Paying for a few letters in a particular order.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good example of paying for a stamping is the HS 2000 made in Croatia. Its now sold in the US as basically the same gun but Springfield stamped "XD" on them and, of course, raised the price.
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair, you're paying for a little more than the stamping. Having a respected U.S. company guaranteeing an item and providing service and support can be worth a good deal. Try buying a replacement part from a manufacturer in Croatia or trying to get a pure importer to provide customer service for a gun that's not an obvious warranty issue and it becomes apparent that at least some of the extra money Springfield is charging is well spent.
 
The XD is still made by HS Produkt though. And Springfield puts their own name on it. Also, i think S&W makes the PPK for Walther and they put walthers name on it. And Walther makes the m&p 22 pistol and puts S&W on it. Crazy. It doesnt matter too much when both are good, known companies, but sometimes you dont know who really makes what.
 
Winchester/Browning/FN fall pretty well into this category. They are owned by the same company, and share many designs. With the only real difference between them being the aesthetics and a couple hundred dollars on the price tag.

For example:
The Browning Gold/Winchester SX2/FN SLP. Same gun different style.
Or Browning BAR/Winchester SXR/ FN AR. Again, same rifle, with minor feature changes.
Or Winchester SXP/ and FN P12

I'm sure there are several others there.
 
^ Do any of those come with a better warranty or noticeable advantages?

A few years ago the Ford Escape and the Mazda Tribute were identical underneath the exterior sheetmetal... but the Mazda came with a 50K bumper-to-bumper and the Ford was 36K.
I dont recall the price being significantly higher on the Mazda tho.
 
The XD is still made by HS Produkt though.
Click to expand...
Sure. But Springfield stands behind it, provides spare parts, factory service, etc. Trying getting all that from a maker in another country and it becomes obvious that at least some of the extra cost that you pay now that it's marked "Springfield" is worth it.
And Springfield puts their own name on it.
Click to expand...
That's pretty common in the firearm world and has been for many years. Walther and Manurhin is one notorious example that comes to mind.

Springfield also rebadges some Imbel products in addition to the Croatian guns.

STI sold the Grand Power K100 as the STI-GP6 for awhile. Sears put the J.C. Higgins name on a number of of makers' products.

Sometimes the rebadging is advantageous to the buyer, sometimes it's a wash, sometimes it can cause problems when a lower quality product is sold under a brand that is generally considered to be a premium mark.
 
Love to say that Browning Citoris are made BY Miroku
Click to expand...
The fact they are made by the same company doesn't always mean the end products are similar

Miroku builds Brownings to Browning's specifications, and uses Browning's designs
 
Back to what I think was the original question, I'd propose Marlin/Glenfield and perhaps some models of Savage/Stevens. There were also number of firearms that were sold by department stores under their brand name, Sears for example. Sears sold the Winchester '94 with the Sears name on it, I don't think it would bring the same price at auction as a Winchester roll stamp.
 
There were also number of firearms that were sold by department stores under their brand name, Sears for example. Sears sold the Winchester '94 with the Sears name on it, I don't think it would bring the same price at auction as a Winchester roll stamp.
Click to expand...

There was a time when Sears sold Winchester 94's under the "Ted Williams" label.

Marlin Model 30 (336 ) was sold there under the J. C. Higgins label......

IIRC, Ted Williams was a baseball player ..... and "J. C. Higgins" was a made up name taken from "John Higgins", a book keeper at Sears.
 
Back in the 90s there were a few European car brands known for their, shall we say, loose interpretation of the word "quality".

Two examples were the Spanish marque, Seat ("Sei-at") which produced cars unable to cope with the weather outside the Iberian peninsula, whilst being somewhat inefficient, and unreliable, but cheap. Then there was the Czech marque, Skoda, whose existance spawned no end of poor jokes

(What do you call a Skoda with two exhaust pipes? A wheel-barrow! Haha-hoohoo! Why do Skodas have heated rear windows? To keep your hands warm as you push...! Guffaw!! You get the idea.)

Anyway, in the late 90's both these brands were bought out by VW who also own Audi. After an extensive and very successful re-branding campaign, Seats were seen as the youthful peppy brand for those young at heart, whilst Skodas became the smart shopers choice of a quality product without the price.

All this is to illustrate that you can essentially buy a Seat or Skoda and be buying the same engine, chassis, build and similar performance/style as an Audi priced 40-50% higher.

In other words one of the only remaining reasons to specifically buy an Audi, beyond some exclusive performance models, is the badge. For day-to-day driving it is just that badge that will show any difference in the quality of one's journey.

The connection with guns?

