HK SA Striker - Page 2

HK SA Striker

This is a discussion on HK SA Striker within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by erichard In some ways, Glock is way underpriced regardless of how cheap they are to make. They have perfected simplicity. I don't ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 56
Like Tree52Likes

Thread: HK SA Striker

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,321
    Quote Originally Posted by erichard View Post

    In some ways, Glock is way underpriced regardless of how cheap they are to make. They have perfected simplicity.
    I don't really get that logic.
    Litespeed likes this.
    "...there is no arguing with such snivelling puppies, who allow superiors to kick them about deck at pleasure."

    – Captain Bellamy

  2. #17
    VIP Member Array Nmuskier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Upper Michigan
    Posts
    3,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave909 View Post
    I agree, prices are for the most part just fine (The VP9 notwithstanding since its quality is well below its price IMHO). Everybody needs to have a Walther PPQ M2 trigger as far as I'm concerned, and they all need to include extra backstraps like the Glock and a few others. Do that for me and don't be a jam-o-matic or ammo sensitive, and I'll have an awfully hard time choosing one over the other.
    Walther sure has figured out that trigger. They also had the interchangeable back strap in the late 90's. Then they ushered in the new craze in sexy slim with the PPS (not the first, just turned the buying craze from hi cap 9mm). Glock finally added adjustable grips and a slim 9mm (just not in the same gun lol).
    Psalm 144:1

  3. #18
    Member Array erichard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by maxwell97 View Post
    I don't really get that logic.
    If you assume reliability is derived from simplicity and fewer moving parts, and if you assume reliability is king, then the innovator who comes up with the simplest reliable design deserves a higher price point. You are paying for the guaranteed result, not what it costs to build it. If it's patented up, maybe no one can duplicate it without making it more complex (in reality not duplicating it). Takes great engineering to simplify. Takes less engineering to makes things more complex, as backwards as that sounds.

    And the simplicity goes beyond just reliability. The Glock has all you need in minimalist design, meaning the slide release is not oversized like my USP. There is no huge safety/decocker like my V1 USP. The G23 is smaller than the USP but carries more ammo. Etc, etc. etc. What you get is what counts, round count, concealability, dependability, and you get them at the top of the class in each category. It becomes a perfect concealable weapon with few downsides and few extraneous doodads that overcomplicate what needs to be done.

    Because Glocks are hard to beat in key categories, it deserves a premium price. Other guns are better at providing a Cadillac full of gadgets to what end? If the Sig 320 can convert to multiple calibers but at the cost of rounds per pound or the high cost of new frames, is it any better than a Glock that is simpler to build, maintain, repair, modify, use, and cheaper to outfit and replace?

    They deserve a high price also for their market share which helps them dominate in after market gear and resell value.

    The biggest difference is the trust you have in buying a Glock. You know it will go bang everytime (essentially) without costly break-in ammo. It's basically a sure bet. That's worth a significant premium to their build costs.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #19
    Member Array erichard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    207
    That said, I'm carrying a Para P10 this winter LOL.
    maxwell97 likes this.

  6. #20
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,321
    Quote Originally Posted by erichard View Post
    If you assume reliability is derived from simplicity and fewer moving parts...
    That's a poor assumption. A smaller number of parts in no way implies greater reliability, and therefore does not imply added value.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichard View Post

    What you get is what counts, round count, concealability, dependability, and you get them at the top of the class in each category.
    That's debatable, and mostly subjective. I have an XD-SC that would be classed with a G26 as a subcompact 9mm. The XD holds three more rounds, while the G26 is more concealable. Which is better? The answer depends entirely on the needs of each particular user.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichard View Post

    If the Sig 320 can convert to multiple calibers but at the cost of rounds per pound or the high cost of new frames, is it any better than a Glock that is simpler to build, maintain, repair, modify, use, and cheaper to outfit and replace?
    How is a Glock simpler to build, maintain, repair, modify, use, or cheaper to outfit or replace than a P320? The retail price for P320's has so far been on line with or slightly less than comparable Glocks. The entire design is modular. MSRP on new frames for a P320 is $45, which I doubt you'll find Glock frames for, and buying one doesn't require a 4473.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichard View Post

