New here, got a question

B

Bribom

Inactive
Hi everyone,
Been lurking around here for awhile and finally decided to register. Im brand spankin new to handguns....Was in the Marine Corps, but other than fooling around on a range with a Berretta for a bit, i got no formal handgun training. I shot the big guns, .50 cals and mk19's. Anyway.....i just got myself a HK .45F because i wanted something fairly accurate, but more importantly durable, reliable and cool!!!!! Well, my question is....I don't understand people and Kahrs, Taurus's or other inexpensive guns. All i seem to read is......"I just got a Kahr, put 100 rounds through it and got 2 FTFs, 1 stovepipe, and the slide wouldn't lock back 4 times." Now i don't know about you, but ive already run 500 rounds through the HK, without cleaning it, and it has functioned perfectly. Am i the only one here who thinks a tool that you are going to rely on to save your life should work perfectly???:confused:
 
Welcome
I happen to be a connoisseur of inexpensive guns and have decided that i'd rather have a Makarov,FEG,and TZ-99 for the price of a Glock.If i stumble across a true POS inexpensive gun (intratec,helwan,tanfoglio gt-27)i get rid of it and get something else.To me, theres no sweeter feeling than being at the range and shooting clip after clip after clip through my Hi-Point while someone next to me is having difficulties with their 5 times the price gun.:D
 
I'm with Tropical Z...LOVE the inexpensive weapons!
Ruger autos can be had for under $300 (on sale) and the Makarov and CZ's are best buys for the money...my next purchase will be a Bulgarian Mak...if they ever come back to the states that is,
Tony.
 
Bribom - Don't believe that your HK will never fail just because you spent more than you needed to. Also don't believe that the guy at the range next to you with that 300$ CZ can't out shoot you because he didn't spend as much money as you did. (Your HK might fail before the CZ does.)



Oh, by the way, welcome to The Firing Line.:)
 
Welcome to the forum. Even if you have the most expensive and reliable tool you can't say about the ammo.

My 0.02.

vega
 
I guess it's all a matter of perspective. When I bought my Kahr P9 I certainly didn't think it was "cheap" - about $550 with factory night sights. I had severe problems with the gun for about three months. A trip back to the factory seems to have fixed things as I've not had a failure since.

Even my $1000 Kimber has had it's moments. Don't be lulled into a false sense of security by the price tag on your weapon. It is likely that at some point you WILL experience some kind of problem. How you react when it happens will be a function of your training.
 
Inexpensive Guns? Kahr, Taurus and other "average to higher" priced guns are still on the same dependability scale with the HK!
Sitting next to my Kahr K40 at the time I bought it was a Very clean HK USPC 40 for the same price.
CZ's, Kahr, Taurus, Beretta, Sig, S&W, Browning, Many 1911's bla bla bla all cost less than the average HK and will serve their owners well for a long time. Rant off!

You are not the only one who feels a 100% gun is mandatory for a self defense/CCW gun.....If I question any of mine, they stay in my safe. Just to let you know...my CZ 83, K40, PT940 and 9359 fit the 100% and would bet my life on any of them performing when I need them too. Shoot well and enjoy your HK
 
A Big and Hearty Welcome To TFL-

There are lot's of H&K shooters here at the forums; as well
as shooter's who prefer "other" firearm's, for various reasons.
After reading through a few thread's, you will find out that
I prefer Sig-Sauer semi-auto's; and Smith & Wesson revolver's.
But, that does not mean that all the other member's have
made a wrong decision in their choice of product. It just so
happens that Sig's and Smith's work for me. There are lot's
of good firearm's out there that will take a licking and keep
on ticking.:cool: :) :D

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Welcome aboard!

I think we would all agree with you that the tool designed to save our lives should work perfectly, and those of us who carry will strive for that. But that doesn't necessarily mean "out of the box." For some, "It's the hunt." We tinker and polish and shoot alot to get a piece broken in and working flawlessly. It's part of the hobby!

As others have said, though, don't expect that a gun will function flawlessly forever even if it appears to right out of the box. Eventually, something will break ... or you'll get some bad ammo ... or ... you get the picture. Any good training program will include malfunction drills. They are there for reasons that do not necessarily reflect the cost of the gun.

Again, welcome aboard!
 
Welcome to TFL.

As you can see, we have tinkerers here who enjoy fixing things, but I agree with you that a product that doesn't work perfectly out of the box is a rip off.
 
I'm a little baffled at how Kahr got included at the same price point as Taurus. Kahrs typically cost somewhere between Glock and SIG and are as well-made as either (better, actually, IMO).

Taurus autos (with the notable exception of the Millenium-series guns) are fine, durable and reliable guns and I wouldn't hesitate to purchase one.

Also, saying "I spent $X on my USP, why would anyone buy a cheaper gun to trust their life to?" only invites someone to come along and say "Well, I spent $XX on my P7/Custom 1911/P210. Why do you trust that cheapo USP?".



Other than that, welcome to TFL! :D
 
Bribom.....welcome.
I'm with you re the reliability requirement.

IF....magazine fails, won't feed some ammo, sensative to limp wrist etc etc.......it is broke and not to be used for defence.

I do not agree with the price comparison. Some expensive stuff out there that is no more dependable than the least expensive.

Sam
 
Expense is no absolute arbiter of quality or reliability in anything.

If that were true, Jauguars would be the most reliable cars on the planet.

And, if that were true, Ruger firearms would tend to be the most unreliable of any of the big manufacturers because they are relatively cheap, but that's rarely the case.