Well, I'd like to know which are the brands for which, to all intents and purposes, the buyer is paying a premium for the letters stamped on the side of the slide?

Which companies managed to raise their retail price by virtue of their name?

I can think of a few, but my opinion is purely based on what I've read here and not on any real hands-on experience of the wider gun market, so I'll just see what others come up with.

(PS, let's keep this civil, eh? They're just brands, not family honours!)
Click to expand...

Being a car guy and a gun guy I like the this topic.

I think that there are a few problems with your initial analogy. In the US, the market I am familiar with, the same argument can be made for VW vs Audi. A Passat is a basically a A6 and the Jetta is an A4. There is a difference in price but that is not really the issue.

I would argue that the difference is not just a few letters. The cars chassis and guts are the same but the chips on the engine are not. They are setup differently. They perform differently. The fit and finish on a Audi in the US is superior to the VW. I have owned both. Real napa leather vs bonded leather plastic and even options like alcantara inserts. VW does offer some napa but only at higher premium price. There are more features and options in the Audi brand. The guts might be the same but the end product differs.

Also the support you get from the dealership is not the same. Every Audi dealer I have ever dealt with handed me a loaner car anytime my car was in for service. VW has never given me a loaner. The facilities are nicer. There scheduling system is better. I have been able to develop a relationship with the service manager of Audi dealerships, in order to get parts faster and cheaper, that I could not do with WV dealers. I could go on and on but you get the gist of what I am saving.

These subtle differences may or may not be worth the extra $$$ only the individual consumer can decide for themselves but presenting that it is an apples to apples comparison is simply not the case.

To the world of firearms one of the best recent example of the question you are asking is the Sig P225 vs the Sig P6. The Sig P225 is a commercial gun imported into the US by Sig Sauer/Sig Arms and sold to the general public. They were sold in their day for $500- $650 depending when you bought them.

Then there is the P6 which was a contract gun sold to German LEOs which were imported into the US by people like PW Arms as surplus. They were sold at one time used as low at $250 and unissued guns around $325-$350. They were a great deal and you will see most people refer to the P6 as a P225 and vice versa.

However there are differences. Not all P6s will shoot hollow points. The older feedramp was designed for ball ammo. They have a heavy mainspring IIRC 28#s which make the DA horrible. They did this to ensure it would fire hard primers. It also has a funny hammer with a ring/hook so that LEO armorers could tell if the gun was dropped. Generally speaking IMHO they are not finished as well as the commercial versions but that point is often debated. These can all be fixed but does it make the gun a P225?

The market says it does not. If you put a used P225 in a classified you can get $500 to $650 depending on condition a recent batch of P6s and they sold in 15 minutes for $419 from Dan's Ammo. The market says their is a difference just like the market says the Audi A6 is worth more than a VW Passat.

You can make the same analysis of the Beretta 92FS vs the M9. There are small differences and the price difference is smaller here but they are essentially the same gun but the market says they are different.

People keep bringing up the Sears guns of old. I will also point out that every single Sears appliance is a re-branded model from a major manufacturer yet the Kenmore name is still stronger than some of the brands that make the Kenmore goods. :eek: People actually pay more for the Kenmore brand.

Whenever you ask questions of "Value" you get subjective answers because it is fundamentally a subjective decision. Even when it is a true apples to apples comparison subjective factors move people to make choices. No way around it. Trying to break it down to an objective analysis is not possible IMHO but it is a fun discussion.
 
Last edited:
Like Dashunde said

Who's going to come out and say they bought a BMW or HK because of the name?? Of course they're reasons will be backed up by some sort of product-based reasoning other than pure prestige, hopefully.
Click to expand...

These are the main reasons I dumped my Glocks (have owned a bunch over the years) and finally went all in with HK .45 USPs (standard and tactical models)
- Reduced recoil system turns recoil into a smooth pulse instead of an abrupt snap
- Match grade trigger and barrel
- Outstanding ergonomics
- Incredibly durable surface coating
- Hammer fired instead of striker (more versatility IMO)
- 100% reliability with all ammo (although lead bullets are not recommended in the polygonal barrel)
- Ambi magazine release button on trigger guard
- Superb fit and finish
- Aesthetically a work of art
- The tapered shape of the slide naturally draws your eyes right to the sights

Does it have it's own flaws? Sure, but would I bet the farm on any other pistol? Not a chance! Like others have said... I also think most of the more vocal HK critics have probably never fired one. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
So you bought an HK for a specific set of features. Good. It doesn't however mean that some people may not add to their budget to buy something with an HK roll-mark.

I also think most of the more vocal HK critics have probably never fired one.
Click to expand...

