what i was feeding them with... jams, stove pipes, ejection issues, brass to the face, you name it, they had their problems. I wont even go into the glock recoil spring debacle. I`ve had countless issues with the glocks i`ve owned, and still do occasionally. I`ve spent alot of time and money correcting the issues, and i still dont trust them reliability wise. Do i EDC a glock now, yes, i actually do. I carry a G43 for back up, the G43 has been a great little back up gun, has run very decent and no hiccups to speak of. My wife`s G43 has been a nightmare with ammo issues, yet mine has not, and we bought them both the same day, same place. My primary EDC is a shield 45, in which to this day, well over 1,000rds, not one single hiccup. Mark my words, i probably just jink`s myself with no hiccups with my shield 45...lol. Now, i dont believe EVERY gun is perfect, they are ALL temperamental to some degree... just have to find what works the best and go with it.

 

[tarosean]

I would have to agree, that nobody in their right mind is going to buy a tight target only pistol that was made specifically for killing paper, metal plates, bowling pin`s, and use it as a defense/combat weapon. If they do, then i dont want to be next to that guy during a shoot out... reliability factors come into play. The WC1911 is NOT a wise choice for a combat weapon, at least not to me when there are guns already out there that are specifically designed for that job. Do people carry a WC1911 ccw, sure they do, but its not our "civilian" choice to say what someone carries for a ccw weapon. I just know for a fact that i would NEVER buy a 1911 target pistol to carry everyday for self defense. STCHMAN is correct, a WC1911 is 99.99% of the time, is going to be a safe queen. At least for the educated crowd.

Probably because it is not a tight target only pistol that you assume it is. They make guns from 3.5" to 6", single stacks, double stack and just about any caliber you want. My WC is nothing but a 45acp 1911 with slight improvements and better small parts. Its tighter than some and looser than others. But it still remains a 1911 that was designed and build for combat. They did serve our troops for 70 + years if you recall.
I would trust my WC 1911, and others, just as much as I trust my Glocks, CZ's, Beretta's, BHP's, SA's, S&W's. If they are not reliable they don't stay. Regardless of the name on the slide.

 

[JDR]

My response to the O.P. is why don't you want to practice shooting several hundred rounds through a new gun?

Some people have 500 rounds of necessary practice with a new gun to confirm reliability and accuracy, confused with 500 rounds of break-in with a new gun

 

[Zaydok Allen]

In defense of Wilson Combat 1911s, they aren't made for ultimate reliability and shooting in horrible conditions. WC guns are precision made with VERY tight fitting tolerances. This precision assures accuracy. Nobody is going to buy a WC 1911 and actually take it into combat, guns that are made for that are FAR less expensive and readily available.

All in all, if someone buys a WC 1911, there's a 99.99% chance it's going to be a safe queen.

If I decide to spend $3000 or more on a Wilson 1911, the damn thing better function 100% of the time in whatever role I choose, within reason.

If it's gone through the 500 round break in suggested buy Wilson, and won't work in ANY combat situation, then it's an over rated and over priced piece of junk.

I don't think that's what they are at all, but I would if they didn't function 100%, given the price.

 

[Panzerschwein]

If I decide to spend $3000 or more on a Wilson 1911, the damn thing better function 100% of the time in whatever role I choose, within reason.

If it's gone through the 500 round break in suggested buy Wilson, and won't work in ANY combat situation, then it's an over rated and over priced POS.

Nonsense.

WILSON COMBAT 1911s are phenomenal firearms. They are more accurate and darn near better build than any 1911 platform in existence. I have not heard of them ever being unreliable, I believe that qualifies as an internet MYTH. And as for those who say WILSON COMBAT 1911s aren't carried by those who might have to engage in combat (LEOS, .mil operators) that too is a load of horse hockey. Some EXTREMELY vetted and respected members of the tactical community such as Larry Vickers, Delta Force, SEALS and other operators carry WILSONS, and for good reason. To them their lives and the lives of their countrymen (including YOU) is worth it.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Nonsense.

WILSON COMBAT 1911s are phenomenal firearms. They are more accurate and darn near better build than any 1911 platform in existence. I have not heard of them ever being unreliable, I believe that qualifies as an internet MYTH.

You totally missed my point. I don't believe that Wilson guns are sub par at all and I'm not saying they are overpriced by one cent. I'm saying the assertion I quoted that Wilson guns aren't built for reliability is total hog wash.

Any gun priced that high should and HAS to be reliable for combat, or no one would buy them.

