Tell me about H&K Pistols


PDA






Sgt.Murtaugh
October 28, 2013, 10:19 AM
I was looking at one of these the other day, and it's a really nice gun. Obviously, like other HK products, it's incredibly pricey for a polymer pistol. The dealer was asking $1199 for it. At that price, I can get a really nice semi custom 1911!

http://www.hk-usa.com/civilian_products/p2000sk_general.asp

So do you guys have any experience with HK pistols? Seems like you are buying a name more than anything. Are they worth the extra money? I do have a Springfield XD(M) and it has never failed me after 2000 rounds of shooting and I actually haven't even cleaned it yet. I just can't see a gun getting so much better that it would warrant the extra $400-600 you would spend to get something with the HK stamp on it.

Thoughts?

If you enjoyed reading about "Tell me about H&K Pistols" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
460Kodiak
October 28, 2013, 10:29 AM
You know man, I have been planning to start a similar thread. I'm interested in the HK45. Another member of the forum, who's opinion always seems to be rational and logical made a comment on another thread I started about the HK P7. He called it the myth of HK. I'm not trying to hijack your thread, but I'm going to invite him to participate in this one, as I am having the same issue you have, the price point. I love the gun, but $1000+ for a polymer gun seems really out of line, and I'm considering the XDm 5.25 as a result.

By the way, that price is too high for that gun.

Destructo6
October 28, 2013, 10:29 AM
For a "sub-compact", the SK really isn't much smaller than the, "full size" P2000.

I have one of each in .40. They're okay, but I would not pay $1,000 for either. Maybe they're more durable in 9mm, but shooting full power .40 will break parts, some catastrophically, in 7k-10k rounds. I've done it twice.

M2 Carbine
October 28, 2013, 10:31 AM
Decent guns but overpriced.

So do you guys have any experience with HK pistols?
Yeah.
Because of their terrible customer service I wouldn't buy another HK if it did sell for a decent price.

460Kodiak
October 28, 2013, 10:35 AM
In another thread, PabloJ posted,

After owning two expensive H&K pistols I finally realized the faux myth of Heckler & Koch greatness. Just couple of Mauser Werke employees that started making guns like G3 rifle in the 50s when West Germany was finally allowed to manufacture them. I no longer see reason to pay extra cash for their overpriced stuff. I don't give a .... if their handguns and submachine guns are carried by many (actually most if one takes project 69 weapon into consideration) elite military forces of the world.

PabloJ, I've heard a lot of fanboy talk from HK owners that say how they are the end all, be all of guns. Your opinion seems to differ in general. Your posts usually are well thought out and well written, so I invite you to chime in on this thread and share your impressions of HK, as I have the same questions about their guns in general that the OP has.

M2 Carbine
October 28, 2013, 10:50 AM
PabloJ, I've heard a lot of fanboy talk from HK owners that say how they are the end all, be all of guns.
You also hear the same thing about Glocks.

I own three Glocks, G19, G26, G33, G36 and owned a G17, and people have shot Glocks on my shooting range (about 19 guns I guess). EVERY Glock I've been in contact has malfunctioned.

So..........don't pay too much attention to what the "fanboys" say.

2wheels
October 28, 2013, 11:03 AM
I recently purchased my first HK handgun, a used V3 P30 in 9mm. I got what I think was a decent deal for it, 980 bucks after taxes and fees and the gun came with 3 extra mags and a kydex holster. I had actually initially wanted the P2000sk but fell in love with the grip on the P30.

I'm far from an HK fanboy, but my impressions of them is that they build a pretty darned good pistol. Are they expensive? Heck yeah. Are they worth it? Only you can decide, it's your money. You certainly can get the job done with a cheaper handgun.

I probably wouldn't spend 1200 on the gun you're looking at though. Dealers around me were quoting 999 for a new V3 version.

Devonai
October 28, 2013, 11:09 AM
I have owned both the USP Full-Size and Compact in .40, as well as the Full-Size in .45. I have a lot of love for these pistols, but (ironically perhaps) the high resale value made them too tempting not to trade when my eyes wandered elsewhere.

These days, it seems like a used USP (or perhaps a P2000) is the only way to get an H&K product at a reasonable price. As the others have mentioned, there just doesn't seem to be any particular reason to spend more unless an H&K product is what you really, really want. I have been jonesing for a USP Compact 9mm lately but I don't really need one; ultimately finding a good price on a used example will be the deciding factor.

wally
October 28, 2013, 11:10 AM
While I've not shot any of my HK pistols enough to break anything, their customer support was helpful enough getting me the parts to convert a used early production USP from DAO to the "variant 1" DA/SA I preferred, prices seemed pretty reasonable too, but this was not a warranty issue.

I tend to agree they are overpriced after actually shooting them, nice guns but nowhere near twice a good as the competition.

mr.trooper
October 28, 2013, 11:27 AM
You should buy one of those Zastava Tokarevs.

$230 gets you a battle proven pistol with excellent accuracy and reliability. It's not even big or clunky, but rather thin and svelt.

How can a pistol possibly be better than that? Why on earth pay $350 for a used Glock when you can get the same accuracy and reliability for $120 less? Waste of money for nothing.

And after all - its based on the 1911, which as everyone knows is the best gun ever invented. Its a win-win-win. The only way you can loose to buy anything else.

;)

usp9
October 28, 2013, 11:54 AM
Seems like you are buying a name more than anything.

Is this the same thing as a perceived difference between a $500 1911 and a big name 1911 at $4000? I suppose there is no difference in these guns either. Both work.

I think you answered your own question. If you doubt the quality or value then don't buy a HK. Stick with what you're comfortable with.

gym
October 28, 2013, 12:04 PM
That's why they make different colors.

M2 Carbine
October 28, 2013, 12:05 PM
Sometimes when she saw me buy some guns or gun stuff that seemed a little overpriced, my Wife used to ask me,

"Do you really need this more expensive *********, or you just spending the money to impress the other kids at the range?"


Truth is, my least expensive Kimber is just as reliable and shoots just as accurately as my high dollar Kimbers.


Trying to impress the other kids can get expensive.:D

Sgt.Murtaugh
October 28, 2013, 12:47 PM
Is this the same thing as a perceived difference between a $500 1911 and a big name 1911 at $4000? I suppose there is no difference in these guns either. Both work.

I think you answered your own question. If you doubt the quality or value then don't buy a HK. Stick with what you're comfortable with.
No, I didn't answer my own question because I'm not talking about "perceived value" I'm talking about actual value. Specifically, I mean what features are on an H&K that make it worth so much more money than the competition? Are they built with different processes or vastly superior materials?

Your $500 vs $4000 1911 analogy is off base. A $4000 1911 has a laundry list of features on it that a $500 1911 doesn't have. Sights, grip, fit and finish, guide rods, springs, triggers, etc. On top of that, a high end 1911 has a lot more handiwork from actual gunsmiths and guys who put in a lot of time making the gun perfect. This simply doesn't happen with polymer/mass production pistols.

From what I can tell with the HK pistols, it's just a higher price tag for the sake of being more expensive or exclusive. Then again, I did say "from what I can tell," hence this thread seeking others' opinions and information. Perhaps I am missing something and I've started this thread to find out what that may be.

Judging by your handle, I can tell you like HK products and I'm not trying to knock them or their fans by any means. Please don't take it as such.

PO2Hammer
October 28, 2013, 01:29 PM
I've owned several HK's and they have all been 100% reliable, no excuses.
Not a fan boy, I like Glocks, Berettas and Sigs too.
I'm looking at P2000 9mm as my next.
I think the quality is worth the money.

boricua9mm
October 28, 2013, 01:45 PM
I've owned a couple of HK pistols. Currently, my only ones are the USP45f and the P7. Comparing a German made HK to a Croatian XD isn't much of an apples-to-apples comparison for a few reasons.

For starters, you have to look at the culture of HK. They are a company that heavily invests in their workforce with the intentions of keeping those people around until they croak. They train their plant workers intensively prior to doing the actual job. This translates into a very high level of Quality Assurace & Quality Control that few other gun companies can even begin to approach. I don't know that HK has ever had to issue a recall on a firearm. Customer Service? Beats me, I've never had to use them, which is a bigger testament to the QA/QC that comes along with their products.

When you buy a German HK, you're getting burned on the currency exchange rate. Springfield is the sole proprietor of the HS2000 here in the US (yes, it is still called the HS2000 over in Croatia) and their deal allows them to avoid the crazy markup associated with the weak US dollar. Skilled labor in Germany is much more expensive than it is in Croatia. The German workforce also enjoys a long list of legal protections that make US labor Unions look pathetic. In other words, running a manufacturing facility in Germany isn't exactly child's play.

Feature-wise, HKs have cold hammer forged barrels with a service life of around 50,000 rounds. The steel they use is very high quality; they have a reputation for being extremely hard. In fact, refinishing an HK can be tough because the hardness of the steel doesn't always allow for an ideal finish. That's why you have extractors turning purple over time and you have the strange-looking slide stop levers. For some people, this is a deal-breaker for a gun of this price point, but most people don't buy an HK because they are pretty. For most HKs, you can have it your way when it comes to the trigger setup. I'd like to see them put out a new striker fired gun, but still, they offer a lot of versatility in their guns.

I don't own any $1,000 HKs, but I will point out that a price differential of $400 is what...a case of ammo? For someone on a budget who is new to shooting, that $400 may be a big deal. For someone who is a regular shooter, that $400 is a pittance for a gun that will be shot with any degree of regularity.

All that said, I carry Glocks. Heartless, cheap, ugly bricks with no soul, but they do the job and I don't have any emotional attachment to them.

Devonai
October 28, 2013, 01:50 PM
For someone who is a regular shooter, that $400 is a pittance for a gun that will be shot with any degree of regularity.

I am a regular shooter, and I take exception to this notion. $400 is twice my monthly car payment and almost half my rent. It is hardly a pittance under any circumstances, unless you are a sponsored competitive shooter or independently wealthy.

Sgt.Murtaugh
October 28, 2013, 01:53 PM
thanks for the post, now I'm beginning to see some advantages to spending that kind of money. Cold hammer forged barrels are indeed a huge plus.

Sam1911
October 28, 2013, 01:53 PM
Cold hammer forged barrels are indeed a huge plus.
Really? ;) If you're absolutely certain they are ... in a way that will matter somehow to your shooting, then yes. For the vast majority of shooters, including winning pistol competitors, whatever rifling method the maker chose to employ will do just fine for FAR more than 50,000 rounds. FAR more. (If you Glock or xD, or M&P barrel is "shot out" at 50,000 rounds, demand a refund!)

You can buy a lot of really solid and reliable handguns these days. Many makers will provide a pistol that will do all you could ask of it for as long as you can keep pulling the trigger.

H&K's not different in that regard. No, their materials aren't far ahead of any of the other major players. No, their tolerances aren't dramatically tighter (without sacrificing reliability somehow). No, they won't run 100,000 rounds longer than their competition without parts breakage.

It boils down to this: If you really appreciate the combination of features their guns offer, and the gun feels comfortable in your hand, and the price isn't too far outside your budget, buy it and be happy. If any of the competition's guns offer something you like a bit more, buy that instead. There's no reason at all to get an HK -- because it's an HK -- if something else fits you better or works in a more appealing manner.

Personally, I look to what the winners are using in the types of competition I shoot for guidance when thinking about what features I favor in a handgun.

"Practical" or "action" or "defensive" pistol shooting is dominated (i.e.: fast times and highest accuracy) by lower bore-axis guns that are striker-fired. So I don't tend to even consider bulky old style DA/SA guns like Sigs or HKs at all.

In the end, all that matters is what you'll shoot fastest with the best hits. If that could be an HK, get it. If it isn't, don't buy the name.

RainDodger
October 28, 2013, 02:01 PM
Nearly all of my semi-auto handguns are 1911 pattern, other than rimfires. I own one single poly-pistol. It's an H&K USP Compact in 9mm, which I bought brand new in about 1996.

It has never failed to function. It has handled all kinds of hand loads, as well as factory ammunition including some gov't issue +P that my agency had in stock for Uzi SMGs at the time.

I'd never say other pistols cannot do the same of course. As said above, buy what you like and what fits your hand and budget. Be happy. I've been happy with my H&K. For a plastic gun, it's pretty nice. :)

S&W620
October 28, 2013, 02:14 PM
I've owned a couple and find them to be very robust, accurate and reliable firearms. The one flaw, at least for me, are the triggers. Glock triggers are light years ahead as are m&p triggers. Some folks love the LEM's, but I have no experience with them.

Price is the thing that bothers a lot of folks,but 'expensive' is a very relative term. I found them to be great pistols provided you like the trigger.

boricua9mm
October 28, 2013, 02:42 PM
I am a regular shooter, and I take exception to this notion. $400 is twice my monthly car payment and almost half my rent. It is hardly a pittance under any circumstances, unless you are a sponsored competitive shooter or independently wealthy.

Your definition of "regular shooter" must be very, very different than mine. A case of 1,000 handgun rounds (to the tune of $400) would only last me a month. A month's worth of shooting and associated costs is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

tommy.duncan
October 28, 2013, 03:46 PM
They are worth the cash, I love my USP.
They are reliable, They will cycle anything. They can handle a steady diet of +p and +p+ without having to change springs more often. They are made to a higher standard then most firearms. JMO

Sam1911
October 28, 2013, 03:57 PM
Meaning no disrespect at all, but the phrases, "Made to a higher standard" and "In my opinion" are really very much at odds with each other.