    They deserve a high price also for their market share which helps them dominate in after market gear and resell value.
    There is something to that, though again the value is subjective. It depends on what a particular user wants for additional gear and how likely they are to sell the gun.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichard View Post
    The biggest difference is the trust you have in buying a Glock. You know it will go bang everytime (essentially) without costly break-in ammo. It's basically a sure bet. That's worth a significant premium to their build costs.
    It certainly was for the first 25 years it was around. It's not today, when you can say the same thing about (at the very least) M&P's and XD's, and probably a number of other options. It remains to be seen about this HK, of course.

    So, the long and short of it is, it depends what the user needs and wants. If a Glock meets his needs and wants somewhat better than a competitor, then paying a premium for it makes sense, for him. But I don't agree that there's something objectively better about Glocks that justifies the premium. There really isn't.
    Litespeed and Eric357 like this.
    "...there is no arguing with such snivelling puppies, who allow superiors to kick them about deck at pleasure."

    – Captain Bellamy

  7. #21
    Member Array hkusp9f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Indiana/ROK
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Agree. They are sleek and simple in appearance, compared to some like an XD or this new HK that looks like they were crapped out of Ben Grimms body.

    I doubt very seriously if another Glock copy is going to affect the Glock over all....but it it confirms to the thinking few, that they must have gotten it right the first time.

    Ironically, it's sort of like the Colt 1911.

    Let's not forget HK was the first striker fired poly pistol with the VP70....if Glock had gotten it right there wouldn't be so many companies doing grip mods and replacement triggers etc. for them.IMHO

  8. #22
    Member Array erichard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by maxwell97 View Post
    If a Glock meets his needs and wants somewhat better than a competitor, then paying a premium for it makes sense, for him. But I don't agree that there's something objectively better about Glocks that justifies the premium. There really isn't.
    I was responding mainly to your saying you didn't understand why we should pay a premium relative to the cost to build Glocks (in your first quote), not so much a premium relative to M&P, etc. I really like the M&P stuff, and to the degree they resemble the quality in Glocks, they also deserve a significant premium relative to their cost to build. Glock will always have a longer term record on reliability, but the M&P may be just as reliable. I do believe, all else equal, that a proven design that uses fewer moving parts and simpler mechanisms is likely to be superior to those with more complex designs and more moving parts. Certainly a bad design is a bad design regardless the number of parts. The fact that Glock can pull it off with so few parts does signify achievement to me.

    The 1911 is a proven design, but so much can go wrong with a 1911. When they work well, they are some of the best. When they don't work well, it can take a while to get it running. JMB was a genius to pull it off way back when. Gaston improved on the design for reliability, capacity, efficiency (weight and size) while maintaining relatively decent shootability, yet 1911's generally command higher prices than Glocks. If we were going to war, I'd pick a Glock over a store bought 1911, so why price the 1911 higher? It's priced high due to the cost of production basically. Glocks deserve a premium due to their design and their track record. M&P is catching up and deserves a premium as well relative to the cost to produce, but there are many brands that don't deserve much of a premium relative to their costs.

    My Kahr gave me a lot of trouble, and I'm not sure I still fully trust it. My Para is OK now, but it took a long time and a lot of study and effort to get it right, and I still have misgivings due to past problems. Para couldn't stay in business because they didn't deserve such a high premium on their guns, often over $1000 for their double stacks back in the day.

    I think M&P and Springfields are a bargain like Glocks, but I think Glocks are more proven overall, having stood the test of time for a long, long while. If buying second hand, I don't really worry too much if it's a Glock. If it's a Seecamp, an $800 380, yeah, I worry, big time. I worry whether I'm getting a lemon or not. The trust is just not there with many brands. Smith and Wesson is nice in that they have a transferrable lifetime warranty. Whether you use it or not, it speaks volumes that they have faith in their product. They deserve a premium for that.

