Service life of handguns

[BlueTrain]

A number of posts last week and earlier got me thinking about how long handguns last before they break or wear out. It sounds like some have a tendency to break after not that many rounds have been fired, say two or three hundred. In fact, one article about a pocket pistol published probably fifteen or twenty years ago referred to one model as being a 100-round pistol. Don't hold me to that, because I didn't go back and find the article and the number of rounds may be higher, but I think the pistol was a Mauser .32, of post-war manufacture.

There have been mention of army issue .45's being loose from being worn out (by the time of Vietnam), yet no mention of one malfunctioning for that reason. In fact, "tightening" them up for accuracy purposes often makes them less reliable. Maybe they are supposed to be loose.

I wonder if manufacturers used to expect their handguns, revolvers mostly, not be fired that often? This is all about shooting handguns, not carrying them. Trick shooters of the past sometimes pointed out how they had fired many thousands of rounds through their factory-standard revolvers with no problem whatsoever, with the gun still in good shape. But later on, manufacturers saw fit to introduce stronger revolvers and automatics. And Glocks appear to have always been that way.

Things had changed over the years. Some shooters insisted on shooting more powerful loads in their revolvers. S&W came out with the L frame to handle those and Colt introduced the Combat Commander with a steel frame to allow more shooting with less problems. Anyone remember Skeeter Skelton's shoot-to-pieces test on a Colt lightweight Commander? I didn't look that up either but he did crack the frame, finally. And does anyone remember that a S&W model 19 was also called a Combat Magnum?

I have shot at least one gun to pieces and had a part break on another one. Both were Stars. Does that tell you something? The broken part was a slide release on a .22, of all things, and it would still work. The other one was a Star BKM, which I had bought new. I think it was one of the last that Interarms had on hand, according to the dealer. But by the time we parted, certain parts were starting to come loose. Now I have an all steel BM, bought used and well broken in.

I have said before that I doubt that increased shooting increases skill with a handgun, although more frequent shooting might. Curiously enough, I never got the impression that Elmer Keith went in for long shooting sessions either, but I suspect that at one time, he fired something everyday. Maybe his guns never wore out.

What has been other people's experiences with wearing out or breaking handguns? Do you think guns are strong enough?

 

[The British Soldier]

I have probably had most of my experience with Browning Hi-Power and SIG Pistols. They are good examples to look at because of the differing ways they are built and that we fired the same rounds through them (mk.2 Z 9mm).
Brownings are incredibly strong and simple - yet I saw stress cracks in the slide along the sear lever recess, sometimes from breech face to firing pin retaining plate. FN were never overly bothered about them, but we always were! Cracks went down the ejection slot to the rail and we always saw them in the thin web of material below the bushing, where the spring locates. Interestingly the frame didn't get too many cracks and most Army pistols in Northern Ireland were at the 50k rounds area - and still going strong. The main things that failed on Brownings were: firing pin retaining plate [cracking in half] or sear spring fracturing at the top. The magazine was always the weak point and we were forever reshaping the lips.
SIG by comparison, P226 & P228, had numerous cracks on them but kept on shooting! Excluding those parts that are regularly changed at the 5k services, I saw a few small cracks around the trigger and sear axis; plus some coming off the top of the slide where the block fitted in. P228 had a lot more problems, because we had the impression it had been brought out quickly to fulfill a requirement for a concealed body weapon. If that is true, I'm not sure but it developed cracks, etc faster than the 226.
Given the additional complexity of the SIG, I think that they were superb pistols and I had the chance to spend a week at the factory in Rhine-Falls near Zurich. We were taken around the factory and it was impressive; their CNC machines were mesmorising to watch and more so was the rotating beacon alarms going off when a machine detected that it had gone out of tolerance and wanted 'human assistance!' I believe they made their own CNC machines on site - a sister company - to their own exacting specifications.
I imagine that HK at Oberndorf would be equally as impressive, but I only caught second hand talk about their place. Yet they did start off the revolution in polymer framed pistols with the VP70 and retook the lead with the USP from Glock.
I was concerned when I first started working on Glocks, and later USP, because of the strength of the mating of steel to polymer. I shouldn't have, because they are fine weapons and just last...