A standard is a real, concrete thing. It isn't someone's opinion. It may be good or bad but it is a fixed, measurable aspect.

You wouldn't say, "this is constructed of 97% Iron, 2% Carbon, 0.75% Tungsten, 0.15% Molybdenum, and 0.1% Chromium, in my opinion." So you really shouldn't use the phrase "made to a higher standard" as a description of your opinion.

What standards does HK use for their handguns that exceeds in a valuable way the standards used by other manufacturers of service handguns?

JustinJ
October 28, 2013, 05:19 PM
My primary carry gun is a P2000sk in .40. I bought it new for $830 and it came with a .357 sig barrel as well. I love the gun but plan on changing it to a DAO as I think it's a much better option for CC. The gun is awesome, relatively low recoil and has been completely reliable. I generally carry the flush fit 9 round mags but have the 12 rounders with gap fill device as well. Was it worth the price? I'd say yes for those who can afford it but I wouldn't recommend one go broke trying to get one. I did pick up a used full size P2000 in great shape for $400 too but decided to sell it because it only gave me a little bit more barrel. Personally I think the P30 and HK45 are the best guns on the market but larger than what I want to carry. Given the price people pay for 1911's I can't see anybody judging one for paying over a grand on a HK45 as I have no doubt the latter is more reliable and durable than any 1911 ever run off an assembly line or made in a custom shop. Even if a 1911 could be as reliable/durable as a HK45 i'd take the extra capacity over the better accuracy any day for a real world handgun.

Old Dog
October 28, 2013, 06:03 PM
I worked for an employer that issued us the USP in 9mm, .40 and/or .45ACP. We finally went in another direction when the company no longer could nor would support us with both parts and service.

Decent enough pistols, totally unergonomic, oversized, possessed of average accuracy though fairly durable.

Overpriced. Not for me anymore.

CharlieDeltaJuliet
October 28, 2013, 06:14 PM
I just want to say that Hk customer service is one of the best I have ever delt with. I know own three of their rifles, they are absolutly rock solid. My experience with their handguns is with the USP. I put nearly 3k rounds without a burp hick up or malfunction, just as expected. I honestly think the Hk barrels are that much better. Especially after going to Columbus ,Ga and seeing a 416 with over 120,000 through it. The only replacement part was the buffer spring at around 100,000 rounds. Kind of cool to see it beat to carp and still shooting.. Only wish they would have let me shoot it...

Devonai
October 28, 2013, 06:40 PM
Your definition of "regular shooter" must be very, very different than mine.

Yes, it is, by about a factor of ten, apparently. I would limit my definition to anyone who practices regularly, regardless of number of rounds fired. Quantity does not necessarily equal quality, but if you can afford a thousand rounds a month, more power to you. I wish I could.

Anyway, the high cost of ammo is exactly why someone might consider a less expensive pistol, or at least a .22 copy of their carry piece (or equivalent). Justifying an H&K by pointing out that the price difference is only the equivalent of 1,000 rounds is like comparing sparkling wine with Dom Perignon.

wild cat mccane
October 28, 2013, 07:57 PM
Insight on hammer forged barrels, they explode when they break. :)

mmissile
October 28, 2013, 08:04 PM
Hk has been great for anything I needed[info, paperwork, etc]. As far as actual work on a pistol, one of my friends broke the safety off my early P9S. I sent them the pistol to have that fixed. When I got it back, it had 6 parts replaced in it that they considered too old[springs,buffer and such], and the safety lever. It was only 2 weeks, and FREE OF CHARGE. They did a detail cleaning while they had it apart. I've had 150-200 of their firearms, and that's the only time I've ever had to have them work on a single one. I did have a Model-4 break the frame, but it was because it had a bad buffer, and was in .380 caliber.

Sam1911
October 28, 2013, 08:08 PM
You've had 150-200 H&K guns? How in the world did you have time to shoot them all?

boricua9mm
October 28, 2013, 08:30 PM
Yes, it is, by about a factor of ten, apparently. I would limit my definition to anyone who practices regularly, regardless of number of rounds fired. Quantity does not necessarily equal quality, but if you can afford a thousand rounds a month, more power to you. I wish I could.

Proficiency with a duty/combat/defense pistol is attained through repetition and practice. If you're only shooting 1,200 rounds in a year, then in all likelihood the only proficiency attained is that of hitting a target at a casual snail's pace. When one practices engaging targets from various levels of readiness (from the holster, from low-ready, etc.) as well as magazine changes and target re-engagement, then 100 rounds a month is not going to be beneficial to maintaining all of those skill sets.

Anyway, the high cost of ammo is exactly why someone might consider a less expensive pistol, or at least a .22 copy of their carry piece (or equivalent).

This thread isn't about rimfire facsimiles, it's about HK pistols, or as it seems...slamming HK pistols. If the cost of 1,000 rounds is the difference between you shooting this year or going completely without, then by all means, go straight to the bottom of the barrel if you'd like.

Justifying an H&K by pointing out that the price difference is only the equivalent of 1,000 rounds is like comparing sparkling wine with Dom Perignon.

You've got it backwards. HK pistols need no justification. If the price difference between a Honda and an Acura is only a few fill-ups at the pump, why would you buy the basic Honda? To be able to say you spent less up front?

This board has a long-standing reputation of a cheapskate mentality. Some folks are adamant about buying the cheapest possible stuff, only to turn around and have to deal with the stress associated with the issues (*cough*Ruger*cough*).

HK makes excellent pistols. In the DA/SA category, they're one of the best production pistols you can buy. One can complain about the price, or they can try one for themselves. I'm not going to be buried with my money, so for me the choice is simple.

xwingband
October 28, 2013, 08:35 PM
I have a P30L and a P7. Both have been rock solid reliable.

HK gets a real hammering on price... but compared to the amount of ammo you'll send through it, it's not that bad. There also isn't a HUGE amount HK can do about it as explained above with their costs and the exchange rate stinking. That being said I got the P30L for a hair under $800 and the P7 for $600. Both are very good deals compared to if I had to buy them now.

We can go back and forth on fit and finish or other things, but I mostly like that HK is offering stuff that others aren't. I like a hammer fired gun on my P30L. I like the myriad of hand variations I can change it to. I like the magazine release and would put one on every pistol I own if it were possible.

It's an option and what's worht the extra $$$ to me may not be to you. For example I couldn't justify the HK45 price when I paired it with my dislike for a manual safety.

Sam1911
October 28, 2013, 08:39 PM
One can complain about the price, or they can try one for themselves. Certainly so. If your one and only gripe about the HKs is the price, then you're doing yourself a disservice. Going cheap is no better "value" in the end than buying the expensive option just because of its rumored reputation.

There is nothing at all to say that shooting one, even giving one a real workout over a period of trial testing, will convince you that they're a better option than many of the big name makes.

Try lots of guns and pick the one you actually make the most accurate hits with, the fastest. If on the off chance that does happen to be an HK, well, save your pennies.

RussB
October 28, 2013, 09:06 PM
I bought a used USP45f in '98, and recently picked up a used HK45. The USP was reliable, accurate and required no maintenance with 10,000+ rounds through it. It would go long intervals without cleaning, and ate up all my reloads, most of which were lead. The gun was big and blocky, with a rubbery feel to the trigger. Recoil was light. It's an easy gun to shoot. I sold it a couple years ago. Bummer

The HK45 is similar, but drastically more ergonomic. It's been reliable. Its accurate. Mine came with both the DA/SA and LEM trigger groups. I prefer the DA/SA for range work. The SA trigger is very nice, right about 4.3#

I own several other handguns in 45acp, Sig P220, M&P45, 4 1911's and a revolver. I like them all (that's why I own them!) and shoot them in local steel plate matches.

I've been shooting for only about 21 years, but I've found that the cheapest option is seldom the best option, and often it ends up being not-so-cheap in the long run.

A few hundred bucks isn't the deal breaker for me. I want a good gun and hate to get something just because it's cheaper, unless its also BETTER. I "save" money regarding my shooting addiction by reloading...well, not really, I just shoot more for the same expenditure!

how about a picture?


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v432/RussBert/HK/DSC06571.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/RussBert/media/HK/DSC06571.jpg.html)

HOOfan_1
October 28, 2013, 09:08 PM
Your definition of "regular shooter" must be very, very different than mine. A case of 1,000 handgun rounds (to the tune of $400) would only last me a month. A month's worth of shooting and associated costs is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

I shoot about 600 a month and it only costs me about $75.

RussB
October 28, 2013, 09:14 PM
To answer the question, HK pistols are reliable, accurate, come with excellent warranty and support. Triggers are mediocre, initial costs is high, as are the cost of spare magazines.

One thing I've seen is no one complains about their reliability or durability




I shoot about 600 a month and it only costs me about $75.


Now that is compelling information. ;)

Devonai
October 28, 2013, 09:38 PM
Buricua9mm's last post

Ok, I take your points. Myself personally, I've shot a lot on the government's dime this year, so I have to concede the point of cost analysis, since I didn't pay for the ammo. And I'll also concede that bringing up a .22 may not have been relevant.

However, the Air Force's M9 pistol qualification course is reasonably dynamic, and only requires 90 rounds. Similarly, the Adjutant General's competition also involves several dynamic pistol iterations, and clocks in at less than 200 rounds total (not counting the rifle portion).

I stand by my notion that proficiency does not require hundreds of rounds, but rather a challenging course of fire, good instructors, and the willingness to learn.

TennJed
October 28, 2013, 10:06 PM
Your definition of "regular shooter" must be very, very different than mine. A case of 1,000 handgun rounds (to the tune of $400) would only last me a month. A month's worth of shooting and associated costs is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

If you are spending $400 on 1000 rounds you are obviously not reloading. Which for someone that claims to shoot as much as you do so you can be proficient and accurate that surprises me. Since handloading can give you much better ammo than the shelf. It seems a waste to spend all that time training and all that money on HKs and then shoot substandard ammo out of it.




This board has a long-standing reputation of a cheapskate mentality. Some folks are adamant about buying the cheapest possible stuff, only to turn around and have to deal with the stress associated with the issues (*cough*Ruger*cough*).

.

It also seems obvious you have never heard of Ruger P series, MK series, or any Ruger revolver.

HOOfan_1
October 28, 2013, 10:14 PM
It also seems obvious you have never heard of Ruger P series, MK series, or any Ruger revolver.

this board also has its share of Ruger hate and hyperbole

sota
October 28, 2013, 10:38 PM
preface: I own 5 handguns currently...
2 P30's 9mm... one bought new, one bought used
2 P2000sk's 9mm... one bought new, onw bought used
1 Ruger SR22... bought new

my first ever was one of my P30's. When I went looking I reseached a lot of guns, I handled a lot of guns, and I shot as many as I could. My requirements came down to the following...
hammer fired
da/sa
10 rounds or more
ergonomics
ambidextrous... i'm left handed
no manual safety
reliability

When it was all said and done once I picked up the P30 it was all over for me. I love the way it feels. I loved the way it points. I love the way it shoots. I even love the way it looks.
I've shot Sigs, Glocks, Berettas, Ruger P and SR series and a couple 1911's whose makers left no memorable impressions on me. I can shoot them all effectively. The only ones that have ever put a smile on my face are the HK's I wound up buying. The SR22 comes close but it's more of a "fun" gun. Are they expensive? yes. Are the worth it? They are to me without question. There's a spot in my safe waiting for a pair of HK45's to show up.

rtz
October 28, 2013, 11:35 PM
The dealer was asking $1199 for it.

Way cheaper to order one online:

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/index.php/cPath/21_47/Handguns/Heckler+%26+Koch

Find a local guy to do the transfer for $10:

http://fflgundealers.net/

460Kodiak
October 28, 2013, 11:56 PM
Interesting reading so far. I need to do some more fondling.

Bobson
October 29, 2013, 12:07 AM
You've got it backwards. HK pistols need no justification. If the price difference between a Honda and an Acura is only a few fill-ups at the pump, why would you buy the basic Honda? To be able to say you spent less up front?
Any product that costs more money than a similar competitor requires justification.

What will an Acura do that a Honda won't? Whether the price is $5k more or $5 more isn't relevant. We aren't talking about a Honda and a Maserati, where the difference is obvious.

Similarly, what will an Hk do that a Glock won't? Shooting an extra thousand rounds per week doesn't make the Hk a better gun, nor does it widen the gap between the Hk and Glock. Is the Hk better? Yeah, it probably is. It damn well better be. But is it twice as good? I can't see how that would be possible. Therefore, the price isn't justified.

el Godfather
October 29, 2013, 12:19 AM
I have been very satisfied with my H&K firearms.

For me the following were decisive factors:
USP I absolutely adore the safety/decock setup.
P30 and H&K 45 In my opinion, ergonomically the best pistols.
Elite, Expert and Match Excellent for target sports.
Mk 23 If you are collector you must have one. You will be surprised how well it shoots. Reliability and accuracy are super.

