High(er) end or Brand name firearm disappointments.

Status
Not open for further replies.
,


Ironically the USP is a newer design than glock.

Really unsure what @CherokeeGunslinger was aiming at.

Esp since 99.99% of handguns are based of 100yr old + technology.
Reducing the design of modern handguns to their locked-breech roots doesn't mean you have a point.

The new Hi-Power from FN is a "redesign," but it's fundamentally still an old design. The USP is based on 60s handgun doctrine when the S&W Model 39 dominated the semi-auto market, Glock is way more modern in terms of design than a USP. I don't get not being able to see handgun design in anything more than the abstract.

Really unsure what @tarosean was aiming at.
 
Last edited:
Almost every single firearm I've ever purchased has had some type of problem right out of the box! Fortunately I'm savvy enough to fix them and move along with a then perfect gun, but it makes me wonder how anyone just buys a new gun that works perfectly straight from the box.

Just a few examples below of guns I had purchased brand new, with problems that were either immediately apparent, or cropped up on the first range visit:

Ruger LCP:
The extractor spring had been cut out of spec at the factory by the assembly worker. The gun had FTE problems right out of the box. I eventually found this problem, and replaced the spring with a new unmodified factory spring that I properly installed (without cutting it!). The problem went away, and the gun has been great ever since.
View attachment 1050821


S&W M&P Shield 45:
Right out of the box, the gun would sometimes have a FTF once per mag. This was an early production Shield 45, and the early mag followers did not have a cut-out in the side to allow them to move past the mag release catch when moving up the mag tube. This would result in them snagging, slowing down slightly, and not presenting the round fast enough for the slide to strip it off. S&W eventually realized this, and redesigned the 45 mag followers with this cut-out molded in. I let them know I was having this problem, and they sent me some of the new followers to install. The problem went away after that!
There was also a burr on the takedown lever, which was chewing up the rear face of the recoil spring and actually causing it to bend out of shape. I found this burr, filed it off, and ordered a new spring from S&W. Again, perfect ever since!
View attachment 1050823
View attachment 1050829


S&W M&P Shield 9mm:
S&W was effing up the spring temper on their mag springs for a period of time, and my new Shield 9mm was one of them... the springs bent out of shape and were not working properly after the very first range trip! I didn't want to bother with more S&W springs, so I just ordered some from Wolff Gunsprings instead. Also, the little pressure-fit cap on the end of the recoil spring was not pressed in fully, and went flying out when shooting. I noticed it was not fully seated when I got it, and figured that wouldn't last long. I had to order a new recoil spring from S&W that was properly made, meaning that little end cap is fully seated. ~6k rounds later, and that little gun is still perfect!
View attachment 1050824
View attachment 1050828


Ruger Redhawk 44 Mag:
The crush-fit barrel was not indexed properly. I first noticed this when I had to drift my windage all the way over just to get on paper! I had to send the gun back to Ruger, where they properly indexed the barrel to center.
View attachment 1050826


Walther PPK - new production:
Right out of the box I was consistently having light primer strikes on the DA trigger. The trigger had a rough clicky spot mid-way through the DA pull, it was locking back with rounds still in the mag, and the red paint flaked off just by lightly touching it. In short, for a ~750 dollar gun it was a mess.

-I replaced the original factory hammer spring with an aftermarked factory standard hammer spring from Wolff Gunsprings - never had another light strike since then.
-The trigger rough click was because the seam of the roll pin in the hammer was actually snagging on the hammer strut during its movement. I had to remove the hammer, remove that roll pin, and reposition the seam of the roll pin so that only the smooth part made contact with the hammer strut. After being reassembled, that gun now has a smooth-as-silk trigger all the way through the length of pull.
View attachment 1050839
-To fix the slide lock, I put a slight angled cut on the slide catch to prevent it from snagging when it's not supposed to (pic below). This was after trying 2 other slide catches from Walther, that all gave me the same problem!
View attachment 1050836
-I also repainted the red parts, after properly cleaning with acetone.

After finally getting all these bugs worked out, the trigger bar snaps in half while shooting!! .... so I replaced that as well. I think it's finally perfect at this point, the new trigger bar was a different shade of metal, so I'm assuming a different (hopefully better) heat treatment. It has been working thus far (knock on wood).