 

[BlueTrain]

I had originally intended to mention that I was limiting the question to handguns because I don't recall any mention anywhere of rifles wearing out, though surely that happens, at least to military rifles. To be fair, you sort of have to exclude bore pitting and the like caused by a lack of cleaning. But a rifle barrel can have a poor barrel and still shoot fairly well, depending on where the erosion is located (usually just forward of the chamber) and also depending on what you expect out of the rifle, accuracy-wise.

However, I doubt if many sporting rifles accrue that many total rounds fired over a normal lifetime, except perhaps for .22 rimfire. The only rifle I ever handled that was dangerously defective was an old .22 but I have no idea what the specific cause of the defect was (It would discharge upon chambering a round). That was 35 years ago.

I have never heard comments concerning breakage on either a Sig or a Browning, any model. But that may be something of "the other guy always has a better gun" sort of thing. I have read of cracks showing up in GPMG's (FN MAG-58), which the United States finally got around to adopting. Let us not start talking about the SA-80 here.

Revolvers apparently have a tougher time on this point, and people love to go over them and try to achieve a non-lockup when rotating the cylinder but, really, I think this makes little difference when firing a revolver under virtually all circumstances, since there is usually no resistance when the cylinder is rotating. Looseness will certainly develop over time and the bullet can be shaved a little but not dangerously so.

Any idea what the manufacturers believe the life of their products should be? Reading the literature that comes with some guns, you could be forgiven for thinking a gun is much too dangerous to have, much less fired, but that is another story.

 

[n3twrkm4n]

I'd be curious to hear too, I remember reading articles about Kimber's 1911s and Springfield's XDs... all over 2000 rounds fired without cleaning but they never discussed if there were any stress fractures.

Revolvers I think are more likely to be durable if built right. I don't want to take any one side but people will agree to disagree on the fact that certain companies who make revolvers shouldn't be making them...

My Dad's ruger redhawk in .44 magnum is a beautiful gun he got on trade it's been fed a long lifetime of 'filled-to-the-brim' with powder rounds that he reloaded himself to the maximum specs and I cannot see with my naked eye any stress. Of course microscopically (spelling?) who knows...

As for rifles wearing out, they do... high powered rifles have a tendency to wear the rifling in the barrel. Although it probably does take some considerable time to do so, I haven't had it happen yet to any of my rifles.

.22 rifles I guess being no so high powered would wear the rifling slower. On another note a .50 calibre machine gun mounted to the deck of a Navy ship will burn out the barrel in several boxes of ammo...

Cars I guess can be considered like guns... people expect more expensive cars to last longer (sometimes true)... take a Buick, I've had two one is well over 150,000 miles and still running strong, while my current one is 115,000 miles and still running like the day it was bought. Now when these vehicles were bought they probably averaged around $25,000 (give or take a few thousand) and I also have owned a Saturn (eh), and a Dodge Neon (2000), both cars didn't make it to the 100,000 mark.

Makes me wonder why people offer 100,000 mile warranties, is that because they will only last that long, hence the term 'throw-away-car'... I guess everyone is different though. That an to get people to buy more cars, not that anyone keeps a car long enough these days.

But yeah, I will keep an Eye on my XD to see if any wear or cracks occur... so far so good, I guess from what I've heard it's less likely for an XD to Kaboom because of the supported chamber while Glocks... (I think don't hold me to it) do not have a supported chamber. So far about 400 rounds through it with no errors (except mine )

"No manufacturing process is perfect"

 

[Blue Heeler]

I have never seen a 'shot out' gun. Never, not ever! I have been a shooter for 40 years. I have had rifles and handguns that have shot thousands and thousands of rounds through them. Well kept and cared for guns.
Maybe I've been lucky, or just had good stuff.
I have a Smith & Wesson Model 10 that has to be one of the most used handguns in the World. It shoots as well today as it did 20 years ago (maybe even better.)

Is there anyone here who has shot a gun out? If so I'd really like to hear about it.

