High(er) end or Brand name firearm disappointments.

Riomouse911 said:

Awful trigger;

Click to expand...

I have 3 USP. The Mark 23 has an awful trigger. The 2 regular USP are far worse. Lol

As far as mad at a brand...the last 2 Smith revolvers I bought were sent back. One with maybe 100 round that broke the cylinder latch. Oh well they fixed it.

The next was an 750 dollar 617. It shouldn't have left the factory. Light strikes all the time and had a hole in the cylinder.


How one misses that is beyond me. I work in manufacturing. I know that crap happens. But that was pretty obvious. Far more so than the picture shows. And someone had to assemble it that way . Again smith rectified it very quick. Kudos to their cs.

I don't consider Smith to be terribly high end. But as far as rimfire handguns go a 750-850 dollar one is pretty high.

Maybe a better picture

I know things break. But some things should never made it out. That bothers me worse than the odd part breaking.

I have never been really disappointed with any of my firearms I have purchased. I do feel that some are a better value than others. My favorite has to be my k98 of my older rifles for now. As far as new purchases I feel like my howa was a very good value. That being said I really can't bring myself to spend massive amounts of cash on a single gun for the fear that I won't like it.

I’m a fan of 2nd tier brands as well, especially newer stuff. Several brands made a name for themselves in the late 19th century (Colt, Remington, Browning, S&W) and deservedly so. Their manufacturing techniques and standards were such that their products performed well and were durable. Those same brands seem to have recently been stagnant when the world around them moves forward. Point well illustrated by those very recognizable brands all being sold off. Colt is in the process of a sale and has been circling the bankruptcy drain for a while. Remington got flushed down the bankruptcy drain and has been gobbled up by numerous groups for individual chunks of the respective pie. Browning is owned by FN and S&W changes hands about once a decade it seems. Meanwhile there are those other companies who are concerned with growth rather than maintaining market share, and those guys have to do something impressive to steal market share from the big names. Similar product at reduced price point seems to be the biggest game in the industry, so I look at Ruger as an example. Colt SAA too expensive, here’s a more durable gun in similar form for 1/2 price... YES PLEASE! Colt 1911 is a proven performer but they are getting pricey, Kimber, RIA, Springfield, and many more knocking on your door to fill that role with a similar or better product at a reduced cost. I say all of that to get to this point, if a company is doing well then they are growing and generally are focused on doing their best to keep growing. If a company is stagnant then they are probably not doing anything incredibly well. If I would not invest in the company through stock market I would not invest in their guns. It’s a bit different for used stuff but not really all that far removed. In historical context, if I could dump money into the company when the gun was made, would I do it? My antique S&W guns are great examples here. They set the world on fire with impressive revolvers in the late 19th century and kept that standard high until the wondernine movement happened and sales slacked off. Then the company sold a few times and quality is generally considered acceptable now but less than historically. Would I jump in the time machine to invest in S&W in 1880? Yeah. 1925? Yeah. 1950? Probably so. 1990 probably not, but there is this up and coming company called Glock, and they show some promise in the 90s....

bassjam said:

Now I know Glock has a solid reputation and this isn't a normal problem, what bothered me more about that was OTHER Glock owners who tended to act like I was making this up.

Click to expand...

That's not an uncommon problem at brand fanboy forums.

My Anschutz model 1712 Silhouette rifle has been disappointing to me. To be fair I have a love/hate relationship with that rifle. I love the way it balances offhand and I love the way the stock fits me. I suppose it is accurate enough but it really isn’t anything special and I hate that it does not except a spent case reliably. Most of the time I have to tilt the rifle to dump the empty brass out and in order to use my Leupold Silhouette scope I need a 25 moa scope rail. Without it I nearly run out of elevation adjustment to shoot out to 100 meters. That tells me that the top of the receiver is not parallel with the bore centerline.

I have repeatedly considered selling it off and replace it with a CZ.

