Do gunmakers still do QC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

goon

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
7,390
About the last 4 new guns that I have bought have all had something wrong with them. The last two, an Arsenal AK and just yesterday a Marlin 1894 were both so screwed up that if anyone had bothered to test fire a couple rounds through either they would have immediately had malfunctions.
How are guns like these ever getting out of the factory?
And how can manufacturers justify this? How much more could it possibly cost to pay a guy to sit in the basement and fire a few test rounds through every gun? Maybe even get a rough zero on the sights? I would think that this would eliminate so many problems that it would be worth the extra $10 per gun to do this.
And wouldn't it be worth it to not anger every other customer with the defective guns that these guys are turning out?

I am sure that someone will be along shortly to explain to me that I am being to hard on these poor manufacturers and that I don't understand the stress that they are under as they count my money but I am not really interested in hearing that.
I want them to start making guns that work right again.
I shouldn't have to buy used guns when I want something reliable.
 
No they don't

I have sent back 3 new guns this year for warranty repairs. All 3 times the manufacturers paid shipping both ways. Why wouldn't they just make sure it worked the 1st time and save themselves $150 per gun in shipping? Because so many people buy guns and never shoot them. Or they put a few rounds through, gun doesn't work right, they chalk it up to break in period at the behest of the dealer and they never question it or put any more rounds through it.
 
I think only some do test firing. I've seen some 1911s that have this done. My Walther P99s have been test fired (even have the test target in the package). I think Beretta does. But yea, I agree. Many companies do not. It tucks.

I KNOW Taurus couldn't possibly do the test firing :neener: :neener:
 
In mass producing items, they don't all get 100% inspection....it just sometimes is not possible. They follow the AQL schedule for the quantity produced, and offer a warranty service afterwards...they only service a small percentage, so it is cost effective.
 
The last three brand new guns I've bought have all had to go back for either safety or (non)function reasons. The RIA I could kinda expect, but the two $1000 Kimbers were a joke. They take their chances that the buyer will either put up with it, have it fixed locally or call them for service. Anyway you look at it, the consumer loses. Mike Z
 
Goon, as a certified gun nut who buys firearms frequently I've noticed the same thing. As you stated many issues would have been identified if shot. I'll go one step further, if the firearm would have been cycled it should have been noticed. Last three purchases were all sent back one a Browning 22 LA that had a trigger pull so bad that I did not have a scale that would measure it. I was told to shoot it some so I did. Breaking the sear eventially do to the extreme pull needed to discharge the weapon. A Keltek 380 would not fire 3 rounds without jamming. Of course that was my fault (limp wristing) until the gun dealer agreed to show me how to shoot it. After jaming twice on the same mag he gave me my money back. The third a S&W 638 that shot 12" to the right at twenty yards. I was told they were not made to shoot that far and I was probably pulling the trigger to hard. I shoot left handed. I finally shot a group of 15 shots of a sand bag both single and double action. After seeing the group all 12" to the right he agreed to send it back. A slight turn on the barrel corrected it and now it shoots great. I have purchased a few since all used.

Jim
 
goon

Where did you pick up the 1894?

I've heard a couple stories of 1894C rifles purchased at Big 5 that had problems, but beyond that, nothing.

Very curious.
 
I bought it a local shop here in PA, Bob's Army & Navy store.
They were cool with taking it back and refunding my money (they always have treated me well in spite of all the defective guns I wind up with from them).
What I think I am going to do is make arrangements to buy it back from them as soon as it comes back from being repaired. I probably should have given Marlin the chance to correct it but as I said, this is about the 4th defective new gun I have gotten and I just decided that I didn't want more of my money tied up in a gun that didn't work. I may have over reacted a little but at the time it seemed like the thing to do.
If I had wanted someone else to have my new $600 rifle I wouldn't have bought it in the first place though. It positively should have worked and it should have been tried before it left the factory, regardless of how many they make.
I find it hard to believe that out of all the guns that go out only a few have problems. As I said, I have had several different models lately from different companies that all had problems. In order for that to happen I am inclined to think that this is more widespread than people realize.
Shooting is a hard enough activity to get people involved in without manufacturers consistently making a bunch of low quality products that shooters will have to depend on.
 
