Do New Guns Really Need "Breaking In"?

B

BarryLee

New member
I was browsing at the local gun shop and a guy had just purchased a Springfield Armory .45 Loaded model. The sales guys was giving him some basic advice and then told him to put at least 500 rounds through the gun to break it in. I will admit I have heard similar advice about most any gun I have purchased, but this time it got me thinking.

So, here is my question: Why is it necessary to still “break a gun in” when we consider the advancement in computer controlled manufacturing techniques? After several years in the electronics manufacturing business I know that manufacturers have the ability to maintain tolerances that were once only dreamed of. If the gun needs to be cycled 500 times aren’t you simply removing a few thousands from the various parts, so why not simply redesign the components to apply these corrected tolerances to begin with?

I realize I may very well be missing something very obvious, but it seems with modern materials and manufacturing techniques that for the most part a new gun should be – good to go no break in needed.
 
IF they use the accurate machines ,IF they have QC. But it doesn't take more than a burr .001" high to cause failures in an auto pistol !!
For a sensible rule make sure your gun will go 200 rounds without failures of any kind !!
 
,,,aren’t you simply removing a few thousands from the various parts, so why not simply redesign the components to apply these corrected tolerances to begin with?
Click to expand...

I've had it explained to me by racing mechanics that no matter how fine a tolerance that two pieces of machinery are manufactured to,,,
They still need to fit properly together.

The only way to make that perfect "together" fit,,,
Is to have them rub against each other for a while,,,
So "breaking in" is simply a matter of rubbing two things together until they fit each other.

Rough tolerance parts needs a lot of rubbing together to "break in",,,
Fine tolerances parts still need that rubbing together,,,
Just a whole lot less of it.

In the case of handguns,,,
Some makes are supposedly pre-broken in.

I read somewhere that CZ pistols have the action cycled some thousands of times while they are immersed in an oil bath,,,
I don't know if that is true but I like the idea of that kind of "fitting".

.
 
One of the first rules of breaking in a new gun is to clean and lubricate it completely before you ever put a round in it. A complete cleaning will not only remove the minor steel chips from the machining and assembly operations, but it'll make you very familair with field stripping and how to properly clean and lube it. Oyu may be surprised by how much excess grease and lubricating fluid you'll find. they pack these guns with so much grease so they won't rust out while they're sitting in the gunshops showcases. After that run a couple hundred rounds thru it, giving it a field cleaning around every 50 rounds or so.
You'll find out what ammo shoots well in it, and possibly find what doesn't shoot well either.
 
it seems funny to me that gun shop owners and salesman still tell people guns need 500 rounds to break them in. personally i think it's just a method of selling you a bunch of ammo to go with the gun.

i own a fair number of semi auto pistols and rifles and my guns either work or they don't work. granted some guns take a little getting used to but 500 rounds? if a gun doesn't work there is a problem, the only out of the box problem i ever had was an extractor. i may have limp wristed a few rounds here or there but that was my fault not the guns.

magazines are another issue. some are better than others and with a semi auto if there is a problem the magazine is the first place i look. with my 1911's i prefer mccormick mags over any factory mag.

i can't imagine the aggravation of buying a new gun and expecting, misfires, failures to feed or eject for 500 rounds. do the problems just magically stop at the 500 round mark or do they just happen less and less frequently? i wonder if they told our soldiers going to war that that 1911 might not work to well for the 1st 500 rounds lol.
 
BarryLee said:
aren’t you simply removing a few thousands from the various parts, so why not simply redesign the components to apply these corrected tolerances to begin with?
Click to expand...

Not so simple. I come from a tooling/machining background and I can tell you it doesn't quite work that way. When two parts are worked together (lapping) you can achieve a fit function that is about impossible to do otherwise. Now I am not saying that making parts to spec. doesn't' help..becasue it does. It is also possible to take time in the factory to stone off sharp edges and work in final fit, but the truth is this is not often done. Breaking in will not solve major problems, but it will help remove minor sharp edges burrs, etc. and make parts work together smoothly.
 