    Regarding the cost to switch calibers with the Sig 320, I'm seeing $329 at Streicher's:
    https://www.streichers.com/sig-sauer...r-x-change-kit
    I bought my second hand G27 for less than that including FFL fees.
    maxwell97 likes this.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Central Kentucky
    Posts
    13,374
    Quote Originally Posted by hkusp9f View Post
    Let's not forget HK was the first striker fired poly pistol with the VP70....if Glock had gotten it right there wouldn't be so many companies doing grip mods and replacement triggers etc. for them.IMHO
    Yes it's a well known fact HK did create the first polymer gun....but it didn't go anywhere.

    Now, I'm not going to defend Glock, because it's pointless.

    However, your statement about grip mods and trigger mods is purely a subjective thing and has absolutely nothing to do with the pistol itself......people modify guns like the 1911 and other high quality arms with better triggers and grips to fit them all the time.
    If they did not get it right the first time, we would still be carrying heavy gen 3 S&W pistols like the 4006 and such.
    The only thing that has changed is everybody else offering their own version of a Glock competing for $$ by trying to reinvent the mouse trap.
    Nothing wrong with that, but it is a testament to the fact that they got it right and it is still the most popular pistol used today, when you consider all the other competitors.
    Even the great 1911 had no such competition for about 40 years or so after it came in to being.
    2ndunamended likes this.
    " Blessed is that man, who when facing death, thinks only of his front sight"
    -Jeff Cooper

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,321
    Quote Originally Posted by erichard View Post
    I was responding mainly to your saying you didn't understand why we should pay a premium relative to the cost to build Glocks (in your first quote), not so much a premium relative to M&P, etc.
    I get that, but I wouldn't agree that Glocks are "way underpriced." They don't have to report their numbers publicly, but during the Sigma lawsuit they estimated their gross margin at 68%. That is ridiculously high, and I doubt it's gone down much. S&W runs with a gross margin of about 40%, Ruger about 33%, and those are very good numbers for manufacturing. Apple and Harley-Davidson also run about 40%. Basically Glock could sell a new pistol for $300 and still have a better margin than S&W or Ruger.

    Now, with a company like HK, I don't really expect them to compete on price, and I expect this new offering won't be super-cheap (though I could be wrong). The civilian handgun market is kind of a side gig for them; they're aiming their designs for military and well-funded LE, and their real money comes from assault rifles, machine guns, grenade launchers, stuff like that. But Glock depends heavily on the civilian market, and yet seems to take it for granted. Their pistols are routinely priced $50-$100 more than their competitors, and I don't recall ever seeing a manufacturer's rebate from Glock. IMHO they depend too much on brand recognition and mystique, and I think it's going to bite them, with Sig and S&W cutting into LE and military market share as well as civilian. Because, if their pistol sales flatten out, where's their growth going to come from? They don't make anything else, and I haven't heard of anything in their pipeline but more of the same.

    Anyway, that's kind of a rant, sorry. I just think the writing's on the wall here; when even HK is coming out with striker-fired handguns at roughly Glock prices, while Beretta, Sig and S&W are coming in under, Glock's going to have to pass the savings on to us at some point. Maybe by extending the LE rebate to everybody?
    Eric357 likes this.
    "...there is no arguing with such snivelling puppies, who allow superiors to kick them about deck at pleasure."

    – Captain Bellamy

  11. #25
    VIP Member
    Array Phaedrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,796
    I'm pretty stoked about the new gun and hope we'll see it in the US! Personally I would probable be a bit more excited about a VP9C than a VP9sk although I will buy one (if they're sold in the US). The VP9 is a marvel although I still like the P30 and the LEM system better than striker guns. HK seems to me to be perhaps the only manufacturer that took the human hand into account when designing their guns, at least their newer guns like the P and VP series.
    Eric357 likes this.
    "When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

    “You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions.” - Naguib Mahfouz

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array flintlock62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    3,081
    Yes it's a well known fact HK did create the first polymer gun....but it didn't go anywhere.
    That could be partly due to the fact that they were plastic, and people just weren't ready to switch from all steel at the time. They also didn't have heavy marketing that Glock uses.
    hkusp9f, Litespeed and Eric357 like this.
    NRA Lifetime member

    "A government big enough to give you everything you
    want, is strong enough to take everything you have."