The way I understand production QC to work is like this - and it's not just for firearms, but pretty mcuh any product:

They take a random completed product out of a selection of (say) 100 or 1,000 - depending on their scale of production. If that one item has problems, they take a look at that whole section of production with more scrutiny; otherwise, the section gets a pass. The rationale is that it's more cost-effective to do this than to scrutinize every single product that's completed: man power/labor is the most expensive part of almost any operation.

They probably don't take into account the negative impact it has on the impression people have on their products as a result. In ohter industries such practices are probably acceptable, but in the firearm industry customers don't tend to take such malfunctions lightly.
 
Being in an ISO company , I can tell you that in manufacturing , not every item produced is tested. Initially , many samples are taken and tested , but once production hits a certian point , 1 out of X amount is checked . If nothing changes between tests , then it is assumed that everything in between is up to par . It's not cost efective to test EVERY piece that is made , but to rather warranty what is made . Not to say that something SHOULD be right from the factory , just that it would end up costing YOU more for that piece of mind .
 
From my point of view though I would rather spend $650 for a rifle that would positively work than $600 for a nonfunctional replica.
 
I think the idea that an earlier poster put out, that gun makers (especially pistols) work with the fact that many guns are bought, but few are shot is definately true.

You know the invincible, indestructable S&W 642? This is the one that never jams ... broke on me after no more than 250 rounds through it. I bought it brand new, shot some WWB and the rest +P handloads. The handloads were using published load data and the weapon was stamped +P on the barrel.

In that case, a portion of the trigger mechanism broke, and the trigger would not engage the hammer...

Lets face it: guns are like rabbits feet to lots of people - they will ward off evil spirits without firing a shot. While that may be true enough, I would really prefer something that fired in case I run into the 1-percenter of the criminal population.

:fire:
 
$5 walmart clock or $500 swiss clock , which would you expect to be more reliable? Btw , has anyone EVER had a problem with a vehicle? Should THEY each be road tested ? Are they not just as deadly as a gun? If you want 0 problems , then you buy a hand made , one of a kind gun . They are out there , you just need to be able to afford them . Just like buying a car . If you buy a Ferrari or porsche , you probably are not gonna have a problem . But buy a Sunfire/accent/neon/whatever is mass produced and you might/will have some kind of problem. If you want a flawless weapon , pay the flawless price.
 
But from the same point of view, wouldn't you be highly frustrated if every brand new car you bought failed you the first time you tried to go somewhere in it?
Hop in your new Ford to go pick your kid up from school and it lets you sitting 10 miles from home. Its OK though because your car is under warranty and they will fix it. Just a minor inconvenience...
But now you don't trust Fords so you get a Chevy. On your way to work the first day after you bought it it breaks down and leaves you sitting 10 miles from work. No big deal though because, hey, you have a warranty. Nevermind the fact that you now have another problem that you have to deal with on your time.
So you decide that you are going to go with a BMW. Everyone who owns one likes it so you figure that it is a great choice. Then it breaks down too.
After a string of every vehicle you buy breaking down, wouldn't you just get tired of it all and start taking the bus? Or start looking for used cars that are still serviceable. At least when they break down you don't have as much in them.

I do want a flawless gun when I buy one.
They are supposed to be flawless and they are supposed to be that way when you lay down the MSRP for them.
 
If that was the case , there wouldn't be a WARRANTY ! If I want something that I know will not fail me , well , I get the best there is at a high cost. Why should guns be any different than any other product? You get what you pay for . If you want top shelf reliablilty , you pay for it . Why should guns be any different than any other mass produced item? buy it , try it , return it if it doesn't function the way it should .
 
goon et all,

I experienced the same feelings as you after my S&W broke on me. You know, 'revolvers fire everytime you pull the trigger' being the common wisdom...?

My solution to it all - enjoying my guns at the range and not paying too much mind to the 'what ifs' if a HD situation, etc ever came up. IMO, a malfunction that cannot be cleared is among the least of your worries. I am more concerned about tripping on my own feet as the adrenaline sets in. One other thing, living a 'better' life was my other solution to this problem. Kinda building up a surplus of Karma, just in case. ;)


If one needs warranty work, I will enjoy another one that I own.
 
