Hi-Points?

[stu454]

Again, he asked what we thought.

Yes, my life is worth more than $350.

Remember the old Bell helmet ads? "If you've got a $10 head put it in a $10 helmet"

That pretty much sums up my attitude regarding these potmetal weapons.

They may work. They may be accurate. They are inexpensive (note I didn't say 'cheap'). They also look like a bucket of cold poop.

The love affair with cheap junk that still accomplishes what you want fascinates me. There's a similar discussion on one of the 4x4 forums that I frequent. It revolves around people using PVC pipe for snorkels on their trucks. We call them 'Shi!!er Pipe Snorkels' or 'Plumber's Snorkels'. Do they raise the intake to prevent water ingress into the engine? Sure.

The point is they look like some guy hacked it together in his garage. There are so many more elegant ways to accomplish the same thing without it looking like you were drunk while you did it. Most of the time they don't cost any more, they just require you to give a damn what it looks like.

Will a dresser with gaps where the wood fits together still hold clothes and a mirror? Yes. But why would you settle for that?

Oh well. I'm going to sign off on this topic before I really hurt someone's feelings.

Disclaimer: I don't make a lot of money so the only snobbery on my end is due to people settling for dogfood when they could have steak with just a little more trouble.

 

[Geno]

I've never fired a High Point handgun, but do own one of their carbines. I like to watch people's faces when I out-shoot their poodle-equivalent, $1,500.00 carbines. They smirk until we draw back our targets. Given the hidden-quality in a High Point carbine, I am inclined to think their handguns are as functional.

Geno

 

[MachIVshooter]

Ah, so your life is only worth $350?

Or is the person who carries a Kimber's life only worth $1000?

Or perhaps if Glock figured out a way to sell their guns for $75 each we should look for something new because our carry gun no longer accurately represents the value of our lives?

A person who's life is only worth as much as his gun - no matter how much it cost, has much more serious problems to worry about than self defense. With that in mind, how about lets talk about whether or not a gun is reliable enough for self defense using terms that actually relate to reliability, rather than coping out and claiming that a gun just doesn't cost enough?

To be so literal with that is pretty sophomoric. We all know that it simply means some of us would not pin our lives on the reliability, or lack therof, associated with a cheap gun.

 

[christcorp]

I love reading "opinions" by people that don't know what they're talking about. Yet, it's their "right" to give an opinion. And by God, we will respect them. Well, I respect their right to speak, but I don't have to respect what they say. When a person says that a particular gun is bad because their life is worth more money than what that gun cost. Such ignorance. And they say the gun is bad because of the way it looks. Again, such ignorance. Yes, people are laughing at you.

A friend of mine felt he owed me a lot of favors, so when he retired from the sheriff's office, he sold me his W. German SigSauer P220 for $200. I guess I should have turned it down because it was too cheap. This weekend I went to a gun show. Most shows are definitely over priced. They were selling hi-point pistols at $259. I guess it's a good gun now because it costs more.

Again, a person's right to an opinion definitely needs to be respected. But no one has to respect what they actually say. I don't care if a person is talking about a glock, s&w, HK, sig, colt, Springfield, or Hi-Point. If they've never owned one or ever shot one, then their opinion of that gun's performance means absolutely NOTHING to me. I have no respect for their opinion. I can definitely respect their opinion on how it looks, feels, price, etc... But as for performance, reliability, dependability, accuracy, etc..., sorry, but if you haven't owned or at least shot one, you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[MachIVshooter]

A friend of mine felt he owed me a lot of favors, so when he retired from the sheriff's office, he sold me his W. German SigSauer P220 for $200. I guess I should have turned it down because it was too cheap. This weekend I went to a gun show. Most shows are definitely over priced. They were selling hi-point pistols at $259. I guess it's a good gun now because it costs more.

Once more, hung up on the literal end of it and failing to acknowledge that what we're talking about here is a cheap gun, rather than an inexpensive one.

Unless you're suggesting that a used gun sold for a good price is suddenly lower quality than a new gun that was cheap to begin with.....

