Posted: 5/28/2004 2:18:21 PM EDT
|
Everytime I have posted an negative opinion of a firearm there will inevitibly be a bunch of guys who post "I love My (CAI, Hesse, Hi Point, etc.)" and go on to call me a snob. Usually it is accompanied by "As soon as I took it apart and rebuilt with better parts it it stopped failing to feed/failing to fire" or some similar allowance. These opinions also tend to come from that group of guiys capable of shooting 1 MOA or better with their SKS and G3 clone. To me I never understood the concept of a "shooter" unless we are talking about surplus historical firearms such as a K98 that has long been fried that is still interesting for it's history. But apparantly some guys buy cheap, unreliable and poorly manufactured firearms and declare them "good" simply because they can (or can be made to) cycle ammunition. They seem to feel that mere function of a weapon constitutes "reliability." By that criteria I guess a Lorcin or Jennings is a "shooter." As for me, I expect a LOT more from a weapon. I expect it to be made as well as any firearm purchased by my Grandfather. I fully expect any firearms I buy "new" to function out of the box and under any conditions "I" as a civilian may subject it to. I also expect it to be passable to my grandchildren in a functional state. And for this "expectation" I am usually labelled a "gun snob." Are my expectations really too high? |
|
A pistol that doesnt function is really too short to be a decent club. A rifle that doesnt function is long enough but kinda heavy. I prefer them to function when I buy them. I dont have any kids and I plane to buried with all my guns in my car with the doors welded shut. |
| Hard to answer the question because my standards for evaluating a nice loaded 1911 are very different than my standards for evaluating a romanian AK pattern rifle. In the former case I fully expect high quality finish, very good accuracy, and complete and total reliability after break-in and assuming proper ammo is used. In the latter case my evaluation consists primarily of three questions: does it reliably cycle ammo? does it have the rudimentary expected levelof accuracy? is it safe and sturdy? |
no. what YOU expect and what I expect are different. would you consider firearms a hobby? you probably do, at least a little bit. do you think that people might get enjoyment and satisfaction from taking a "pos", "cheap" CETME, working on it, and making it function reliably? 
|
|
How do I judge a Firearm? Easy… (1) When I pull the trigger I expect it to go bang…always (2) When said firearm goes bang, I expect it to be accurate enough to hit what I aim at. (3) Fit and Finish… not an issue unless shiny steel finish improves (1) or (2) … any other features or requirements are luxuries Andy |
Sound's reasonable to me. I've even had people try to talk me out of off-loading a firearm that hasn't proven reliable. Bottom line for me, is if it doesn't function- I don't care how elite owning it may seem- it's gone. Being dead, just ain't fashionable for me. Beyond function, I expect accuracy. Not necessarily Sub-MOA. Just needs to deliver the accuracy for the distance I anticipate employing the weapon. Fit...I'm left handed- Screw the fit. They're all built by or for right handers  Expception being the Glock, I prefer using my trigger finger to release the mag while keeping the sites on target. The same goes for the slide release, no changing my grip. YMMVSly |
Very good SteyrAUG A firearm is a tool, a tool used for plinking, hunting, killing efficiently, self protection , CCW carry, and even a flash gun that acts as a status symbol. As I have many tools in my garage for working on the vehicles and house hold tasks. I need many firearms to preform separate and individual required tasks also. What may be important say as a CCW weapon, may not be important as a survival type weapon. The task determines the requirements. There are some guns carried a lot and used very little ... and then there are some carried very little and used a lot and then there are the rest inbetween.............
|
|
part of the fun of those "junk" rifles is learning to fix them up. I have yet to buy one that was a complete POS. and for the money saved the small investement in a few parts to make it a "GOOD" rifle is a pretty good deal. Yes CAI has turned out some shit. I have also seen them make it right everytime that happened. I don't plan on taking my CAI hesse FAL or CETME to war. I have better rifles to fill that roll. I can say i have learned a HELL of a lot about the design and function of those rifles buy buying those "crappy" guns. My FAL has been refinished, and parts replaced to the point i will put it next to any DSA on the market now. And i still came in 200.00 cheaper. I don't buy guns to sell them so investment and retained value is not a concern. mike |
well put. |
|
I hear ya, Steyr. I'd rather have a few near-perfect weapons than a Homak full of crap. I love the hilljacks and bangers at the range next to me shooting an old rusty Century G3 who say shit to me like, "This shoots almost as good as that Heckler and Cock you got there, and I only paid $300 for it!" Yeah. I can't remember the last time my 91 malfed. Oh, yeah, I can...NEVER. 
