Whats your opinion ?
This is a discussion on Whats your opinion ? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I been shooting for a long time now. I have owned several guns over the past few years,mostly revolvers I do admit.
Never had a ...
May 15th, 2008 07:24 PM
Whats your opinion ?
I been shooting for a long time now. I have owned several guns over the past few years,mostly revolvers I do admit.
Never had a problem with any of them. never had to send them back to the factory for repair.They all shot reasonably well right out of the box.
I have one 45 now thats about 15 years old, never been back to the factory. Just recently, the rear sight is working its way loose, I figure its time for new sights anyway.
In the past 3 years I purchased a Kel tek 380; a Kahr 9mm;
a S&W sigma 40 cal; a S&W 45, 1911 , a Springfield 9mm xd sc; and a Para ordinance 9mm Carry 9.
The S&W 1911 is a babe. Everybody loves it.
The Springfield had sight problems, and once I got the nerve and a really large hammer I fixed the problem. The sights were way off I mean way off.
The Kel Tek kept stovepiping. I even had the range guys shoot it. Finally, I just stuck in in the drawer and forgot about it.
The Kahr had barrel problems. After 1500 rounds or so the barrel peened. I sent it back, got a new barrel and after about 1000 rounds it peen too.
The Carry 9 has had numerous FTE. I had at least 4 different people shoot it and we all had the same problem. I worked on the extractor a bit and thought I fix it but well last time on the range, out of 50 rounds I had 5 or 6 FTE. Too many for me to trust the gun.
So, what did I do They all got shipped back to the factories UPS cost me $ 190 in postage.
So whats do you think is going on ?
Is quality control so poor that 50 % of guns have to be sent back to the factory for repair ?
Are guns just not being made as well now as they use to be ?
Do we have to expect guns out of the box have to be sent back to the factory for whatever reason ?
Or am I just one unlucky guy ?
What are your experiences with new guns out of the box. ?
Have you guys and ladies have had similar problems ?
All this is IMHO,
May 15th, 2008 08:12 PM
Okay, let's see if I can articulate my opinion clearly here.
Let's look at revolvers from 50 years ago.
Who were the trusted names? Colt.. Smith & Wesson.
Who made the guns your dads and granddads carried on the police forces of America? Colt.. Smith & Wesson.
There were a few other makers here and there but over the years their names have gotten lost and their guns are scarce.. why? My theory is that people were complaining about them 50 years ago and finding flaws in their machines that were not in the Colts and Smiths of those days. They didn't have what it took to make it to this century and now they are collectibles or found in pawn shops for $70 with tags that read, "fire at your own risk".
So, now let's speed up today? What are the guns that are being raved about, carried, depended on today?
Glock, Springfield, Smith & Wesson, Sig Sauer, H&K, Kimber, Beretta...
Now, I'm not saying that the other manufacturers are junk because that's obviously not true. Taurus and Kel Tec, Bersa, Cobra, Kahr have all been making guns that have saved countless lives around our country.
BUT... (and this is a big BUT) SOME of them have had rough spots. Heck, even Glock, Springfield, Sig, Kimber and HK have all had rough spots and they are actively trying to keep an updating world updated with new weaponry and technology. Some manufacturer's have better equipment, better financing, better ability to make higher quality guns. And sadly, some manufacturers don't give a crap if they make a good gun or not. Some manufacturers change management and suffer a huge down-grade in quality. Some change management and see a huge JUMP is quality and try to repair their reputation as selling crap.
The fact of the matter is that there are only a handful of names that you can say that instantly make people think, "QUALITY." It's sad, but it's true.
Most people who've been into guns for any length of time, if they are honest, will admit to looking at their own FAVORITE gun manufacturer with a critical and skeptical eye because somewhere, somehow, they were let down. But their faith is restored when they see the countless times that manufacturer has produced quality that could not be disputed.
I've seen exploded Glocks, I've seen cracked HK's, I've seen faulty Kimbers and stubborn Sigs, I've seen down-right broken Smith & Wessons and crappy Berettas, but more often then not I see much more happy customers than not.
