Originally Posted By: zerosoma
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: hatt
50 round torture test. LOLOLOLOLOLOL.
+1
Like a 50 foot road test...
Would it have been better if I'd said 500 rounds? Why the child's play?
You can't easily clear a locked up revolver. It's typical to hear responses like these that just don't make sense when you begin to clear the air about silly theories old men have been hanging onto for years. So let's move on.
500 rounds would make me feel a lot better about a gun/ammo combination. If it's a semi- auto, be certain that you stick with the same magazines in your test. I've had guns that take a few hundred rounds just to break in.
If you're OK with trusting your life to something that you haven't tested, then you're a fool.
50 rounds isn't a reliability test. Period.
This isn't an "old man's silly theory" question, it's common sense. Clearly, common sense isn't child's play,,either. I'm not arguing about locked up revolvers, or semi autos (I own both), or which is better. I've advocated for both depending on the requirements of the situation.
This is about verifying that a particular gun/ammo combination is reliable. If you're carrying the gun for self defense, it must be reliable.
1200 rounds of .40 S&W Speer Gold dot 165gr, without cleaning, through my H&K while shooting in the desert, with dust and sand in the air, was a sufficient reliability test for that weapon/ammo combination for duty carry. Carry in which my life, and the lives of others, depended on that weapon.
If your life doesn't depend on the weapon, then it doesn't need to demonstrate reliability. Shoot 50, 20, whatever, I don't care. It's a range toy. Reliability becomes only matter of convenience for a range toy.
What made me, among others, laugh was the juxtaposition of the words: "50 round" and "torture test". It's oxymoronic.