People generally complain about price. To me thats a very subjective issue. When it comes to personal preference price of a gun is irrelevant. One would pay in excess of $100,000 for an English shotgun, whereas a purpose/utility of a shotgun can be achieved with shotgun worth under $1000.

There is no end to this debate. If H&K prices were ridiculous they would have long gone out of business, but they have not. This means people are willing to pay to own a product they want to have.

Thank heavens we dont live in a world where the only handgun available was model grey, in grey color and in .X grey&grey caliber, and made by grey, grey & grey, and so on so forth.

tarosean
October 29, 2013, 01:28 AM
When you buy a German HK, you're getting burned on the currency exchange rate.

:what:


I hope you realize that the Euro is not synonymous with Germany??
After all Beretta, Glock, FN are all produced by Euro countries with that same exchange rate.

tarosean
October 29, 2013, 01:37 AM
EVERY Glock I've been in contact has malfunctioned.

Wait, what? I thought I was the only person on a forum to experience this phenomenon. we are certainly rare birds.

mljdeckard
October 29, 2013, 02:26 AM
I concur entirely with post #4. I think SIG is a better compromise for the money, and I don't feel the need to kiss the ring of the H&K "we also sell to civilians when we feel like it" attitude.

PO2Hammer
October 29, 2013, 02:30 AM
The people who pooh-pooh HK prices are the same people who end up spending hundreds 'upgrading' their Glocks to run right or trying to find a 1911 mag that works reliably.

False economy.

PO2Hammer
October 29, 2013, 02:32 AM
and I don't feel the need to kiss the ring of the H&K "we also sell to civilians when we feel like it" attitude.
I think you mean the internet hype, not attitude.

mljdeckard
October 29, 2013, 02:37 AM
I upgraded precisely nothing in my Glock. and I got it right the first time with my 1911 magazines.

cerberus65
October 29, 2013, 07:56 AM
EVERY Glock I've been in contact has malfunctioned.
That has sure not been my experience with them and I have no use for Glocks (just ask either of my brothers who have drunk the koolaid). I've not seen a single malfunction across 6 or 7 models I've shot and seen shot. But to me they feel like picking up a 2x4.

When it was all said and done once I picked up the P30 it was all over for me.
That's how I ended up with multiple 1911s.

And that brings me to my HK advice. I don't think I've ever shot one. DA/SA semi-autos just don't do it for me. I tried a bunch of DA/SA guns and even bought one but in the end sold it and don't miss it a bit. Some guns I realized I wouldn't like before I'd put half a box of ammo through. Others I had to buy before I figured it out. Some I knew I would love before I made it through half a box of ammo.

There's really no substitute for handling and shooting a gun. If you can rent one from a range or go with a friend that has one you can find out if it fits you and if you shoot it well. If the HK fulfills those two criteria and if you handle enough other guns that don't fit or don't shoot well for you, you won't care near as much about the price. But if you find something that does fit and shoot well for half the price you can spend the extra money on ammo. :)

Onmilo
October 29, 2013, 08:56 AM
I own H&Ks (3)
Glocks (4)
Sigs (2)
1911s (3)
bunch of odball one offs, Astra, Walther, etc.
I keep them clean, lube them lightly and keep them maintained.
I can't remember the last malfunction I have had with any of them.

Buy what feels best in your hand and don't worry the cost.

CharlieDeltaJuliet
October 29, 2013, 09:22 AM
I prefer to carry a Sig, but love the workmanship in an Hk. But I am mainly in love with their rifles. The USP is a tank though. The barrel life in the rifles is where I notice the difference. As I said I was lucky enough to be invited to Georgia (years ago) and see their building. There is this beat to crap Hk 416 that is still in functioning condition. After looking at it it honestly looks like it has been dragged behind a vehicle , beaten, used as a hammer and everything else. It has over 120,000 rounds through it. I am guessing it is a reminder. According to them it still shot well within military specs... That kind of made me a believer in their barrel making process. I will never knock a Hk after that.

madFive
October 29, 2013, 09:41 AM
Yeah, the MSRP listed in in OP isn't realistic - $1200 for an HK pistol is way too much unless it's a rare or specialized model. They normally go for anywhere from $700-950. Look around and you should be able to find some better deals.

HK had the market cornered on high-end plastic guns for many years, but currently I would think long and hard before buying an HK over a Beretta PX4, Sig P2022, or a few other other poly guns that shoot nearly just as well. The performance vs price difference just isn't there any more IMO.

And for reference, it looks like the gun linked in OP goes for around $840 retail.
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/index.php/cPath/21_47/Handguns/Heckler%2B%26%2BKoch/page/1/sort/6a

jhco
October 29, 2013, 10:03 AM
They are nice guns, but that price is really high. I bought my father one new from Gunbroker 3-4 years ago for $750ish

MachIVshooter
October 29, 2013, 10:18 AM
This board has a long-standing reputation of a cheapskate mentality. Some folks are adamant about buying the cheapest possible stuff, only to turn around and have to deal with the stress associated with the issues

That's a pretty bold statement, considering that some of the posters you're disagreeing with have spent far more than the cost of an HK pistol on optics. Pretty sure a couple of them also have machine guns.

I could buy an HK if I wanted another. I spent more than any of their standard pistols cost on RC cars last month alone. Why don't I? Because they are not only overpriced for what they are, but generally have inferior ergonomics compared to much of the competition. Anyone who knows me also knows that I am no Glock fan, but I can tell you that even my G20 is a more comfortable pistol than the USP I had. It also performs just as well and cost half as much. The Glock represents a good value.

Value is the part of the equation that seems to elude a lot of the fanbois, especially the HK types. It's not that they're not good guns; they certainly are. It's that they offer nothing in the way of durability and performance that you can't get out of a much less expensive firearm, nor does their manufacturing process correlate with the cost. As stated back on page 1, when you pay substantial money for a hand-fitted, machined steel precision pistol such as a top shelf 1911 or Sig P210, you're paying a lot for the labor that went into making it, and for most of us who don't shoot competitively, there comes a point of diminishing returns anyway. I like 1911s, but I won't spend more on Nighthawk that performs no better than a Kimber just to say I own a Nighthawk. Same thing with HK.

As Sam1911 said, if the gun appeals to you in a way that justifies the cost to you, then buy it. But don't buy it just to say "I have an HK", especially if you felt the the M&P, Glock, XD, FNP or some other actually fit you better or had a preferable feature.

HK has really done this to themselves. The standard service handgun market thrives in the $500-$700 range, but tapers off substantially as you approach $1,000. Yet the HK pistols are not competitive with the class of firearms that start at ~$1,000. I have a Witness Limited 10, which presently cost about $1,100. Why would I pay that kind of money for the Tanfoglio firearm and not the HK? Because a USP Tactical or HK45 cannot compete with the Limited in that type of shooting.

Simply put, HK has put themselves in a very strange position where value isn't an attribute. Value is what drives most of us to make purchases, and it is not synonymous with cheap. It simply means getting what you paid for.

TarDevil
October 29, 2013, 11:11 AM
Proficiency with a duty/combat/defense pistol is attained through repetition and practice. If you're only shooting 1,200 rounds in a year, then in all likelihood the only proficiency attained is that of hitting a target at a casual snail's pace.
I'm one of those who significantly curtailed my shooting due to the ammo shortage. Last week I shot for the first time in months with my sister and brother-in-law, ran through numerous drills, was able to keep 8 inch groups - with the occasional flyer - with a fire rate of 15 rounds in under 5 seconds. Proficiency comes in many forms...

This board has a long-standing reputation of a cheapskate mentality. Some folks are adamant about buying the cheapest possible stuff, only to turn around and have to deal with the stress associated with the issues (*cough*Ruger*cough*).
... and I did it with my Ruger, which has been a flawless gun.

boricua9mm
October 29, 2013, 01:27 PM
That's a pretty bold statement, considering that some of the posters you're disagreeing with have spent far more than the cost of an HK pistol on optics. Pretty sure a couple of them also have machine guns.

So then the $400 premium isn't much of an arguing point, now, is it?

I could buy an HK if I wanted another. I spent more than any of their standard pistols cost on RC cars last month alone. Why don't I? Because they are not only overpriced for what they are, but generally have inferior ergonomics compared to much of the competition. Anyone who knows me also knows that I am no Glock fan, but I can tell you that even my G20 is a more comfortable pistol than the USP I had. It also performs just as well and cost half as much. The Glock represents a good value.

One only needs to detail strip a Glock to see why they are able to be produced on the cheap. You're not exactly telling me anything I don't already know. I've been carrying Glocks for quite some time now. Doesn't take anything away from H&K.

It's that they offer nothing in the way of durability and performance that you can't get out of a much less expensive firearm, nor does their manufacturing process correlate with the cost.

The very nature of their business and the associated operating costs makes them more expensive. This was clearly outlined in my first post.

As stated back on page 1, when you pay substantial money for a hand-fitted, machined steel precision pistol such as a top shelf 1911 or Sig P210, you're paying a lot for the labor that went into making it, and for most of us who don't shoot competitively, there comes a point of diminishing returns anyway. I like 1911s, but I won't spend more on Nighthawk that performs no better than a Kimber just to say I own a Nighthawk. Same thing with HK.

HK doesn't make anything in the same price bracket as a top shelf 1911 or the P210. You're comparing an $800 production gun to a $2,000 hand built pistol.

HK has really done this to themselves. The standard service handgun market thrives in the $500-$700 range, but tapers off substantially as you approach $1,000. Yet the HK pistols are not competitive with the class of firearms that start at ~$1,000. I have a Witness Limited 10, which presently cost about $1,100. Why would I pay that kind of money for the Tanfoglio firearm and not the HK? Because a USP Tactical or HK45 cannot compete with the Limited in that type of shooting.

HK's specialty is not in building game guns. They have some models like the Expert and the Match pistols, but given your comparison to base model USPs and the HK45, I have to assume you have no experience with those models. HK's specialty is building combat grade hardware that works. There is a significant difference between game guns like the Tangfolio and the HK45c that NSW uses. They really aren't even after the same market.

boricua9mm
October 29, 2013, 01:32 PM
... and I did it with my Ruger, which has been a flawless gun.

I'm happy for you. Others have had to deal with pain-in-the-neck recalls on multiple models. The point is, Ruger has had multiple recalls in very recent history, yet no one can remember HK ever having one.

It also seems obvious you have never heard of Ruger P series, MK series, or any Ruger revolver.

Pfft! Please! So you admit to knowing nothing of Ruger's recall troubles? :D

Any product that costs more money than a similar competitor requires justification. Similarly, what will an Hk do that a Glock won't? Shooting an extra thousand rounds per week doesn't make the Hk a better gun, nor does it widen the gap between the Hk and Glock. Is the Hk better? Yeah, it probably is. It damn well better be. But is it twice as good? I can't see how that would be possible. Therefore, the price isn't justified.

Glock doesn't make a hammer fired gun with multiple trigger mode options. So, for starters, that's one thing an HK can do that a Glock cannot.

tarosean
October 29, 2013, 01:41 PM
I'm happy for you. Others have had to deal with pain-in-the-neck recalls on multiple models. The point is, Ruger has had multiple recalls in very recent history, yet no one can remember HK ever having one.


USC/UMP were recalled...

boricua9mm
October 29, 2013, 01:57 PM
USC/UMP were recalled...

...which would be great material for the Rifle section.

Bozwell
October 29, 2013, 02:00 PM
So then the $400 premium isn't much of an arguing point, now, is it?


Just because you own expensive things doesn't mean you laugh at spending $400 for no reason. The wealthiest men I know are the tightest with their money. Now if spending the $400 is worth it to you to get the gun you want and that fits you best, by all means spend it. But don't dismiss the extra cost outright.

That said, people shouldn't dismiss what you get for the extra cost. Comparing a Nighthawk to a Kimber... ha. While it's not quite as drastic of a comparison, you should expect a higher quality from a production H&K than your standard Glock or Ruger. Whether that's worth the extra $$$ is up to personal preferences.

boricua9mm
October 29, 2013, 02:08 PM
Just because you own expensive things doesn't mean you laugh at spending $400 for no reason. The wealthiest men I know are the tightest with their money. Now if spending the $400 is worth it to you to get the gun you want and that fits you best, by all means spend it. But don't dismiss the extra cost outright.

You are implying that HK makes a $450 gun, then just plops on another $400 "for no reason."

The HK pistols are not as mechanically simple as a Glock. They cost more to make, period.

You boys have fun with your HK hate, ya hear!? :D

Sergei Mosin
October 29, 2013, 02:19 PM
Some pistols cost more than others. It might be interesting to know why, but it's academic - if I like the gun and I'm willing to shell out the cash, why not? I was never much on polymer pistols until I rented a couple of USPs and discovered that I shoot them really well. Now I have a pair (.45 and 9mm) and every time I see a P30 I'm sorely tempted. Some folks trumpet value - less expensive does not equal better value. It isn't a good value if doesn't work for you. Glocks cost less but they don't fit me. H&K pistols cost more but they do fit me. For me, a USP is a far better value than a Glock.

Bozwell
October 29, 2013, 02:26 PM
You are implying that HK makes a $450 gun, then just plops on another $400 "for no reason."