Well of it helps my buddy has a cz and it is an amazingly accurate rifle. I was going to buy one but ended up buying a ruger instead for threaded barrel. On another note I love the ruger. So far seems very accurate and action is smooth

Brand new S&W Model 65 3”. Bought it and shot it with everything I could find. Could not group better than 6” at 7 yards. Had a smith look at it, could not find an problem, sent it back to S&W, they could not find a problem and came back the same way. This was late 80’s. Still love S&W everyone makes a bad product once in a while. Sold it with full disclosure and for half of what I paid.

Although I don’t own a high end 1911, I have demo’d some $2K models from Colt and S&W. The action, finish, and feel are vastly different than my RIA.

tarosean said:

Was my question too.

Just about everything named in the thread has been mass-produced on an assembly line. I dont consider that high end.


View attachment 977304

Click to expand...

Any guess as to how many forum members can afford a $90K+ gun. as Biden would say "give me a break-man"

I think we have to define “high end” because I see several firearms mentioned that are absolute Kias of the gun world. If we are talking about mid-priced production guns, Kimber is at the top of my never again list. I’ve owned six. All but an early TLE were disappointing. I’ve sent back more than one Raptor and a Warrior SOC for reliability issues. They were great looking pistols and were quite accurate, but they just wouldn’t run.

My SCAR-17 was a bit of a disappointment. Both of them were actually. I wanted to love them. I spent a bunch of money the second time around trying to make the rifle more accurate and more comfortable. Ended up trading it off and have not regretted it.

My wife bought me a Ruger No. 1 B stainless in 300 Win Mag for Christmas and that is a rifle I’ve listed after for quite a while. In typical No. 1 fashion, accuracy results have been quite frustrating, but I knew going in that No. 1s can be weird about accuracy.

All of those are production guns though and production guns can be expected to have issues. That said, the SCAR didn’t have any real problems. I just never fell in love with it like I had thought I would. I’ve never had a truly high end firearm that performed poorly.

A few years ago I wanted a new carry gun and decided on a Springfield Armory 9mm 1911 Enhanced Micro Pistol (EMP). It was everything I wanted or so I thought.

Springfield was running a swag deal, 6 extra mags, holster, dual mag carrier and range bag. I also had ordered a leather Bianchi OWB holster and shoulder holster a couple weeks earlier. Put it all together and it looked good. Real good.

I really wanted this setup to work. The only problem was I couldn’t shoot the thing worth a damn. I put a hundred rounds through it and even at 15 feet I was all over the place. I had my LEO son and grandson shoot another hundred rounds and their groups were everything I couldn’t do. After about 300 rounds of different ammo I had to admit it was a lost cause. I remember my grandson saying “your disappointed aren’t you PaPa?”

After listening to everyone rant and rave about the fit-n-finish of anything Pedersoli, I got a myself a Brown Bess. Don't get me wrong, it is a decent gun, but I don't think the folks that ranted and raved about "fit-n-finish" truly understand "fit-n-finish". I'm apparently spoiled by the fit and finish of pre-ww1 commercial and even military arms. At one point when I was new to firearms, I thought a Remington 700 BDL was the bee's knees. Then I got a hold of a pre-64 M70, actually a pre ww2 M70 and thought "Wow, this is way better". Then I got my first South American contract Mauser, an Argentine 1909. That rifle defined fit and finish. My Snider also demonstrates incredible wood to metal fit for a "soldier's gun". The Pedersoli? LIke I said, it's a decent gun and it shoots well, but I was initially a little disappointed in the wood to metal fit. Honestly I shouldn't have been surprised.

marksman13 said:

I think we have to define “high end” because I see several firearms mentioned that are absolute Kias of the gun world. If we are talking about mid-priced production guns, Kimber is at the top of my never again list. I’ve owned six. All but an early TLE were disappointing. I’ve sent back more than one Raptor and a Warrior SOC for reliability issues. They were great looking pistols and were quite accurate, but they just wouldn’t run.

My SCAR-17 was a bit of a disappointment. Both of them were actually. I wanted to love them. I spent a bunch of money the second time around trying to make the rifle more accurate and more comfortable. Ended up trading it off and have not regretted it.

My wife bought me a Ruger No. 1 B stainless in 300 Win Mag for Christmas and that is a rifle I’ve listed after for quite a while. In typical No. 1 fashion, accuracy results have been quite frustrating, but I knew going in that No. 1s can be weird about accuracy.

All of those are production guns though and production guns can be expected to have issues. That said, the SCAR didn’t have any real problems. I just never fell in love with it like I had thought I would. I’ve never had a truly high end firearm that performed poorly.

Click to expand...

Interesting about the SCAR17. I got one used, less than full retail, but still a lot of money. Looked to be in minty new condition. Apparently was bought by a sailor that was re-assigned to California and decided he couldn't keep it. So I ended up with it. Picked it up on the way to the rifle range and when I got there it was shooting clover leaf groups at a hundred for three shots with Federal 150 hunting ammo. Extremely pleased with this specimen. Now my SCAR16 does not shoot as well, but I still like it more than any of my AR's.

Actually, as I read your post, I think I'm the other end of the bell curve in our respective gun world. My two kimbers have been excellent for both accuracy and reliability and my Ruger No. 1 45-70 has been excellent as well. Dumb luck I suppose.

bdickens said:

Curious.

They're generally considered ultra reliable.

Click to expand...

You practically have to be a gunsmith to take apart the older ones to clean.

A new Colt Competition 9mm is at Colt's for the second time, it's been there since last August pretty much. I'm 0 for 2 with new Colts.

A Sig P210 was the most unreliable handgun I ever bought, about a 50% failure rate, they did fix it but I never did shoot it well.

On the other end, a Korth .22 had exceeded my expectations more than any other handgun.

gnappi said:

You will note that no name brands were mentioned in my OP so clearly bashing was not intended. YMMV

I've had really good luck with many products but there's a bit much of the brand war thing, and I wanted to point out that not every premium priced firearm is a premium product. As far as Who cares? Regarding 1911's for example, there's not a single thing Colt does with the platform that others have not done better, and less expensive. Same for their AR's.

Regarding not buying X brand over another, absolutely I have blacklisted a number of brands. New shooters read accolades on uplevel handguns and I thought I'd offer a different perspective. Fair enough?

Click to expand...

Sure, and thank you for responding. No disrespect intended, but it often seems as though many folks on firearms discussion forums seem surprised that some firearms leave the production line and don't perform up to expectations, even the major brands or the more expensive brands. I've experienced failure from high-end automobiles, kitchen appliances, power tools, hand tools, custom windows, kitchen and bathroom plumbing fixtures, even -- gasp -- expensive fishing equipment, but especially, top-end electronics.

I don't blame brands nor do I engage in public brand-shaming or brand "bashing" either on-line or person to person. I do my research, try and figure stuff out, get repaired or replaced if necessary, and move on.

And yes, it's totally natural to complain about something if we feel we paid a premium when we deliberately sought out a more expensive consumer product. I get that. I just don't obsess about the lemons life tosses me anymore, nor do I give up on a manufacturer if I get one example of their products and it doesn't work out. Hey, I worked for GM back in the day when they sucked, and I'm still driving a Chevy. And I'm still shootin' Colt's. I've had disappointments from practically every firearms manufacturer out there, but frankly, I only want to talk about the ones that I got that I like.

Oh, and as far as advice to new shooters who might read the firearms forums, I'd want them to know that if they're reading "accolades on uplevel handguns" not to think it's all BS and folks shilling for the makers. Far more good handguns out there now than bad ones, and I'd caution anyone to not decide against a particular manufacturer based on a sample of one -- or worse -- believing everything you read on the internet.

commygun said:

Everybody makes a lemon now and then.

Click to expand...

THIS^^^^^^^^. At some point everyone will trash talk a certain brand including me, interestingly I own just about every trashy gun everyone hates and I love because they are reliable and work.
I've shot my cheap pre- accutrigger Savage rifle against customs costing thousands more and I won't say my rifle out shot that rifle but I know I out shot that shooter with his super dooper rifle that he may never know its true accuracy as he could not shoot.

So any gun ,regardless of price may be a lemon once in a while , especially if the person working on that gun that day had a hangover.

swg1 said:

After listening to everyone rant and rave about the fit-n-finish of anything Pedersoli, I got a myself a Brown Bess. Don't get me wrong, it is a decent gun, but I don't think the folks that ranted and raved about "fit-n-finish" truly understand "fit-n-finish". I'm apparently spoiled by the fit and finish of pre-ww1 commercial and even military arms. At one point when I was new to firearms, I thought a Remington 700 BDL was the bee's knees. Then I got a hold of a pre-64 M70, actually a pre ww2 M70 and thought "Wow, this is way better". Then I got my first South American contract Mauser, an Argentine 1909. That rifle defined fit and finish. My Snider also demonstrates incredible wood to metal fit for a "soldier's gun". The Pedersoli? LIke I said, it's a decent gun and it shoots well, but I was initially a little disappointed in the wood to metal fit. Honestly I shouldn't have been surprised.

Click to expand...

I gather that Pedersoli can be kind of hit-or-miss. As I mentioned early in the thread, my "high grade" Pedersoli Gibbs has some of the worst checkering I have ever seen. It also has wood-to-metal fit that would not be out of place on a fine Purdey shotgun. The tasks were obviously not performed by the same fellow (or at least not in the same state of sobriety) but it would not surprise me if the outfit has checkering guys as good as the inletting guy. Getting them all to work on the same gun probably results in an heirloom.

Of course, getting all of the other guys to work on the same gun probably results in something we'd read about in threads like this one...

My Colt Combat Commander was garbage. Went back to Colt, twice, and then to a local 1911 guru who said it never should have gotten out the factory door. He messed with it and got it to function, sort of, as long as it was run "very very wet" as in dripping with oil, and even then the also bad AMT Hardballer Longslide I had was better, at least it didn't spray me with oil when I shot it. It jammed less than the Colt did at a much cheaper price. My used Python broke the hand soon after I got it, but since it was used and bought from a pawn shop, I can't hold it against Colt, but it's the only revolver I've had that broke a hand.

The biggest disappointment was a new Browning SL-22 Grade II. It was pretty, but had the dumbest trigger assembly I've ever experienced. Couldn't wait to get rid of it. Also had a Browning Buckmark that would frequently FTE the fired empty, no matter what I did__sold it too. Almost everything else I've bought has met my expectations or exceeded them.

I don't know if I have ever owned anything "high end". Maybe "better quality" i.e, SAKO, CZ, and FN. They were all fine firearms. Not a loser in the bunch. Very impressed with all 3 - tops would be the FN...

Oh...2nd post. Forgot about my Sako FinnFire II 17HMR. It was an OK gun but didn't wow me at all. Didn't impress me as I had hoped. Plain unimpressive wood, stiff unforgiving bolt with occasional difficulty feeding from the mag__even had my gunsmith go thru it and polish the innards. Still oh hum, so sold it.

I briefly owned a Walther PPQ that was the most inaccurate handgun I've ever fired. My FFL was kind to me on the trade and I ended up with something I really liked.

Not too many ehhh moments in my experiences.

Had a colt model 357 that couldn't hit the side of a barn from inside. 4 different shooters and 5 different ammo types didn't make much of an improvement.

Traded it off eons ago and found another 357 that is good enough for me.

I don't consider anything I own in the way of guns to be high end. I have a Colt .45 SAA that's worth a couple thousand dollars but I would never sell it. The most I paid for a rifle was $1200.00 for a Colt LE6920, for a pistol $825.00 for a CZ 97b. I've had a bunch of dud's most recently a Ruger 9MM American that would group 3 to four shots then throw one about a foot out. Kimber's are out. Saw too many malfunctions to ever carry one. My Colt .45 Series 70 needed an new extractor but that was after twenty years of use. Two makers of firearms that I have had absolutely no problems with are CZ and wait for it, Taurus. I have a bunch of both, no problems.