S&W Model 642:
This gun had a very sloppy crown, it was rough and not concentric with the bore... I recrowned it myself. You can see the difference here below.
View attachment 1050841


NAA 22 Short:
Just like my 642, another case of a sloppy crown. I redid that one also. The crown is a very important component to a gun's inherent accuracy, so I hate to see this part botched on any gun. Even if it's a short barrel gun that is difficult to shoot.
In addition, the front sight went flying off while shooting at the range the first time. I JB-Welded it back on.

^With these experiences, I don't understand how the norm is to actually buy a gun that works reliably, and is properly made, right out of the box! Lol

Had I not been able to fix these problems, my experiences with brand name firearms would be one of endless disappointments.
I agree with you about the LCP. My LCP was my biggest purchase disappointment ever. Jammomatic, felt cheap, sold it.

I'm surprised by your S&W disappointments. My Shield in 9mm has been flawless, as has been my 642.
 
My biggest higher end disappointment was a Ruger Mark IV Target, which was $550 price tag.

It looks beautiful, with the Altamont grips it came with.

However, it has been very picky with ammo, the stock trigger isn't all that great, and it's sufficiently accurate for a .22 pistol but not exceptional by any means. I care more about the ammo reliability issue. With some boxes of cheap ammo, it jams or FTE left and right. With CCI it generally runs well, especially mini mags.
 
My dud gun list is long. Both higher end and budget brands made pitiful junk back in the later 70's to early '80's.

Worst was my first, a Taurus 83, bought on the advice of an ex-NYPD officer who was a family friend. Spit, barrel was all messed up, and Taurus fixed the spitting problem, but they insisted the trashed barrel was "not a problem". When you had to chisel lead out of the barrel, there is something wrong! While it was in FL the first time, I bought a Dan Wesson 15-2 and after the family friend told me the Taurus was better, I knew not to listen to his advice on guns any longer. Years after I bought the DW, I was carrying one of them at my security job when he came in. He seemed shocked when I told him that not only did I keep and like the DW, I had 3 of them at that point. All were great and about as reliable as a revolver could be. The Taurus was long gone.

My Colt Combat Commander was one of the most expensive guns I ever bought at the time, and it was just sad. Chattering tool marks, jamming constantly, and two, TWO trips to Colt, and it was still a mess. If Colt had any caring about what they sold, they would have just replaced it with a good one. I finally sold it off to some guy who eventually played with it and got it close to being reliable, when run soaking wet with oil flying out of it when you shot it.

S&W 686 no dash. Cheese grater grips, spit badly. A trip to S&W got the spitting problem solved, but they scratched the gun all up. The grip issue was solved with some sandpaper and a refinish and eventually, new grips. First of 3 686's I've owned and the only one with problems.

H&K VP-70Z Wow, what a trigger! Not especially accurate, but tolerable.
AMT Hardballer Longslide. Jamtastic! AMT was not helpful. Sold in minutes when placed in the LGS consignment display case.
AMT Back-Up 45. Wow, that gun would make your trigger finger dead tired after pulling it a few times. Jammed a lot, end of my AMT experiences.
FTL Auto-Nine. Blew extractor off. FTL said I used too powerful ammo. When it came back, I used the exact ammo recommended. Less than 5 shots, the extractor blew again. Adios.

Winners are:

Beretta, 950BS, Cheetas, a few 92's, all great.
Sig, P series, all great.
Canik CZ clones are nice.
Sar, Again, CZ clones are all good.
S&W (Old prelock and Gen 3 guns, with the one dud listed above) I don't care about any of their current handguns.
Tanfoglio, how could I not like a CZ clone?
Astra-Never had a bad Astra gun.
CZ, so far, so good.
Sphinx, another CZ clone. Very nice.
 
Reducing the design of modern handguns to their locked-breech roots doesn't mean you have a point.

Striker fired is over 100yrs old. Browning tilting barrel is over 100yrs. Poly framed pistols is over 50yrs now.. if you really thing there is a major difference between dA/Sa and dao.. I cannot help ya..

Glock didn't bring anything new to the table that wasn't already there.

Yes I do own Glock's and H&K's..
 
I've always though Kimber 1911's felt cheap. However, their rifles seemed nice.

I don't think they feel any different than any other band, but the bead blasting to hide imperfections on many I've seen is waayyy overdone.
 
Almost every single firearm I've ever purchased has had some type of problem right out of the box! Fortunately I'm savvy enough to fix them and move along with a then perfect gun, but it makes me wonder how anyone just buys a new gun that works perfectly straight from ,….