The HK pistols are not as mechanically simple as a Glock. They cost more to make, period.

You boys have fun with your HK hate, ya hear!? :D
That doesn't even make sense. No, I'm not implying that. If you actually read my post, you would know that. I'm saying that...

So then the $400 premium isn't much of an arguing point, now, is it?

...is a silly thing to say, just because people own some expensive things (optics, NFA items, etc.). Owning something expensive does not mean you should dismiss cost as a factor altogether when comparing two items.

$400 might be an arguing point, if one personally doesn't consider the difference between two guns to be worth $400. This is true, regardless of whether they own a $3000 1911, drive a $60,000 car, or drive an $800 clunker.

RBid
October 29, 2013, 03:57 PM
My filter for value is 'performance added'. I have fired multiple HKs. I don't shoot them any more accurately than I shoot my Glocks, and I find that the PPQ, Caracal, P99AS, and Ruger SR pistols are marginally easier to be accurate with due to their triggers. I never had an HK fail in my hands, but that's also true of every Glock, SR, Walther P99/PPQ, and M&P I've fired.

For +0 ease of accuracy, +0 reduced muzzle rise, and +0 reliability, I'll save my money and buy something else.

460Kodiak
October 29, 2013, 04:16 PM
I think Sergi Mosin has the idea with this.

It isn't a good value if doesn't work for you. Glocks cost less but they don't fit me. H&K pistols cost more but they do fit me. For me, a USP is a far better value than a Glock.

The more I think about it, if I expect a pistol to save my life if needed, shouldn't I choose the one that I shoot best and most accurately, regardless of price? It just means saving longer. My life is worth an extra $400, IF that will get me a pistol I shoot better than another.

If you shoot a less expensive gun just as well, then you are lucky and get to save some money I guess.

So really when we are talking about value, it is a relative thing. Value will exist for some with HK's and not with others...........

I mean really, a $350 Remington 870 may be more valuable to you than a $900 HK pistol.

The difference to me in the HK45 for example is the magazine release type, and the ergos. And even though I own an FNP45, I may trade up in the near future. I need to shoot an HK45 first though. In the hand, it feels more natural.

SharpsDressedMan
October 29, 2013, 05:34 PM
When HK makes a nice 10mm pistol, I'll consider getting rid of my G29 and G20.

Quercusalba
October 29, 2013, 08:22 PM
I've been checking out the hk45 for a couple months. Has the features I like and I like the grip feel, mag release, recoil. I keep my pistol collection small so paying a little more is not a big deal. For a polymer 45 it seems like a good option if like me, you're not fond of glocks or the FN. Unless Walther ever puts our a 45. In the end, it's subjective.

RussB
October 29, 2013, 08:28 PM
Seems the only thing "wrong" with HK pistols is the price

MachIVshooter
October 29, 2013, 08:31 PM
Wow, I certainly managed to ruffle some fanboy feathers, didn't I?

They have some models like the Expert and the Match pistols, but given your comparison to base model USPs and the HK45,

I checked their site to see what current offerings are, and those are not on the menu. Having said that, the Expert and Match also come up short compared to a number of other pistols built for IPSC type shooting, including but not limited to other CZ based pistols, many 1911s, S&W 945, etc.

You are implying that HK makes a $450 gun, then just plops on another $400 "for no reason."

I know that wasn't directed toward me, but I've long maintained that HK makes an excellent $500 pistol and sells it for $1,000. I'm also far from the only person who feels this way.

mljdeckard
October 29, 2013, 08:46 PM
I concur. I like them just fine, I have absolutely no idea what would make them worth so much in comparison to other guns.

browningguy
October 29, 2013, 09:48 PM
Overpriced Euro trash. And this from a guy that loves his HK USC.

If you have the money then buy one, you won't go wrong, everything about an HK is built right. If you don't have the money buy a M&P/XDm or similar. They'll work just as well.

Sam1911
October 29, 2013, 09:54 PM
If you don't have the money buy a M&P/XDm or similar. They'll work just as well.
Let's say they will FUNCTION* just as well. They may indeed WORK** better for you, personally. They do so for an awful lot of people -- people for whom any cost savings is an irrelevancy.


* Function -- feed and eject reliably, achieve fine mechanical accuracy, operate without breakage or undue wear, etc.

** Work -- Enable YOU to make accurate hits as fast as possible. Remember, as long as the guns function, there's really no other goal.

RussB
October 29, 2013, 10:18 PM
The wisdom in this thread makes me feel we should all just buy hi points because if cheap is better, cheapest is the best!

TarDevil
October 29, 2013, 10:21 PM
You boys have fun with your HK hate, ya hear!? :D
Personally, I don't hate HK's at all and haven't made the slightest derogatory comments about them. Guess Rugers are in season, eh?

Sam1911
October 29, 2013, 10:39 PM
The wisdom in this thread makes me feel we should all just buy hi points because if cheap is better, cheapest is the best!

Once more -- the cost is not the relevant factor.

IF your shot timer and score tell you that you shoot a Hi-Point faster with better hits than an HK, BUY THE HI-POINT. IF your shot timer and score tell you that you shoot an HK faster with better hits than an Hi-Point, BUY THE HK. To do otherwise would be -- no real other way to put this -- stupidity. Fast hits are the goal. Again, assuming reasonable reliability, nothing else truly matters.

Sam Cade
October 29, 2013, 11:06 PM
Interesting tidbit:

Inflation adjusted MSRPs from a 1994 Gun Digest.

Glock G17: $915.31
Sig P226: $1,270.38 (base model)
S&W 4506: $1,170.96 (base model)
Colt Series 80: $1,095.21
HK USP: $984.75

460Kodiak
October 29, 2013, 11:27 PM
^^^^^^^ Ha! Now that is an interesting bit of info Sam.

Sam Cade
October 29, 2013, 11:39 PM
If you figure 80% if MSRP as street price a USP costs about the same now as it did when it was introduced.

A Glock is MUCH cheaper now than it was in 1994.

tarosean
October 30, 2013, 12:27 AM
The point is, Ruger has had multiple recalls in very recent history, yet no one can remember HK ever having one.

Quote:
USC/UMP were recalled...
...which would be great material for the Rifle section.


Your statement was towards Heckler & Koch as a company. Not individual product lines. I simply corrected the oversight.



FWIW: I hated the trigger on the P30L I had. However, I recently was contemplating an HK45c LEM to give them another chance as I did like the balance and ergonomics. In the end though I went with another 1911.

460Kodiak
October 30, 2013, 12:28 AM
It would be interesting to look at inflation rates in Germany and Austria as well, and see how the current going rate relates to the cost of HKs and GLOCKS in their homelands as compared to America. I suppose if they try to maintain a certain profit margin it should be proportional to their inflation rates.

clang
October 30, 2013, 12:51 AM
I've got exactly 1 HK in my safe - a Stainless USP45 set up for a lefty (I have no idea what variant it's called, nor do I care).

My only concern when buying this gun was the stories I've heard about HK's terrible customer service, but my one experience with them was completely the opposite. The welds on the seam of one of my mags came undone (probably from dropping the empty it too many times). The mags from HK are ridiculously expensive, so I contacted HK CS to see if they could fix it. They asked me to ship them the mag. A couple of weeks later the mag was returned to me with the welds repaired and they included an extra brand new mag too.

H&K treated me more than fair and I appreciate it.

tarosean
October 30, 2013, 12:53 AM
It would be interesting to look at inflation rates in Germany and Austria as well, and see how the current going rate relates to the cost of HKs and GLOCKS in their homelands as compared to America.


I dont think inflation has much to do with it...

More so production. I dont think HK produces the shear number of guns that some of these other companies do. therefor cannot sell at a rock bottom prices and maintain profitability.

If you look at our import numbers from the ATF in 2011. we imported the following amount of handguns.

Germany - 265,092 (Heckler & Koch, Walther GMBH, ?????)
Austria - 515,396 (Glock, Steyer Mannlicher. ?????)

(Question marks for little known companies that might be importing too)

Unfortunately the ATF doesn't break their numbers down by companies. However its a pretty safe bet that Glock imports a lot more than Steyer. Not sure about the split in Germany though.

Tejicano Loco
October 30, 2013, 01:22 AM
I bought my HK USP45 in 1998 and paid well under $700 brand new. Right out of the box I could shoot it better than any gun I have ever owned - and I have about 30 handguns, mostly modern hi-caps. I thought the Para-Ord I built to my personal desires would be the only gun I would ever carry until then. I am really more of a 1911 fan.

It has been a phenominal performer for me. Shooting against an old buddy with his favorite Glock left an impression on him - the next time we went out to shoot his Glock was gone and he had an HK USP.

Knowing what I know now I don't know if I would pay $1,200 for one - but I might.

I'm not really an HK fanboy either. I really like my USP but it's the only HK I have. That being said I feel I should disclose the fact that I have made the pilgrimage to Oberndorf to see the Mauserwerke museum there.

Black Butte
October 30, 2013, 01:56 AM
I own three Glocks, G19, G26, G33, G36.

I only own one: a G20 and a G23. :)

csa77
October 30, 2013, 02:51 AM
id guess the cost of an HK pistol isn't the reason you don't see them commonly in competitive shooting.

reliability and accuracy is just as important to competitors as it is to a HK owner.

PO2Hammer
October 30, 2013, 02:54 AM
A Glock is MUCH cheaper now than it was in 1994.
Yup, they keep finding new and interesting ways to cut costs.

ZEN.45
October 30, 2013, 05:52 AM
Im always surprised when H&K prices are being discussed on gun forums. On this side of the Atlantic a P30 is about 125 $ more than a Glock and about the same price as a MP9.

Sam1911
October 30, 2013, 07:11 AM
id guess the cost of an HK pistol isn't the reason you don't see them commonly in competitive shooting.

reliability and accuracy is just as important to competitors as it is to a HK owner.

Exactly! Competitors in the practical, action, and/or defensive shooting disciplines spend A LOT of money on their equipment. When your ammo budget for the year is between 10,000 and 80,000 (or more?) rounds a year and your match fees alone are costing more than a new gun or two, if a gun shoots better, faster, more accurately, you really don't think twice about dropping the coin.

No serious competitor says, "I think I'll buy a lesser gun because I could save $400." No way.

Competition is the test bed, where anything and everything is tried to gain an advantage. 100ths of a second of consistently faster hits will be enough to induce a shooter to buy a different kind of gun, and there's thousands -- hundreds of thousands, probably -- of shooters in the various disciplines trying this, that, and whatever. Anything that works better for more folks will be adopted widely. Wide success in the practical competition fields really means something.

tarosean
October 30, 2013, 07:25 AM
On this side of the Atlantic a P30 is about 125 $ more than a Glock and about the same price as a MP9.

Curiosity got the better of me so I checked out Lidy Arms, Aaschot.

GLOCK 17 GEN 3 9 X 19 mm 599,-
CZ 75 SP-01 Shadow 9 X 19 mm 999,-
Dan Wesson "Pointsman Seven" .45 acp 1.339,-
BROWNING GP Practical 9 X 19 mm 925,-

Conversions are approximately.

824 USD for the Glock
1374 USD for the CZ
1925 USD for the DW
1272 USD for the BHP

:what: Im thinking some posters shouldnt be complaining about overpriced...

righteoushoot
October 30, 2013, 08:30 AM
I recently picked up a Used P2000SK in .357 + .40. Came with NS and extra mags and some other stuff. Has the LEM. This helped get around the topic of higher priced than the Glock. I had a P30 V3, but hated the trigger, but wanted an external hammer.

Now, I have the external hammer, which Glock does not have (I checked :neener:) which was a big + for me. Love the V1 Light LEM trigger, and I like to carry a 1911.

I had personal issues paying New prices, so I bought used. For me, the ergos with the 12 round mag and the X-Grip are superior (again, for me) to the Glock 26 I have with the equivalent G19 Mag setup. No safeties to mess with and Double strike capability, which Glock does NOT have. I checked. :neener:

So, just so you know I am not biased, I also just picked up a G29 Gen4. I guess I don't like to eat the same thing for dinner every night, so to speak. :D

sota
October 30, 2013, 08:35 AM
I'm going to copy and link back to a thread on HKPRO that gives a good explaination.

http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk-talk/179650-hk-s-really-superior.html


Why HK?

1. Most are designed, built and tested to NATO MIL specs (ACC-225), not commercial specs. NATO specs includes tests not conducted by many commercial makers such as drop tests, obstructed bore tests, extreme temps, ice, static sand, OTB, elevated/depressed, etc.

2. All (100%) of HK firearms are test fired and zeroed at the factory. In some companies only a % are tested.

3. HK materials (steel, barrel, etc.) are of the highest quality available and it shows in long-term or worst case scenarios. The superior barrel performance is a good example, though you may never see it in casual use.

4. HK pistols are not assembled by armorers’ students and then sold to customers. Some companies have been known to do so.

5. The average German worker is paid at a far higher rate than the equivalent US worker. Part of the reasons why includes the mandatory training they must receive and tests they must pass before receiving the position. The cost of living in Germany is also higher and HK contributes to a substantial “Pensioner Fund” for its retirees. Many also work at the same company for decades and not uncommon are 40 year employees!) and therefore rise high on the pay scale for their extensive hard-earned skill and experience.