The occasional broken gun is not too shocking. Machines break. Okay.
One has to be patient with the other manufacturers who are trying to catch up.
Some of the guns you listed have not REALLY been around that long. They need time to perfect what other manufacturers have perfected and been sending out the door for years. It's no surprise that they have a little more hiccups than the others.
Will some of these manufacturers make it to the next century? Who's to know? Maybe one day our grandkids will be looking at $40 Kel Tecs in pawn shops windows with tags that read, "Fire at your own risk."
OR, one day, they could even be looking at a $30 Glock with same tag. We have no way of know, but for now, the only thing we can trust is the results. The mass push for those certain manufacturers that scream, "quality" at us in a language we all can understand.
But that, of course, is all just Lima theory.
May 16th, 2008 09:39 AM
Lima has it spot-on. Kel-tec can be good, but generally requires some tuning to be user friendly, if not reliable. Same with any 1911; your S&W being the exception. The higher-end production 1911s are generally as good as any out there. Equally, Khar is good, but the initial design parameters were not the same as Glock, so it has been a bit more "iffy."
It can be very frustrating. I would highly recommend getting on related forums, to find how other owners are detail-strippng and/or modifying their weapons. Also, Jerry Kunhausen wrote several tech manuals covering the 1911, Rem shotties, Ruger and some others. Maybe a bit dated, but excellent primers, as you will learn basic firearm function and some DIY. Brownells has the manuals and a vast array of tools and accessories (hint, hint).
May 16th, 2008 09:59 AM
I don't believe we can expect perfection in guns that we buy. I have seen my share of gun problems personally, and read about 10,000 gun chat postings of other people's problems. Guns are an assembly of many small parts subjected to stress and corrosion, and things can break or malfunction.
The real question is how can you plan your purchases and take care of your guns to minimize the problems, realizing that you can never completely eliminate them.
After awhile you start to have an impression of which gun brands and models have a good reputation, and which ones don't. Usually the good ones cost more, but isn't that always the pattern with anything? So get out your checkbook and buy the best brands, inspecting them closely before you seal the deal. And when you do have a problem, let the factory or a competent gunsmith fix it. It's just part of the admission price to the game.
Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington
May 16th, 2008 10:34 AM
Originally Posted by limatunes
NO they wouldn't be seeing it because they would be buying the GLOCK for his/her grandfather for his birthday. Because granddaddy has 20 magazines for it.
Its not about guns...Its about Freedom!
Assistant Instructor @ http://www.green-ops.com/
Located in the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area "Why should your training be any less special?"
May 16th, 2008 12:22 PM
I am going to take a slightly different path and postulate a theory that I have about the current state of gun manufacturing. With the rapidly rising costs of metals and their subsequent alloys, I believe some, if not most, firearm manufacturers are trying to keep costs down by using MIM parts or stamped sheet metal parts instead of ones made from forged steel. This is why I believe we are seeing a degradation in current product quality. But the main reason, I believe, is also that a lot of gun companies are substituting warranty repair for quality control, somehow hoping that it will save them money in the long run.
Last edited by crzy4guns; May 16th, 2008 at 05:10 PM.
God bless our troops!
May 17th, 2008 09:04 PM
I can think of at least one major 1911 manufactuter that seems to think this is the way to go. Glock is the closest thing I've found to revolver-class out of the box reliability, and I leave them that way. I've only had one 1911 that didn't require some tweeking, a Colt Combat Commander, but 1911s are a tinkerer's dream anyway. I've got a BHP my teenage daughter and wife shoot that's NEVER had a malfunction. I used to carry revolvers, a Ruger SP101, GP100, and a J-frame 'Smith, but my G19 and Colt Commander now perform the roles of all three, and both Rugers are gone. There are reliable semis out there.
Originally Posted by crzy4guns
May 17th, 2008 09:11 PM
I absolutely love my Commander. I put 50 through it today and everybody noticed how accurate it was. Everybody wanted to shoot it too!