I know that each FNP gun is tested. When I took the tour they explained that each gun is targeted and function fired. I watched them shoot several while I was there. They said they do the same for the machine guns, too.
Can you imagine the amount of ammo they go through?

lawson4
 
This could be the bright side of the goofy “ballistic fingerprinting” laws. Even though it is not required in my state, my new S&W 1911PD came with a fired case that S&W swears was fired by my gun. It won’t tell them anything about how it groups or feeds, but it should highlight some egregious defects (lame trigger, no ejector, won’t fire etcetera) before the weapon is shipped.

BTW: My 1911 works flawlessly and the iron sights and laser grips both came correctly sighted.:)
 
Do gunmakers still do QC?
Click to expand...

Not when they can avoid it, and many buy most of the components they use, rather then actually make them. They don't have to have a quality control system worth beans because regardless of what they put out, people keep buying their products, and getting them fixed themselves if something breaks or won't work. In this kind of environment why should they worry?
 
ptmmatssc, please don't make excuses for the manufacturers that produce basically shoddy products. When I look at a $2000 shotgun and it has proud wood around the reciever, or a $600-$800 handgun that has a flat blue finish and machine marks, it is a sign that that company is taking shortcuts and selling an inferior product. The use of plastic in firearms today are for ease of manufacture and saving a buck, yet they don't pass the savings on, they pocket it and the consumer again gets an inferior product.

I was looking at magazines this week end, in the mens dept of Walmart. I was comparing prices and noticed that the same gun, with an extra groove or different color plastic would cost another hundred dollars or so. Of course it was given a new model number. We have let the gun companies get away with these practices and because of it, we get inferior products.

I do think they should test drive every car. A company bean counter will find out that the gas tanks will explode on certain models (for instance the Pinto) and kill all of the occupants. He then weights the cost of correcting the problem with how much will be paid out in lawsuits. If it is cheaper to pay settlements than correct the problem, a lot of people are slated to die in order for that company to make the most money. This is a fact.

Look at all of the baby car seats that we have been required to use for children. They have now admited that everyone on the market is defective and all are being recalled. How many children have been killed because we were required to put them in carseats that were defective.

Just because a company sells guns does not make them different than o ther industries. they take shortcuts and we pay the price.:scrutiny:
 
ptmmatssc - so you are saying that when I buy a gun I should expect it to not work right?
I fail to see the logic of that. If you expect something to be defective, why lay down hundreds of dollars of your money for it?
When I buy a gun I buy it so that I can take it out and shoot it and enjoy it. I don't buy it so I can send it off to someone else. If I had wanted someone else to have the gun, I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. I would just leave it on the rack at the gun store.
A gun that I buy isn't doing me any good when someone else has it.
I don't get what you are saying here.
How is it that we don't have a right to complain when a product that we buy doesn't work correctly?
From my point of view, the purpose of a gun is to send bullets downrange. It should do this reliably with available ammunition and it should do this with reasonable accuracy.
If it doesn't do these things, it isn't a very good gun.
OTOH, it would make a great paperweight.
But at the same time, I am not going to pay $500 or more for a paperweight...
 
Wow , where do I start . I am not making excuses for ANY company regarding ANY products. I DO know that if we inspected every item we made , the cost would go up very steaply and people would look elsewhere. Companies take the chance by doing quality checks/inspections at certain intervals and provide a warranty for the ones that get through that are bad . I also am not saying something ( especially a gun ) should not work based on price . But , like anything else , the higher the price , the less likely a failure . People can and should gripe if what they paid for fails them and it's up to the company to make good on it . I personally get more upset if/when my vehicles have a failure due to a defect/flaw. it carries me and my loved ones and would hate to have a failure doing 60 . My vehicles also get me to where I work to be able to afford that new gun I was looking at . If one of my guns happens to have a failure (excluding blowing up :eek: ) I simply throw it in it's case , make a phone call , then ship it out for warrenty work, if it's worth it.

I know someone will chime in about having a gun fail when it's most needed , but really , is anything that perfect that it NEVER fails? I have one pistol that has over 3000 rounds through it and only 1 FTF . Just one problem out of 3000 rounds , but it could have been when I needed it most .
 