Last edited:
Tolerance

All machine parts are normally machined to a tolerance. That means there is a slight variation allowed. This is true for virtually all manufactures of mechanical parts. So, you cannot think of a particular handgun being exact on every part, there is a certain amount of overlap of tolerance. When you Assembly a complete gun you have parts that all have a slight deviation from zero, so they may not work smoothly until a break-in period. It's just the way things are.
 
NO! Any gun (with the exception of some target pistols) should work out of the box with any reasonable ammunition. If it doesn't, it is no good and the brand should be avoided.

Will a gun work BETTER after a break in period? Sure. Like a car, a break in period is good, but would anyone buy a car that they couldn't drive off the dealer's lot until it had gone 20,000 miles?

But too often, makers (1911 type makers are notorious for it) will respond to complaints about a new gun by telling you that their guns have to be broken in for some huge number of rounds. Then, after the break in, if the gun still doesn't work, they will tell you the warranty has expired or is void because you used the gun too much before reporting the problem!

All that being said, I strongly recommend that any auto pistol on which you stake your life should be fired at least 200 rounds with the carry magazine and the carry ammunition. If there is ANY failure, correct it and start over. Revolvers should be tested the same, but of course there is no magazine.

Jim
 
Do New Guns Really Need "Breaking In"?
Click to expand...

It depends.

For some guns I prefer knowing that they work right out of the box. I like knowing that my Glock and AK are loose enough that they run.

For other target setups, I prefer that the gun is a little tight. This allows the parts to mate up properly and it should be a more accurate setup.


I will agree that for a new gun you should take it apart and clean it. Then lube it. Then shoot it.

Now the question is what do you do if it is not exceptionally smooth and functions right out of the box?

For my 458WM, I was not impressed with the finished product. It was use able, but not as smooth as I would like. There is no freaking way I am going to shoot 500 rounds through it to break it in. What I did was put some polishing compound on some parts and start cycling dummy rounds. This got me familiar with the action, parts, handling of the gun..... It is good. After cycling the rifle 500+ times and carrying the rifle around the house for a couple months, I was happy with the action. I then cleaned it, and took it back to the range. At the range I shot many of my powder puff loads. The gun handled like a 30-06.

For my Franken AR, the combination of new mags and low powered ammo meant that it didn't cycle. With full powered 5.56 it was ok. With a used mag and low powered ammo it was ok. So I cleaned it, but didn't lube the rifle and proceeded to cycle the mags twice at home. When I went back to the range with a lubed rifle, everything was happy. This rifle shoots better than it should with me behind the trigger.

On another forum a guy made a home built milled AK. To begin with it had cycling issues. After a couple hundred round it was great.

I think there are times when you just need to take the new finish of the parts that are going to wear and the gun will work great.
 
I would think firing 200 rounds or so would let the shooter "break in" to the pistol, get the feel of it, know its quirks and peculiarities. As example my Satin Finish Colt Commander-purchased used, I admit- came with a very stiff safety. Seeveral range sessions alerted me to that and allowed me to take corrective action. And I do not consider 200 rounds to be "excessive", 50 rounds is one range session for me.
 
Every new gun that I've purchased worked just fine right out of the box. And every single one of them, without exception, worked much better after a few hundred rounds and being dry fired a few hundred times more. That's been true equally with my revolvers and my semiautos.

Last year, after many years of being a revolver only guy, I bought my first 1911, a Smith & Wesson. The gun worked fine out of the box, cycling various manufacturer's ammo without problems, shooting very accurately. But, and after about 1000 rounds downrange, I notice a distinct difference in the way it handles. The trigger is lighter and crisper than when the gun was new, the slide racks more easily, it even takes down and reassembles more easily. It's not my imagination, this is definitely a more smoothly operating gun than when new.

That experience has typified all of my new handguns' break in periods. My explanation for this is that, no matter how precisely the guns' parts are machined, they still need to be broken in if only a little bit in order to function optimally. As one poster put it, metal needs to rub on metal.
 