Originally Posted by Cofaler
May 19th, 2008 01:00 PM
Just to let you know, Kahr is the first gun company to respond to the returned CW9. Per Joe, they have had some issues with the slide/barrel/and slide rails matching.
So he is basically sending me a new gun, because of the new frame he has to send it to a ffl so I gave him my range/gunstore name and number.
I read all of the comments,and found it interesting.
May 19th, 2008 03:01 PM
Actually I doubt there are that many more problems now than there were 25/30 years ago. Just that with the internet you hear more about it. Befdre it was mainly word of mouth, and what problems were encountered in PA weren't normally heard about in TX or IN. Problems encountered in TX might be known about in OK, but somoeone in MT wouldn't have known about it. Also many more people shoot semi automatic pistols now. More things to go wrong than with a revolver, so more problems encountered. JMO
May 20th, 2008 11:28 AM
I guess then the question is this
Is its acceptable for a large percentage of new guns right out of the box to have to be sent back to the manufacture for repair ?
My vote is no
BUT then there is nothing I can do about it !!
May 20th, 2008 11:49 AM
I'll say this: they all have their issues, even the mighty Glock. My brand-new G-34 broke right in front of Chris Edwards and the Glock gurus during a match a couple of years ago. The gun had less than 100 rounds through it at the time.
As for the 1911s, if you purchase a pure GI model, and feed it hardball it is as reliable as any other handgun out there IF it was assembled to John Moses' original specs. The problem is that the design platform has so much potential that we have tweaked it over the years to a point where the modified 1911s vastly outnumber the GI issues. Hence, the problems.
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry
May 20th, 2008 01:16 PM
...As for the 1911s, if you purchase a pure GI model, and feed it hardball it is as reliable as any other handgun out there IF it was assembled to John Moses' original specs. The problem is that the design platform has so much potential that we have tweaked it over the years to a point where the modified 1911s vastly outnumber the GI issues. Hence, the problems...
Yes! A voice of wisdom.
May 20th, 2008 02:46 PM
This is largely true, word of mouth is slow and the www is blazing fast. OTOH, there are a few other things to condsider.
Originally Posted by archer51
The guns that Military and LE carried back in the day were carried because they worked. The US Military contracted the 1911, ONLY because it was the absolute best weapon for bad breath distances. Same with the Garand. They were chosen because they were the superior design in terms of durability and reliability and most importantly, protecting the lives of our troops.
Nowadays, the guns that are "popular" with citizens are such, mostly due to marketing hype. Many of us purchase guns because "that's what the cops, or soldiers use." They fail to realize that these weapons are no longer chosen for the above reasons. They are the result of international bidding wars and backroom dealing. For example, the Glock you just paid $585 for, cost the cop who's wearing it $130 and that's only if he/she (or agency) had to pay for it at all. So where's the rest of your $455? In slick catalogues, gun shop posters, gun rag ads and giant banners at competition venues. Is the US Army using Beretta because it's the hands-down best choice? I think we all know the answer to that. Is LAPD using Kimber because its the toughest, best made 1911 available? heh
Another issue is the tendency for makers to try to reinvent the wheel and cater to the interest of consumers to make things ever smaller, all the while, riding the ragged edge of physical laws. Sure, you can make a credit card sized gun that will run in a cleanroom, but the minute you get a particle of navel lint in it, STOP. As long as the machining, springs and metalurgy are to absolute perfect spec, they all run fine.
There was a reason that earlier handguns were wildly overbuilt and weighed 40oz and it wasn't because they wanted heavy guns.
"Happiness, is a warm gun" -St. John of Liverpool
Proud to be an infidel.
May 20th, 2008 07:18 PM
Originally Posted by Ping Ping
By Nathan67 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: July 22nd, 2014, 01:12 PM
By tbones54 in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
Last Post: September 6th, 2010, 09:24 PM
By Jrod012889 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: April 26th, 2009, 10:08 PM
By wishicould in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
Last Post: March 20th, 2006, 02:53 PM