1911 break in period

tarosean said:
In reality whats the difference? I want a gun to work period.
Click to expand...

Hmm…. That’s a really good question.

I would think break in, as I understand that term, would imply running X amount of needed rounds through it as to make the weapon as functional as possible. But, I don’t really think either of my 1911’s needed a break in to be functional. Maybe some 1911’s do. Maybe mine did and I’m incorrect in my thinking.

Whereas, verifying certain mags and ammo combos is a good thing to do whether your gun is new or whether it is “broken in”. Introducing new mags and different ammo types may require vetting, which I think makes it different than what I think breaking in means.
 
One of my NiB ones was a lemon from day one.

The others, new and used, have all gone bang every time.

I do normally clean and lube them before I take them to the range for the first time. That might be helping.
 
md7 said:
But I think checking for reliability with mag and ammo combos is a different thing than breaking in.

...I would think break in, as I understand that term, would imply running X amount of needed rounds through it as to make the weapon as functional as possible. But, I don’t really think either of my 1911’s needed a break in to be functional.
Click to expand...

Reading your description of the difference (in the 2nd portion quoted) would seem to put the lie in the first portion quoted...unless, you mean something different that what you wrote.

While it is commonly called "Break In", the complete term/phrase is "Reliability Break In"... you're running rounds through a new gun to insure reliability. You're giving the mating surfaces a chance to work against each other to smooth out any imperfections.

Think of "break in" the same as correctly bedding new brake pads after a brake job...so that the pads and rotors mate optimally

The only things that have changed, particularly with the 1911 that’s been fired over 1,000 rounds, is that they smoothed up a bit over time (slide seems smoother and trigger seems a little more crisp).
Click to expand...
That change you feel is the result of the surfaces breaking in and mating with each other

Maybe mine did and I’m incorrect in my thinking.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call you "wrong", perhaps a bit confused in your understanding of the meaning of the terms
 
CapnMac said:
The barrel locks up to the slide, and the fit of the locking lugs determines the fit to the breech face. It's pushed up into that lock-up via the swivel link
Click to expand...
Actually, in a properly fit 1911 it is the barrel lugs pushing against the slide stop that raises the barrels locking lugs into position. The hood will also be snug against the breech face. The link's only job is to pull the barrel down and out of battery. This is true for accurized guns but your run of the mill 1911 usually has the link doing both jobs.
12Bravo20 said:
There is a misconception in the 1911 world that you must have a very tight slide to frame fit for accuracy. This is not true. Yes slide to frame fit will effect accuracy to a certain extent. It is the barrel to slide fit, including the bushing, that has more to do with how accurate a 1911 is.
Click to expand...
This is quite true, although the best and most accurate job still mandates a good Slide/ frame fit.

Les used to tell customers that the gun had a "break in" period. I forget how many rounds that was. The gun writers always seemed to mention that was unnecessary. When the assemblers test fired the finished guns for the first time they rarely had much trouble with them, but when they did, they would continue to work on and fire them until the problem went away. A gun didn't ship until it could run flawlessly with five full magazines. The guns were test fired with the actual magazines that were shipped with the gun. Les was NOT stingy when it came to test firing. However much it took to get the gun right was the rule.

As a curious aside, when we sent out a Wad gun with a lighter spring and designed to shoot target 185 gr. semi-wadcutters, Les used to tell the customer to shoot a box of full power hardball through it to "smooth it up" a bit. "Just don't go ( expletive deleted) overboard on that."
 
Last edited:
Guns are machines. Like any machine, if it's designed well and built to spec, it has no choice but to run properly.

This includes the 1911 and any other handgun out there.

Now, if we're taking about custom worked guns that deviate from the original engineered design, that's another matter.

@halfmoonclip is 100% correct.

As for all those people paying out the yin-yang for a high dollar custom 1911 for defense or shooting competitions...I seriously doubt they're actually getting more bang for their buck.

Unless they're slow firing for accuracy at competitions, I don't think it really matters. My opinion, though.
 
Last edited:
9mmepiphany said:
Reading your description of the difference (in the 2nd portion quoted) would seem to put the lie in the first portion quoted...unless, you mean something different that what you wrote.
Click to expand...

I was meaning that I think vetting ammo and mags is different than what I think of as break in.

Example… my Glock 19 has many, many rounds through it. I tested Federal HST prior to carry to verify function.

I’d vet Gold Dots before switching to Gold Dots if I were to leave HST. Maybe my pistol doesn’t run Gold Dot. Gotta verify. To me that is vetting, not what I’d consider breaking in. It’s already “broken in” so to speak.

Certainly meant no deception, or to lie.
 
9mmepiphany said:
While it is commonly called "Break In", the complete term/phrase is "Reliability Break In"... you're running rounds through a new gun to insure reliability. You're giving the mating surfaces a chance to work against each other to smooth out any imperfections.
Click to expand...

