Most overrated?

I wonder how many of the HK USP and P7 detractors here actually OWN or have FIRED one ?? Sheesh.

Anyhow, I think the Bren Ten , might qualify as an overrated pistol.

After all, it defined "vaporware" before the computer industry made that a household term... decent trigger, but not particularly durable or well built in all cases.

Another overrated pistol was the ASP.

And of course, El Supremo Overrato...

the Glock... "effective at conversational distances".

And yes, I have shot a Bren Ten, shot lots of Glocks, and I owned an ASP.
 
So, I'm still wondering how price has anything to do with a product being overrated.

Call them expensive if you want, but overrated? How are these guns overrated?

Price DOES NOT equal overrated.

You can pay well over $10,000 for a H&K PSG-1 rifle, would you say it was overrated simply because of the price? I sure wouldn't.

Again, if a Glock, H&K, SIG, custom or stock 1911 does what it is supposed to do then how can anyone say they are overrated? Overrated by whom?

Shake
 
Shake..we hear ya talkin'..let me try to answer. Overrated by whom? By us the owners of these pistols thats who. Who else "rates" these pistols? Some gun guy who writes for a gun rag who really puts a pistol through it's paces alright (a couple hundred rounds if that).
Trust me on this one..you're talkin' to the experts. You know, the folks who actually OWN the said pistols. Before I discovered this great website I was a gun mag fanatic. I wanted info in the worst way.
I RARELY buy a gun mag anymore. This web is my salvation because it's the "real deal". Overrated by whom? ME, that's who. Trust Me,;) J. Parker
 
Sig P229,etc. Shoddy Sigs of late. For all the bad posts, HK USP series, Tactical, M23 are stone reliable. Soak 'em, (swamp slime, mud), snow 'em, grit'em, and strip 'em of ALL lube........they cannot be stopped. Try it. :p
 
if we count some of the older handguns, then it's Desert Eagle. It's simply a big overblown macho ego-boosting piece of hardware. Sure it glistens under the desert sun, but the ergonomics and price leaves alot to be desired.
 
{ Glocks are overated by some who think they are perfect. Glocks are great for what they are. If you like the feel, they work for you. If you don't, they don't. Glocks are overated by some who think they are perfect.}

Well, perfect is just what my Glock's have been. With the exception of a batch of PMC ammo WAY out of specs, both of my Glock 20's have never had any type of failure. That includes FTF, FTE, jams, light strikes, magazine indused problems etc. Except for the batch of PMC ammo that was so far off, it would barly fit in the magazine, my Glock's have been 100% absolutely perfect in the reliability catagory. I refuse to be apoligetic about that...its a simple and true fact. I'm not the type of person who thinks anything but a Glock is crap, or try to push a Glcok on someone who dosnt like 'em. Every Glock I have ever owned or been around has performed as advertised and then some. All of mine have far exceded the manufacturers clames. how is that Overrated. Tell me presisly what Glock is claiming but not delivering. On the other hand, Sig claims to produce an extreamly accurate, reliable pistol with above average durability. My experiance was the polar opposite. That is how I define "overrated". I dont mean to pick on SIG, but its really the only pistol I have had major problems with. ironicly, it probly has the best overall reputation of all my handguns.

And no, Glock arent the be all and end all to someone that dosnt like them. Buy what you like. But that dosnt change the fact that my Glocks have performed flawlessly.
 
S&W Performance Center guns! Take them apart and check out how rough some of the work is. I owned one of the originals, Shorty Forty #66. It shot about 20" below point of aim at 25 feet! Groups were aweful, trigger was aweful, and the supposed hand fitting was really rough and sloppy. I've seen other examples of Performance Center guns and some were nice but none live up to their billing and none are worth what they cost. The revolvers are a LOT better than the autos but still way overpriced.

By the way, I used to work for Lew Hortons, who, at the time had the exclusive right to market and sell the Performance Center guns. I still thought the guns were terrible even though I made good commissions selling them. When dealers asked me my opinion of them, I would say "They are definitely going to be collector's pieces"! I still feel guilty.
 
for the sig comments:

my p226 makes up for my lack of shooting ability - owned this gun (and a hand gun period now for a little over a month).

At 50 feet i'll put all 10 rounds within a 3-3.5" diameter. Pretty much has floored my gun buddy who got me into this. Dinners have been free as of late.

I've put a little over 1800 rounds through it so far, with me cleaning the gun - 50% chance it's probably not being done right, but it hasn't jammed once since the first 50 i put through it (2 loads got caught cockeyed in the barrel/slide).

So I'm pretty happy with the gun.

Granted my next two purchases will probably be a USP and 1911, so I'm gonna have one over rated collection, lol.

-d
 
A SIG228 here costs $1,800.00!!:eek: :mad: :barf: If that ain't overrated (OVER-PRICED?!!), then I can't tell what is..:rolleyes:


Be wise,


New_comer:cool:
 
Most over rated???