6. HK barrels are made by a cold hammer forged process using a material that is unique to HK guns. Many barrels get special HK-unique steps added such as a tapered, poly, hybrid poly bore profile or induction hardening and all long-gun barrels are straightened. As an example, Stelite liners are not used in HK MG barrels – they are simply not needed and perform as well or better.

7. Compare the polymer molding and machining of say an HK P30 and a SIG P229. It is RARE to see machining marks on an HK.

8. HK rigorously tests their products to destruction in a "Firing Lab" manned with very senior test personnel before the design is frozen. This reduces the incidence of post-release issues. HK also takes and test its products at remote environmental test facilities to include desert (Yuma Proving Grounds, Saudi Arabia), arctic (Norway, Alaska), jungle (Brunei, Panama). That costs BIG bucks but pays off in hard core performance.

9. HK guns are imported for the most part (or the parts used to assemble them in NH) are imported. That results in mandatory FET, freight and exchange rate subsidies being added and passed on to the customer. HK as a German gun maker and importer they also have to comply with stringent export controls and that too costs money, which gets passed along in sale prices.

10. The cost of the production tooling (and materials) used by HK to produce, assemble and QA product is high as it includes QA tests and steps not conducted by many other makers. HK cut its teeth as a mass producer and still today builds the production tooling with that in mind –high volumes with a lot of automation. That tooling and gauging costs money as does the high hourly rates of the skilled workers and the additional time required to conduct it.

11. 10-20% of HK’s annual operating budget is spent on its extensive “Technique” departments to include Design, Prototype Fabrication and the Firing Lab. These are the highest paid, most skilled workers at HK and that costs money as well. They are best of breed and always have many more projects up in the air then you might think, or know of (Phased Plasma Rifle in the 80 watt Range).

12. HK places itself purposely in the “higher end” of the market. Like BMW and Mercedes HK knows it rates are higher and always will be compared to say Colt, S&W, Beretta, etc. So they go after superior performance and quality at a higher price point to fewer purchasers versus a cheaper, lower quality product to more buyers.

13. @ 15% of HK annual revenue is reinvested in new products, and infrastructure. While that may not seem like a lot it is and the state of the factory at in Oberndorf shows it. Look at the state of their competitors factories. There are few that compare to HK GmbH in the eyes of those who have been to many others. HK spends the revenue it makes off of both commercial and Government sales on new product so in a way the US commercial buyer who purchases an HK45 pistol helps fund the development of the MG4 LMG or XM25.

14. HK builds much of the weapon parts in house to maintain quality control. While cheaper subs are available one loses some control in doing so. HK’s goal has always been to minimize cost but maintain quality and to do so it keeps many items in house that in many others companies go to the higher bidder (magazines, small piece parts, etc.). HK also has some of the very best MIM and molding capabilities and can thus up the quality of their product by using their own, superior product.

15. Like HK, HK’s subs are of a higher quality for the same reasons and with the same end results. You buy the very best frame mold in Germany, it will cost you but the end product is superior.

16. Interchangeable parts – very few HK parts are not fully interchangeable without hand fitting. Even in a gun like the GMG, there are no parts that require hand fitting. This requires that each and every raw material and finished part, and each tool that fabricates the part, is dimensionally and exactly the same and maintained the same at all time by constant checks by skilled personnel with high dollar measuring devices and gauges. Again something you may never see but it insures when you replace a part it both fits and works w/o modifications.

17. HK has voluntarily developed, tested and included in their product unique features like USP firing mode modularity, MK23 barrel O-rings, special high performance finishes, unique G36/HK416 gas systems, drop-in LEM trigger systems, side-loading 40mm grenade launchers, GMG’s with extruded aluminum receivers and HK211’s with Ti receivers, unique cartridges for things like MP7 and P46, etc. HK also makes over 100 models of HK firearms currently and 1000’s of modular variants for users the world over speaking many languages, which costs money to build, inventory, document and record these countless production variations.


MODS: if either violates some ToS please feel free to either correct or let me know to correct.

mooner
October 30, 2013, 09:13 AM
They stay in business, so they must not be too overpriced. I think we would see the price drop if they couldn't find enough people that see the value (real or perceived).

As for me? If I were to purchase a handgun in the $1000 dollar range (I haven't yet) it would not be an H&K. Different strokes for different folks as they say.

I do find it interesting that they don't focus more on competition. I wonder if we will either see that change, or if it will bite them.

rtz
October 30, 2013, 09:23 AM
I started off with Glocks. Got XD, M&P, 24/7, etc.. Got SIG's. Played with 1911's. Only thing left was HK's. HK's are cheap compared to some 1911's and only a bit more than some SIG's.

Shame they are expensive. First time you handle one though; they are nice.

If you don't have HK's yet; get one, play with it. Don't like it? Sell it off. They hold their value:

http://summitgunbroker.com/usp-40-v1.html

Sam1911
October 30, 2013, 09:58 AM
I do find it interesting that they don't focus more on competition. I wonder if we will either see that change, or if it will bite them.I'm sure they, and all other gun makers, ponder those sorts of questions a lot. When you have a good product, a relatively successful product, at what point do you change it or abandon it to make your products excel when driven hard against competing designs? If they can sell all the pistols they really care to sell right now, there's no immediate reason to make a vast departure from their old reliable designs.

Think of S&W in the '90s with their very successful and reliable series of autos, but killing that line to make the polymer/striker M&P. Something told them they'd need to take the huge gamble of ending something good in order to try to take their place in the group at the real head of the pack. They did, and it really worked for them. Probably even better than they'd hoped.

Will SIG and HK be able to do that? I surely believe so -- they aren't suicidal or into building strictly nostalgia pieces -- but obviously it won't happen (ISN'T happening) until the cutting edge has moved a long way away from their current offerings.

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2013, 10:25 AM
I'm going to copy and link back to a thread on HKPRO that gives a good explaination.

I don't even know where to start with that, other than to say the entire list could have the name and location of many, many manufacturers substituted and hold the same amount of truth.

Compare the polymer molding and machining of say an HK P30 and a SIG P229

I mean, seriously? Compare the polymer molding of an HK to an ALLOY framed handgun? What exactly are we comparing?:rolleyes:

CharlieDeltaJuliet
October 30, 2013, 10:30 AM
Sam you are right... It is like the 1911 builders, there is only so many ways to make them. Hk ans Sig make great pistols. I trust my life to a Sig everyday. I don't want a striker fired pistol, so I am glad that these companies have not gone that way. I am the person that has to have an external hammer. I truly think that Sig and Hk are at the top of the game on their hammer style pistols.

TarDevil
October 30, 2013, 10:37 AM
I don't even know where to start with that, other than to say the entire list could have the name and location of many, many manufacturers substituted and hold the same amount of truth.

+1... beat me to it.

tomrkba
October 30, 2013, 10:50 AM
I personally like the USP 45 Compact. I like how it shoots and that the thumb controls may be setup to suit the user. It can even be carried cocked and locked. All it needs is a good holster, night sights, and some flat magazine base plates.

$1200 for the gun mentioned seems high for what it is. It does not do any more than any other gun in its class.

Can't resist:

http://larrycorreia.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/hksucks3.jpg

righteoushoot
October 30, 2013, 11:57 AM
Hey, did you realize those bullet are facing the wrong way..:what:

:neener:

tomrkba
October 30, 2013, 03:28 PM
Hey, did you realize those bullet are facing the wrong way

Yup...famous marketing glitch...without compromise!

SharpsDressedMan
October 30, 2013, 03:35 PM
If an HK routinely cost 50 to 100% more than a comparable Glock, what do you get in return? More accuracy? More durability? If it just subjective pleasure, based on personal preference only, then I have to wonder if it is worth the higher price.

Sergei Mosin
October 30, 2013, 04:28 PM
What do I get from H&K that I don't get from Glock?

I get my preferred manual of arms - a hammer-fired pistol with a manual safety - as well as my second choice - a traditional DA/SA setup with decocker. I do not care for the Glock's method of operation; I don't like striker-fired pistols and I don't like the way the Glock combines a relatively light trigger pull with an absence of external safeties. Fine for a range toy, not what I want in a defensive pistol.

I get a pistol that fits me. Glocks don't fit my hands. The grip angle is wrong, the finger grooves are wrong. Putting a Glock in my hands is the proverbial square peg, round hole problem. They're not comfortable to me. But the USP fits pretty well despite its blocky profile, and the P30 and HK45 fit me like the proverbial glove. (I want a pair!)

I get a pistol that I shoot well right out of the box. I'm sure that with time I'd be a good shot with a Glock. You can get good at anything with enough practice. That's assuming I could overcome the fit problems, of course. But the first time I fired a USP was enough to convince me that here was a pistol that's plenty accurate in my hands. It wasn't quite like the first time I fired a CZ 75, but it was up there.

I've played around with Glocks and tried to see what it is that folks see in them. And I do see it, but for me it's just not there. I've thought about a G17 or G19 for a range toy, I've thought about a G20 for fun with the 10mm. I just can't get past the poor fit. I've looked at M&Ps, I've looked at assorted other polymer guns. The only ones I've ever found that fits my preferences, my hands, and my wants/needs are made by Heckler & Koch.

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2013, 05:02 PM
The only ones I've ever found that fits my preferences, my hands, and my wants/needs are made by Heckler & Koch.

That right there is justification of the cost in your case, and I cannot (nor should I) argue that.

Where I become annoyed is some fanboy trying to convince me that the HK is better than a Glock, Sig, S&W, FN, etc. None of them can actually quantify why, but still insist that they are.

I had a USP45 stainless. It was combat accurate and plenty reliable, but also had the profile of two rough blocks of pine, and the trigger guard rubbed my finger raw in any range session that was more than 2 or 3 boxes. I sold it at a loss to fund the purchase of a pristine S&W 1006, and never looked back.

In my case, I find HK ergonomics disagreeable, don't feel they are particularly attractive, and have yet to handle one with a trigger that I liked. So for me, no, they absolutely aren't worth the asking price. More to the point, even if they were less expensive than some of the competition, I still wouldn't buy another one.

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 05:03 PM
Some of you guys must be pretty lousy shoppers! The complaints about HK pricing seem to me to be pretty overblown. If you check Bud's or any of the LGS in my area you'll find USPs starting at about $750 brand new, and cheaper of course used. That's not Glock or Hi-Point cheap but it's not outrageous, either. Right now you can get a P30S at Bud's for around $840 shipped. At any rate, most of them are made in Germany. If HK sent manufacturing to China or Brazil I suppose they'd be cheaper, with all the attendant 'benefits' that go along with that. You're paying for labor that costs more; German wages are higher. Incidentally you're paying for a tremendously skilled workforce, many of which have worked making guns for generations. You're also paying for very expensive and laborious QC measures that go far beyond what most gun makers employ.

You also don't hear people bitching about a Corvette because it's not steel! That's part of why/how it performs well. Why should a pistol with a polymer frame have to cost less than a metal one? That expectation is baseless and doesn't reflect the reality of how guns are made. Unless a gun is made out of gold I can't imagine why the frame material should affect the price of the gun that much. Aluminum is hardly expensive, and steel is far cheaper. The choice of frame material is dictated by engineering concerns for the most part. Would Glock have risen to the level of popularity they enjoy today if they cranked out yet another steel gun?

I love my HKs because they're a very very rare breed to me: Modular guns that can be set up like I want. I carry Condition One. Do some Googling and list all the guns that you can run C1 safely. Then narrow that list down to the ones you actually would. For instance, I really liked my FNP45 Tactical but the safety was tiny, and detent was very weak (you could brush it off on clothing). Technically you can have the gun cocked and apply the safety but I certainly wouldn't have dreamed of carrying it that way.

I like that HK doesn't have much 'flavor of the month' about them. They don't chase trends and dump half assed guns on the public for beta testing. They don't seem to have many recalls where they admit they don't have any idea how to fix the guns, nor do they start "perfect" and get steadily more flakey with each passing Gen.:neener:

As for the guns, that's totally subjective. I love the USP and find the ergonomics to be superb. Fits my hand like a glove. It's pretty much pointless to debate something as subjective as this. It's like all the posts that read "what IWB holster should I get?" All the replies will just be posters saying what they use. Will that help you? Who knows?

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2013, 05:06 PM
Do some Googling and list all the guns that you can run C1 safely.

Umm, pretty much all of them except for single action revolvers and the CZ52. Just because you're not comfortable with a 1911 or CZ75 carried C&L doesn't mean it isn't safe to do so.

Bozwell
October 30, 2013, 05:11 PM
Yeah, got to say you lost me as well with that comment Phaedrus. Are you seriously implying that HK's are some of the only guns that are "safe" to carry condition 1? If so, that's preposterous. If not, what ARE you trying to say with the "Googling" comment. I'm lost.

el Godfather
October 30, 2013, 05:26 PM
Bottom line is that you get to own whatever you like at whatever cost you are willing to pay.

No point in trying convince anyone out their personal preference. Free market and freedom to choose rather.

I like H&K and Glock, and somedays I like neither while carrying my other pistols. They offer different utility to me. Just like my Sigs, Colts, DWs etc. If H&K prices, like I said before, were ridiculous - they would not be in market selling the number of pistols that they do. SUBJECTIVE!

