At that firing rate, you should get at least 20 years out of your pistol.jrjordan said:the carry gun is my pdw (personal defense weapon) and carried frequently. On average, I'm firing between 200 to 400 rounds per month, and I'm very conscientious about cleaning the weapons.
Exactly. No, you may not ever experience a malfunction because of them, but you might. They are an unnecessary risk that solves an overblow and questionable "problem."dubb-1 said:I don't like shock buffs. I like the idea of high mileage frame protection, but not at the cost of plastic/rubber/fiber inside my pistol. I am quite sure that if I can wear out a 1911, I'll be on the cover of a few magazines, know what I mean?!
I agree. I would much rather sacrifice theoretical longevity than compromise reliability any day. Also, your range situation should match a carry situation so that you are confident of how the gun would perform in a BG situation.I like the idea of high mileage frame protection, but not at the cost of plastic/rubber/fiber inside my pistol.
I use the Wilson shok-buffs in all my 1911's and I've never had one come close to tearing apart. I change them every 500 rounds or so, and they show only a very slight deformation after that many rounds. There may be some buffs that will last longer than a Wilson, but since I change them every 500 rounds, that's not an issue for me. I know some people think the Wilson's are too soft, but I've never had a problem with them and in fact, I think a slightly softer buffer is doing its intended job better than a hard one (and it's not like the Wilsons are actually soft - they're still relatively hard).Shike said:Slowhand:
I have found the same as you. The Wilson blue buffs just don't hold up. I use the clear ones that Brown sells and I have found they last twice as long as the Wilson's. I have never experienced a malfunction with any of my current 1911's that could be attributed to a shock buff. I guess we are lucky