Pretty cool to see this come together
This is a discussion on Handgun Reliability Poll - Preliminary Results within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; After two days, and a good response rate, I think we can start to draw some lessons from the "Reliability" polls I put up. Special ...
After two days, and a good response rate, I think we can start to draw some lessons from the "Reliability" polls I put up. Special thanks to all who have replied so far.
Grouping those who have had zero or only one malfunction, and comparing to those who have had two or three + yields the following approximate percentages:
XD - 90/10
SiG - 90/10
Ruger - 86/14
Glock - 85/15
Kahr - 58/42
KelTec - 55/45
Kimber - 44/56
For sure, these are not "scientific" polls, but the sheer volume of replies tends to weed out variability in the data. To this point, it would seem that my impression, based on a few years of reading anecdotal reports on various forums, bears out - folks buying a defensive handgun may wish to beware the "K" manufacturers. They seem to have a much higher issue rate than the other makers polled.
Fans of the makers in question have given me grief in the past, but the numbers bear the need for caution with these makers out.
I'd be interested to see if the numbers change much with more data points, so if you have not yet voted, please do so.
Someone made a comment on one of the polls that if you shoot long enough, you will experience malfunctions. While this is likely true, I would consider a failed spring in a gun with 25,000 rounds through it "routine wear and tear" and not a true "malfunction." If the same spring breaks after only 400 rounds, that would be a "malfunction" to my mind. And remember, a malfunction caused by bad ammo shouldn't be counted against the gun - please read the first post before voting, for the poll rules. If the maker has a "break in period" I wouldn't count any malfunction during that period either.
If others wish to conduct similar polls for other makers (S&W, Bersa, Beretta, Taurus, Colt, CZ, etc) then feel free to do so.
While I am a proud Springfield XD owner/fan, and am glad to see the XD fair so well, I am not so certain that the poll results may be somehow skewed by the fact that Glock, having scored lower than the XD's in reliability, is probably not correct. Glock has been around a long time and their owners may have had their Glocks longer than many XD owners have owned their XD's.
Time is the variable here.
“I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry.”
- Barack Obama Chicago Tribune, April 27, 2004
No worries! Given that this is a non-scientific poll, I would consider the results for the top four (XD, SiG, Ruger, Glock) to be the same - within the "margin of error."
However, there is a definite difference between these and the others.
Not really much new there, it just bears out what lots of us already knew.
I get to see alot of guns used in action as we do alot of CHL's classes with lots of students.
The only thing that I can see that comes to me as a susprise is the Ruger beat out Glock. In my experiences, the Rugers seem to have more issues than the Glocks overall, certainley more than indicated in the poll.
Even so, it's interesting to see.
I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
Makes me want to jump out there and buy a $1,000 kimber
Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything
Want to post another up there for the Walther PPS? Seems like we already have some info... I would love to see the summary though.
I would also be helpful to note the amount of responses to the different polls. If you have a large sample size responding to the glock vs a low sample responding to ruger you may have skewed results. Three people with perfect rugers couldn't be compared to 200 people with glocks and 20 of them having had problems.
I looked for the ruger numbers but couldn't find the poll.
Just a thought.
Anecdotal reports and experiences are one thing, but a poll such as this gives more weight to our observations.
Whenever I've posted to newbies that they beware the "K" makers, I've always immediately had the fanboys jump in defending their purchases - "I have X gun with Y rounds through it without a hiccup." Great, as far as it goes. But now we have more concrete evidence that these makers are more likely to have issues than other makers. Not that they will...but that they are more likely.
Don't believe what you hear and only half of what you see!
The sample size is fairly significant - when I checked last evening, there were well over 100 replies on most, and some others were at about 75. Large enough to iron out most variables. Of course, more data points would be even better - thus my request in the OP in this thread for folks to continue voting.
My only comment is that you probably shouldn't give up the day job for one in statistical analysis!
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."
The Kimber stats bears out my experience with them. Three of them over a three year period each one an over priced, over rated, over hyped, rusting POS. No more.
Thanks for the effort you put into this! Regards 18DAI.