 

[Jack Malloy]

I have owned model 1911s that were older than I was and they usually shot just fine.
One of my friends put about 7,000 rounds through his Beretta 92 and it still shoots fine. Ditto with the Taurus of another shooting buddy.
I have helped put several thousands of rounds through a Colt King Cobra that stilll feels like brand new.
I have shot older model 10s that probably had several thousand rounds through them when my grandpappy was a young boy.
Conversely, I did seriously loosen up a Model 629 (early one) with hot loads at about 3,000 rounds. I had it retimed and it was just fine. Cost about $35 including a trigger job back then (ye gods, I miss the 80s).
My own studies and first hand experiences and takes on such things lead me to these conclusions.
Provided the gun started out in good shape:

• K frame shooting .38 rounds will probably last upwards of 15,000 rounds before it needs retiming. Cut that to 6,000 rounds with hot magnums.
• N frame with endurance package can often go upwards of 8,000 rounds of full power magnums or more without retiming. Older models can shoot loose at 3,000 rounds or less.
• 1911s seem to be good for upwards of 60,000 rounds providing you change your springs.
• Beretta 92s will go 33,000 rounds or longer provided you change springs and keep an eye on the locking block.
• Glocks seem to be the durability champs of the auto pistol world, provided you are talking about the 9mms.
• I have shot a boatload of Security Six rugers and never seen one that needed to be retimed no matter what types of loads were being used. Ditt o with the big Dan Wessons.

 

[Russ5924]

In your post you said you shot out a Star and had broken a second one.I would not consider a Star pistol or revolver any where top of the line.In many years of shooting and hunting haven't shot out a gun yet.A friend says he has a S&W .22 with over 40.000 rounds fired and still going strong You get what you pay for I guess

 

[BlueTrain]

I'm not what "shot out" ought to mean but I shot my BKM until certain parts started to loosen. It had an aluminum frame, just like the Colt lightweight commander. And just like the Colt, there is a steel framed version, the BM. As far as I know, they both came out at about the same time. Also, as far as I know, there are no handguns marketed as Stars anymore, because of a merger. At any rate, I didn't consider it unsafe to shoot (at that point) nor did it ever malfunction for that reason.

You usually get what you pay for, which is why everyone thinks Kimbers are so much better than Colts and Winchesters are better than CZ's. Or are they?

Now having brought up the subject, I'll have to go read up on what Elmer Keith had to say about the subject.

 

[Wyo Cowboy]

I've got a Colt Gvmt 1911 with over 35,000 on it and other that changing out the springs, I've had no problems. HK with over 6,000 with the same results.

 

[fastbolt]

I remember when we first adopted the early S&W 5903's & 6906's, and some folks were asking about aluminum frames breaking. I was told that the factory had given us an estimate of a 60K service life if we took reasonable care of our pistols. I tried to reach that point with one of our 6906's, but was only able to reach somewhere around 45+K rounds fired before I finally lost interest. The pistol's frame hadn't developed any cracks, although it was starting to exhibit some noticeable wear in the area of the barrel camming surfaces. It was still functioning fine, though.

While talking to someone at the factory one day, I happened to mention how many rounds I'd fired through that 6906, and he just chuckled and said that they'd replace the gun if I managed to actually wear out the frame. He also said that back then when they were making them they'd never really thought that folks would be shooting them that much. I doubt many manufacturers did expect many of their customers to shoot their pistols that much.

I have enough different pistols that I use for carry and training, however, that I don't often have the opportunity to fire an excessive number of rounds through any particular one of them. I had to work at it on that one 6906.

Aside from a Combat Commander and an early production Ruger KP-90DC ... both of which have seen a lot of use ... I doubt any of the rest of my issued or personally owned pistols have seen much more than 8-10K rounds through any one of them. I don't keep an exact round count, aside from a continuing rough estimation for the purpose of periodic inspection and magazine/recoil spring replacement maintenance considerations.

Remember when a 5K service life was considered more or less acceptable? Times change, it seems.

I know of a 3913TSW which developed a small crack on one side at the end of the dustcover. It had only been fired between approx 12K-15K rounds, and the recoil springs had been replaced periodically, too. S&W replaced the entire pistol under warranty. Said it doesn't happen often.