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 05:31 PM
Either it's a writing issue on my part or a reading comprehensive problem on yours. Reread my post again, slower if you have to. I never said 1911s can't be carried C1.:rolleyes: I said Google for the ones you can. Now count them up. You don't have a huge list. Certainly the 1911, the BHP, the CZ75 clones/variants. I can list some more (that are no longer made); the Star PD, the Star BM come to mind.

Now when you're finished with the list, how many of the would you want to own? I liked to carry my Star PD, but it wasn't much fun to shoot. I never had problems with mine but reports were the frames tended to crack eventually- not surprising given the small size and econo alloy frame. My PD ran well but had a single stack mag and weighed more than my BHP!

Now look at all the striker-fires/safe-action sidearms you can buy. That will take some time! My back-of-a-napkin notes show maybe ten SA/DA or striker fired guns out there for every hammer fired gun that can be run C1.

That's all I was trying to say.

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 05:33 PM
Hahaha! We made it to page five before you showed up, el Godfather! I thought you had it set up to be notified when the letters "HK" were posted!:p:D

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 05:38 PM
Just to clarify a bit, I carried a BHP for at least 20 years. And I probably would still be carrying it if it worked right. Had an ammo issue that looks to have damaged my extractor, just haven't got it sorted out yet. But even when I do, the BHP probably won't see much CCW in the future. Sadly, it seems that holster makers are not showing it much love nowadays. Even during the "prime" of the Hi-Power many holsters sold for it were simply 1911 holsters that were marked for use with the BHP. Not a lot of rigs made just for it now. I've become a very big Garrett Industries fanboy and they can't make a holster for the Hi-Power. I may scrape up the cash to get Red Nichols to make me an 008 Big Shot for it if I manage before he retires.

For the most part my P30S is pretty much the heir apparent to the throne of the BHP, at least for me. Not quite as thin though the slide but it's the ergonomic equal and the hammer doesn't bite the web of my hand.

el Godfather
October 30, 2013, 06:06 PM
Phaedrus/69

Read post #45 :)

I wonder why everyone thinks that I like H&K?! My signature also has Glock as disclaimer to keep 'them' thinking. ;)

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 06:11 PM
Oh, missed it!:D Well, I for one will admit to being a shameless HK fanboy. But not for no reason. I'm pretty fond of FN, too. Ruger hasn't let me down either.

Right now I have an HK USC on layaway!:D My plan [gulp!] is to do the UMP conversion eventually. Yeah, everyone should have a $1500 ten shot .45 carbine, right?;):neener:

el Godfather
October 30, 2013, 06:14 PM
^ how do you do ump conversion?

No shame in speaking your mind. H&K is well H&K. When they came out with P30 and then 45, they just set a new standard in ergonomics for me. Nothing fits my hands better then P30. Whereas usp controls are just awesome.

SharpsDressedMan
October 30, 2013, 06:35 PM
The more I shoot, the more I find I can wrap my hands around most any handgun, and begin to care less about grip shape. What if one pistol felt great in the hand, but for some unknown reason, another pistol allowed you to hit every target you aimed at, and quickly. I have had that happen more than once, and even though it didn't change my liking that sweet feeling pistol, it made me respect the other. To me, "Feels great in the hand" is overrated. Performance SHOULD be king.

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2013, 06:36 PM
Phaedrus, condition one simply means ready to fire without having to manipulate a bolt handle, slide or hammer. A striker fired pistol is C1 when a round is chambered, as is any SA, DAO or TDA gun. Condition one does not require an external hammer.

Therefore, as I have already said, the list of handguns that can be safely carried C1 is pretty much everything that is not a single action revolver, a CZ52 or another pistol that is unsafe to carry C&L for mechanical reasons. Beretta, Glock, M&P, XD, all Sigs, S&W 1st, 2nd and 3rd gen autos, 1911, CZ75/83/85/97/SP01/etc..........it's a very long list.

HOOfan_1
October 30, 2013, 06:37 PM
The more I shoot, the more I find I can wrap my hands around most any handgun, and begin to care less about grip shape. .

ditto....I've been shooting a Glock 19 for about 2 years now, and then I bought a Ruger SR9c....until I shot the Ruger, I didn't even notice how thick the Glock's grip is. I shoot both guns well though.

leadcounsel
October 30, 2013, 06:48 PM
Good pistols. Sure they are fine and have a good reputation.

Worth twice the cost of the competition? No way.

I've owned and/or fired nearly ever modern small arm pistol type. I have owned 4 HK pistols in 9mm, .40, and .45. They were unremarkable in my view. Felt comfortable and looked nice and professional... but compared to the competition, they were bigger and fatter, and held less rounds. And, again, much more expensive. And their mags are much more expensive and rare too. So, I sold them all.

For the same money, you could buy a $500 gun, and piles of magazines and ammo, donate the the NRA, and buy a annual range membership!

Shop for something more affordable that does just the same or better job. I'd pick a $500 Glock, XD, M&P over an HK every time.

There is happiness in being financially smart.

CharlieDeltaJuliet
October 30, 2013, 07:34 PM
I would prefer the USP with a hammer. I will not own a striker fired pistol (just my preference). I like Sigs just as well as most HK's. I think Sigs and HK's are worth every dime, but that is my choice and the fact is we all are just basing opinions. The facts are they are just as well built as any mass produced firearm, and better than some. Some hate Hk because they cost more, but they actually just went up with inflation. I paid $500 for my first USP in 2001. Others just hate them... The fact is until you see the pride they take in manufacturing these, it is surprising. I was surprised at the low amount made and the tests that they put each model through. When I saw the 416 with 120,000 rounds through it, and it still shooting within military specs, it is impressive. The barrels really impress me.

As far as comfort, the new grips on the Sigs are as comfortable to me. I have carried a Sig for quite some time now.

It is just like everybody who hates Colt, Remington, Savage..etc. either they have a reason, or just do. Either way it doesn't change the quality of the firearm. Colt has the worst customer service I have ever delt with but I still think they make a good product.

Bozwell
October 30, 2013, 07:35 PM
Phaedrus, condition one simply means ready to fire without having to manipulate a bolt handle, slide or hammer. A striker fired pistol is C1 when a round is chambered, as is any SA, DAO or TDA gun. Condition one does not require an external hammer.

Therefore, as I have already said, the list of handguns that can be safely carried C1 is pretty much everything that is not a single action revolver, a CZ52 or another pistol that is unsafe to carry C&L for mechanical reasons. Beretta, Glock, M&P, XD, all Sigs, S&W 1st, 2nd and 3rd gen autos, 1911, CZ75/83/85/97/SP01/etc..........it's a very long list.
Pretty much everything without a decocker and that isn't DAO... I don't need Google to tell me that's a crapload of different options.

sigarms228
October 30, 2013, 07:35 PM
Value is in the eye of the beholder.

To me SIGs and HKs are worth the investment. But I look for best prices and would never pay $1200 for a P2000SK when they can be purchased online closer to $825. I just spent $300 more for a new P30LS than I would have for a XDM. To me that is not that much more for the enjoyment I personally will get out of it over decades of use. When you take the resale values into account the difference in investment is much closer.

45 years ago I sold my Remington shotgun for a Browning Auto 5 and never regretted the extra investment nor once ever worried about if I was getting my moneys worth. I still have that Browning Auto 5 which makes me smile every time I handle it and will own it until my death.

My neighbor does not understand why I wasted my money on a Honda lawn mower when in his eyes his Craftsman is just as good and mows the lawn just as well or why I own Milwaukee and Bosch power tools while he says his Ryobi and Black and Decker tools do the job just as well. I just smile.

Sergei Mosin
October 30, 2013, 07:39 PM
The idea that H&K pistols cost twice as much as the competition seems to be getting tossed around a lot. Except they really don't. I bought a new USP9 recently for $680. Same store was selling new G19s for $499. I wouldn't pay $1000 for a H&K...but I've never yet found any gun I'd pay $1000 for. OK, maybe a Colt Delta Elite.

There's happiness in getting a good deal on a pistol you like, too.

HOOfan_1
October 30, 2013, 07:43 PM
45 years ago I sold my Remington shotgun for a Browning Auto 5 and never regretted the extra investment nor once ever worried about if I was getting my moneys worth. I still have that Browning Auto 5 which makes me smile every time I handle it and will own it until my death.

My dad said he owned 2 A5s....said they were the biggest jammomatics he has ever dealt with traded one on a Remington 1100 and has never looked back

I bought a new USP9 recently for $680. Same store was selling new G19s for $499..

Where was this??? I have NEVER seen a new USP for under $750

I bought a new FNP 40 for $550...same store was selling the USP 40 for $900

Sergei Mosin
October 30, 2013, 08:02 PM
Big box chain store. At that price, I didn't waste any time hauling out my wallet; I had paid $800 for my USP 45 several months before. They still have another one on the shelf for the same price, too.

Sergei Mosin
October 30, 2013, 08:10 PM
The conditions of readiness as laid down by Col. Cooper were specific to the 1911. They can be extended to any single-action pistol with a manual safety, such as the Browning Hi Power, certain variants of the CZ 75, the USP V1, etc, but the terminology doesn't work with pistols not equipped with manual safeties. By definition, a Glock cannot be in Condition One, because it doesn't have a thumb safety.

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2013, 08:57 PM
The conditions of readiness as laid down by Col. Cooper were specific to the 1911. They can be extended to any single-action pistol with a manual safety, such as the Browning Hi Power, certain variants of the CZ 75, the USP V1, etc, but the terminology doesn't work with pistols not equipped with manual safeties. By definition, a Glock cannot be in Condition One, because it doesn't have a thumb safety.

Yes, that is correct if you apply an old testament type of interpretation. As amended to incorporate more modern designs, condition one applies to any firearm that has a round chambered with safety engaged, be it a passive or active safety. In the case of a Glock, M&P or many other pistols with no manual safety, a DAO handgun or a TDA pistol with a decocker/decocker safety, they really can't be in condition zero, since their action does not actually have them cocked. Hence they are condition one when a round is chambered. Likewise, a DA revolver is condition one with the hammer down, condition zero with the hammer cocked.

If we're going to use conditions of readiness outside of discussing the 1911 or other single action only semi-automatics, then we have to apply the modern adaptation/interpretation.

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 09:36 PM
Phaedrus, condition one simply means ready to fire without having to manipulate a bolt handle, slide or hammer. A striker fired pistol is C1 when a round is chambered, as is any SA, DAO or TDA gun. Condition one does not require an external hammer.

That definition is fine for you, but to me it lacks the "locked" half of cocked and locked. We can quibble over which definition is technically accurate but the fact is that swiping off the safety of a 1911 gives you a smooth crisp 4lb SA trigger pull- that ain't gonna happen with a Glock. I guess I'll second Sergei Mosin's "Old Testament" definition as it came from the God of SA autos, Col. Cooper.;) Again, carry what you want but you can't seriously suggest that a Glock behaves like a SA auto, mechanically or in actual use. Calling the trigger a safety seems like something Feinstein would have come up with, and at any rate it's like attaching your brake pedal to the top of the gas pedal IMOHO.:neener:

Converting to an "UMP" is an involved process. It won't be a real UMP, just a very close civilian-legal copy. First you replace the lower; I will get an FBI if I can find it, a Navy if I can't. Then a rear stock block, which lets you use the folding stock. Vent cuts need to me made and a few parts added to comply with 922r. Then just pop in some UMP mags and let 'er rip!:D

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 09:40 PM
I would prefer the USP with a hammer. I will not own a striker fired pistol (just my preference). I like Sigs just as well as most HK's. I think Sigs and HK's are worth every dime, but that is my choice and the fact is we all are just basing opinions. The facts are they are just as well built as any mass produced firearm, and better than some. Some hate Hk because they cost more, but they actually just went up with inflation. I paid $500 for my first USP in 2001. Others just hate them... The fact is until you see the pride they take in manufacturing these, it is surprising. I was surprised at the low amount made and the tests that they put each model through. When I saw the 416 with 120,000 rounds through it, and it still shooting within military specs, it is impressive. The barrels really impress me.

They are well made! A while back one of the big ammo companies sent back a USP to be inspected by HK. They used it to test ammo and wanted routine maintainence done. Aside from small springs that wear out on every gun the firearm was in terrific shape. Turns out there were over 1/4 million rounds put through that gun!:eek: I'm not saying only HKs can do that but anyone worried about HK durability can rest easy.

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2013, 10:09 PM
We can quibble over which definition is technically accurate but the fact is that swiping off the safety of a 1911 gives you a smooth crisp 4lb SA trigger pull- that ain't gonna happen with a Glock.

Ain't gonna happen with a stock HK, either. Modified guns, all bets are off. Glock trigger can be pretty darn crisp & light.


you can't seriously suggest that a Glock behaves like a SA auto, mechanically or in actual use.

Never said it was. Closer to a DAO, but lacking the scond strike capability means it cannot use that definition either. Glock's description of "safe action" works fine, though.

For the record, I'm no Glockophile, either. I have one, and only so I don't beat up my nicer 10mm guns in the woods. I have no particular love for the thing, and would have much preferred the M&P or FNP if they came in 10mm.

