So... as can probably be deduced from my posting in this thread, I do like this platform - I'm generally a fan... but 5 failures in 500 rounds is not great performance, I don't think. I'd feel really uncomfortable with my firearm if I had a stoppage on average every 100 rounds.
I've had 2 FTFs (simple failure to feed "stoppages" which were cleared easily by cycling the action) in 1450 rounds. 1/725 = 0.14% failure rate. 5/500 = 1% failure rate. One of the stoppages was while using a Cross Industries magazine ("cross mag") and one was with a Gen 3 PMAG. The Hera H3 and CPD Duramags have had zero stoppages.
The common terms used are "mean rounds between failure" (MRBF) and/or "mean rounds between stoppages" (MRBS) - they mean different things - a "stoppage" is any kind of failure to cycle or fire that can be cleared relatively easily, whereas a "failure" requires more intensive measures. Apologies if you know these terms already - but they're useful to define in case anyone reading this isn't aware.
As a comparison, the US Army requirement in 1990 for the M4 was 600 rounds between stoppages. In 2013, that expectation was increased to around 1,700 rounds with improved internals on the M4A1 and better ammunition. As another example on the other end of the reliability spectrum, the early model SA80 (which became the L85) was notorious for stoppages, and had a MRBS of 95. Another benchmark might be the threshold requirements for the SCAR's development was 2000 MRBS and 15,000 MRBF. The manufacturer of the ARX-180, Beretta, claims 15,000 MRBS (!) for the ARX-180.
I know we can't expect military grade reliability with a civilian rifle, but we should expect much more than 100 MRBS for any semi-automatic rifle, I think. Me, I'm "satisfied" with the 725 MRBS I'm getting so far with my Crusader Sentinel (Gen 1 Templar equivalent), but I'm not "happy" about it.
Are you tracking which ammo and which magazines you were using when you had your stoppages?