I serviced another 3913, this one an early production model, through which the owner estimated he'd easily fired over 10K in weekend competitions and training. I had to replace the extractor, because the hook was badly chipped, and replaced the older hammer & drawbar because of a Skip DA condition I discovered.

I know another fellow who uses a couple of box-stock 4003TSW's for weekend competitions, and last time I spoke with him he said he'd exceeded 25K rounds through each of them without any significant wear observed in the frames.

I've heard the CHP has at least a couple of pistols at their academy which have digested anywhere from 100K-200K rounds without significant problems.

A friend of mine has couple of full size SW99's, one in 9mm & one in .40 S&W, and gave up keeping track of the number of rounds he'd fired through each of them as he was approaching an estimated 50K rounds fired through each of them.

He did crack a bushing in a stainless steel Colt Officers ACP one time, after it had been moderately customized and he'd fired more than 10K rounds. After replacing the cracked bushing he fired close to an another (estimated) 10-12K rounds, and then 'retired' the pistol for some S&W TDA pistols.

I was told S&W has a SW99 chambered in .40 S&W at their academy which has been documented as having had more than 75K rounds fired through it, without problems and without having been cleaned. They're apparently interested in seeing how the pistol will continue to function under this sort of abuse, and naturally don't recommend anyone else attempt anything like it ...

I think polymer-framed pistols have gone through their growing pains, and have developed into some serviceable pistols.

I think steel-framed pistols are still going to remain durable and long-lasting when it comes to long term service life.

I think S&W has a real winner on its hands with the Scandium enhanced aluminum frames, and hopefully they'll continue to extend its use within their pistol lines.

I think that with reasonable maintenance, including various spring and other minor parts replacement, most modern pistols from the major manufacturers are going to provide years of reliable service to most owners/users.

Naturally, some folks will never have either the interest, the inclination, or the time & money to discover the limits of their pistol's practical service life.

 

[HSMITH]

My current high mileage gun is a K-frame M19. Upwards of 50K on it now, about 8000 of them really hot magnums. Still shoots good but could use a trip to the doctor for some work.

I have owned 1911 types that went over 100K rounds with minor small parts worn out or broken. Barrel on one was still OK (GI cheap gunshow barrel) and another was really degraded as far as accuracy goes at 50K (springfield 2 piece). I have had one double stack Para alloy frame crack through the slidestop hole up into the rails at about 35K rounds. It still shot OK when I saw the crack, but was parted out.

Guns, like any other mass produced mechanical object, might last a LONG time or they may give up before the average life. You really don't know until you get there.

 

[res1b3uq]

Star

I have a Star PD.45 with an alloy frame that I carry every day. (Civilian concealed.) I had Sprinco put a double-spring recoil system in it, and only shoot about a mag a week through it. So far it has never missed a lick. If it ever does, I'll be in the market for a Colt LW Commander. My range pistol is considerably stronger.

 

[Jeff22]

service life of handguns

In my life, I've shot three guns to frame failure, a Beretta 92FS and two Sig 226s (all in 9mm)

The Beretta I bought new in 1986 and broke in 1996.

The first Sig I broke I bought about 5th hand and cracked both slide rails in 1999. (Gun kept working, but all of a sudden my groups opened WAY up. I thought it was me until I discovered the cracked frame rails when I went to clean it . . . )

The second Sig I was issued new in the box by the PD in December of 1989 and broke in September of 2001 (the week after 9-11, as it happens). Only broke one slide rail that time.

I don't know the round count of the first Sig I broke since I bought it used. The other guns had frames crack at 30,000 rounds + (I shot about 250 rounds a month in practice through each gun + in-service qualifications + training classes + pistol matches). It still took over 10 years.

In all cases, the guns were replaced NO QUESTIONS ASKED by the manufacturer. In fact, Beretta even threw in night sights and a cool folding knife.

I usued to teach at the local regional Police Academy, and a S&W 3906 that we bought in 1989 or 1990 broke in 2000, also at the 30,000 round + mark. (Most students provide or are issued their own weapons, but we had a variety of others to issue as needed. This one got a lot of use. The Academy cirriculum at that time was 40 hours of training in handgun and about 1,000 rounds a class, and we usually did 3 classes a year, and twice we did 4 and once we did 5, and that gun was in use the whole time). Smith & Wesson replaced that one as well, although they were reluctant to do so and it took quite a while to get a replacement.

