"The best I can afford". I bet thats got figure pretty heavily in some(lots) of peoples equations.
Why do people buy BMWs instead of Hyundais? Both are adequate and reliable transportation. If you get an excellent version of each companies car the quality and workmanship differences will be obvious but both will get you back and forth to work.
In the last month I have returned 3 ParaOrdnance, 2 Rugers, and one Kahr for repair. These were all new guns that customers purchased and immediately had problems with. Every manufacturer has a few lemons but the incidence of poor quality is much higher in some brands.
In the last month I have returned 3 ParaOrdnance, 2 Rugers, and one Kahr for repair. These were all new guns that customers purchased and immediately had problems with. Every manufacturer has a few lemons but the incidence of poor quality is much higher in some brands.
Youre right;
as does benelli and HK.
all three make fine firearms.
Beretta has been around for 500 years and their customer service SUCKS.
(sorry to wreck your analogy)
as does benelli and HK.
all three make fine firearms.
I have had several rossi guns over the years and found them to be reliable well made guns. I think taurus has come a long way over the years, quality has improved. I have rented several guns before purchaseing and surprised at times that the most expensive gun is not always my favorite.
I feel Taurus has actually gotten worse in recent years, and the acquisition of Rossi has dragged that company down with them. The products they churn out now are near junk, in my experience.
Again, we fall back to my old "scale of quality"; Crap, Good, and Good Enough. The two extremes are easy to define, its the Good Enough where preference, price, and intended use come into play.
Again, we fall back to my old "scale of quality"; Crap, Good, and Good Enough. The two extremes are easy to define, its the Good Enough where preference, price, and intended use come into play.
Beretta has been around for 500 years and their customer service SUCKS.
(sorry to wreck your analogy)
You misunderstood, I meant being owned by me.
Right, High Point = Crap, Glock = Good, 1911 = Good enough.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Just messing with you Dustin.
In my small array of 1911s I have a Kimber and a Charles Daley, the CD was half the cost of the Kimber. In the last several years they both go bang, feed and function have never let me down. Both are full size and all metal. I would leave the house with either one and feel well protected. So, sometimes something that cost less is also an acceptable alternative. IMHO
To me firearms are like anything else, they have models and price ranges that fit fine depending on the intended use.
If bought for an investment a big name gun would most likely hold more value over time than a smaller name.
If bought for plinking/occasional use, I see no difference. In this case I will use single action 22's as an example. I have owned both a Ruger Single Six and the Heritage versions. Aside from the fit and finish, both worked equally well for shooting cans and the occasional small game. Therefore in my opinion and for this use there is no difference in the two guns.
For self defense/heavy use, I would say the advantage rides with the bigger names. I am assuming in this case that the gun is fired often with a high shell count. I would want this gun to be of a higher quality and to have a proven track record.
Personally, I have a mix of mid level to low level guns. I own Rugers, Smiths, Marlins, Heritage, and yes Hi-Point. I have not yet made it to the point in my life where I add any of the upper level (i.e. Sig, Wilson, etc) to my collection.
If bought for an investment a big name gun would most likely hold more value over time than a smaller name.
If bought for plinking/occasional use, I see no difference. In this case I will use single action 22's as an example. I have owned both a Ruger Single Six and the Heritage versions. Aside from the fit and finish, both worked equally well for shooting cans and the occasional small game. Therefore in my opinion and for this use there is no difference in the two guns.
For self defense/heavy use, I would say the advantage rides with the bigger names. I am assuming in this case that the gun is fired often with a high shell count. I would want this gun to be of a higher quality and to have a proven track record.
Personally, I have a mix of mid level to low level guns. I own Rugers, Smiths, Marlins, Heritage, and yes Hi-Point. I have not yet made it to the point in my life where I add any of the upper level (i.e. Sig, Wilson, etc) to my collection.
Ask yourselves this question, if someone would offer any of you for FREE any of the following guns which would you choose?
Colt SA Army or Uberti
Colt AR 15 or DPMS
Wilson Combat or Springfield Armory
Benelli M4 or Remington 1100
Colt SA Army or Uberti
Colt AR 15 or DPMS
Wilson Combat or Springfield Armory
Benelli M4 or Remington 1100