I don't think anyone here would infer that your awsome score of a $200 P220 makes it lower quality than a $280 NIB Llama. I've bought tons of very good quality used guns in the $200-$400 range that originally sold for two or three times as much. I paid $270 for my S&W CS-45. It's not a $270 gun. I paid $259 for the Llama Max-I's I had. They were $259 guns.

 

[X-Rap]

When the OP solicits opinions, especially from those who don't own them what would you expect.
I don't need to marry a fat woman to know that I don't want one, nor do I need to buy a Prius to know that it doesn't fit my style.

To be so literal with that is pretty sophomoric. We all know that it simply means some of us would not pin our lives on the reliability, or lack therof, associated with a cheap gun.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[stu454]

I seem to have touched the elusive 'cheap bastard' nerve.

Thanks for taking me literally on the value to life comparison.

I'm ignorant because I like having good equipment? Sure thing.

If you'd like to laugh at me because of my posts in this thread, have at it. And you respect my right to have an opinion, just not the opinion itself? Okie dokey.

Enjoy settling for mediocrity. The ugly wife analogy is a good one; two arms, two legs, two eyes, right number of holes. I do!

 

[mgmorden]

I seem to have touched the elusive 'cheap bastard' nerve.

Not exactly. I don't actually own a Hi Point. I have shot them a good bit (I have friends and family that own them), but never bought one. I own several Rugers, a SIG, and a few CZ's. You see though, someone will always one-up every purchase one makes. To some people, the guns that I own are worthless trash, and anyone who doesn't purchase an H&K or Wilson Combat just doesn't value their life enough. Instead of seeing the item for the tool that it is and accepting that some people have different priorities, they prefer to see the item as a status symbol, and then proceed to literally measure their self worth based on the the prestige of that status symbol.

This ultimate association of cost with quality is the same crap that keeps salesman who sell a $600 audio cable to the "audiophile" crowd in business when a $3 cable is virtually indistinguishable in function.

In the end, the harsh reality is that if you want to suggest that someone not buy a product, then to come from a logical position you have to argue merits other than cost. Relying on a low or high price to make your decision for you is short-sighted. From my personal experiences, Jennings, Bryco, and Jiminez arms are cheap and malfunction at an unacceptable rate. I wouldn't trust my life to them not because of their cost, but because of their track record. Hi Point on the other hand, while I do have my doubts as to their longevity if submitted to high volume shooting, have proven to have a reliability level that I'd consider within an acceptable margin of error for personal self defense. As such, despite them being of the same price as some junk guns, I don't consider their cost to disqualify them from such use.

 

[howlnmad]

I own a C-9 and have run at least 1000 rounds through it, probably closer to 2000. all those rounds and never a problem with function or accuracy. The only cons I have are, capacity and stripping it down for cleaning. Would I buy another one? Maybe.

 

[christcorp]

Once more, hung up on the literal end of it and failing to acknowledge that what we're talking about here is a cheap gun, rather than an inexpensive one.

I agree with this 100%. Where we disagree, is that you believe that the hi-point is a "CHEAP" gun. And it's not.

To be so literal with that is pretty sophomoric. We all know that it simply means some of us would not pin our lives on the reliability, or lack therof, associated with a cheap gun.

Again, couldn't agree more. NOW, show me evidence that there is a lack of reliability with a hi-point. Then we'll have something that we agree on. Now, if you haven't owned or shot a hi-point, then I really don't know where the conversation is going. Your opinion is unfounded. There's no proof. There's no facts.

Yes, you can say that you don't need to marry a fat ugly girl to know you don't want one. Again, I agree 100%. And you could say that you don't want a hi-point because it's ugly, bulky, heavy, etc... I can buy that. But don't B.S. me or anyone else here and say that the gun is cheap, unreliable, undependable, etc.... Don't tell me that the ugly fat girl is mean, self centered, illiterate, stupid, etc... if you don't know her personally. Some of you all can come up with all the analogies that you want. It doesn't mean you know what you're talking about.

This is actually a VERY SIMPLE SCENARIO. IF you own and/or shot hi-points, then you can have a valid and respected opinion about ANY ASPECT of the hi-point that you want. If you haven't owned and/or shot hi-points, then the ONLY opinion you can have is about it's looks, feel, weight, or other aesthetic attributes. NOTHING about it's reliability, dependability, accuracy, function, etc... If you comment about those things, your opinion doesn't mean anything. It's invalid. It's ignorant. It's uneducated.

