I know a women who ones a .380 Accu Tec and it looks pretty decent. It is alot better than some of the lower priced guns I have seen (Jennings, Bryco, etc.) I think it is made by the same family though.
The BL9 is supposed to be junk but the .380 isn't junk.
February 26, 2003, 02:29 AM
The BL 9 picture in the first pic has been discontinued...however the XL 9 is still available...which is almost exactly the same, except that it is in stainless finish, and has iron sights.
February 26, 2003, 02:44 AM
I am actually interested in getting one of the XL 9's...however like the first poster, I am unsure of their quality...However from the pics I have seen they look like quality guns...But looks can be decieving.
I really just want a cheap pocket gun for the times that I cant carry my full sized pistol.
I figure as long as it will fire at least twice before it jams...it is better than nothing. 2 shots of 9 in the gut should be enough to let me excape with my life...but I am a starving student, so my funds are restricted.
They just seem like a better choice than a jennings/bryco....
And BTW...they are made by different companies from what I am aware of...Accutek is made by excel industries in chino CA...Jennings is made by bryco...also located in CA, but in costa mesa.
Do you honestly want to compare a couple of Accu-Teks to this...?
Like the man once said, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". :confused:
February 26, 2003, 08:08 AM
I thought people complained that Glocks were ugly...
The stainless one isn't too bad...
But the HK made going into this thread and viewing the pics worth it! :)
February 26, 2003, 09:02 AM
thanks for the better pictures. I handled the glock look alike this weekend at a funshow. I picked it up to see what it was and almost threw it down. The quality from the outside seemed hideous, i did not try trigger pull etc.
I mean if you want a plinker give it a try. I would have to put a minimum of a couple of thousand rounds through these things before i would consider using them for SD, and even then i wouldn't . I mean i'd go buy a beat to hell S&W .38 and saw the barrel off with a hacksaw and end up with a better pocket gun than either of these things, but then i am a gunsnob after all:)
February 26, 2003, 09:05 AM
The P-7 and the P-5 were the only beautiful guns Ive seen so far.:neener:
February 26, 2003, 10:51 AM
What a bunch of gun snobs! They should call this forum The High Nose instead. :D
February 26, 2003, 03:12 PM
This is a pair of beautiful guns and I am not a Gun snob but know beauty
February 26, 2003, 03:21 PM
Now thems some purty guns. I've read nothing but glowing reviews about that company. That bluing and those colors offset by those simple grips is art. Far nicer than my 3rd gen horsey.
Fellas, I don't claim to know much about the Accu-Teks, except the Gunshop Lizard at Guncraft who tried to sell me his bottom-barrel stuff saved it for dead last. No sights of any kind? Um...Please buy this Kia. Has no windshield, but hey, it's inexpensive transportation... :rolleyes:
I think if I was REALLY limited to under 200 FunTickets and HAD to have a new gun, I'd go with Hi-Point, that at least we know feeds and fires ANYTHING. It's AT LEAST as ugly a line as the Accu-Teks! ;)
February 26, 2003, 09:11 PM
I mean, there are some cheap ugly guns, no doubt. Ruger autopistols have never been mistaken for being things of beauty, but they don't have a lot of zinc alloy in them, either.
Ugly does serve a purpose at times, though. Nothing pretty about my PPC/Steel Challenge revolver. But it works slicker than grass through a goose... (or was that wadcutters through a hard drive?)