Do gunmakers still do QC?
Click to expand...
In 2006, I bought six new guns - three bolt guns (two Remington and one Weatherby) and three pistols (two Springfield Armory and one Sig Sauer). All six were/are 100% reliable out of the box, with no failures or finish issues. Without trying to diminish the fact that lemons do exist in every product line (QC is a poor substitute for QA), I'm feeling OK with the state of the industry.
 
Hah, Smith & Wesson can't even be bothered to enforce meaningful QC on their REPAIRS!

Back in June, I sent them a nice 4" Model 29-2 .44 Magnum to have the forcing cone recut and the barrel set back to fix a spitting problem that it had from the factory.

When I got the gun back, it had a couple of DEEP cuts in the side of the barrel, where they had misused a tool or fixture when working on the barrel. There was NO mention of the damage to the gun, either before it was returned to me, or accompanying the gun.

When I notified them of the problem, they denied responsibility. After I refused to buy their nonsensical denials, they wanted to REFINISH the barrel. They didn't mar the finish, they CUT the STRUCTURE of the barrel, so deeply that your fingernail would catch in the void!

I demanded that they replace the barrel. They kept insisting that I let them grind the crap out of the barrel to remove the cuts. Nobody at S&W could explain to me how they could remove such a deep cut without causing dips, flats, assymetry or an overall reduction in the diameter of the barrel. When I couldn't be bullied into that further damaging of the barrel, they suggested BIRCHWOOD-CASEY cold blue!!! I stated both verbally and in writing that I would NEVER authorize an attempt to refinish the existing barrel. I returned the gun to them.

They finally agreed to replace the barrel. They then sent me a terse email, stating that they had no barrels and that they intended to refinish the whole gun, including the damaged barrel, contrary to my expressed wishes. Note that they didn't ASK me again, they TOLD me what they were going to do. I could not reach the person with whom I'd been dealing on the phone, so I was forced to stop work and fax them a letter stating that if they disobeyed my instructions and attempted to refinish the existing barrel that I would sue them. I was finally able to contact the person with whom I was dealing and ensure that they had not done anything further to the gun.

They still insisted on refinishing the mutilated barrel, which I told them I would NEVER authorize. I told them that I had started looking for a replacement barrel, and that THEY had caused me to stop that search when they told me they'd replace the barrel. I offered to put them in contact with a potential seller, but they said they wouldn't buy parts from third parties (which I have since learned was not truthful). I told them they needed to rethink this policy.

S&W then agreed to purchase a barrel from ME. I located and purchased TWO barrels just in case. While waiting for the barrels to arrive, I received ANOTHER call from one of their technicians, insisting that I have them refinish the gun as-is, since their "master polisher" was leaving. If I didn't have them do what I didn't want done right away, I might not be able to have done what I didn't want them to do. I again refused. At this point, their insistence on grinding the crap out of the existing barrel was taking on the air of taunting.

I sent S&W the first barrel... which they rejected. I sent them the second. We had already discussed the need to refinish the replacement barrel(s), since there are NO new pinned and recessed factory contour barrels, and I could find NO used 4" Model 29 barrels without SOME finish wear or defect. They installed the second barrel (finish wear and all) and refused to refinish it or the gun.

The second they wrecked the original barrel, they trashed the value of the gun. They have as yet neither reimbursed me for either barrel, nor returned the gun to its original appearance prior to their damaging it through their negligence. It is probably IMPOSSIBLE for them to restore the gun's value. This has gone on since JUNE.

S&W has:

1. Attempted to slide by me without comment, damage caused by their negligence.

2. LIED to me about their culpability for the damage.

3. Failed to explain to me how a deep CUT in the barrel could be repaired without leaving flats, dips, assymetry, or overall reduction in the barrel's diameter.

4. Suggested COLD BLUE as a fix to a CUT in a barrel.

5. LIED to me about replacing the barrel.

6. Attempted to DICTATE to me a further unauthorized modification of the gun as a "repair" to their original unauthorized modification.

7. Continually badgered me to authorize a ludicrous "repair" that constituted further damage to the gun.

8. Failed to either return the gun to its original appearance or to reimburse me for the barrel which THEIR negligence forced me to purchase.


I will NEVER send another firearm to S&W for repair because I simply cannot trust either their competence or more importantly, their INTEGRITY.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top