Handguns quality

F

Firepower!

New member
I was just wondering which handguns have gone down the drain in quality over the years, and which have improved significantly.

I think Glock has stayed about the same. They were as good as when they came out. The only thing they did do is shinnier finish, finger groves, and rail. I think that is not enough. However, lots of after market accessories available for them.

I think Sig has slid a little from back when they made all metal pieces out of West Germany. Any comments?

Colt, well I dont know what happened to them. They just gave up on the civillian market.

What are your thoughts specifically on Ruger Revolvers? I have read somewhere that they have improved significantly. I own thier newer ones, so I am not sure if they improved over the years or not. Certainly the ones I have are great.
 
Ruger revolvers may have gotten better, but their semi-autos have become an embarrassment! SR-9 and LCP recalls. Bad magazine releases and extractors on many of the P series. I was considering a second P-95, but with all of the negative reports lately, I've become more interested in a Glock 34. I think the reason why Glock has remained pretty much the same is that they haven't tried to cheapen their product. With them, there is also a good aftermarket for things like the plastic guide rod replacement, and barrels that offer better case head support.
 
I like my Colt WWI Repro. I don't see any evidence of any backsliding or anything, it's well made and very accurate. I also don't see that Colt has "given up."

Heck, I'd rather shoot my Repro than my '99 Kimber Stainless Gold Match and it's a great gun too.

I can't wait for my '69 Python to get here, but that's the way it goes when you're sitting by the mailbox so to speak.

John
 
You'll get a lot of disagreement about Colt "giving up the civilian market." Sort of the same way Apple has supposedly given up on the home computer market.
 
Kahr

well, out of the ashes of trying to figure out economies of scale, supply/demand, you have up and coming companies such as Kahr that change things up, make things simpler and start to kick ass.

doesnt matter what you buy, you will pay more for quality, same goes for mostly EVERYTHING else you can spend money on.

I have had a PM9 since october and have shot over 1,000+ rounds, from cheap reloads to expensive defensive ammo and have never had any FTF or FTE. It truly rivals the accuracy of my Sig P239 and weighs 50% lighter.:cool:
 
I can only regurgitate what everyone else says on here, which isn't a fair way to judge a firearm.

All I know is, my old Sig 220 is great, my CZ75 chokes on range ammo somewhat, my P11 is fine and the SP101...well, it's built like a tank.
 
I think a lot have gone down hill in the interest of saving a few $$.

I swaped a POS Para for a S&W 1911PD. The Para had a FTF each shot. And while I have not shot the Smith yet, the trigger rattles and most of the parts seem to be MIM.

I ordered a new trigger for the Smith, and will be replaceing the rest of the parts at some point.
 
Looking at overall trends in terms of quality in handguns...

Colt has been improving for a few years now.
Kimber has been slipping.
Springfield has held steady.
Ruger has held steady.
S&W has been hit and miss. Some unsteadiness in wheelguns, progress in semis.
CZ has improved including the Dan Wesson line.
Kahr has held steady.
Sig has been steady with a few rough spots (1911 line for example).
Glock steady.
Berretta, steady.
Walther (in partnership with S&W) steady.
H&K steady.
Browning steady.
FN steady.

These are the majors.

"Steady" means that while there may have been minor mis-steps overall they have been holding a line of quality products that can be relied on or that they have not improved. For example, opinions on Kahrs vary some shooters think they make a very reliable product while others complain. It's been this way for several years now. No change, so steady. Ruger has been steady in making quality products they stand behind with a lot of customer satisfaction. They do make the occasional occasional lemon that they will repair. No change. so steady.

tipoc
 
You seem to have forgotten Taurus who bought the Beretta factory and then spent $20,000,000.upgrading it. Plus they inherited a number of former Beretta employees, both engineers and technicians.They continue to listen to their customers and improve designs, basically on the run.Since 2004 they have won more awards than Michael Phelps.They produced in 2007 a manufacturer's leading 500,000 handguns, with 220,000 coming to the US.New models coming out are the 709 "Slim" and the 809, 840 and 845
55284.jpg
 
Yeah I forgot Taurus. From what I understand their revolvers have been getting a bit better. More are being sold in the U.S. anyway. I haven't heard enough to have an opinion on their semis though. I haven't heard much bad just not enough on them. They are one of the world's leading manufacturers.

Course what I said above is based on what I've seen and read and is obviously just my take on it.

tipoc
 
Gosh, 14 posts and no one's yet said "Smith's gone to hell since they stopped recessing their chambers, pinning their barrels, using forged parts, and especially since they put locks on their revolvers." Congratulations!!:D
 
I think its easier to name the companies that have not slid much in the last few years:

1. Wilson Combat / still doing a first class job
2. Ed Brown / still doing a good job
3. Browning is doing pretty well overall
4. Sig is doing pretty well / but not on their 1911's
5. Springfield is doing pretty well on their higher end 1911's

Revolvers - I don't think any of them are doing that well. The older S&W's and Colts are still very good guns / I'm seeing a lot of them for sale ( so they are very good buys in my opinion ).

The rest of the semi-autos out there ( Kimber, Glock, Beretta, H&K, Kahr, etc are kind of all lumped in the same block of also-rans. ) You might get a decent gun / you might have to spend $ 100 - $500 on it to clean up the trigger, replace MIM parts, or fix issues that should have been caught at the factory ...
 
Glock makes good products if they fit your needs for sure. But how could they "cheapen" it any more after making a large portion of the gun out of injection moulded plastic? They made every part possible with plastic and used steel where it must be. The quality of the product is first rate, but I think that they have a pretty good profit margin on those things with all the savings on stuff like machine work etc. So they can hold the line on prices with a better cushion than other makers that have to make each part on a machine than spit them out like tupperware. And they can depend on government sales in huge numbers besides the civilian sales, unlike makers of pistols that have no official use and depend on individual sales. So they probably will remain quite profitable while other makers raise prices to the moon or go out of business. I guess this would be taken as a Glock haters rant or something, it is not, just a point of view.
 
Based on some personal experience and a lot of reading on the internet, in no special order, here are the companies I'd trust for quality at the moment:

-- Sig (except 1911)
-- H&K
-- Glock
-- Wilson
-- Maybe the latest S&W M&P autos, and maybe the proven J-frames.
-- Beretta M9 size (9mm only, not the 40)
-- Springfield 1911
-- Makarov (based on the surprising number of favorable reports on the web).

Just my impression. I'm sure there are plenty of others OK right now. But to me, these stand out. As mentioned, these are NOT in any particular order.

-------------
 
"Makarov (based on the surprising number of favorable reports on the web)."

I would not base my judgement based upon internet opinion. The only Makarov I had went auto fire on its own. I think the trigger gave in, so every i cocked it, it will fire and empty the mag. But then it was an old Soviet army issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top