Hell, I own a Wilson/Betetta 92 Brig Tac, and it's an utterly reliable gun I'd happily take into combat. Different animal, granted, but I flatly disagree with stchman's assertion that they are all safe queens.

 

[Panzerschwein]

You totally missed my point. I don't believe that Wilson guns are sub par at all and I'm not saying they are overpriced by one cent. I'm saying the assertion I quoted that Wilson guns aren't built for reliability is total hog wash.

Any gun priced that high should and HAS to be reliable for combat, or no one would buy them.

Hell, I own a Wilson/Betetta 92 Brig Tac, and it's an utterly reliable gun I'd happily take into combat. Different animal, granted, but I flatly disagree with stchman's assertion that they are all safe queens.

Very cool. Yes I should have quoted him, not you. I agree with you. Those WILSON Berettas are very, very cool and I'd love to have one!

 

[Old Dog]

STCHMAN is correct, a WC1911 is 99.99% of the time, is going to be a safe queen. At least for the educated crowd.

Troll much?

Sorry, but you're full of doo-doo. I, as well as every other 1911 aficionado of my acquaintance (at least 40 or 50 guys with each having at least 30 years experience in military, law enforcement and/or competitive shooting), don't buy Wilson Combat pistols to be "safe queens." Most of us are not only college-educated, many with post-grad degrees, but also are retired military or law enforcement. Now "Cooter Boolit" -- sit down, shut your pie-hole and stop making statements that do nothing but display extreme ignorance of the topic at hand.

When Bill Wilson recommends firing a certain amount of rounds through his pistols, I'm gonna pay attention. If you think that a pistol from a maker who recommends shooting it for a certain amount of rounds before considering it to be "broken-in" is BS and something you simply cannot countenance, fine, but don't try and convince folks who know better otherwise ...

 

[powwowell]

i won't buy another firearm that has a "break in" period. I'm really pi$$ed at Kahr. Any problem with a Kahr and they insist that you fire 200 rounds before they authorize a return. Taurus is out. The only trouble free Taurus I've had was a .22 revolver, and the DA pull was about 12 lbs. $2,000 1911s are out of my league. Never had a problem with my Colt Commander. I either have, or have had, many versions of Glocks. Only had a problem with my G42. A little file work on the slide lock fixed that. M&P 9mm worked fine. Except it was not accurate. It functioned 100% though. Various Rugers have worked for me, from the get-go.

If I were to buy another pistol today, it would be a Glock, or the M&P 2.0. Specifically a gen. 5, Glock 19, or wait a little while until the M&P 2.0 Compact, becomes available.

 

[BSA1]

Some people have 500 rounds of necessary practice with a new gun to confirm reliability and accuracy, confused with 500 rounds of break-in with a new gun

You must of missed my comment on post #21 where I said;

"I do not run ammunition though my guns just for the sake of "breaking it in." I combine learning how that particular gun functions, getting use to the trigger pull and sights and any bullet style and ammunition brand preferences along with practicing my marksmanship."

So I consider shooting 500 rounds as "breaking-in" BOTH the gun and the shooter WHILE practicing proper marksmanship skills. In fact clearing malfunctions is a important technique that professional instructors teach.

The fact that a new gun has feeding and ejection problems is not a particular concern until I have tested several different types and brands of ammunition.

My personal standard for all new and used semi-auto's that I rely on for self-defense is it must pass 500 round problem free test. Unless I can clearly identify the cause of the malfunction such as out-of-spec cartridge, bad magazine, etc. I diagnose, repair the problem and start the test all over.

This also applies to guns that I have owned for a long time. A while back a Ruger P-89 that I have owned since 1992 started giving me failure to feed and eject problems. I replaced the recoil spring (along with the mainspring and firing pin springs at the same time just because) which fixed the problem. I then repeated my 500 round function test.

In regards to the O.P.'s comment that "It costs about $20/ box of ammo, so the owner is out of $200 of ammo trying a break in period that doesn't seem to work very often (at all in my case)." Why the heck are you buying ammunition that costs $20.00 a box? FMJ ammunition is cheaper especially when you catch it on sale. For example Cabelas had Remington UMC 9mm FMJ box of 50 on sale last month for $9.99.

As I reload my own ammunition it significantly lowers the cost of my ammunition even more (which also explains why I can do a lot of shooting).

After the gun passes my arbitrary 500 round test then it just becomes a matter of testing various commercial brands of self-defense ammo until I find a particular brand(s) my pistol shoots most accurately.

There are a lot of comments on THR that some posters only shoot as few as one or two magazines in a new gun and if it works fine call it good-to-go and carry it for self-defense. In fact there members here who argue that every time you shoot a gun you are increasing the chance for parts breakage so that is why they don 't shoot their new guns other than the first function test.

