Kudo's to you Mr. Deeb & your firearms company

T

triplebike

New member
http://www.gunsandammo.com/video/handguns/reviews/torture-tests/trying-break-hi-point

The gun has probably been through more "real world" torture tests that any other firearm & it still holds up. It truly is the " I get no respect " handgun on the market today. What's even more impressive is that Hi Point had no problem offering up the gun which tells me they have absolutely nothing to hide. I wonder how many of the BIG NAME BRANDS would even offer their product after seeing what they put that Hi point through. I say NONE!

I think that the statement below by another gun owner is right on the money;

Kudos to Hi-Point for not running away from a test they KNEW was going to be out on a national magazine website for the world to see, whether the outcome was positive or not. They didn't even ask what was being done to the gun. That was decided AFTER they committed to send the gun in.
 
i like the shake and bake hi point. i don't own one and never will. i don't see the point, at least for me. i do understand the draw though, for some one looking for a reliable gun in that price range. i will never say anything bad about a high point, other than they are ugly. but we all already know that. but you have to give hi point props for being what it is, a good working tool.
 
What is the point?

Nothing against High Points, but I never see the point of these "torture tests," and I particularly see no point in this one.

For those who can't make it through the video, welcome to the club. I watched as he put the pistol in a bag with flour, and then with wet flour, then mud, then sprinkled it with dirt and strapped it to his lawn mower, and then placed it on soft spongy grass and ran over it with a pickup. I then lost interest and went on with my life. The pistol fired three or four times after the flour, then started having multiple failures to fire, cycle, and go into battery after each of the subsequent tests.

My questions, though:

What does shaking a pistol in a plastic bag of flour have to do with real life? What does it prove when you do so, then wipe the flour off with a rag before attempting to fire? (For those who choose not to watch the video, the tester does exactly that, and then to one degree or another cleans away the very things that constitute the "torture" after each step of the test.) How is it considered a good result to have progressively more frequent failures with each test until the firearm fails in some way on nearly every shot? What do three or four shots at a time prove about reliability, even if they are successful?

The reliability I need is continuing normal function over long periods of time, with lots of rounds through it, with different kinds of ammo, under a variety of realistic conditions. Few if any torture tests, and certainly not this one, demonstrate the kind of reliability that I am interested in seeing. If I needed a gun that was going to function well in a swamp, for example, I would want to test it extensively in those conditions rather than just for three or four shots after smearing it with mud, and not after brushing and cleaning it first; and I would not consider constant failures that have to be resolved banging the gun on a table or forcing it into battery with every shot to be a positive result of the test. And if I was trapped in a plastic bag of flour, I am not sure what I would use a gun for.

If you find this stuff interesting or entertaining, enjoy yourself, but I cannot honestly recommend making a firearm selection based on such bizarre testing, with or without the patently unfavorable results that are demonstrated in the posted video.

Just one guy's opinion, of course.
 
Last edited:
I agree with TailGator that most of these torture tests, while dramatic, aren't really all that applicable to real life. A drop test is somewhat useful because someone might drop their handgun, a function test after being left loaded with the springs compressed for an extended period of time (a year seems like a good point of reference) may be useful, a function test after firing a large volume of ammunition without cleaning or parts replacement (500-1000 rounds) might also be applicable to the real world, and a test for reliability with a wide variety of ammo would be most useful. Wet flour, on the other hand, doesn't really tell me much unless I'm planning on getting in a gunfight in a flooded bakery.
 
All that video showed me (and yes, I watched it all) was that the High Point is NOT the pistol I want to protect myself and my loved ones. I know for a fact, because I was there, that DHS put the HK P2000 through much more than riding on a lawn mower and a bag of flour and it passed every test. People certainly have a right to a cheap gun, which the High Point is in more ways than one. No thanks. I'll keep the HK.
 
I will never begrudge an honest citizen for buying the only pistol they can afford at the time.

At one time, a hi point was all I could afford.

It never jammed, FTF, FTE.

Too heavy, of course. But not as heavy as the burden of protecting my loved ones the best way I could at that time.
 
Nothing against the Hi-Point. However, I feel that these test are nothing more than propaganda and the waste of a gun. I feel that the only true tests are those that are conducted over time, i.e., 1,000s of rounds with sporadic cleaning etc. The gun fired ONE MAG after being taken out of the box. Every gun will do that. I feel that tests such as Chuck Taylor's Glock test or Bill Wilsons? 1911 test 340,000 rnd test are more of a true test of a firearm. Yes, the Hi-Point passed some tests that are more than the average gun will ever see.
 
Yes, the Hi-Point passed some tests that are more than the average gun will ever see.
Click to expand...

Yes, and whether it says anything more in terms of "real world use" than do torture tests conducted for Glock, HK, SIG and other pistols or not is up for debate, I guess. But it does say something and, if we want to be fair and objective, we should give the devil its due.

I think the so-called torture tests have their place in the overall scheme of things and they might very well say something about the nature of a given firearm's projected performance in more mundane duties There's nothing wrong with a firearm that performs well after being rigorously tested in elements and conditions unlikely to be encountered in the "real world" and still does everything else that it's designed for right. And I'm not saying whether the Hi Point is one of those firearms.
 
I'm a bargain hunter in a lot different areas of my life, so I've always been intrigued by the Hi-Point brand.

That being said, I think this video was missing something. In an ideal world, the first test should have been putting 10,000 rounds through it, but I understand why they didn't do that.

But I think the most important thing was missing. I want to see the gun go through all of that mud shooting, flour shooting, getting run over by a truck (on concrete, THROW it against a rock five or six times. Then give the gun a really good cleaning and see if it works flawlessly.

I could care less if the gun will fire when pulled out of the mud, I want to know if it works flawlessly after all that.

Basically, they needed to clean the gun really well and shoot of a mag at the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top