Rather than tell stories, here's the original 2,000 round challenge. That's 2k rounds fired through a pistol with no additional lube or interior cleaning.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showt...ge-DISCUSSION-THREAD

I have always enjoyed Todd's posts and tests. And the long term tests truly give one confidence in certain guns (like the P30 for example). But some of the comments of this thread just don't make statistical sense. Of course you can change a major component and perhaps improve the performance of some aspect of the gun that's easily measured, like accuracy. But unless you run a substantial and meaningful long term test you don't actually know anything about its impact on other aspects you might care about like reliability. Take my favorite gun the 226. Its been tested a bunch of times going all the way back to the 1981 trials. Its MTBF is generally in the range of 3K rounds between serious stoppages. If you put a new barrel in one and fire 500 rounds you know nothing about your impact on reliability. In fact you know nothing meaningful till you fire about 50x that number. And the person that made the barrel didn't do that. The person who fitted it didn't do that. So you are really on your own about reliability. And that is truly the #1 criteria for a defense sidearm IMO.

Properly fitted match barrels, particularly in the P Series guns have proven themselves reliable in the competition circles for years. The Bianchi Cup is a perfect example. At least for the 20 years that I have been in the industry, the guns have performed without issue in the hands of major competitors. Not sure how much more “meaningful” you’d need. To expect any difference because the gun is carried for a different task is a fallacy at best. This isn’t Afghanistan where the conditions are so rough that you need a loose fit gun.

It is a pretty easy standard to prove. A properly fit barrel is just as reliable. Anyone who says it isn’t probably needs to find a gunsmith that knows what they are doing.

Lest we forget the question:

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
Would you use a closely-toleranced match-grade barrel in a combat or carry pistol?

I am sure that in a combat situation, I would be using what the armory sergeant issued me so the question is not relevant.

For urban self defense I would be quite happy with a "closely-toleranced match-grade barrel" so long as it were properly made and properly installed.

That requires an understanding of the terms. "Match grade" and "closely toleranced" does not mean an undersized chamber, although that is often what you get. A look at the SAAMI prints shows that the chamber specs for .45 ACP Match are THE SAME as for .45 ACP.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim Watson:
I am sure that in a combat situation, I would be using what the armory sergeant issued me so the question is not relevant.

Thanks for your comments, Jim. Just to clarify, it's not necessarily "formal" combat (why do I feel like a meme is imminent?). Civilians (including LEO) may also find themselves in a firefight.

Terminology differences.
I take "combat" to mean military action, as with "firefight."
But these days we are all exposed to "gunfights."