
Originally Posted by
EricCartmann
I forgot that the Russians and Chinese employed Elves at low wages to break in the guns to reduce cost before sending the out. I guess same goes Colt AR's, never heard of those needing break in either. How can Colt keep cost down? I thought employing Elves for low wages were illegal in this country?
Cute. The problem, though, is simple: when new, the system needs extra force in the gas system to cycle reliably. When "broken in", it requires less force, and therefore less gas.
The need for more force can only arise from 2 things: 1) the spring needs broken in, and/or 2) the action tolerances need worn in a bit.
So it would be interesting to know, and to know if RobArms knows, what/where the source for the need of the break-in period comes from.
My impression is that it has been in the spring, given that I can feel it requires less force to cycle by hand than when I first bought it. If the action really was
that tight, it would bind up a lot. But the action has never actually binded up, and the wear on the moving parts isn't all that bad.
So I think it comes in from the spring mainly, with a potential secondary influence from the action.
Think of the springs in your mags. Pistol mag springs are certainly quite stiff when new...but the more they're used/cycled, the easier it becomes to push bullets down into them.
RobArms could have, then, easily just sold the gun with a single, nonadjustable gas setting, setting 4. That cycles everything, even when brand new out of the box, without break-in. Or made a setting even larger than #4, for even more out of the box assurance. For some reason that wasn't a good idea. Too hard on the recoil pad from what people say who've left it on #4 the whole time. Could use a better recoil pad then...
I'm not sure what the philosophy/reason is behind allowing the user to reduce the gas setting after the spring gets worn down a bit. Yes it does allow the user to reduce recoil, allows the user to be more accurate, etc., but for all the confusion it gives people who aren't rocket scientists, maybe they didn't need to bother. Also not sure why the XCR requires this kind of finesse when an AK47 does not...