Any .45 cal 1911 or 1911A1 or 1991A1 not made by the "original guys" and over $1000 is not only over rated, it's insanely over priced!!! You can take a basic Colt, and install what some believe are absolute necessities, add a few "hard core" parts, remove any factory installed "plastic", and throw in a set of Ahrends grips of your liking for well under a $1000, and have a pistol that has no peer...regardless of price or who the current 15 minute of fame 'smith stamped their name on your pistol.:rolleyes:
 
Anything produced by Colt in the last 10 years or so. Definitely a case of paying for the name. Smith and Ruger make DA revolvers that are as good or better than anything Colt put out. Springfield, Kimber, and others make 1911's as good or better. Even though this is a handgun forum, I can't resist mentioning that lots of people make AR's of equal or better quality. The SAA? $1200? No thanks, I'll take an Italian copy or a Ruger SA. They have known for a long time that their name was their last asset; otherwise they wouldn't have pushed the "anything else is a just a copy" type marketing.
 
Neal

I believe that Ruger does produce a quality gun. I believe that my P95 gives me the best bang for the buck out there today. And as an aside, I happen to like the trigger pull :)

Anyway, what this all really boils down to is how the phrase "over-rated" is defined. Are there any quantitative measures of "over-ratedness" that we can all agree on? Answer is probably not.

To me, a gun is "over-rated" if there is another gun out there that performs as well at a lower price (never been concerned about asthetics, hence the reason I like Rugers).

Others are very concerned about asthetics (fit and finish, etc.) and are willing to pay high dollar amounts. That's cool with me. However, because of my interpretation of the phrase "over-rated", I'll think they got screwed :)!

Of course, these other will think the exact same thing about me and my P95 ;)
 
Gotta say that my P7, USP40f and Springfield .45 1911 are by far the BEST shooting overrated pistols I've ever owned :D

There I go overrating them even more than they already are.
 
J. Parker,

I don't have a problem with that. I think I disagree with most everybody here on what guns are overrated because so far no one has put forth a definition of "overrated".

I see a lot of claims that certain guns are overrated simply because of price. As most of us know price doesn't always determine how good a firearm is. Generally when you spend more, you get a better product, but that isn't always the case (i.e. CZ75s, Maks, Rugers). I fail to see a correlation between price and how a firearm is rated by anyone (as far as performance is concerned).

If someone comes up with a definition of just what "overrated" means (i.e. exaggerated accuracy claims, exaggerated reliability claims, etc.) I might agree with it.

ojibweindian,

Maybe I just don't agree with your definition of overrated, but I would say you are referring to "value" or an advantageous purchase.

As far as aesthetics, I'd agree with you on the finish of a gun, but fit has a lot to do with how a gun performs. I wouldn't label "fit" as an aesthetic quality.

Shake
 
Shake

Yeah, I guess I would be referring to value. However, value plays an important role when I'm concerding a gun for purchase. When I see two makes of pistols in the display case that share similar characteristics (reliability, durability, accuracy, etc.), I'll go with the least expensive and consider the other "over-rated" for the price being asked.
 
Hey, there's nothing wrong with buying 'obsolete' (1911). Lots of people still read the newspaper. Lots of people still buy audiotapes and videocassettes. Lots of people still watch black-and-white reruns. Lots of people still dance Charleston, Jitterbug and Lindy Hop. Lots of people still use rollerskates. Lots of people still drive standard. Lots of people still wind their clocks and watches (even if they don't have to). Lots of people still go to live concerts. Lots of people still prefer mustard---and not mayonnaise---on their cheeseburgers. And yes...some of us still sing the U.S. National Anthem in the shower, as opposed to rap crap or some other jungle tune.

Guess it's that warm fuzzy feeling inside... ;)



P.S.> I've got better guns for when BG knocks.
 
Last edited:
Shake is raising correct question - What is "overrated"?

For me, it's a price relative to specs, but probably it would be correct to call it "overpriced" when I express my opinion that
HK USP is "overrated" - I really wanted to say "overpriced",
because HK USP does work for $600-$650, but CZ-75 does
work at least that good for just $300-350 (and has much nicer
DA trigger, sorry, Shake).

So, it seems that there should be two relative ratings

1. Price determines rating of "material" value
2. Functioning/Specifications, which is "technical" rating

So, guys, which of the ratings we're refering to?
 
Not to be snobby......

Well guys, according to Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary,
"overrate" is defined simply as "to rate too highly". "Rate" is
defined as "1. (obs) ALLOT ;2. CONSIDER, REGARD ;3. a)to set an
estimate on, or b) to determine or assign the relative rank or class of ; 4to fix the amount of premium to be charged per unit of insurance on; 5. to have a right to: DESERVE <she rated special priveleges> ~ vi: to enjoy a status of special privelege.

I think in this case, definitions 2 and 3 apply best to the subject.

Simply put, what handgun do you think is regarded or considered
too highly (i.e.,"overrated") according to what it can do?

Thanx

ANM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top