Those were all alloy frame guns. I should expect that all steel guns or guns with a polymer frame should hold up better.

 

[stephen426]

• 1911s seem to be good for upwards of 60,000 rounds providing you change your springs.
• Beretta 92s will go 33,000 rounds or longer provided you change springs and keep an eye on the locking block.
• Glocks seem to be the durability champs of the auto pistol world, provided you are talking about the 9mms.

I think Jack hit it on the head when it comes to auto loaders. Think about the slide slamming against the frame of the gun over and over. The only things that keeps the slide from slamming full force are the springs and buffers (if they are installed). Just make sure the buffers are replaced every so often to prevent them from breaking and jamming the gun.

The longevity is often dictated by the type of metal used. Aluminum or aluminum alloys are going to be more brittle than steel. Aluminum will be lighter and less prone to corrosion though. Another factor is the power of the loads being shot through the gun. Full power loads require stronger springs. Even then the high powered loads are exerting more stress on a lot of other parts as well. The rate of fire or prolonged firing is often a factor as well since it heats up the metals.

Maintenance is probably the greatest factor. I don't know of any modern ammo that uses corrosive materials, but some of the older Russian stuff does. A clean gun and well oiled gun is a happy gun. If you live in a humid environment or sweat all over your carry gun, expect it to rust to pieces if you don't keep it well oiled. Lead build up (if you shoot unjacketed bullets) will increase the barrel pressures if you don't clean them every so often. Even if the barrel doesn't blow, the slide will come back with more focre and smack itself silly against the frame. One other thing to check is the firing pin since it gets smacked by the hammer and the primer every time you fire a round.

Revolvers should out last most auto loaders since there are a lot less moving parts. There is also no impact of metal on metal except for the hammer on the firing pins. Just don't spin the cyliner and swing it shut like they do on the old westerns. I guess that is why many people still feel more comfortable with revolvers then autoloaders.

To make a long story short, don't abuse your guns. They are your friends. Keep them clean and well oiled and they should serve you well for a long time. Inspect for damage every time you clean and change the springs every so often. You probably need to check with the manufacturer since the specs are different for all guns.

 

[WESHOOT2]

rd ct

I have over 35,000 through oneamy Witnesses, over 10K through my Caspian 45 1911, and some thousands through oneamy Redhawks (the 7.5" 357) and lower counts through all my guns except the 'always'.

Never broke nuthin' never.

Suprises the crap outta me, 'cause I make some stupid ammo...........still echoing............

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I recently shot some of my high round count auto's. All of them are right around 7000 rnds give or take. None has ever broken anything. My opinion is that they are now just nicely broken in.

While cleaning them, I realized that on average I put about 1000 rnds per gun per year down range. Because I own a lot of guns and don't just shoot the favorites, the reality is I will never wear out any of my guns. I just don't shoot any one enough. My thought was between 50,000 and 100,000 is the life expectency of a gun with reasonable care. I just won't get there in my lifetime.

 

[JohnKSa]

There is a guy on the Beretta forum who claims to have shot well over 100K rounds through a Beretta 96 before it broke.

Beretta claims (substantiated by army testing) indicate that an M9 frame will last an average of more than 30K rounds and an M9 slide will last an average of more than 75K rounds.

There is a gun writer who claims to have shot well over 150K rounds through a Glock 17 that is still shooting fine.

Glock claims to have a Glock 17 with well over 300K rounds through it with "no failure of a major component".

At this moment I can not recall ever having heard of anyone wearing out any of the currently available Ruger centerfire revolvers, or any centerfire Ruger autopistol. By wearing out, I mean shot to the point that it was no longer safe to fire or would no longer operate reliably.

I like talking about this topic and reading about this topic, but I have to admit it's academic. There are very few shooters who shoot enough to really wear out a centerfire. And those that do realize that it costs far more to buy enough ammo to wear out a quality gun than it does to buy a quality gun.