Unfortunately Balrog might the person that ends up with the lemons more often that the rest us so I can understand his attitude about why 500 round break-in is a waste of time and ammunition.

 

[BSA1]

i won't buy another firearm that has a "break in" period.get-go.

If I were to buy another pistol today, it would be a Glock, or the M&P 2.0. Specifically a gen. 5, Glock 19, or wait a little while until the M&P 2.0 Compact, becomes available.

powwowell,

The problem is you don't know if a new gun will have problems until you shoot it on the range. Even Glocks are far from being the problem free guns you think they are. You said yourself that you had to do some repair to yours to get it to work reliably.

Plus you are missing out on learning about and shooting different types of pistols.

 

[Cooter Boolit]

Troll much?

Sorry, but you're full of doo-doo. I, as well as every other 1911 aficionado of my acquaintance (at least 40 or 50 guys with each having at least 30 years experience in military, law enforcement and/or competitive shooting), don't buy Wilson Combat pistols to be "safe queens." Most of us are not only college-educated, many with post-grad degrees, but also are retired military or law enforcement. Now "Cooter Boolit" -- sit down, shut your pie-hole and stop making statements that do nothing but display extreme ignorance of the topic at hand.

When Bill Wilson recommends firing a certain amount of rounds through his pistols, I'm gonna pay attention. If you think that a pistol from a maker who recommends shooting it for a certain amount of rounds before considering it to be "broken-in" is BS and something you simply cannot countenance, fine, but don't try and convince folks who know better otherwise ...

WHAT THE..??? Sit down and shut my pie hole...????????? Folks that know better...????? REALLY...????? The only troll i see in here is you.!
Yeah, i DO know better, thru experience...!!!! I didnt try to convince anyone... you`re the one trying to pull that stunt off by quoting something from a manual, i was just disagreeing with 500rds break in with MY OWN OPINION on the subject. Not everyone is going to agree with you, mainly because you`re a follower instead of a leader by preaching someone else`s gospel, and certainly not from anything you`ve learned on your own. Bill Wilson isnt the king of 1911 building either. He`s a very small time builder. There are better gun makers out there building 1911`s that DONT need 500rds to break them in, and they shoot bullseyes all day long.

And by the way... let me tell you something mister, i`m in my 60`s, with 40+yrs experience, and i`ve worked over more guns than most, and a heck of ALOT of 1911`s over the years. Have you ever once had one of YOUR guns that YOU worked over, in a published magazine...???? I highly doubt you did, but i surely have. If you want to listen to what BILLY WILSON says, GREAT, DO SO, go pay attention to BILLY all day an night, which is what someone like YOU should do. I dont really care what BILLY WILSON says. So go over to his site and fan him up if you like, and MAYBE, he might start paying you to fan him up, or is he already doing that for you. YOU come in here to insult my intelligence tells me all i care to know about you. I pretty much figured out that your one of those armchair commando`s that preach`s what others have said and done or are doing. Maybe you should try to lead instead of follow, then you`ll figure out that 500rd break-in`s are an excuse for shiddy gun building. If people didnt build their guns out of inferior metals, that wear down so quick, they would need to build them so tight and have to use 500rds to loosen them up...!!!! And further more, anyone that carrys around a $3,000 dollar 1911 safe-queen pistol for self-defense is just carrying it around just to brag about how much money they wasted and then try to impress people that just dont know anything. You go ahead and use that $3,000 BILLY WILSON pistol for a self-defense shoot, and when you dont get it back from the police after you kill somebody with it, go buy $3,000 dollars worth of crying towels. I`ll spend $300 dollars on a self-defense gun that will shoot bullseyes @ 7yds/10yds all day long, (which is MORE than satisfactory for self-defense) and when the police take it after a shoot, i`m hardly out anything. Ok lets see now, i could have 10 self-defense shoots before i will have wasted the money on one BILLY gun, and $300 dollar SD guns that hold far more ammo, and lets say, ALOT LIGHTER TO CARRY. Something to the tune of, work smarter not harder.

I STILL say, 500rds to break in ANY gun is pure BS... if you need that many rounds BEFORE it shoots halfway decent, the gun wasn`t built that good. All i see with BILLY type guns is all flash, and its not coming from the muzzle either. Everytime BILLY sells a gun, he`s laughing all the way to the bank... so it must be that you own a BILLY gun due to how i offended you, then you came in here to try to belittle me. There are 1911`s out there that shoot as good or better than BILLY`S pimp pipes, for half the price. If your buying the BILLY gun for all the glam looks, i dont need to explain myself any further.