 

[JR47]

At what point should price decide everything about a gun? Or looks? An M240B is ugly as sin, but I doubt that any of the "lovely" supporters would pass one up just because of that.

We're in a deep recession, under the "modern" interpretation. Otherwise known as a depression. Money is tight, jobs are lost, homes are foreclosed upon, and cars are re-possessed. Not everyone is going to be able to afford the "lovely" guns. So, are they expected to go unarmed?

Have any of those telling us about the reliable used, name a brand guns, seen many of them around today? Most of the ones that I've seen are looking pretty ratty, and may not be reliable. Buy one, and, if it tanks, you're on your own repairing it, at your own cost. Oh, and while it's down, and you're scrounging up the money for the repairs, you also don't have a gun for defense, do you?

The High Point is unlovely, but it appears reliable, accurate, and dependable enough for a less dedicated (read as unwilling to sacrifice food for the family) shooter to build skills, and stop threats.

Personally, I think that Glocks are ugly as that PVC snorkel, and balance like someone nailed a grip onto a piece of 2x4. However, they also work, for the most part. They just cost enough that people will defend them instead of admit that they bought a reliable, accurate, but UGLY handgun.

 

[ccsniper]

several people on this thread have more than a thousand posts yet are still continuing to flame one another, just amazes me.

 

[Larry Ashcraft]

several people on this thread have more than a thousand posts yet are still continuing to flame one another, just amazes me.

I just read through it and didn't see any flaming, actually. Spirited discussion, yes, but that's why we are here, isn't it?

 

[mlkx4]

I own a 995ts, and its lots of fun!!! I also know quite a few people who have them and never a problem, 100% reliable and the BEST warranty of ANY manufacturer. If you dont consider yourself an elitist, it is a great weapon. If your trying to keep up with the jones's, well then they are not for you.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Son's Gun

My son owns a HiPoint C9. I gave it to him as a beginning pistol. Just something to get him started.

We've been to the range a number of times, him with his C9, me with my XD-40.

He consistently outshoots me with the C9. Okay, sure, he's younger, has better eyes, better reflexes, steadier hand, and all that. I can accept that he's just a better shot than I am.

Well, almost.

It turns out that *I* shoot the C9 better than I shoot the XD-40. How embarrassing. I can hold my own against my son if we both shoot the C9, as long as we keep it under 30 yards. Past that, his eyes give him the decided advantage.

I bought this pistol used from a co-worker a couple of jobs ago. He paid about $170 for it, used it for six months, had no failures, cleaned it up and sold it to me for $150. He kept the HiPoint carbine with the red dot. He was hitting cans out past 150 yards with it.

My son doesn't get to the range that often. It's a common malady with people in our line of work. When he does get to the range, he's in the middle of the paper by the end of the first magazine. I have to work to keep up.

I have nothing bad to say about the C9.

Yes, I wish he'd go buy something a little more fashionable, and something that conceals more easily (just like I keep hoping he'll get his CCW), but he's not a hard core gunny yet. For him, it's mostly recreation. He appreciates that skill with a pistol is good to have, and frankly he's way better on moving targets than I am. The two years he spent sweating in high-energy Airsoft competitions evidently wasn't a complete waste of time and money. (Although, I still cringe when I realize that his Airsoft armory cost him more than five times what that C9 cost me.)

I don't own one myself, but I've given it some thought. I could use a "cheap" toolbox gun for the truck.

I'm okay with HiPoint, even though I'd personally rather own a HiPower.

 

[stu454]

Not exactly. I don't actually own a Hi Point. I have shot them a good bit (I have friends and family that own them), but never bought one. I own several Rugers, a SIG, and a few CZ's. You see though, someone will always one-up every purchase one makes. To some people, the guns that I own are worthless trash, and anyone who doesn't purchase an H&K or Wilson Combat just doesn't value their life enough. Instead of seeing the item for the tool that it is and accepting that some people have different priorities, they prefer to see the item as a status symbol, and then proceed to literally measure their self worth based on the the prestige of that status symbol.