Calling the trigger a safety seems like something Feinstein would have come up with, and at any rate it's like attaching your brake pedal to the top of the gas pedal IMOHO.

Huh? I never said anything about the trigger safety, and the latter portion of that comment is way out of left field. The passive system in the Glock is not having the striker fully cocked until the trigger is pulled.

But to use your own analogy, it would be more like requiring the accelerator pedal be tilted prior to depressing.

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 10:32 PM
You wanna put your trigger gauge on my USP45 Tactical? It's not much if any heavier than a 1911. Of course, 1911 triggers vary quite a bit from merely good to spectacular. In any event every SA trigger pull I've ever felt on every SA/DA gun I have personal experience with is lighter and better than a Glock trigger.

I don't know what your motivation is but you seem to be looking for an argument where there is none. I think we both understand that a Glock can't be carried cocked and locked. Maybe you're a youngster or a big fan studying the evolution of language but I don't you'll find many gun people hewing to your innovative, novel new definition of Condition One, either. But if you must cling to it, so be it. Let me try to state it in way that will take you more than 5 minutes to deconstruct and distort; if you truly can't understand this it's probably because you simple want to contradict:

"I am a fan of guns with an hammer and external safety lever that can be engaged while the hammer is cocked."

There. If we're going to have a pointless debate let's at least be clear what we're debating. Now compare the USP, P30S and HK45C to the other guns that can be carried in that manner. You can argue that an automatic transmission is better than a manual, but you don't get a vote in my preference for one over the other.

For the record, I've not said one critical word about guns that don't have hammers and/or are striker fired. If you like them, that's awesome for you and the world is your oyster.

But if you don't particularly care for that type of sidearm there aren't nearly so many choices.

Phaedrus/69
October 30, 2013, 10:41 PM
BTW, to address the first line of the OP, I'm equally amazed at how 1911s (which I love) get a pass on price! Really, what can, say, a new Sig 1911 do for $1100 that a USP45 can't do for $900? The HK is at least as accurate, holds more rounds and if I had to bet my life on a gun digesting 1000 rounds right out of the box I'm sure as hell gonna pick the HK over the 1911!

It seems to be almost an article of faith that a good 1911 is gonna cost a grand, and with a few exceptions it would be foolish to spend less than that (eg a Rock is probably going to be okay for cheap, and STI Spartan will run well, etc). It's also pretty much a given that the 1911 you buy for a grand will need some work (!).

MachIVshooter
October 30, 2013, 10:48 PM
In any event every SA trigger pull I've ever felt on every SA/DA gun I have personal experience with is lighter and better than a Glock trigger.

I can list a whole lot that don't, including many that I own. TDA guns on the whole have relatively mushy, undefined triggers as they come from factory. Most of them also don't break below 5 lbs.

Maybe you're a youngster or a big fan studying the evolution of language but I don't you'll find many gun people hewing to your innovative, novel new definition of Condition One, either.

Well, let's put up a poll and see, shall we? It's not my " innovative, novel new definition of Condition One" anyway. And let's not resort to insulting other members by way of accusing them of lacking experience for their age. You have no idea who I am, how old I am, or what my experience level is, so don't presume or insinuate. I have not met you with such discourtesy.

As for the remainder of your post, my preference is single action or TDA with decocker safeties. HK does offer the latter, but they don't offer it in a package I particularly care for or at a price point that represents value to me. I own a lot of guns that cost more than a USP, HK45, P2000, etc., so it's not being cheap. I simply remain unconvinced that the HK offers anything to justify its price over comparable models. I gather to some the aesthetics, exclusivity or ergonomics (???) are worth a $400 premium. Not for me, though, and I'm definitely in the majority if we judge by sales figures.

AKElroy
October 30, 2013, 10:53 PM
You can buy a lot of really solid and reliable handguns these days. Many makers will provide a pistol that will do all you could ask of it for as long as you can keep pulling the trigger.

H&K's not different in that regard. No, their materials aren't far ahead of any of the other major players. No, their tolerances aren't dramatically tighter (without sacrificing reliability somehow). No, they won't run 100,000 rounds longer than their competition without parts breakage.

+1. I think one would have a hard time finding significant differences in quality between the HK and Glock, SA XD's and XDm's, sig 2022, S&W M&P, CZ Phantom, FN FNH, et al. Try them, shoot them if you can, choose what fits, what you can find parts for, and what you can find quality carry gear for. Any other considerations are due to personal preference and status IMO. It may well be that the HK rises to the top, but I certainly would not assume that without looking at less expensive, and IMO, equally quality options.

Big Dave
October 31, 2013, 12:05 AM
This thread seems to have evolved into an 'are HK's worth the premium?' question. One point that rarely gets mentioned, is that if you sell an HK or a Glock, you'll probably lose about the same amount. So essentially, you can 'rent' them for about the same amount.

Phaedrus/69
October 31, 2013, 04:13 AM
I like the poll, Mach4! I'll be curious to watch it unfold. As far at the OP, I will admit that HK fanboy though I am, they certainly aren't for everyone...evidences by sales, as you point out. The way they're made and marketed is obvious that they aren't meant to be. I'm fine with that. There are lots of great guns out there, and the world got by just fine before HK was founded over 50 years ago. Hell, I got by just fine for along time before Gaston decided to put together his Glock committee, too.

The thing that baffles me is why they're bashed for being 25%-40% higher priced than, to pull one out at random, a Glock. By all means, if cost is your primary criteria then buy a cheaper gun. I know some don't like the brand comparisons but look at Rolex vs Timex. A Rolex is 100X the cost of a Timex but I suspect it's no more accurate...maybe less accurate. Stolychnia is 50% than Phillips and maybe 85% of people can't tell them apart. But I don't see the pulling of hair and rending of garments over the deal like I see with HK.

Some people buy HKs or Sigs and Audis or BMWs just like some people buy Taurus or Glock and Hondas or Fords. Different people like different things and/or are more cost conscious. I don't see what the big deal is about it.

Phaedrus/69
October 31, 2013, 04:16 AM
+1. I think one would have a hard time finding significant differences in quality between the HK and Glock, SA XD's and XDm's, sig 2022, S&W M&P, CZ Phantom, FN FNH, et al. Try them, shoot them if you can, choose what fits, what you can find parts for, and what you can find quality carry gear for. Any other considerations are due to personal preference and status IMO. It may well be that the HK rises to the top, but I certainly would not assume that without looking at less expensive, and IMO, equally quality options.

I am in agreement. It's hard to make any sweeping statements without actually shooting the gun. Without that it's just baseless speculation. It's hard to know how you'll like something until you try it.

MachIVshooter
October 31, 2013, 06:10 PM
By all means, if cost is your primary criteria then buy a cheaper gun. I know some don't like the brand comparisons but look at Rolex vs Timex. A Rolex is 100X the cost of a Timex but I suspect it's no more accurate...maybe less accurate. Stolychnia is 50% than Phillips and maybe 85% of people can't tell them apart. But I don't see the pulling of hair and rending of garments over the deal like I see with HK.

The gnashing of teeth comes from those of us who are very tired of being told how superior HK guns are with absolutely nothing to back up the statement. If someone wants to spend the extra coin to buy one for whatever reason, that is their business. But trying to convince me that it's better because it "just is" only serves to irritate.

I get paying for quality. I have a very large tool box stuffed full of Snap-On, Matco & Mac tools because Harbor freight or home depot tools are demonstrably lower quality, from fit & finish to durability to the way they fit on fasteners. In this case, as a professional mechanic, it is absolutely worth the premium cost for a wrench that is far less likely to slip and round a fastener and/or bust my knuckle, or just flat out break on me. Do I think some of those tools are a bit over-priced? Yeah, but there's really not a cheaper option that is of the same quality. Craftsman used to be, and I had bought quite a bit of that back in the day. But they're cheap chinese junk nowadays.

Likewise, I'm big into RC, and there's definitely a difference in quality between an HSP/Redcat/Exceed/Himoto kit and a Team Associated/Losi/OFNA/Durango/Xray kit. It is very tangible, from materials & assembly to engine/motor output, servo quality, shocks, and resulting overall performance & durability.

Yet when it comes to HK versus the world, when we're talking about guns that are offered in comparable models by other quality manufacturers, I have yet to find anything that makes the HK superior. Comparing the USP, P30, P2000 and HK45 to the FNP and FNX, I see no advantage to spending another $300 or $400 on the HK. If it is an aesthetic or ergonomic preference, well, then, OK. But performance and durability wise, you're buying nothing with the extra money.

If HK wants to pay their employees better than the competition and use that as justification for increased cost, they have to accept that many people are far less concerned with the happiness of a company's employees than with receiving good value for the money they spend. We regularly see folks right here on this board argue that they won't pay more for US-made products if the cheaper import is just as good because they don't believe in corporate welfare; why should it be any different with HK?

sigarms228
October 31, 2013, 07:50 PM
This thread seems to have evolved into an 'are HK's worth the premium?' question. One point that rarely gets mentioned, is that if you sell an HK or a Glock, you'll probably lose about the same amount. So essentially, you can 'rent' them for about the same amount.

This is very true. Also a savy firearm owner often is able to purchase excellent used firearms at a great price and are able to sell for the same price or more than what they paid if they desire.

CharlieDeltaJuliet
October 31, 2013, 08:14 PM
MachIV, I will agree that most pistols are just as reliable. I will not back down that the Hk 416 is the best AR built. The military pays about $1100-1300 each for their weapons. When I was in Georgia I seen the 416 with 120,000 through it and it was going out for more abuse. I honestly believe their barrels are second to none. The QC is better because their plant is ran by and with employees who care about their products. America quit carving about the time the drive thru was invented. Don't get me wrong there are still great American made firearms, but the differences in the QC is crazy compared to the 40's,50's and 60's. A grand for a USP isn't that much when a Colt 1911 can cost roughly the same.

I do believe some buy them because the name and never understand what Hk is about. How many military contracts they have around the world. And at least some of our very best (DEVGRU) carry one or two HK's. So when you care enough to send the very best.... I truly believe Hk make a firearm that is on par with any other of the BEST military firearm manufacturers.

el Godfather
October 31, 2013, 10:19 PM
416, 417, Mp5, Mp5 sd, Mp7, Ump, 91, 53, g3, etc. If step out of pistol realm then its a no brainer!

MachIVshooter
October 31, 2013, 11:26 PM
416, 417, Mp5, Mp5 sd, Mp7, Ump, 91, 53, g3, etc. If step out of pistol realm then its a no brainer!

Unless, of course, you're not fond of them.

About the only one I'd want is an MP5/10. Many AR platforms I'd buy before the 416, the MP7 does nothing for me, UMP falls into the same category as any other PCC (useless to me), the 91 can't do anything a SASS can't do better, the 53 was pretty much a dead end for a reason, and the G3 is one of the least ergonomic and heavy recoiling 7.62 battle rifles out there (and not an HK design anyway, but one they ripped off from the Spanish CETME)

JDR
November 1, 2013, 05:21 AM
These days, it seems like a used USP (or perhaps a P2000) is the only way to get an H&K product at a reasonable price.
I bought my USP 40 LNIB and it is an excellent firearm and it is a great range gun, I wish I could find a USP 45c, at the condition & near the price of my 40 USP, if it wasn't already a LEM trigger variant, I'd have it converted; this is my idea of a carry gun!

DammitBoy
November 1, 2013, 05:59 AM
I'm looking at an HK USP Elite for $1300 with 3 12 round magazines, is it worth it?

460Kodiak
November 1, 2013, 09:33 AM
Do you want it? If so, then it is worth it to you. As Sam1911 stated earlier in the thread, buy the gun, not the name.

DammitBoy
November 1, 2013, 10:53 AM
I tend to buy value over name brand. The three HK's I have owned all performed very well. Still own my favorite.

The Elite is supposed to be the best of the best of the HK line. I might just have to find out if that's true.

usp9
November 1, 2013, 12:34 PM
The Elite is supposed to be the best of the best of the HK line.

The Elite is a very accurate pistol. They are out of production though. If you want one, you may want to seek it sooner rather then later.

Check with CDNN. They were selling the Elite a while ago for $899. A steal at that price.

DammitBoy
November 1, 2013, 02:03 PM
Thanks USP, they still have them at that price! I think I found my Christmas present...

usp9
November 1, 2013, 03:36 PM
Outstanding!

To wet your whistle in the meantime;

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i186/ripley16/Pistols/Heckler%20Koch/Elite45target-1-1.jpg (http://s72.photobucket.com/user/ripley16/media/Pistols/Heckler%20Koch/Elite45target-1-1.jpg.html)

HKGuns
November 1, 2013, 06:55 PM
They typically work right out of the box and they hold their value, generally speaking, better than any other brand if you take care of them.

85win
November 3, 2013, 09:33 AM
For ME, the perfect 9mm ever created is the P30L. So far I have not been able to justify any other 9mm handgun purchases because this one is so ideal in every way. If you plan to have a gun for at least 5-10 years, it would be worth it to spend a few hundred bucks more. It is worth it.

ExTank
November 3, 2013, 10:09 AM
The P7 series and P30 are the only HK handguns I have had any interest in.

The P30 felt every bit as good/ergonomic in my hand as my Walther P99/PPQ, and the OOB trigger also fely every bit as good as my Walther's.

