What round count determines reliability?

This is prompted by a discussion I saw on Instagram today.

What round count determines reliability? If I have a PSA/DPMS/Bushmaster rifle on which the basics (gas key and castle nut staking, headspace, gas block, etc.) have been checked and I run 1k rounds thru it in 3 months thru a combination of practice and 3 gun(not out of the question for a casual 3 gunner), is it a reliable rifle? Is it trustworthy? Admittedly it's not the same quality as a Colt/BCM/Noveske/Hodge, etc., but is it reliable?

I'm not trying to make a case that an entry level gun is "just as good as" but I've also seen a lot of derogatory stuff posted about "it works for me", but what if it actually does run AND it cost less than $700? What then?
 

Matt Landfair

Matt Six Actual
Staff member
Administrator
It isnt so much a specific round count as it is the odds of running into issues due to poor qa/qc. It is entirely unpredictable. That's why there is more emphasis on quality weapons because you are paying more for actual qa/qc and things being done right.
 

Mike_IA

Regular Member
So that leads to another question: with TDP in the public now, if you inspect and fit parts to TDP or better QC standards where does that place things?
 

RallyMech

Amateur
This is prompted by a discussion I saw on Instagram today.

What round count determines reliability? If I have a PSA/DPMS/Bushmaster rifle on which the basics (gas key and castle nut staking, headspace, gas block, etc.) have been checked and I run 1k rounds thru it in 3 months thru a combination of practice and 3 gun(not out of the question for a casual 3 gunner), is it a reliable rifle? Is it trustworthy? Admittedly it's not the same quality as a Colt/BCM/Noveske/Hodge, etc., but is it reliable?

I'm not trying to make a case that an entry level gun is "just as good as" but I've also seen a lot of derogatory stuff posted about "it works for me", but what if it actually does run AND it cost less than $700? What then?
Unless you can do material testing, you'll never really know. Cheap gas key screws shear, bolts lugs shear prematurely, extractors fail, triggers wear out, etc. Do you trust a harbor freight rifle for now? Use it for now since that's what you've got. Should you try to replace it with a known quantity product you can trust when able? Absolutely.

A lesson I was taught early in my mechanic career is the difference between Craftsman and Snap On. Sure you can always exchange a Craftsman tool for a new one, but that doesn't do you a damn bit of good at 3am when you're elbow deep in a Subaru and you have to race at 7am.
 
So that leads to another question: with TDP in the public now, if you inspect and fit parts to TDP or better QC standards where does that place things?

That's the point I'm driving at. If a manufacturer produces things to the TDP or to a spec that is generally considered better (parkerized vs. nitrided BCG's for example), but they sell them cheaper in a profit-by-volume model and the parts have been shown to be reliable under their intended use, why all the hate on "it works for me"?

The biggest difference I see is that a higher tier AR(Colt, Noveske, BCM, etc) gets the benefit of the doubt in terms of QA/QC and should have a higher level of fit and finish. A lower tier AR(PSA, DPMS, Bushmaster, Diamondback) doesn't get the same benefit of the doubt and has to prove itself thru more rigorous initial inspection and more rounds needed for verification of reliability.

DISCLAIMER: Before I knew better, I "built/assembled" two all PSA AR'S. They are almost identical in configuration, differences are having a 416R barrel with a NiBo BCG and the other having a nitrided barrel and BCG. The hardest use either one has seen is 3 years of 3 Gun use with practice sessions, all after a 500 round break in and zero session and the round count(s) are around 4k per gun . I'm not mil/LE, just a guy who shoots.

ETA: I have since bought better rifles, but this is where I started.
 

shoobe01

Established
Of course, I have broken two Snapon and one Proto tool in a matter of minutes, somehow never have broken any of the old Craftsman stuff I have laying around :)


To the OP point and following onto rallymech: one thing quality materials and proper dimensions gets you is longevity. Past (or setting aside) any mechanical break in period, most things work well. For a while. But wear and failures will tend to set in much earlier with the cheap machinery than the good one.