You're also discounting the fact that, like a new car, a new semi-automatic firearm often requires a break-in period before it can be considered to be 100 percent reliable. Just like piston rings need to wear to the cylinder walls, the slides on some semi-autos need to wear to the frame.

The break-in period is why you will often see recommendations here that a semi-auto firearm be shot at least 200, and better yet 500, times with no failures of any kind before it is used as a carry weapon.

You specifically mention Kahrs as an example. All of the failures you quote can be directly attributed to the break-in period.

I guess in that sense I've been lucky, as my Kahr, which cost me a bit over $500 several years ago, not cheap by any stretch of the imagination, has been stone cold 100% absolute reliable from day one.

But, all that said, if I want absolute reliability in a gun that I'm going to use to defend my life, I'm picking up one of my Smith & Wesson revolvers. I have more confidence in those than I do in any semi-automatic, with the possible exception of my HK P7M13.

Now, given that your USP cost so much less than my P7M13, why would you buy a cheap and possibly unreliable gun? :D (sorry, I just had to say it!)
 
IMNSLE

I don't trust it until I've fixed it.

Frankly, I don't trust my life to just one; they ARE machines. I 'kinda' trust them.
 
I agree with Mike Irwin EXCEPT...

My Kahr problem was not a "break in" issue. I had well over 1000 rounds through the gun before I finally gave up and sent it in. I was ready to give up on it. There were definetely quality issues that were resolved by the factory - I suppose it happens to the best of them. But, it's functioning flawlessly now. In fact it has honestly become a favorite of mine.
 
Bribom, welcome to TFL!

Well, I don't consider $500 guns to be inexpensive. I think it is more average or mid-range for a factory gun. I have never had a problem with any of my centerfire handguns, at whatever price. I feel confident with my Kahr, because it is reliable.
If you look around this forum, you will see that some people have had problems with their H&K. While I think it is a good gun, I would never think of it as my only choise.
The $300 CZ-75 is just as reliable and accurate in my hands, so I guess the extra $500 or so is just for pride of ownership.
I really can't say a $1000 gun is going to be more expensive than a $300-$400 gun.

It is also nice that you have the means to buy a more expensive gun. I certainly enjoy my collection. Consider that there are a lot of people out there without much money and don't know much about guns. They need a way to defend themselves also.
 
I'm with WESHOOT2 on this one. Just because it has never failed doesn't mean that at some time it won't. Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances.

I believe a person should select a gun because they are comfortable with the feel, then they should shoot it mercilessly until they are either confident with it, or decide it's not reliable enough.

As for reliability, my .45 auto has never failed to feed, fire, extract or eject. It's a Ruger KP90DC. There is a difference between inexpensive and cheap.
 
Wow, thanks for all the great replies......this is a friendly place! Everyone here has made a great point. And i hope no one thinks i am bragging about how much i spent.....Nowhere did i mention how much my USP cost me. I was just curious about the problems i seem to hear about with less expensive brands, but my eyes have been opened a bit. I love cycling, and own $4000 bikes, but i understand that a $750 bike can give great performance at a fraction of the cost. Anyway, thanks for the welcome.......I'm already addicted....now im thinking about a .22 to plink with at the range! Time to research my next purchase........and no...this one isn't going to be half as pricey!!!!!!!!!!! Now if i can just make some of these politicians in Illinois dissapear (hack, cough, Daley, Hack) and get CCW here.
Thanks for the welcome!
 
Welcome to TFL. I'm sure you will enjoy it here.

But, This is the first time I've heard anyone call a Kahr cheap. As a matter of fact, I mostly overhear folks at the gunshops asking why they are so much more expensive that other pistols in the same size class...and why it is so much heavier and has less capacity. I'm not knocking Kahr, or any other brand..its just what I hear alot. Its easy for folks that arent avid gun enthusiasts to overlook some of the less obvious qualities of certain guns. I guess the whole inexpensive thing is pretty subjective. About a year ago I bought my wife a Charles Daly Empire grade 1911 for about $550..thats what she wanted, thats what she got. It turned out to be a very accurate and reliable weapon. I just always thought it was teribly funny when someone with a $300 Ruger or Smith auto on there hip comented about my cheap throw-away 1911.
I have owned expensive guns and inexpensive guns, but generaly avoid cheap guns...there is a big difference.
<< Am i the only one here who thinks a tool that you are going to rely on to save your life should work perfectly?>>
While I have a few guns in my collections that havent so much as hiccuped the whole time I have had them and through thousands of rounds,no gun will function perfectly forever. But I tell you what, when that HK does finaly hit a snag, I'll give you 50 or 60 bucks to take the worthless, unreliable hunk of crap off your hands ;) ;) But in all seriouness, I do agree fundamentaly with your statement. I wont carry a gun for defence that has failures that cant be solved by switchhing ammo or replaceing a worn out part. Now that I think about it, I dont think I own a gun that has had more than a handfull of failures. And most all failures I have had are chance ocurances that just happened for no apparent reason. The only gun that I have owned that had chronic reliablity problems with was a 10/22, and it is long gone.

BTW, the only pistol I own that ever had a major, factory return worthy problem with cost well over $800 and had to be sent back one day after purchase.
I noticed when I started shooting Ar's, that on the rare occasion when my Carbon-15 type 97 had a malfuction, it was because it was a cheap, no-name, peice of junk, but when their Wilson or Colt HBAR (which probly cost about the same as my Carbon-15) jamed, it was becasue it was a highly precise piece of enginearing, with supre-tight tolerances that just wouldnt tollerate inferior junk ammo such as factory fresh match grade. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top