  13. #27
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    7,321
    Quote Originally Posted by flintlock62 View Post
    That could be partly due to the fact that they were plastic, and people just weren't ready to switch from all steel at the time. They also didn't have heavy marketing that Glock uses.
    IIRC, the VP70 wasn't really designed to compete with metal-framed handguns. The idea was a 9mm machine pistol that could mount a stock, and could be produced in large numbers cheaply, for militia use in case of a Red invasion. Hence the VP moniker, for Volkspistole, "the people's pistol." So it was kind of bulky and the trigger was apparently not too great (I dry-fired one once, it seemed okay, but would not excite Glock fans).

    I wonder if the new "SFP" designation might mean that these pistols are aimed at the military and LE markets, as opposed to civilian?
    "...there is no arguing with such snivelling puppies, who allow superiors to kick them about deck at pleasure."

    – Captain Bellamy

  14. #28
    Member Array Shadow1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    20
    This will sound crazy, but I just think the VP pistols from HK are "badass" looking. Now that is probably not a reason to buy one especially for a Glock "fanboy" like me. However, I bought one just after Christmas. I own 6 Glocks and love them. If you don't, I don't care. Anyway, a very good friend of mine believes guns begin and end with Sig Sauer. He also happens to be a 13 year U.S Marshall. He was laughing at the gun shop when I bought my HK. Anyway, I have put about 1000 rounds through it and can't begin tell you how great it shoots. I have had absolutely no misfeeds or any issues so far. I have shot 5 different types of ammo through it. Now for my friend, he shot the gun one time, shot it better than any Sig he owns. After our time at the range guess what . . . I was laughing at him. We went to our local gun shop and he bought a VP 9.
    Militant likes this.

  15. #29
    VIP Member
    Array Phaedrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,796
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow1 View Post
    Now for my friend, he shot the gun one time, shot it better than any Sig he owns. After our time at the range guess what . . . I was laughing at him. We went to our local gun shop and he bought a VP 9.
    It is indeed an amazing shooter. When I had to shoot a qualifying course for my enhanced permit I opted to use the VP9 since that's almost 'cheating'.
    "When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

    “You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions.” - Naguib Mahfouz

  16. #30
    Member Array Militant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow1 View Post
    This will sound crazy, but I just think the VP pistols from HK are "badass" looking. Now that is probably not a reason to buy one especially for a Glock "fanboy" like me. However, I bought one just after Christmas. I own 6 Glocks and love them. If you don't, I don't care. Anyway, a very good friend of mine believes guns begin and end with Sig Sauer. He also happens to be a 13 year U.S Marshall. He was laughing at the gun shop when I bought my HK. Anyway, I have put about 1000 rounds through it and can't begin tell you how great it shoots. I have had absolutely no misfeeds or any issues so far. I have shot 5 different types of ammo through it. Now for my friend, he shot the gun one time, shot it better than any Sig he owns. After our time at the range guess what . . . I was laughing at him. We went to our local gun shop and he bought a VP 9.
    This gun world of ours is not a one size or brand fits all! We're all different and will like and dislike different things. It's all about one's "personal preference" when it comes to guns. I use to own a FNX, M&P, Ruger, Kimber 1911, 2 Gen 4 G19's and now, a few HK's. Since then, I've got rid of all those pieces except the Kimber 1911 and my HK's. All of them were good guns...all of them! However, the HK's just have my heart! They go "bang" every time I shoot them with no issues, no failure to feeds and they chew up every type of ammo I feed them. Their price point isn't a issue with me either like it is for most. But then again, I love'em and others may not. To each his own.

    Just carry something to defend yourself and loved ones in this crazy world!

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •