Tiers of Quality

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pukindog12

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
186
Tiers of Quality

When I hear or read of gun manufacturers of semi-autos in my mind I automatically lump them (maybe foolishly) into a group quality wise. I don't consider this gun snobbery as all funtioning, reliable, and safe guns is better that a stick. But, OTOH, some guns are better quality wise than others. Here is what I consider the best on down.

1st tier:
Walther
H & K
Beretta
Sig
CZ
Browning

2nd tier:
S & W (if revolvers were included this would jump one tier)
Ruger
Kahr
Bersa
Stoeger
Glock
Springfield
Makarov
Canik
Colt
Caracal
FN Herstal
Sarsilmaz
Grand Power
Boberg
Girsan
Kimber
Magnum Research
BUL
Rohrbaugh
STI
Steyr

3rd tier:
Star
Astra
Tanfoglio
Arcus
Daewoo

4th tier:
Kel Tec
SCCY
Hi Point
Diamondback
Taurus
Rock Island

5th tier:
Jennings
Lorcin
Davis
Jimenez

These are just the ones off the top of my head. I am sure I forgot some. And in my limited experience I've shot/handled about half the list which makes this list somewhat speculative. But one can get a decent idea about quality by reading or talking to people provided the sources are numerous. I am sure people will aggressively disagree with me and so be it. But this is how they stack up quality wise in my feeble little mind of which is subject to change.

How do they stack up in your lists?
 
Last edited:
Well, this is likely to end in a flame fest.

I sure would stack them differently. Very differently. (None of Tier 1 would be in Tier 1, for example.) Not much point in writing that all out though -- it's all too subjective. Even "quality" is so subjective as to be of very limited value as a descriptor.

Just line them up by cost. That's at least something fairly concrete to hang your hat on. You'll get no consensus on any of the rest of it.
 
I agree with Sam, particularly on rating by cost. Alternately, if doing levels like the OP, I would only have three tiers.

The first tier would include everything from "semi custom" 1911s like Ed Brown, Les Baer, and Dan Wesson, on through Glock, Ruger, Springfield, SIG, CZ, S&W, etc.

The second tier would include KelTec, Kahr, Bersa, RIA, Taurus, and the like. I wouldn't even bother with anything in this tier - not because they're all completely worthless, but because there are so many affordable guns of superb quality in the first tier.

Third tier would be guns I wouldn't recommend to anyone unless they were looking for a novelty paperweight. Everything in your tier 5, plus many from 2, 3, and 4.
 
Last edited:
Stoeger, Bersa, Colt, Rorbaugh, STI, and Sarsilmaz don't belong in the same group together? Say it ain't so! :eek:


;)
 
The first irony is that Browning is above FN Herstal.
Click to expand...

Yep. I sure brainfarted on that one. :eek:

Stoeger, Bersa, Colt, Rorbaugh, STI, and Sarsilmaz don't belong in the same group together? Say it ain't so!
Click to expand...

Like I stated "in my feeble little mind"! :p
 
I sure would stack them differently. Very differently.
Click to expand...
Me too. I certainly wouldn't put an STI Edge, Eagle, Grandmaster ... never mind.
 
I'm curious -- what was the RATIONALE behind the original list? And, the definition of quality needs some 'splaining.

It doesn't seem based on experience with or ownership of the guns so ranked. I've probably owned guns from a least half of the gun makers listed, and clearly have a different appreciation of what's good and what's important.

Some of the gun makers cited aren't gun makers but importers, and quality there varies over the years. (Gun Test Magazine used to downgrade guns if they weren't beautifully finished internally, even though some of the areas cited had nothing to do with the gun's functionality. I gave up on that magazine years ago.)
 
Last edited:
You really have to qualify what "quality" means to you.

I'd put Glock into the higher tier 1. Sure my G23 feels terrible, but it's a gun, not a sofa. And it is one of my most reliable, fastest, and accurate pistols. (Custom sights) For whatever reason, the compact Glocks (G23,G19) and fullsize Target Glocks (G34, G35, G21 longslide) work so darn well for me that they get bumped to a higher grade. No matter how much I hate it, if my G23 is hitting a Gatoraide bottle at 30yards as well as my custom $2k+ 1911's, that's a good, good feeling.

I thought Tiers were an obsolete term because everyone has a different idea of "quality". Collector quality differs greatly from a soldiers type of quality. "Look it's pretty" vs. "I'm alive, they're not." Anytime I shoot a IDPA course better with my G23 than my 1911, I notice. Gun could be a complete junk pile, but if it's winning trophys........

My take (I'm only going to list pistols I often recommend):

Tier 0:
Ed Brown
Wilson
Dan Wesson

Tier 1:
Colt
Glock
Walther
H&K P7, P9

Tier 2:
S&W M&P
Kahr
Springfield
Ruger
H&K USP
Sig (old models)

Tier 3:
Cheaper 1911's: Kimber, Springfield, Rock, Rem, SIG, STI Spartan etc. etc.
Beretta
Sig (late models)


Anything less, Tier 4, isn't worth mentioning IMO.
 
Last edited:
Pukindog12 said:
And in my limited experience I've shot/handled about half the list which makes this list somewhat speculative.
Click to expand...
That is the major flaw in the list...that you would try to rank any gun you haven't personally shot, much less handled. Ideally you would have shot the gun in excess of 500 rounds to form an opinion.

It is pretty funny that you would rank a Browning and FN differently..and also to have the Rock Island 2 tiers too low

Of the ones you have in tier one, the only one that might belong would be the H&K...and that is just based on function as opposed to price
 
Impossible to assess the list without understanding you objective acceptance criteria for each tier. I own a number in several of your chosen examples: Browning, Ruger, Glock and etc.

What I've decided over the years is that if you shoot them all, they'll all eventually end up in the same functional tier. The ones that immediately shoot well seem to stay that way and those that don't are worked on in various fashions to achieve fully functional status.

Then there are the "show pieces" ... the collectibles. These few are to look at only.

With that in mind, my guns fall into only two tiers: the shooters and the lookers.
 
Last edited:
After looking at the "Tiers" I'm too confused as to even venture into the rationale behind those rankings. I just know what I like in terms of the quality I have experienced with different manufacturers, as well as their price point, and pretty much go with that as my measure of quality.
 
S&W, Glock, Colt, Makarov and Kimber need to be oved up to 1st teir, CZ down to 2nd teir.

That would leave Ruger, CZ, Springfield, Bersa and FN in the 2nd teir, everything else drops down. Anything below 2nd teir doesn't matter.
 
It's just a gut feel list. Some input from owning some and mostly from reading the internets. Most gun owners I've encountered have a list in their own mind. Maybe these gun owners would never write it down in such a manner, but we all have our own experience and bias. It's the OP's opinion as he clearly states. My "list" is different, but neither would be wrong nor worth arguing about.

I do agree "gun manufacturers" is a misnomer. Maybe separate lists for designers and manufacturers. Importers change so much, a list of those guys is kinda nutty. :D
 
I'm surprised jmr40 let CZ stay as high as tier 2.

The entire exercise is subjective. While there's no doubt a Les Baer or Wilson Combat 1911 is a very fine firearm, many of us would rather own a much less expensive gun and a very reliable 15-tr-old pickup truck than a single handgun for the price of both.
 
I try to keep life much more simple than this. While you do USUALLY get what you pay for, it certainly isn't guaranteed. I tend to file them into two columns: "IS" likely to do the job I need it to, or "IS NOT". I really think that this kind of ranking is overthinking it.
 
Being wired to value practicality above all else, I think ku4hx nailed it. If a firearm is functional and accurate enough to allow a shooter to do what he needs to do, then I don't care if it's a Bersa or a Nighthawk.

I can and do appreciate fine craftsmanship, but fit & finish mean jack & squat if it doesn't run.
 
I'm surprised jmr40 let CZ stay as high as tier 2.
Click to expand...
I think people forget there can be various models within each manufacture's line. The higher end CZ pistols have won several World IPSC Championships and they are very popular.
 
lists such as this partly fall apart when one factors in that quality often changes over time; as machines are used too long quality may suffer during that time period...or a 'new' model is rolled out with some flaws and the entire brand is percieved in a poor light.

but we mostly agree on the very top and the very bottom tiers.
 
Ok but....even the guy who successfully used the Jiminez to save his life, do you think he was saying; "Yep. They laughed at me, a cheap gun is all you need."?

Because if it was ME, I would be thinking; "I was a fool for getting a cheap gun assuming I would never need to use it, and if this ever happens again, I will want something a LOT more effective and reliable." But what the heck do I know?
 
The Jiminex guy goes out and gets himself a Glock?

mlj, I agree with you. He thanks his lucky stars the thing fired, then he rethinks his strategy. But I bet he never sells that Jiminez.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Smallest 9mm?
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
richardKatts
R
M
  • Locked
Need a new project...
Replies
2
Views
273
Mauser lover
M
T
  • Locked
Sig 239: buy it in 9mm or .40S&W?
Replies
16
Views
3K
evan price
evan price
tahunua001
  • Locked
S&W is overrated...
2 3
Replies
55
Views
4K
Walkalong
Walkalong
tahunua001
  • Locked
battle of the budgets (a review 2 years in the making)
Replies
24
Views
2K
tahunua001
tahunua001
Back
Top