SIG P938 Review - 1st shots

[SigM4]

Never take a new gun to the range without cleaning and lubing first.

I agree. While others may have had success with not having done this, I just don’t see why you wouldn’t. Rarely do guns come from the factory properly lubed. Not that they won’t function without said lube, but it’s just good insurance. That said I’m a stickler for proper maintenance. Every time I hear/see talk about oil on a handgun it pains me. 99% of handguns, especially those used and carried for self defense, are best served using a non-migrating grease (of which there are many good choices). I guess I just enjoy knowing that I’ve been the one to apply the grease as I’m confident in my abilities. Same reason I change my own oil in my vehicles vs. letting some high school grease monkey do it down at the local speedy lube.

[Bitter Clinger]

Never take a new gun to the range without cleaning and lubing first.

I agree. While others may have had success with not having done this, I just don’t see why you wouldn’t. Rarely do guns come from the factory properly lubed. Not that they won’t function without said lube, but it’s just good insurance. That said I’m a stickler for proper maintenance. Every time I hear/see talk about oil on a handgun it pains me. 99% of handguns, especially those used and carried for self defense, are best served using a non-migrating grease (of which there are many good choices). I guess I just enjoy knowing that I’ve been the one to apply the grease as I’m confident in my abilities. Same reason I change my own oil in my vehicles vs. letting some high school grease monkey do it down at the local speedy lube.

Right. So we are back to the time honored discussion of "break-in" vs. "no break-in".

Do you feel that a pistol should perform reliably first thing right out of the box and forever thereafter, or do you need to run several hundred rounds through it first (not that that isn't fun!)? Do you prefer early 20th century design or 21st century technology? No clear winner, just whatever you prefer and what works for you...

[rotor]

Never take a new gun to the range without cleaning and lubing first.

I agree. While others may have had success with not having done this, I just don’t see why you wouldn’t. Rarely do guns come from the factory properly lubed. Not that they won’t function without said lube, but it’s just good insurance. That said I’m a stickler for proper maintenance. Every time I hear/see talk about oil on a handgun it pains me. 99% of handguns, especially those used and carried for self defense, are best served using a non-migrating grease (of which there are many good choices). I guess I just enjoy knowing that I’ve been the one to apply the grease as I’m confident in my abilities. Same reason I change my own oil in my vehicles vs. letting some high school grease monkey do it down at the local speedy lube.

Right. So we are back to the time honored discussion of "break-in" vs. "no break-in".

Do you feel that a pistol should perform reliably first thing right out of the box and forever thereafter, or do you need to run several hundred rounds through it first (not that that isn't fun!)? Do you prefer early 20th century design or 21st century technology? No clear winner, just whatever you prefer and what works for you...

I have never had a hand gun that didn't work reliably out of the box. I had a Ruger SR762 that had to go back to the factory but never a handgun and although I always field strip each before firing and checked for oil in the barrel, etc. I have never lubricated a new handgun before going to the range. I don't want to buy a gun that needs to be broken in.

[SigM4]

Never take a new gun to the range without cleaning and lubing first.

I agree. While others may have had success with not having done this, I just don’t see why you wouldn’t. Rarely do guns come from the factory properly lubed. Not that they won’t function without said lube, but it’s just good insurance. That said I’m a stickler for proper maintenance. Every time I hear/see talk about oil on a handgun it pains me. 99% of handguns, especially those used and carried for self defense, are best served using a non-migrating grease (of which there are many good choices). I guess I just enjoy knowing that I’ve been the one to apply the grease as I’m confident in my abilities. Same reason I change my own oil in my vehicles vs. letting some high school grease monkey do it down at the local speedy lube.

Right. So we are back to the time honored discussion of "break-in" vs. "no break-in".

Do you feel that a pistol should perform reliably first thing right out of the box and forever thereafter, or do you need to run several hundred rounds through it first (not that that isn't fun!)? Do you prefer early 20th century design or 21st century technology? No clear winner, just whatever you prefer and what works for you...

What? No 9mm vs. .45? Man we’re really getting lax around here. But yes, just as you say you’re correct in that it’s personal preference. I can’t, and won’t, chastise anyone for not cleaning/lubing before the initial outing. If however a problem is encountered thats always my first question. Sounds like the OP did just that and it rectified the issue, which is ultimately what’s important.