That makes sense. I never considered insuring reliability as breaking in, but rather vetting or function testing. Semantics aside, I agree with this statement.
 
md7 said:
Example… my Glock 19 has many, many rounds through it
Click to expand...
Glocks are shipped with anti seize grease applied to their metal mating surfaces as a break in lube. You're not supposed to clean this off until you've put at least 500 rounds through the gun.

You wouldn't think a Glock would need to be broken in, but that is what they advise
 
9mmepiphany said:
Glocks are shipped with anti seize grease applied to their metal mating surfaces as a break in lube. You're not supposed to clean this off until you've put at least 500 rounds through the gun.

You wouldn't think a Glock would need to be broken in, but that is what they advise
Click to expand...
Even when broken in per Glock’s definition, which mine certainly is, I’d still vet new carry ammo.

But I get your meaning.
 
Otto said:
What about reverse break-in ? That's when the gun goes to crap after the first 500 rounds.
Click to expand...

:rofl:

Seriously, though, that's also a good consideration.

If there's a weak component, it may not show up unless shot for a while. Other issues might come into play, like the gun works well cold, but not hot after being shot a couple hundred times in a session. Or maybe issues caused by fouling after a few boxes of ammo.
 
Last edited:
Break in periods aren't required across the board.

The reality is that the 1911 is a design that was built when hand fitting was cheap and as such it needs more of it than a modern design. When that hand fitting is done correctly they run like clockwork. Some manufacturers also have tight enough production tolerances that they can get away with not as much hand fitting. When that hand fitting isn't up to snuff or the tolerances stack in an unlucky way, a 1911 can be a bit temperamental.

Sometimes a few hundred rounds will finish off whatever smoothing/break-in the gun needed and it'll run fine, so it picks up a reputation for needed it.

I've got 3 1911-eqsue guns. One is an honest to goodness 1911 - an STI Spartan in .45 ACP (made by Rock Island Armory). 2 are 2011's in .40 S&W (an STI DVC Limited and a second parts gun that I built myself from random stuff).

The Spartan gave me a lot of trouble, and several hundred rounds of "break-in" did nothing for it. Eventually replacing and properly tuning the extractor got it to run quite reliably.

The STI DVC - several thousand rounds through that gun and its never so much as hiccupped, but it was nearly $3k so I'd be a little upset if it did :).

The other 2011 that I built has been MOSTLY reliable. I've put a good 800 to 1000 rounds through it and I think I've had it fail to feed twice. That's not great but also not to the point where I expect a jam each time I shoot it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: md7
9mmepiphany said:
Reminds me of the infamous Glock BTF which often didn't show up until you reached the neighborhood of 1100 rounds
Click to expand...

Yep, getting repeatedly smacked in the forehead with a hot casing is super annoying. I went through this 2 weeks ago with a 1911.
 
N555 said:
Mine wouldn't clear a 7 round mag with out a stove pipe until I put at least 100 rounds through it.

I think there's 3 reasons an individual 1911 can jam all the time.

Safe queen, never been broke in.

Expensive 1911 syndrome, It's one of those tighter fitting expensive ones , you might think it's broke in, it's not.

Safe queen condition 2, it's been in the safe so long all the oil ran out from where it's needed and you are just about firing a dry gun, because you grabbed it and headed to the range since you cleaned it last time you put it up, several years ago.

Powder puff reloads. Reloading manuals have start loads for a reason.

Crap magazines. If you got a feeding problem, it's probably not a gun problem. So many 1911 mags have been made by different manufacturers who knows what's out there.
Click to expand...
And don't forget "limp wristing." It's almost impossible to limp wrist a .45 caliber 1911, but the 9s are a different story. The one I had required a firm hold
 
Last edited:
My SA-A1 ran decently well out of the box. By the time it was approaching 300 rounds it began sending brass to the forehead and showing other signs of poor extraction. It became progressively worse that it needed some intervention. The SA runs well now.

index.php

index.php


The Sig 1911 ran well from round 1 and remains consistent.
 
RA40 said:
My SA-A1 ran decently well out of the box. By the time it was approaching 300 rounds it began sending brass to the forehead and showing other signs of poor extraction. It became progressively worse that it needed some intervention. The SA runs well now.

index.php

index.php


The Sig 1911 ran well from round 1 and remains consistent.
Click to expand...
What did it take to get yours running well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
1911 break in period for trigger?
Replies
7
Views
2K
Sean Smith
S
Skribs
  • Locked
What can a break-in period cure?
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
5K
hemiram
hemiram
B
  • Locked
Colt Gold Cup Break In Period
Replies
5
Views
949
SwampWolf
S
C
  • Locked
Les Baer - Break In Period Question
Replies
19
Views
3K
NG VI
N
P
  • Locked
1911 breaking my heart...
Replies
10
Views
778
stevekozak
stevekozak
Back
Top