This ultimate association of cost with quality is the same crap that keeps salesman who sell a $600 audio cable to the "audiophile" crowd in business when a $3 cable is virtually indistinguishable in function.

In the end, the harsh reality is that if you want to suggest that someone not buy a product, then to come from a logical position you have to argue merits other than cost. Relying on a low or high price to make your decision for you is short-sighted. From my personal experiences, Jennings, Bryco, and Jiminez arms are cheap and malfunction at an unacceptable rate. I wouldn't trust my life to them not because of their cost, but because of their track record. Hi Point on the other hand, while I do have my doubts as to their longevity if submitted to high volume shooting, have proven to have a reliability level that I'd consider within an acceptable margin of error for personal self defense. As such, despite them being of the same price as some junk guns, I don't consider their cost to disqualify them from such use.

That is the best counter argument yet.

If they work and are reasonably accurate, I say go for it and have fun.

Someone will always one-up you on price. "Oh here's Bill. He just bought a Korth."

Hi, my name is Stuart, and I'm a gun snob.

Everybody say hi to Stuart.

 

[DNS]

I had a C9 Hi Point and it worked 100% percent with fmj as long as I locked both elbow and wrist since it was a blowback. Only reason I got rid of it is because I'm a lefty and I had issues with ejecting mags on the ground.
Fun shooter.
Mike

 

[makarov9]

My experience has been that they shoot decent, but ugly as sin. They'll pretty much shoot any brand ammo and have a lifetime warranty. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I can afford better handguns than the Hi-Points and therefore don't have one, but if I had no gun at all, needed one badly and only had $150-$180 (depending on caliber), I would buy one. A handgun I paid over $900 for went exactly one shot before its first stoppage. One Hi-Point I've actually shot was a 9mm carbine belonging to a friend which I put a magazineful through. It looked like it fell out of the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down, but it put all the bullets where I aimed them without a stoppage.

 

[Hawk]

This is actually a VERY SIMPLE SCENARIO. IF you own and/or shot hi-points, then you can have a valid and respected opinion about ANY ASPECT of the hi-point that you want. If you haven't owned and/or shot hi-points, then the ONLY opinion you can have is about it's looks, feel, weight, or other aesthetic attributes. NOTHING about it's reliability, dependability, accuracy, function, etc... If you comment about those things, your opinion doesn't mean anything. It's invalid. It's ignorant. It's uneducated.

Well, without letting it get personal vis a vis the poster vs. the idea, may I suggest that you're just hacked that you didn't read the OP?

The OP, quite unlike most threads here, clearly solicits uninformed opinion. That's not only unusual for a first post, it's rare: it may even be unique.

Or, not to put to fine a point on it, you're wanting informed opinion while the OP is specifically soliciting uninformed (uneducated) opinion. I don't see any reason why we should disrespect his request, denigrate it or believe your criteria is superior. He asked what he asked which will cheerfully permit input from folks you would rather not offer input. Tough noogies. It's the input he wants. If you want a thread with input only from owners and shooters, you are certainly free to start a thread of your own.

This one, most assuredly, is not that thread. This is the "what do the non-owners believe" thread. Perhaps a very uncomfortable parcel of internet real estate for you to deal with but the OP makes the rules. If you are so absolutely, unrepentantly, opposed to the premise of allowing (nay, soliciting) non-owner opinions, may I suggest you start your own thread? This one permits uninformed opinion explicitly. Your distaste for the allowance won't change the facts of the matter. Whining, griping and understandable (though irrelevant) objections aside.

 

[stu454]

Christcorp,

I apologize if anything that I wrote got your dander up. I just flat don't like Hi Points. They are bulky and ugly. There. I said it.

If we met and fired a Hi Point for 5000 rounds with zero issues I would respect the gun. I still wouldn't own one. The $1 can of Alpo will keep you alive but for that same dollar you can get a burger off of the value menu.

I don't have to own a Yugo to know that I don't want to drive one. Even if it gets me from A to B reliably.

No hard feelings from me.