I can testify to the break-in period of a new firearm. When you're dealing with a piece of machinery like a pistol, break-in periods just make sense. Parts have to "wear" together, springs have to loosen up, etc etc. When I first got my Springfield Champion the slide seemed kinda sandy and gritty pulling it back, it was much more prone to limp-wrist-induced failures, etc etc. Now the slide pulls back buttery smooth, it doesn't catch any more, and has no more failure.
 
I'll testify to the break in period as well. My Para Ordnance 1911 started FTFing after only a hundred rounds or so down the pipe. I cleaned it real good, no fix. Took it out and cleared malfunction after malfucntion while firing when I could and about a hundred rounds later, it was pretty much fixed. 300 rounds as fast as I could pull the trigger later and she's better than new :)

I will also testify that I've owned several guns that never needed it. I've put over 1,000 rounds through my FNP-40 without a single failure of any kind. I think it's just the differences in tolerances.
 
How many here think that too much is made of the "break in period"? I know I do. Someone used the "car break in" well when I buy a gun its to be shot. 500 rounds is nothing in the life of a new gun. I was planning on shooting at least 100x that amount when I put out my money to buy the thing. I've had plenty of new cars that had to go back to the dealer for this or that. Remember the dealer prep before you took it off the lot. Try to get a gun dealer to throw in a free cleaning and lube before you take it out of the store. When he stops laughing you can tell him about gun prep that should be like a new car prep. I don't remember the car mfg's paying for gas for my car so why should I expect a gun mfg to buy my bullets? I'd love to see it, but I'm not holding my breath.

I would also like to hear from you old time 1911 fans how much have the shooters expectations of the firearm changed since its introduction? I shot one in the USMC in the 70's what junk, loose, rattled when you shook it. A new 1911 is tight, accurate, clean and for the most part a very nice weapon. In the 80's I had a couple of buddies that loved their 1911's but each had purchased expensive factory production models and then had gunsmiths work on them to the value of the gun. This literally gave each gun a 2x cost, they shot well but now I would like to compare their guns to the modern factory models. I do have a 80's model lower end 1911 and its not much better than the USMC models that I used. I also have a 2009 mid level model which is much better but almost 30 years newer.

So is it the change of expectations that causes this issue or is it really the mfg's fault? I know it can't be the users....:D
 
One theory I've heard, and kinda like, is the break-in period is something the manufacturers came up with to make the buyer actually familiarize themselves with the gun, and designed to reduce user-induced failure. It's really to break you in.
 
Jim Keenan said...

Will a gun work BETTER after a break in period? Sure. Like a car, a break in period is good, but would anyone buy a car that they couldn't drive off the dealer's lot until it had gone 20,000 miles?
Click to expand...
...

Seems to me, it's not uncommon for new cars to come with recommendations to drive them easy for the first 500-1000 miles.

My 2001 Harley came with the recommendation to not exceed 2500RPM until at least 500 miles were put on the bike.

Had a new gasket installed on a Buick 455 I was working on, back in college. Machinist told me to drive it easy until I'd put at least 500 miles on the new gasket.

So, while I do prefer to find that a gun works like clockwork out of the box, I'm neither overly perturbed nor chagrined if the manufacturer recommends a break-in period.

And I'd be very unimpressed with a shooter who didn't function test any SD pistol he was thinking of carrying for CCW, with at least 200 rounds if not 500 rounds. Should he have to? Not in a perfect world. Then again, in a perfect world, there would be no need for SD pistols...
 
I don't run through any special break in procedure. I just shoot them, clean them and lube them. I agree that sometimes failures are more frequent during initial use of some weapons, especially all steel weapons. Just shoot'em till they settle down. Also, I agree with the Marine who noted the crappy nature of government 1911's. They were a case of excessive break in. I have a new Auto Ordnance plain jane 1911 which had a few malfunctions in the first 50 rounds, but now runs like a champ.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top