I’ve shot a 938 several times and I do believe based on the tolerances I’ve seen it probably benefits from a good application of lube more so than other makes/models. Sigs in general are that way, but every 938 I’ve ever handled has been super tight.

[SigM4]

Never take a new gun to the range without cleaning and lubing first.

I agree. While others may have had success with not having done this, I just don’t see why you wouldn’t. Rarely do guns come from the factory properly lubed. Not that they won’t function without said lube, but it’s just good insurance. That said I’m a stickler for proper maintenance. Every time I hear/see talk about oil on a handgun it pains me. 99% of handguns, especially those used and carried for self defense, are best served using a non-migrating grease (of which there are many good choices). I guess I just enjoy knowing that I’ve been the one to apply the grease as I’m confident in my abilities. Same reason I change my own oil in my vehicles vs. letting some high school grease monkey do it down at the local speedy lube.

Right. So we are back to the time honored discussion of "break-in" vs. "no break-in".

Do you feel that a pistol should perform reliably first thing right out of the box and forever thereafter, or do you need to run several hundred rounds through it first (not that that isn't fun!)? Do you prefer early 20th century design or 21st century technology? No clear winner, just whatever you prefer and what works for you...

I have never had a hand gun that didn't work reliably out of the box. I had a Ruger SR762 that had to go back to the factory but never a handgun and although I always field strip each before firing and checked for oil in the barrel, etc. I have never lubricated a new handgun before going to the range. I don't want to buy a gun that needs to be broken in.

I think the days of a “break-in” period are probably behind us for guns that are mass produced. Prior to today’s era of super high repeatability in the manufacture of individual components (mostly due to proliferation of computer controlled CNC machines and the like) sometimes individual pieces had to wear in somewhat due to stacking of tolerances in their manufacture. Today production tolerances are so much tighter that the stacking effect is greatly marginalize (not unique to the gun industry). Anymore, so long as you’re buying a mass produced pistol from a reputable manufacturer it shouldn’t be an issue. Now, are they going to put out lemons from time to time? Sure, but it won’t be because it wasn’t broken in, but rather there was a legitimate issue with some piece or part during manufacture.

All that said, some people do prefer to go out and run say 100 or more rounds through a new gun to check for function prior to carrying it. To me that’s different from a break-in and totally understandable if this is going to be a gun you’re going to count on for EDC.

[Liberty]

I think the days of a “break-in” period are probably behind us for guns that are mass produced. Prior to today’s era of super high repeatability in the manufacture of individual components (mostly due to proliferation of computer controlled CNC machines and the like) sometimes individual pieces had to wear in somewhat due to stacking of tolerances in their manufacture. Today production tolerances are so much tighter that the stacking effect is greatly marginalize (not unique to the gun industry). Anymore, so long as you’re buying a mass produced pistol from a reputable manufacturer it shouldn’t be an issue. Now, are they going to put out lemons from time to time? Sure, but it won’t be because it wasn’t broken in, but rather there was a legitimate issue with some piece or part during manufacture.

All that said, some people do prefer to go out and run say 100 or more rounds through a new gun to check for function prior to carrying it. To me that’s different from a break-in and totally understandable if this is going to be a gun you’re going to count on for EDC.

I think it depends on a lot of things. I have only DS/SA hammer fired handguns. What I've found is that the trigger changed considerably on my pistols during the first few outings. Always for the better. New guns tend to be grittier and not as smooth before they are broken in. This has proven true to me even with rifles. I don't trust any gun to fire a specific hollow point until they have proven themselves. 1911s particularly seem to benefit from a good breakin.

Maybe striker fired weapons do not benefit as much from a break in period as do hammer fired.

[SigM4]

I think it depends on a lot of things. I have only DS/SA hammer fired handguns. What I've found is that the trigger changed considerably on my pistols during the first few outings. Always for the better. New guns tend to be grittier and not as smooth before they are broken in. This has proven true to me even with rifles. I don't trust any gun to fire a specific hollow point until they have proven themselves. 1911s particularly seem to benefit from a good breakin.

Maybe striker fired weapons do not benefit as much from a break in period as do hammer fired.

I think we’re talking about two different things though, and on that I should clarify. For pure function I don’t think there is much need for a break-in for the firearm to function these days. That is not to say though that things don’t smooth out with use. Like you all my guns are DA/SA expect for one P320, but even that has gone from slightly gritty to much smoother with rounds down range. So in that instance a break-in isn’t required, but definitely makes for a more enjoyable experience.