 

[Nicodemus38]

taurus, hi point, rossi, charter

simply do not exist to the crowd that doesnt have to reconcile their annual earned income against outgoing bills. Result is that if a handgun costs less then their gun belt or holster, it is automatically junk.

however, its american, you can contact them in listed business hours, and just about always get a live personon the phone. most other companies dont have that ability.

 

[christcorp]

Stu; I never said you had to like a hi-point or buy one. In your first sentence, you said you flat don't like them. That they are ugly and bulky. And therefor won't own one. That's great. I can respect that. You don't need to justify it. But you also didn't say anything about it's performance, reliability, dependability, etc... That too is respectful.

It's the people who speak about the hi-point's performance, accuracy, dependability, reliability, quality, etc..., and have never owned or shot one, that I have a problem with. And Hawk, I totally respect your right to have any opinion you want. I was simply saying that if a person hasn't owned and/or shot a hi-point, that I don't have to, and won't respect what they have to say about the hi-point when mentioning reliability, dependability, performance, quality, etc... Yes, I'll respect their right to speak, just not respect the words coming out.

But this is not a hi-point complaint. I've asked the same thing when people state opinions about glock, Springfield, religion, politics, etc... that require an "Educated Experience" when it comes to forming an opinion. I've gotten into discussion on politics, and when a co-worker jumped in to "AGREE" with me, I told him basically that I had more respect for the person's opinion I was disagreeing with than his, because the person I disagreed with at least had an educated opinion. They researched, experienced, studied, etc... My co-worker was simply jumping on a bandwagon. I don't respect people who don't think for themselves and simply jump on bandwagons and regurgitate other people's opinions.

But as stu said, he'd never own one because they're ugly and bulky. That's good enough for me. We don't have to agree. If you want to have an opinion about it's performance respected, then you have to have at least shot one. If not, then I can't respect that opinion. I'll respect your right to have an opinion, but I don't have to respect the words coming out.

 

[christcorp]

taurus, hi point, rossi, charter

simply do not exist to the crowd that doesnt have to reconcile their annual earned income against outgoing bills. Result is that if a handgun costs less then their gun belt or holster, it is automatically junk.

however, its american, you can contact them in listed business hours, and just about always get a live personon the phone. most other companies dont have that ability.

Nic; I'm not quite sure I really agree on that as a general statement. Maybe for some people. I can honestly say, with no B.S. intended, that there's probably not a gun for sale that I couldn't buy right now, and I wouldn't have to balance my checkbook to cover it. And, my wife probably wouldn't even notice it. "I will qualify this and say that I'm not talking about a $1 Million gun that George Washington personally owned and is a million dollar collector edition. But regular guns, there isn't one out there that I can't afford. Doesn't mean I'd buy it.

I have Sigs, Dan Wessons, Kimber, Sprinfield, Colt, S&W, and others. And yes, many are well over $1000. But I also own a Hi-Point 9mm and an H. Schmidt 22LR revolver. I buy guns for certain purposes. The hi-point has it's purpose. And when I bought it, used, I knew that I had to give it a good workout before I would trust it. But I do that will all my guns. So while some people might buy guns for economic status; and some people may buy guns based solely on what they can afford, it's still important that if a person gives an opinion on the gun's functionality, that they at least know first hand what they speak of. Any other information is a waste.

 

[X-Rap]

taurus, hi point, rossi, charter

simply do not exist to the crowd that doesnt have to reconcile their annual earned income against outgoing bills. Result is that if a handgun costs less then their gun belt or holster, it is automatically junk.
however, its american, you can contact them in listed business hours, and just about always get a live personon the phone. most other companies dont have that ability.

The biggest BS quote of the thread.
This counter elitism or weird martyrdom that comes when scopes, rifles, handguns, or reloading presses are compared or discusssed amazes me.
Perhaps I am the odd gunloving Kennedy and don't have to work for a living or maybe if I just wouldn't spend so much on my gun leather I could afford my mortgage.
How life would suck if we all had to buy and love the peoples gun that everyone could afford. Think of all the great things we could do with all that money people spend on those high dollar elitist S&W's, Kimber's, Colt's, H&K's, Glock's and Beretta's. Yes Komrade I think your on to something