Whether you follow manufacturer's instructions or not is irrelevant; If I (personally) see a number of a particular gun having the same problem, then it tells me to stay away from that particular gun.
Whats to say you didnt personally see a number of people who didnt follow the suggested break in, ammo, spring, or any of the above, and were having issues due to it?
Lets face it, how many who own them, actually read the manuals before they took them out and shot them?
As much as we hate it, the makers usually suggest certain things for a reason, even if it is a cost cutting thing on their part, like "break in". Sorta like those 1911 (and a few other makes) that tell you you need to shoot a couple of hundred rounds to break the guns in on your dime. Ive had a couple of them, and they cost considerably more than my Mosquito, and they never worked right, even after following the instructions.
I guess Ive been lucky with my SIG and Walther. Ive had them a little over 10 years now, and they have worked as well as any of the other .22's Ive had (and Ive had at least one of most of the big makers), and in some cases, better. Right now, they are the only .22 pistols I have, and I usually shoot a brick or two out of them each year.
Ive heard the pot metal complaints ever since I got them, and havent found that to be an issue.
The only one I saw that did have an issue, was a Mosquito that had a suppressor improperly mounted early on and the slide was impacting the rear of the can (a no-no), causing it to crack. The barrel was improperly threaded by the owner (pre factory threaded barrel), and allowed the can to snug up to the slide.
Then again, I have a pic around here somewhere, of a SS Springfield 1911 where that slide cracked and separated in the same place, and it didnt have a suppressor mounted.
Would it be better if they were aluminium or carbon steel? Whos to say? I guess well never know at this point.