|
A bullet from his gun would kill just as fast as a bullet from your gun ..... |
Not if he can't get a round to feed. |
Personally, if it doesn't work flawlessly coming out of the box, I don't want it. My bro-in-law buys POS cars, fixes them up and sells them. Everyone's hobby's are different. I don't buy "fixer-upper" houses. I don't buy "fixer-upper" cars. I don't buy "fixer-upper" computers. I don't buy "fixer-upper" boomsticks. I don't have the money to waste on buying faulty shit that I may or may not get working as good as I want and I don't have the time to waste fixing what shouldn't be broke in the first place. But everybody's different. Some people like to buy boat anchors and turn them into firearms. I prefer to put time my and effort into working in the yard, playing with the kid and putzing around the garage. |
|
There are certain firearms I would never buy. Hi-Point, Jennings, Lorcin, & Llama all fall into that category. Why? Because I think I can afford to spend a little (or in some cases a lot) more money on a firearm that I know will do it's job every time as long as I do my job every time. I had a friend who carried a Llama Minimax, and he said it never failed him. I didn't have the heart to point out the fact that you will be hard pressed to find a firearm that will fail from being carried. That it went bang the one time he took it to the range and shot a magazine of ball ammo through it doesn't prove anything to me other than that it was capable of firing one magazine of ball ammo. I don't mind buying a fixer upper every once in a while, but when I do those firearms are usually quality firearms that have been used. I don't like the idea of buying something as a fixer upper when it has never been used. I've bought Springfield Armory, Enfield, Remington, Ithaca and god knows what else as fixer uppers, but none of these firearms would fall into the category of unreliable firearms when they were new. After all - a reliable brand/model of firearm is one that goes bang every time without having had any parts replaced. Though of course, at one point all firearms become old firearms, and with age and use the reliablity decreases. But the true measure of a quality firearm versus a "cheap" firearm is how soon that downward turn sets in. |
|
Just as a matter of discussion.... Guns don't have to be expensive to be "good". I have a Century Arms FAL with an Imbel receiver that is a 100% rifle. I paid $400 for it. It is reasonably accurate and never fails to shoot. Here it is, in action:  So. Why do I need a $1,000 FAL when I paid $400 for this one? |
|
#1 reliable #2 accurate as is required #3 finish I will not carry a pistol untill I have shot at least 1k rounds thru it to make sure it goes bang. I has a P229 once that wouldnt cycle about half the time with any ammo. I called SIG , they said it was just dirty after 100 rounds or so that was the problem. I sold it as soon as I could. Thats not reliability |
I forgot that I have owned a firearm that many would consider a cheap bad firearm - a Norinco M14. If I had had the $ I would've bought a Springfield, but alas I was just a poor student at the time. I did tinker a bit with the M14 and when I slapped a scope on it it did manage to shoot some outstanding groups. So yes, there are always exceptions to the rule. 