Expectation of reliability is probabilistic, but reliability is an instantaneous measure. 5 years of good running and no sign of wear doesn't mean a critical part won't break the very next time you pull the trigger.

Back to cars as an analogy this time, everything drives off the lot and seems nice, quiet, shiny. But only a few makes have million mile clubs. There's a reason, and cheaper stuff is all a lot of people need.
 

Seth Thompson

Regular Member
"The biggest difference I see is that a higher tier AR(Colt, Noveske, BCM, etc) gets the benefit of the doubt in terms of QA/QC and should have a higher level of fit and finish. A lower tier AR(PSA, DPMS, Bushmaster, Diamondback) doesn't get the same benefit of the doubt and has to prove itself thru more rigorous initial inspection and more rounds needed for verification of reliability."

From a price vs. value perspective, why should I, as the customer be tasked with doing the manufacturer's QA/QC for them?

"ETA: I have since bought better rifles, but this is where I started."

Me, too. I was building my own rifles from junk parts bought out of the back of the shotgun news, circa 1990 (Anyone remember Nesard/Drasen/Sendra?). After a while, I realized that "just as good as" really wasn't. After being exposed to numerous rifles of numerous makes in high-round-count training classes and seeing what broke, it further reinforced my personal plan to buy good stuff first and avoid the hassle that came with the other stuff.

Some people like a challenge though, so they buy iffy stuff and make a hobby out of diagnosing and fixing it. Hey, if that's their thing, good for them. It just isn't good for me.
 

RallyMech

Amateur
Exactly Shoobe. Every manufacturer has lemons. No QA/QC procedure is 100% perfect, they just vary on how close they get. This is why organizations test a batch of guns, 5, 10, 100, etc. not a single gun.

I've lost count of how many dollar store special AR's I've had to clear, diagnose, or DQ at matches in the last two years. I average 1 bad gun a match, and the common denominators are cheapo brands, mixmaster specials by people who have no place holding an armorer's wrench, and adjustable gas blocks.

@Mike, I have the same question. Unfortunately for us, most companies have zero interest in releasing that info to the public.
 
I'm not looking for confirmation bias re:my PSA rifles. I objectively understand that my Colt and BCM are better built and higher quality. I'm looking at it more as all one hears in this group is how crappy the lower-tier AR's are but my experience hasn't supported that assertion. Maybe I got lucky. I also remember an article in SWAT years ago where a very well known and well respected trainer (Pat Rogers or similar level) took an off the shelf M&P Sport, added Magpul BUIS and a Vortex Sparc and ran it until it didn't break. The takeaway from the article is that for non-door kickers it would suffice, but it was always better to buy better if possible.

My two PSA builds have a combined 8k-ish rounds thru them, both without a non-mag/ammo related failure in 3 gun (where they are regularly dropped/spiked into dump barrels and otherwise abused) and I have $1300 or so in the base rifles combined before add ons. When I look at my other rifles, they cost significantly more but I can't honestly say they've outperformed the sub-par guns.
 

RallyMech

Amateur
I ran a PSA through several 3gun matches myself, and was surprised when it *didn't* break. That's just it, I didn't trust it because I had no idea if it was going to fire the next time I pulled the trigger, or deadline itself with a parts breakage.

There is no "If it fires 1k rounds it's good" on firearms with bad quality control. Too many potential failure modes, and too many places where corners could be cut. On the other hand, once you break in a mid or high end quality rifle, you can be 99.99% certain that it will go bang another 8k-12k times by doing nothing more than adding lube, and following the maintenance schedule.
 

Kain

Member
One observation I made on the AR system is it will function with all manner of out of spec, sub par, items and do so reasonably well and sgill shoot accurately. I have an old bushmaster(fine example of shit ars) that has run for years narry an issue, granted the entire ass end has been replaced with milspec parts, front sight post has been replaced to zero it, gas key staked(am planning on swapping carrier at some point really) and other things. It works fed it garbage ammo, it fires, with decent shit it groups shockingly well.