 

[stephen426]

JohnKSa,

I like talking about this topic and reading about this topic, but I have to admit it's academic. There are very few shooters who shoot enough to really wear out a centerfire. And those that do realize that it costs far more to buy enough ammo to wear out a quality gun than it does to buy a quality gun.

It may seem like it all academic but its really not. Maintenance is probably the main factor. I'm willing to bet that rust and corrosion will dramatically shorten the life of a gun. Running crazy hot ammo will also lead to premature failure. I know I already said it but making sure you change out your springs every so often (or using a slide buffer if your gun can take it) should increase the lifespan of semi auto pistols.

 

[JohnKSa]

Practically any quality handgun will last 30K rounds or more, even under relatively adverse conditions. That's something like $3,000 in ammo costs. With a little care and maintenance you could probably double that in nearly all cases. Up to like $6,000 in ammo required to wear it out.

So, let's look at the difference in costs vs service life.

Let's say we want to shoot 100K rounds of 9mm. Let's assume that all the guns in the test cost about $550 and the ammo cost 10 cents a round.

Gun 1 has a service life of 35K

It will take 3 guns to get through the 100K rounds--$1,650 and $10,000 in ammo costs. ($11,650 Total)

Gun 2 has a service life of 50K

It will take 2 guns to get through the 100K rounds--$1100 and $10,000 in ammo. ($11,100 Total)

Gun 2 has a service life of 100K

It takes only one gun to go through the 100K rounds--$550 and then the $10,000 in ammo. ($10,550 Total)

So what's the difference in cost?

It will cost you 10% more to shoot a 100K rounds through a gun with a service life of 35K rounds compared to a gun with a service life of 100K rounds or more.

It will cost you 5% more to shoot 100K rounds through a gun with a service life of 50K rounds compared to a gun with a service life of 100K or more.

And that's with CHEAP ammo. If you pick a more expensive caliber or shoot more expensive ammo, the percentage difference will be even less because the ammo cost will dominate even more.

 

[larvatus]

Originally posted by Jack Malloy:

Provided the gun started out in good shape:

• K frame shooting .38 rounds will probably last upwards of 15,000 rounds before it needs retiming. Cut that to 6,000 rounds with hot magnums.
• N frame with endurance package can often go upwards of 8,000 rounds of full power magnums or more without retiming. Older models can shoot loose at 3,000 rounds or less.
• 1911s seem to be good for upwards of 60,000 rounds providing you change your springs.
• Beretta 92s will go 33,000 rounds or longer provided you change springs and keep an eye on the locking block.
• Glocks seem to be the durability champs of the auto pistol world, provided you are talking about the 9mms.

I agree with all but the last estimate. For example, thus spake Beretta:

The average durability of Beretta M9 slides is over 35,000 rounds, the point at which U.S. Army testing ceases. The average durability of M9 frames is over 30,000 rounds. The average durability of M9 locking blocks is 22,000 rounds.

To put this in perspective, when Visier tested a Mauser C96 with full-power 7.63x25mm ammunition, no measurable wear was found after firing 200,000 rounds.

It is possible to construct a magnum revolver of similar durability. In early Seventies, French Manufacture du Haut Rhin, a.k.a. Manurhin, undertook the creation of a new French service revolver of high quality, strength, and accuracy, resulting in the MR-73. The French Gendarmerie switched from the semiautomatic 9x19mm PA MAC 1950 to these revolvers for its special unit GIGN, when they found that none of the US made revolvers could handle the daily practice regimen of 150 rounds of Norma 158 grain .357 Magnum ammo. The revolver was machined in its entirety from high quality steel forgings, to be capable of delivering match grade accuracy and withstanding 170,000 full power Norma .357 loads without appreciable wear. Numerous published tests witness this capacity. By contrast, the N-frame S&W .357 revolvers are generally good for a third of this life span.

Needless to say, guns of this quality are unsuitable for XXIst century military and law enforcement service, for one reason alone: their cost. As a civilian, I vote with my wallet by carrying a SIG P210.

Notwithstanding the hype generated by Gaston Glock, injection molded plastic, mass-produced stampings, and light alloy fabricated by the lowest bidder do not and cannot measure up to ordnance steel.