|
Actually the Imbel on Imbel M444 is a pretty good FAL. The problem with the CAI Imbels are usually crap grade part kit, pot metal US 922r compliance parts and a bonehead build. Editted to add: It's funny you bring up FALs. I'd personally rather have a $1000 DSA than a $3,000 FN original. I happen to believe the FN is gonna be better in quality, and certainly has the edge in pedigree, but the DSA is close enough in terms of quality and reliability that I won't spend the extra 2k given the DSA alternative. Now if the 89 Import Ban magically went away and FN imports were about $1,000 I'd buy the FN. So again I reject the idea that I am a gun snob. I just want quality, reliable firearms that I can depend on. |
|
I tend to agree with TBS. I like a challenge. I got an AR kit instead of buying a prebuilt because I perfer to work on things myself. I may get a CETME or other rifle (when I get the money) because they are cheap. I have a reliable rifle now. I enjoy working on/fixing things. Like my single stack to double stack AK. There is a place for "fixer upper" stuff, but it takes a special breed to enjoy it. |
exactly |
|
If a handgun doesn't work "Out Of The Box" I have no use for it. Regardless of it's brand, caliber or type. I refuse to pour money into gunsmithing to make something reliable. I don't mind enhancing a pistol to make it more of what I want, but reliability is non negotiable. I consider handguns tools for personal defence, not something to brag about owning. Rifles are more of a pride of ownership thing to me. I want one that's reliable, but I doubt I will ever have the need to use one to defend my family or myself (in a realistic scenario - not some SHTF fantasy). I don't mind doing some tweaking to get the most out of a rifle. But I'm not going to rebuild one just to make it function. |
| I judge a firearm buy function first. It must be completely reliable. Then by fit and finish, finish being the least important. Now, I expect things to be what they are and am pleased when they prove to be more than that and disappointed when they prove to be less than that. I expect more out of an $800 bushmaster than I do a $300 SAR1. What I have found is that my $129 Yugo sks is more than I expected and I am exceedingly pleased with it. Same for my keltec P-11 and SAR1. It does not bother me that I chose to do a little parts swap on the last for a better trigger or a little polishing on the keltec. However, I would expect the Bushmaster, Kimber, Colt to be flawless in everyway right out of the box. I would expect their performance to equal or exceed their cost. Therefore it is a cost benefit analysis. One should remember however, particularly with eastblock firearms that they would cost far more were they made here commercially. What would an SKS made by Remchester with US commercial grade wood cost???? FWIW every HK product I've ever handled was less than I would have expected for their price. Hope that answers your question. |
|
StyerAUG, I'm with you! I've invested in some real fixer-uppers (I once bought a single-action .22 at a garage sale for $15 just to work on it), but nowadays I'm really interested more in shooting something that works than fixing something that doesn't. I wouldn't call you a gun snob, but instead someone who would rather spend his time and money on something else besides fixing up a POS. After all, you can put lipstick on a pig, but in the end, it's still a pig.... |
|
Accuracy is paramount. Then comes reliability, the fit or finish a distant third. I'd add a fourth criterion for certain rifles, historical significance. I admit I obsess a little on accuracy, I don't even own anything in 7.62x39 anymore for that reason. If a gun right out of the box does not give me acceptable accuracy, it's gone. I won't spend money on it.
|
|
I certainly don't judge them the same way as you, Steyr Aug... You're too fucking picky. It needs to fit ALL of the following criteria to be considered "Good" to you: -Needs Price Tag Of Over $1500.00 MINIMUM. -Needs Accuracy Of A Remington 700 PSS -- Even in Full-Auto Mode -Needs To Be Capable Of Full Auto Firing The only exceptions to the "Steyr-Aug Good Gun" criteria are: -It is good if it says HK, Steyr, [insert exotic or extremely high priced firearm name here] -It is good if it is ANY FIREARM YOU INTEND TO RUN AS A GROUP BUY. What? Was I too realistic in describing your judging criteria?  |
No my criteria is more like SGBs... Simple......would I trust it to defend MY LIFE WITH IT !!!!! I have plenty of under 1k semi autos that won't shoot 1MOA that I consider excellent firearms. Most of my AR15s come to mind specfically. |
I'll have to agree. Reliability has to be #1. |
|
Egronomics and function are the only things that matter to me. The only gun that I have that I would consider crappy is a Marlin 60 that I got to teach my girlfriend to shoot on. I just couldn't justify paying much for a trainer, I got the marlin, with rust spots on the barrel, for $30. And suprisingly enough, it has functioned perfectly. I have a franken AR that gun snobs would consider crappy, but I have several thousand rounds through it with no malfunctions, and it is close to MOA so by my standards it is not crappy. The only gun that I presently own that has had any malfunctions is a SA mil-spec 1911, both FTFs were on the same magazine, hundreds of rounds apart, so I suspect that the magazine is the culprit. As far as the reason why people who own crappy guns, Hi-Point etc., say they are great is because they are in denial that they got fucked. |
|
Don't be dissin my high point.... MAN Actually the 9mm carbine is not that bad for 150.00. Mine has a couple of thousand rounds through it and has only been cleaned once. That was because the trigger finally collected so much grit i couldn't pull it anymore. OK actually it is a POS but it shoots reasonably accuratly and very seldom jams with ball ammo. It's no GREAT gun and barely rises above POS standards by construction but frankly i kept it over a couple of AK's i owned. mike |