However, from the factory it had a carbine buffer, and this is one of those corners that if a company is cutting these days I have to question them, and while it functioned beside my first BCM it kicked like a bitch. Was a middy gas system just that much better in reducing felt recoil from even the lowly 5.56? No it wasn't really, $20 buffer and the bushy was tamed down and much more plesant to shoot, the BCM is still softer shooting but not "OMG feel that" soft now. Another issue, and revalation to the tolerance of the system to shoddy shit was that I found that the buffer spring in the rifle was a rifle and not carbine length spring. A head scratcher to be sure, but it ran. Front sight base was none f marked and too short to properly zero, an $8 part to fix that. Then we get into the minutia, the finish sucks, of all my rifles, while not been run exceptionally hard, it has finish having flaked off. The bolt carrier also has a nice ledge that when manually racking if you are not all the way bavk will catch on the bolt catch and make you assume it is locked back when it isn't, a fun thing when loading that first round sometimes if you are being gentle, and while it can be chaulked up to training issue, it is an oddity for the rifle. The bolt carrier itself with several thousand rounds on it is also still rougher feeling in hand than my BCM carriers though both have a park finish.

The point being here while it has worked, it really has, and I trust it, though I am continiously changing parts out to proper spec stuff from more trusted manufacturers, there are a number of small details that were ignored, over looked, considered good enough, or just plain cut. Sure it was as a base cheaper than my BCMs, all things being equal. But, to fix the issues I've had to put another $150 ish into it changing out the entire back end from commerical demensions, buffer, springs, front site, and front site is more of a bandaid then a fix. It also doesn't take into cost of a carrier since the current one does have the afformentioned ledge that catches and I consider it to be out of spec. So while it hasn't given any issues, in the long run is has not truly been any cheaper. And I akso bet with enough rounds side by side the chrome moly barrel gives up the ghost before the chromelined BCM ones so there is yet another cost.

There are ways to save, be patient, watch for sales, or don't buy shit that isn't needed, "do you really need the gucci zero laser shifting rail when you not running a laser?" And you can save money. Trying to bring up a rifle to spec might get you there, but it gonna cost time and if you start needing to replace parts if likely going to at best end up costing you the same amount in the long run if you are lucky.
 

Seth Thompson

Regular Member
My two PSA builds have a combined 8k-ish rounds thru them, both without a non-mag/ammo related failure in 3 gun (where they are regularly dropped/spiked into dump barrels and otherwise abused) and I have $1300 or so in the base rifles combined before add ons. When I look at my other rifles, they cost significantly more but I can't honestly say they've outperformed the sub-par guns.

All I can guess is that you got lucky. You have a sample of two rifles. Maybe the tolerance stacking gods were in your favor the day they were made. Maybe both were made on Wednesday, by a guy who wasn't hung over.

Meanwhile, having observed hundreds of rifles in various types of use, I've seen critical parts on low-tier rifles self-destruct, fall off, or stop working at very low round counts...like five hundred. Or two hundred. Or the first magazine.

Low-tier AR's are kind of like General Motors cars from the 1980's: If you got a good one, it would run perfectly until the body rusted to death. If you got a bad one, it would fall apart on the way home from the dealer.
 

Mike_IA

Regular Member
I am not in the PSA whatever wagon. I see more then a few of them. There is an issue with parts life, accuracy, barrel life, amongst other issues. Reliability is relatively easy on the scale of things that quality weapons deliver.
 
Last edited:

Seth Thompson

Regular Member
PSA anecdote #1:

About two years ago, a friend brought a PSA 20" heavy upper to me for diagnosis. He'd gotten "a great deal on it", but it would not cycle. At all. As in, the bolt wouldn't even twitch when fired.

Some investigation found that only a teeny, tiny starter hole had been drilled in the barrel, for the gas port. Nothing even close to the specified size. Regardless, PSA (or their subcontractor) pinned a front sight on it anyway and sent it out the front door as a "complete" assembly. Obviously, it wasn't test-fired, or it was and they didn't notice/care that it didn't cycle.

I've got many similar anecdotes. Add them all together and they tend to form a pattern.
 
Top