You have YOUR opinion, i have mine, and mine came from what i`ve learned, you, not so much... have a GREAT day OLD DOG...!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rant....done...!

 

[Cooter Boolit]

Often, I hear of automatics that fail to feed after they have been purchased. I have even had some. If you call the manufacturer, they will often tell you, "Oh, it just needs to be broken in, shoot 500 rounds through it and call us back if it still is a problem".

And so I have taken that advice, and every time I have, the gun still had the same problem it did 500 rounds earlier. I call back, they let me send the gun in, fix whatever was wrong with it, and send it back. Usually that solves the problem.

Never in 30 years of shooting though have I had a gun that actually improved with break in.

I think the 500 round break in is just manufacturers putting off a problem. It costs about $20/ box of ammo, so the owner is out of $200 of ammo trying a break in period that doesn't seem to work very often (at all in my case).

I know some tightly built custom 1911s probably do need a break in, but short of that I am not a big fan of having to waste $200 of ammo on a gun that jams before a manufacturer wants to take it back and work on it some more.

AMEN BROTHER...!!!!!!!!!!! I`m with yah on that...ridiculous having to shoot 500rds for break in. You hit the nail right on the head with your comment..!

 

[Old Dog]

Cooter? Cooter? Are you off your meds again? A little sensitive today, aren't we? After all, wasn't it you that said:
"a WC1911 is 99.99% of the time, is going to be a safe queen. At least for the educated crowd."
I was merely pointing out that for myself and many of my well-educated and experienced friends ... you are making an ill-considered and erroneous statement ...

 

[stchman]

Fine, if someone wants to pay $3K on a WC 1911 and actually go into combat, go ahead. I still have not had one combat elite in this thread tell me which people use those very costly safe queen pieces of jewelry in actual combat. There are less costly firearms that are used for that.

 

[JeffG]

Like this??? My Baer also had similar verbiage.
View attachment 762249

I see it, and it is written. However, if you are taking the 1911A1 down to tight tolerances such as that, I disagree that this is a carry gun, and not a target gun. In the Marines, we, as match armorers would tighten slides, stone triggers, and hammers and triggers to increase accuracy for National Match guns. But the trade off, was that if you tighten those beyond the factory designed tolerances, you encouraged malfunctions; period.

It was accepted wisdom in the early 70's and the knowledge had been inherited from generations of Marines and armorers before, a 1911 needs play in the working parts to function reliably; in turn, the shooter could hit the upper torso of a human at 50 yards.

For me, if I have to venture into the 300-500 round break in arena, to assure myself that a carry pistol or revolver was going to function reliably, I'm going to pass.... and fill my holster with a gun that is reliable.

 

[rskent]

I don’t think of it as a “break in period” as much as a “get to know you” period.

For me 500 rounds is a little light. I would prefer quite a few more.

.

As for the Wilson Combat 1911. The only reason I don’t have one is because I’m

not smart enough to have a better paying job. If you can afford one, good for you.

 

[Balrog]

I don’t think of it as a “break in period” as much as a “get to know you” period.

For me 500 rounds is a little light. I would prefer quite a few more.

.

As for the Wilson Combat 1911. The only reason I don’t have one is because I’m

not smart enough to have a better paying job. If you can afford one, good for you.

If the gun is jamming 1 round out of every magazine or so, then its really hard to get anything useful accomplished other than learning how to clear jams.

 

[tarosean]

I don’t think of it as a “break in period” as much as a “get to know you” period.

Pretty much.. Makes me wonder how much the naysayers actually shoot their guns.
Since that Wilson manual comes from one of my guns I shot 600rds the first weekend I had it. Without a single hiccup. Then I cleaned it. Shot it some more and more and more..
It wasn't any different than what I do with my other handguns. I've had some guns get a bobble or two within the first mag then go on to perform perfectly. It is what it is...

 

[tarosean]

If the gun is jamming 1 round out of every magazine or so, then its really hard to get anything useful accomplished other than learning how to clear jams.

There is something wrong with the gun..

 

[Balrog]

There is something wrong with the gun..

That is what I think too, and why I don't think a manufacturer ought to tell you the gun needs to be broken in. They should just take it back and fix it.

 

[Zendude]

I have had a couple of compact 9mm guns rated for +P ammo that needed a hundred or so rounds through them before they would reliably cycle some brands of 115 grain range ammo. Self defense rounds and Winchester 9mm NATO ammo would cycle just fine before any break in period.