:D

You sound like a friend of mine. He has that sort of luck. Almost every gun he buys has a problem. For that matter if you let him try your gun, then it has a problem now. We don’t let him shoot any of our guns anymore.

I hope you have better luck in the future. :thumbup:
 
Striker fired is over 100yrs old. Browning tilting barrel is over 100yrs. Poly framed pistols is over 50yrs now.. if you really thing there is a major difference between dA/Sa and dao.. I cannot help ya..

Glock didn't bring anything new to the table that wasn't already there.

Yes I do own Glock's and H&K's..
I don't need your help. You missed my point entirely.

If I built a 1:1 replica, engine to spec and all, of a 1967 Ford Mustang, just because I built it in 2022 doesn't mean it's any less antiquated in design than a 2020 Ford Mustang. The 1967 Ford Mustang is an antiquated car that was designed with the automotive doctrine of the time in mind. It's an outdated design, period. There were predreadnought battleships built in 1907 through 1909 after HMS Dreadnought, but that didn't make them any less antiquated than those built before HMS Dreadnought, nor did it make them any more modern than HMS Dreadnought.

The HK USP was built with 60s handgun doctrine in mind. The HK USP is one of the gun world's equivalents of the aforementioned predreadnought battleship. The only thing modern about the HK USP was the polymer frame. Everything else about it is based on obsolete doctrine. Sure, the Glock may be built off of a striker, and a polymer frame, and a trigger safety, and a safety plunger, and all these other individual parts/technology that were developed a long time before the Glock came out, but that doesn't mean that the Glock wasn't revolutionary or modern. The Ford Mustang used a carburetor at the time it was released, that doesn't mean it was any less revolutionary or modern.

You can adopt a reductionist attitude towards gun design, but nearly all guns are based on technology that was developed long before they were designed. The P365 is based on a striker and a polymer frame, which, according to you, are both old designs. Does that mean it's any less revolutionary or modern in design? No. You can't critique and evaluate gun design intelligently if all you do is reduce a design to its basic parts. Intelligent critique is also dependent on evaluating a design as a whole.

Just because a gun was designed in 1992, doesn't mean a whole lot if the leading doctrine behind the design is from 1962. The Glock wasn't based on much preexisting doctrine and largely made up its own, that's why it's considered so revolutionary in firearms history and was so economically successful.

Hopefully, that gets the point across.
 
I agree with you about the LCP. My LCP was my biggest purchase disappointment ever. Jammomatic, felt cheap, sold it.

I'm surprised by your S&W disappointments. My Shield in 9mm has been flawless, as has been my 642.
Yeah my S&Ws have been perfect once I worked out those initial quality bugs from the factory... My Shield 9mm has had over 6,000 rounds through it since then, and has not had a single malfunction of any kind... it's still in good shape and ready for another 6k! Once I get them working properly, I'm vary happy... I just never seem to get one that works properly from the factory without my intervention.
 
:D

You sound like a friend of mine. He has that sort of luck. Almost every gun he buys has a problem. For that matter if you let him try your gun, then it has a problem now. We don’t let him shoot any of our guns anymore.

I hope you have better luck in the future. :thumbup:
It's a curse! lol
 
Hopefully, that gets the point across.


Obviously we will never see eye to eye. If we were arguing the Laugo Alien. I might concede some. Yet a Model-T is vastly different than what is a vehicle today.. However, the same cannot be said for handguns.


That said.. wanna guess what year resides in my garage and what will never enter it?

Even put your not so modern gun in the grill.
20220126_202836.jpg
 
my s&w 617-6 bought new. has 1 to 5 ftf per cylinder, shaves lead due to being out of time and slightly canted barrel. sent back after a week from buying and 38 days later still not yet back.
 
Honestly speaking, I don't actully own high end guns, whatever that means. I own two Dan Wesson 1911's which are very nice production guns, and they have not dissapointed. But I can't really call them high end............

My CZC A01-LD is higher end to me, and is a great gun, once the initial problems wer worked out. But again, it's quite low end compared to many guns out there.

I did have a very nice Ruger N0 1 that I got rid off, because it really didn't do anything specila for me. All ARs are dissapointing to me, regardless of make or model.............

Honestly I'm too cheap to spend north of $2000 for any handgun, so I think I will be forever eliminated from higher end guns like Nighthawk Custom and others...........