Have there been any in this thread? I've not noticed any myself. In fact there has been no brand-bashing, just some views stating that some brand-names may carry a premium that others do not.

Someone thinking a brand is not worth what they charge is not bashing.
It's economics.
 
I did not say there were bashers in this particular thread- just been around long enough to have seen it happen on forums and in person.
 
So you bought an HK for a specific set of features. Good. It doesn't however mean that some people may not add to their budget to buy something with an HK roll-mark.
Click to expand...

Maybe they do spend more for the name without really understanding why.
Whether they know it or not, or even care, they're certainly getting much more than meets the eye with an HK.
Read on...

Someone thinking a brand is not worth what they charge is not bashing.
It's economics.
Click to expand...

Lets talk about those economics, and I'll drag CZ in while I'm at it.
Many would say CZ is worth the money, right?

Consider:
CZ labor rates compared to HK's in Germany and the US. (has no bearing on the end product, but it is factored into the price)
CZ's internal machining appears to be chewed by tungsten toothed beavers, HK's are clean, precise and appear to have undergone several additional tumbling/smoothing processes (mine anyway).
Compare CZ's paint-like coating to HK's.

Thats really just a start... the additional effort and expense contained in the HK may not matter to many, myself included at $1000 for a poly 45.
I know what was in my HK and what was in my CZ... Personally, I'd rather be somewhere in between them with one of the many other brands.

Is the HK worth it? Yea, if the extra money is available and those features & attention to detail are a priority for the buyer...
So did someone buy an HK for its name? Or for the name because they know what was put into its production?
Who knows...
 
The OP was about which brands people might be paying extra for or buying altogether because of the brand name they carry. I had some thoughts on the matter. So did others.

There was a branch of the discussion looking at the same product sold for more or less, but under a different name.

The thread was not "which brands are perfectly justified in having a higher price tag attached because of A, B and C?".
Nor is it about HK, although HK has been discussed.

As you point out, there is no way of knowing exactly why people bought a gun for the most part, but by that same logic, posting a stack of production comparisons won't help either. You still don't know if the end user bought it for the name.

I find it interesting that the most vocal opponents of discussing what is a fairly innocuous topic are either current or past HK owners.

Once more: this thread is not a personal attack on your own gun choices!!
 
Last edited:
back in the very early 70s, my whining little brother finally convinced my family to get a snowmobile. And they discovered that one could actually have fun in the winter without having to skate or ski.

At the time, the "Cadillac" of snow machines was considered to be the Arctic Cat. They cost more than others, so they must be better, right?

The same engines and performance was available in several other brands, but Arctic Cat owners acted like they were a cut above.

My mother (who had her own way with words) said they acted as if their s... didn't stink.

Certain Harley Davidson owners sneer at "rice burners" (Japanese bikes)

Some HK fans remind me of Arctic Cat owners....of course, some GLock fans remind me of idiots, so that means nothing, really....
:rolleyes:
 
As you point out, there is no way of knowing exactly why people bought a gun for the most part, but by that same logic, posting a stack of production comparisons won't help either. You still don't know if the end user bought it for the name.

I find it interesting that the most vocal opponents of discussing what is a fairly innocuous topic are either current or past HK owners.
Click to expand...

What I'm trying to point out is that sometimes the name says a lot about what is put into the product - the obvious features & style, and the not so obvious manufacturing processes.
Whether or not the buyer actually distills that info during their decision is anyones guess.
Few would admit to blindly buying one on name alone.

HK is a great example to use here because of their high price, name recognition, and their obvious & not so obvious attributes.
 
What I'm trying to point out is that sometimes the name says a lot about what is put into the product - the obvious features & style, and the not so obvious manufacturing processes.
Whether or not the buyer actually distills that info during their decision is anyones guess.
Few would admit to blindly buying one on name alone.

HK is a great example to use here because of their high price, name recognition, and their obvious & not so obvious attributes.
Click to expand...

Sometimes people just assume that a brand equates to certain intrinsic qualities. Sometimes they do, sometimes less so: that is where marketing comes in.

Unless you know how much more HK production costs than others and that it fully accounts for HK's higher retail price, then those conclusions are conjecture.

So you're using an assumption to disprove assumptions by other posters that some HK buyers are heavily drawn by the brand name.
Doesn't seem like sound logic to me.

I understand that you don't agree with the premise of the thread, but this is about people's impressions regarding certain brands impact on choice of purchase, not absolutes.
I never expected posters to have a window on the thought process of <INSERT BRAND> buyers, when they put cash on the counter, and they haven't claimed to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top