But the price differential between the HK's and Walther's (which already takes some heat for being more expensive than Glocks and other similar polymer guns) precluded my picking up a P30.

RussB
November 3, 2013, 12:43 PM
The P30 felt every bit as good/ergonomic in my hand as my Walther P99/PPQ, and the OOB trigger also fely every bit as good as my Walther's.

what is an OOB trigger ?

HOOfan_1
November 3, 2013, 01:15 PM
what is an OOB trigger ?

OOB=Out Of Box

browneu
November 3, 2013, 06:41 PM
To me the price point is negligible since it's the only gun I trust my life with. I carried others and this is the only gun that went bang every time I pulled the trigger with great accuracy.

ExTank
November 3, 2013, 08:12 PM
I can say the exact same thing about several makes/models of guns I've either owned or currently own: Ruger, Colt, Springfield, Taurus, Walther, and CZ.

My Walther's (P99AS and PPQ) just "fit" the best of any gun I've owned. The P30 I handled at a gun shop felt just as good. I have no doubt it would have shot just as reliably and as accurately as my two Walther's.

All other things being equal, then, it came down to price. I wasn't paying $1,000+ for a gun that was virtually identical to two I already owned.

Phaedrus/69
November 4, 2013, 12:09 AM
Maybe I missed the actual model # you're talking about but if you mean the linked one (to the OP) $1200 is a terrible price! That gun is work $875, $900 tops. With all guns it pays to shop around but especially with HKs. CrossCreek is one of the best places to buy; great prices and service.

righteoushoot
November 4, 2013, 07:50 AM
Also, some dealers subscribe to this theory:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giffen_good

MachIVshooter
November 4, 2013, 11:01 AM
Also, some dealers subscribe to this theory:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giffen_good


Close, but Veblen is more accurate:

Some types of premium goods (such as expensive French wines, or celebrity-endorsed perfumes) are sometimes claimed to be Giffen goods. It is claimed that lowering the price of these high status goods can decrease demand because they are no longer perceived as exclusive or high status products. However, the perceived nature of such high status goods changes significantly with a substantial price drop. This disqualifies them from being considered as Giffen goods, because the Giffen goods analysis assumes that only the consumer's income or the relative price level changes, not the nature of the good itself. If a price change modifies consumers' perception of the good, they should be analysed as Veblen goods.

Black Butte
November 5, 2013, 11:40 PM
Overpriced HKs are for snobs and suckers.

I don't see it that way. Even if I don't get one, I like having the choice.

el Godfather
November 6, 2013, 06:19 AM
H&K envy!.........and you say its for snobs?

Sour grapes! ....and you say its for suckers?

usp9
November 6, 2013, 07:53 AM
I paid $400 for my USP. That makes me a sucker? I've bought new and I've bought used... always felt I received value for my money. There are great deals on HKs if you look for them. An Elite from CDNN at $899 for example. Paying $3500 for a 1911... that's approaching suckerville IMHO.

tarosean
November 6, 2013, 08:42 AM
If you doubt the quality or value then don't buy a HK.

Paying $3500 for a 1911... that's approaching suckerville IMHO.

I find it rather ironic that you defend one and attack another.

Just where is this sane price point in your mind?

MachIVshooter
November 6, 2013, 10:26 AM
Paying $3500 for a 1911... that's approaching suckerville IMHO.

There are basically three types of people who pay that kind of money for a 1911.

1) A competitive shooter who actually needs that level of performance.

2) A person who considers three or four grand chump change, does not bat an eye at dropping that kind of scratch on a toy.

3) Someone looking for status/bragging rights.

Sam1911
November 6, 2013, 10:45 AM
I'd add...

4) A collector or someone who enjoys appreciating very high-end and/or custom guns as objets d'art.

Sam Cade
November 6, 2013, 01:02 PM
and:

5.) Someone whose sense of self worth is predicated on the possession of a 1911* and directly proportional to the monetary value of the firearm*.




*or other item, though IME it is either firearms or motor vehicles of a given make.

Black Butte
November 6, 2013, 01:44 PM
My biceps are scrawny, so I'm getting this:

http://sviguns.com/data1/images/f01.jpg
http://sviguns.com/data1/images/f02.jpg
http://sviguns.com/data1/images/f03.jpg
http://sviguns.com/data1/images/f04.jpg

usp9
November 6, 2013, 02:00 PM
I hope it comes with a matching man purse. ;)

ExTank
November 6, 2013, 06:41 PM
While looking at that very...elaborate...firearm, this song was running through my head. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xTGrfs5TXM)

I mean that as a compliment. :)
















Kickin' song.

tarosean
November 6, 2013, 11:29 PM
1) A competitive shooter who actually needs that level of performance.
2) A person who considers three or four grand chump change, does not bat an eye at dropping that kind of scratch on a toy.
3) Someone looking for status/bragging rights.
4) A collector or someone who enjoys appreciating very high-end and/or custom guns as objets d'art.
5.) Someone whose sense of self worth is predicated on the possession of a 1911* and directly proportional to the monetary value of the firearm*.


As I asked earlier gentlemen... Where is the price point??

There are people here who cannot afford a HiPoint and there are ones that can afford six figure guns. As multiple comments allude to in this thread.. There is a division somewhere that you go from your average every day Joe to an Elitist.. I just find it odd.

Course the same arguments are played out over Glass, Shotguns, etc. etc. etc. etc.

460Kodiak
November 7, 2013, 09:30 AM
Looking at that gun almost sent me into a seizure. Some of the detail is cool, but there is way too much going on there.

MachIVshooter
November 7, 2013, 10:56 AM
I'd add...

4) A collector or someone who enjoys appreciating very high-end and/or custom guns as objets d'art.

Agreed, though more often than not this collector seems to be buyer type #2. I consider myself a collector, and I'm not afraid to spend decent money, but a Nighthawk just doesn't appeal to me on any level at its price point.

The non-wealthy collector who pays $3k, $4K for a 1911 is probably buying a piece of history, not a modern custom. That kind of money for an unissued 98% WWI or WWII gun makes a lot more sense to me.

If I was making half a million annually, I probably would buy a Les Baer or something similar. But then, my upland bird gun would probably be a Beretta 682EELL instead of an Ithaca 37 lightweight, and I'd be driving a 2013 Cummins rather than my 1990 Comanche.

HKGuns
November 8, 2013, 12:05 AM
I'm looking at an HK USP Elite for $1300 with 3 12 round magazines, is it worth it?

There are a lot of Elite's suddenly on the market recently (I don't know why) they used to be fairly uncommon amongst HK fare. Given this recent glut I think I would shop around a bit for a better price.

A fair price is for anything is that which someone is willing to pay. HK's and elites are great pistols.

Good luck.

tarosean
November 8, 2013, 07:24 AM
The non-wealthy collector who pays $3k, $4K for a 1911 is probably buying a piece of history, not a modern custom. That kind of money for an unissued 98% WWI or WWII gun makes a lot more sense to me.

Sorry I'm the opposite.. If I drop that kind of coin I wanna shoot it, shoot it some more, and attempt to wear it out.. I have no room in my safes for queens....

45_auto
November 8, 2013, 07:47 AM
I have no room in my safes for queens....

I found that problem to be easily solved by the addition of multiple large gun safes.

Many of the most enjoyable guns I own (heirlooms from family and friends, historic, etc) are only fired on special occasions.


As for H&K's, get one and try it. Consider it entertainment. Most you'll lose if you don't like it is less than the price of a decent dinner or movie.

I had a couple, found them to be bulky and clumsy. Gave them to my sons. One was almost immediately traded away for a 1911, the other one for a Glock.

tarosean
November 8, 2013, 08:08 AM
I found that problem to be easily solved by the addition of multiple large gun safes.

I have multiple safes.
However, no heirs that are interested.....So I came to the realization that I need to acquire what I really want. I've sold off around 40+ firearms over the last couple years and picked up a few high end 1911's... So, no, I don't really fit into the above "list"....

MachIVshooter
November 8, 2013, 10:19 AM
However, no heirs that are interested.....So I came to the realization that I need to acquire what I really want. I've sold off around 40+ firearms over the last couple years and picked up a few high end 1911's... So, no, I don't really fit into the above "list"....

To each his own, and that is why I did not say "absolutely" but "basically". There are always exceptions, and I don't like to paint myself into a corner by stating absolutes where they do not exist.

For me, personally, as a mostly recreational shooter, I find there is nothing a Les Baer, Ed Brown or other custom will do for me that my Kimber won't, besides drain my bank account. I don't shoot bullseye, and a 1911 that can produce 1-hole 50 yard groups will not perform better in practical shooting competitions (where the greatest accuracy requirement is about 4" at 25 yards) than any number of common service pistols.

Also, having said that, I do question what one is really buying much of the time besides exclusivity, because I do have a gun that will rival the accuracy of many of the best 1911s out there at a fraction of their cost:

http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n117/Hunter2506/WitnessLimited10mm.jpg

Like I said, if there is something about those high end specimens that makes them worth the cost to you, it's your money, and far be it from me to tell you how it should or shouldn't be spent. For me, though, the performance has to justify the cost. I don't really care if it was carefullly hand-crafted or spit out by machines, and I certainly am not willing to pay extra for man hours that did not enhance performance, reliability or durability.

tarosean
November 8, 2013, 10:34 AM
For me, though, the performance has to justify the cost. I don't really care if it was carefullly hand-crafted or spit out by machines, and I certainly am not willing to pay extra for man hours that did not enhance perform

Yet, you didn't post a picture of a hi-point? Hmmmmmm:evil:

45_auto
November 8, 2013, 08:41 PM
I have no room in my safes for queens

I have multiple safes.

I've sold off around 40+ firearms over the last couple years and picked up a few high end 1911's

I'm trying to figure out where you're coming from.

You sold 40 guns and bought a couple, yet you have no room in your safes?

You have multiple safes, yet none of your guns are safe queens? I easily get 50-60 guns (combination of handguns and long guns) in each of my safes.

Either you have some very small safes, or you shoot a LOT of different guns every day to prevent them from becoming safe queens! ;)

DammitBoy
November 8, 2013, 09:31 PM
I've never understood this sniping at each other and looking down your nose at what someone else chooses to do with their time and money.

Enjoy your firearms, your sport, and your hobby and let the other guy do the same.

tarosean
November 9, 2013, 12:22 AM
You have multiple safes, yet none of your guns are safe queens? I easily get 50-60 guns (combination of handguns and long guns) in each of my safes.

Either you have some very small safes, or you shoot a LOT of different guns every day to prevent them from becoming safe queens!

Perhaps my definition of a queen might differ than yours? I consider it something that will never be shot/NIB, etc.

HexHead
January 13, 2014, 10:13 AM
I've got a P30, and like it enough that I just ordered a HK45, both with LEM triggers. The ergonomics of the P30 grip easily outshines all it's competitors with it's fully interchangeable panels. When I brought it home, I showed it to my wife, who's first comment was how good it felt in her hand. We then got out her Gen4 G17, and did a side by side comparison. She evaluated trigger pull, feel, fit & finish, slide to frame fit and said, "No wonder it costs twice as much as my Glock, it's a much nicer gun". My P30 is the first pistol I've had with an easily and readily discernible trigger reset point. It's very easy to "ride the reset" and shoot it very accurately.

To the guy that said a Nighthawk doesn't do anything a Kimber won't do, well, he doesn't know what he doesn't know. I had a Nighthawk when I had two Kimbers. Shot side by side, the Nighthawk shot groups half the size.

For those of you that think lower priced guns will do everything a HK will do....a P30 went 95,000 rounds in a recent test without a stoppage. The HK45 did 50,000 rounds over an 8 month period with only two stoppages, one a bad primer and the other a broken trigger spring at about 38,000 rounds. The gun was cleaned 7 times during the test. According to Larry Vickers, the HK45 shocked him, shooting as accurately as custom 1911s. To me, they're worth the premium.

Paul7
January 13, 2014, 11:04 AM
I find HKs to be overpriced, and to have mediocre triggers. Recently shot a P30 and was unimpressed. Prefer my Beretta PX4 Storm at half the price.

usp9
January 13, 2014, 01:35 PM
I paid $500 for my Stainless Vertec 92fs and only $400 for my USP. What does that mean... anything?

They're both great guns FWIW.

RX-79G
January 13, 2014, 04:46 PM
HK is one of the only gun companies in existence that spends any money on fundamental Research and Development. The "couple of Mauser employees" comment ignores the fact that these guys have made so many amazing new firearms types that were widely adopted by militaries, despite their novel method of operation.

Comparing that to companies like Glock that can't make an out of battery safety or the many S&W and XD recalls you read about all the time, I think there is something to be said for a company that gets things right the first time, even when offering a market changing mechanism.


If price and value are the bottom line, don't buy an HK. But don't buy a Glock, Ruger, S&W, Springfield, Colt, FN or Beretta, either. They are all phenomenally overpriced when compared to something like a Canik (which is probably more reliable than some on that list).

jjones45
January 13, 2014, 10:51 PM
Almost all guns are overpriced, some more than others. Hk's are good, accurate, reliable, expensive, good looking guns. Nothing more, nothing less

If you enjoyed reading about "Tell me about H&K Pistols" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!