I've definately had my dissapointments and "meh" moments with standard production guns. they have all been traded or sold off.
 
After reading this whole thread, either I’m really lucky or just not as observant as to all the problems listed here.

Out of literally hundreds and hundreds of guns in my life, the only two I’ve had issues with to any degree was a AR SOCOM .458 and a Browning Buckmark pistol I got used but appeared unfired for really cheap. On the SOCOM, after much frustration I simply hosed it down with Teflon lube and it ran perfectly

I think the extractor spring is weak on the Browning and I’ve been too lazy to replace it

My SP10 Remington quit ejecting empties, but a good internal scrubbing cured that. I had a cheapie Savage that wouldn’t chamber a round, but it was used and I think the prior owner that fouled the chamber with lacquered ammo. Scrubbing the chamber solved that.

I had a custom.358 WSSM AR that had trouble ejecting. Guy that built it said to load it to max pressure, which immediately solved the problem. Also tightened the groups to about 1/2”
 
...The Glock wasn't based on much preexisting doctrine and largely made up its own, that's why it's considered so revolutionary in firearms history and was so economically successful...

The only thing "revolutionary" about the Glock is that when it was released, it could be carried through airport magnetometers without being detected.

Some will get it...
 
I've never purchased any of the "Higher End" firearms. I guess a S&W is about as higher end gun I own and it was under $450 new. I'll buy used more often than new. Thinking about it, I don't remember buying any gun that I was really dissatisfied with. I did have some problems with a Taurus but it turned out to be a sweet shooting little gun. And some problems with a lower price Beretta pistol. But, Beretta quickly got it's problems fixed. I really don't know what might be gained by paying higher end prices for higher end guns. Not this average shooter anyway. But, I'm sure some people do.
 
Obviously we will never see eye to eye. If we were arguing the Laugo Alien. I might concede some. Yet a Model-T is vastly different than what is a vehicle today.. However, the same cannot be said for handguns.


That said.. wanna guess what year resides in my garage and what will never enter it?

Even put your not so modern gun in the grill.
View attachment 1055154
The pettiness you've constantly thrown at me illustrates why we'll never see eye-to-eye. Have a good one.
 
PapaG said:
Gee, do any of you remember the trash Smith put out in the 70s under the Bangor-Punta banner.
I'm sorry to say I do.:barf:

Back in the 80's I bought a new 83/8" S&W 44Mag.The trigger felt as if I was stirring concrete.
Sold it for what I had in it, unfired.
Years later I found out what I should have done was send it back and the Custom Shop would have breathed upon it and made it into the gun it should have been.

Oh well, too soon old, too late smart!

436
 
I had a custom rifle in .35 Whelen built on a Montana action. Even with a steep going-to-war military discount, it was one of the 2 most expensive firearms I've bought.

I guess the smith didn't get adequate spring tension...cuz it doesn't go bang. Of course, the smith retired before I made it back from deployment, and to the range. :(
 
The concept we are talking about here is 'value for money.' Which is meaningful only after a threshold of reliability and accuracy are reached. Not to be confused with whether or not the gun is the right one for the job.

Never disappointed with the reliability, accuracy, and overall quality of a Dan Wesson or a CZ.

Bad luck with S&W M&P-9 from the early 2000's, with lousy accuracy, which most sources indicate has been fixed and okay for the past 10 years or so. Perfectly terrible Colt 1911 Mark IV Series 70 from the early 1980's - never, ever ran a full magazine without a failure to feed or eject.
 
Kel Tec bullpup.
Got tired of problems, and practically gave it away for half of what I've paid for.
But the thing is, people told me about the piece of dirt, but I did it anyway.
Shame on me.
 
I've been lucky. Out of hundreds owned, I've only had one dog. My Freedom Group Remington 870-based AOW. Piece of junk. Three factory defects, all had to be fixed by me and my dealer as neither of us wanted to ship an NFA item back to factory service.
It's a really lousy, unreliable gun. Other than this, everything I've ever owned has always gone bang. I'm not a skilled enough shooter to pick up on at least a good portion of subtleties in sight picture, trigger refinement, etc. that many of you do. If it goes bang,
doesn't break and is fun to shoot, I'm generally happy.

I've never owned a gun that cost more than $1,500 so I probably don't know what I'm missing, but there is the Dunning-Kruger Effect too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top