I visit alot of gun forums and after reading a million stories of people paying alot of money for guns that dont work I get sorta angry at the industry. I hate that nowdays you have to engage in a hit or miss gamble with your hard earned money. Of all the industries I have to say firearms probably ranks torward the bottom as far as trouble free useage is involved. No I'm not an anti but of the many many guns I've bought about half have given me some sort of trouble at some time. But I've never bought a bad telephone! Instead of us buying guns that might work how about they give us the guns and we might pay? Glocks arent super guns they're just the one damn company that got it right. I mean if you break it all down- Man sees neat gun in magazine- Man works hard and saves his money- Man buys his dream gun and has high hopes- OOps his PPK wont eject- He just got ripped of for 500$ Why do we take it? And why is this acceptable? OK sorry about the insane rant I feel a little better now. I just had to vent a little. Thanks be safe
Horror Stories
- Thread starter timothy75
- Start date
- Status
ingram
Member
You have many Glocks to choose from.
Try to catch them all!
Try to catch them all!
The-Fly
Member
hmmm maybe people need to stop buying crap guns 
i own a pair of glocks, a s&w 357 mag, a bushmaster, a bulgy AK, a 870, and a ruger 10-22. The only gun that gives me problems is the ruger, and i blame the crappy after market mags for it. (It seems to me that any semi auto 22lr tends to be picky, just because of the tiny round).
i own a pair of glocks, a s&w 357 mag, a bushmaster, a bulgy AK, a 870, and a ruger 10-22. The only gun that gives me problems is the ruger, and i blame the crappy after market mags for it. (It seems to me that any semi auto 22lr tends to be picky, just because of the tiny round).
EZ CZ75
Member
Consider this
I do agree that many companies could do better with what they have, but consider this. What other tools or pieces of metal in such a small, compact form take as much pressure and abuse as a firearm? What other tools have to be so versatile in what they can be used for? By this I am referring to bullet selection.
Now, take the ration of abuse to size and cost and there is nothing else in the world like a firearm. Granted, many tools can take as much abuse, but their versatility is limited. Hydraulics and construction machinery are also up there in abuse, but look at the cost.
I guess in the end all of these problems just mean that someone else will continue to build a better mouse trap and I will continue to unravel the mysteries of my FTE's/FTF's.
I do agree that many companies could do better with what they have, but consider this. What other tools or pieces of metal in such a small, compact form take as much pressure and abuse as a firearm? What other tools have to be so versatile in what they can be used for? By this I am referring to bullet selection.
Now, take the ration of abuse to size and cost and there is nothing else in the world like a firearm. Granted, many tools can take as much abuse, but their versatility is limited. Hydraulics and construction machinery are also up there in abuse, but look at the cost.
I guess in the end all of these problems just mean that someone else will continue to build a better mouse trap and I will continue to unravel the mysteries of my FTE's/FTF's.
I've bought about 30 guns in the past few years and have had problems with only two that I purchased new, and both were CZ 75Bs. On both I had the firing pin retaining roll pin break several times. I understand that CZ has tried to fix this by installing a second, smaller roll pin inside the first to give it additional support. On one gun the trigger return spring broke after about 400 rounds.
I've purchased two Springfield 1911A1s, a loaded model and a GI milspec. Both operated flawlessly (the loaded has been sold). I've never had a problem with a S&W revolver. Oh sure, I've had some mods done on things I didn't quite like, but they've all worked as advertised. Same goes for my Colts. I didn't like the finish on the Cowboys, but the guns worked just fine.
Overall I think the gun makers do a pretty darn good job.
Where I have a problem is with the gun shops. If you buy a new TV and it doesn't work when you get home you take it back and get a new one. Buy a lawnmower that won't run and you take it back to Home Depot and they give you another one. Buy a gun that doesn't work and the dealers says "send it back to the factory." Guns are about the only consumer product I know that gets so little support from the dealer. A good dealer might offer to ship it back for you, at your expense, of course. But I've never heard of one offering to exchange a problem gun.
I've purchased two Springfield 1911A1s, a loaded model and a GI milspec. Both operated flawlessly (the loaded has been sold). I've never had a problem with a S&W revolver. Oh sure, I've had some mods done on things I didn't quite like, but they've all worked as advertised. Same goes for my Colts. I didn't like the finish on the Cowboys, but the guns worked just fine.
Overall I think the gun makers do a pretty darn good job.
Where I have a problem is with the gun shops. If you buy a new TV and it doesn't work when you get home you take it back and get a new one. Buy a lawnmower that won't run and you take it back to Home Depot and they give you another one. Buy a gun that doesn't work and the dealers says "send it back to the factory." Guns are about the only consumer product I know that gets so little support from the dealer. A good dealer might offer to ship it back for you, at your expense, of course. But I've never heard of one offering to exchange a problem gun.
wally
Member
dfaugh said:
+1, sorta.
3-5% DOA rate and letting the customer do the final QA/QC has been the norm for consumer goods for a long time. Its crept into electronics in the mid 90's and seems fast becomming the norm in the gun business now that the bean counters have taken over.
As a productivity measure it may be a large part of why we can buy complex electronics so cheaply -- the 1 in 20 chance of needing to exchange it is on average a win for the consumer. But the restrictions on firearms greatly increase the problems and hassles of the consumer stuck with a bad gun.
I've had only two guns that had major problems out of the box -- my first Colt GM 1911 bought circa 1984, and a new (Christmass) Kahr CW9 that is at Kahr now via my dealer. Unfortunately more than a few have had minor issues that were easy to fix, but also pretty much prove nobody who gave a crap looked at them before sending them out.
--wally.
rbernie
Contributing Member
What other durable good can you buy for so little yet expect from them so much? I'm continually amazed, for example, that $300 can buy me a new rifle that will shoot from 1 to 1 1/2 MOA and that will last several lifetimes (given proper care and treatment)....
Compared to other industries the QA of the gun industry - well - leaves a bit to be desired.
I own 8 hand guns and 5 long guns all purchased new. Of those I had catastrophic failures occur in a Bushmaster AR-15, a Taurus Raging Bull and a CZ-75. The BM failed right out of the box. The RB after about 200 rounds and a couple of months and the CZ after about 1000 rounds and about 6 months. All failures were related to bad parts. In the BM the ejector and spring were out of spec. In the CZ the trigger was out of spec and in the Taurus a spring and retaining screw were just poorly designed.
3 out of 13 is a 23% failure rate. The odds of a single individual experiencing a 23% failure rate if the gun industry is doing a good job (say real failure rate is <1%) are pretty darn slim.
For example in the last 27 years I've never been without a computer. In that time only 1 has failed and it was 3 years old. If computers had a 23% failure rate within the first 6 months I wonder how many people would be computing today. The same goes for my cars only better. None has ever failed in any way in less than 5 years with one exception. Since I bought my first car in 1974 I've only experience one catastrophic failure (rotten ass lousy British made MG Midget - POS right out of the box - it never worked right - the carburetor even caught on fire once).
Back in the late 80's and early 90's I ran a manufacturing department that made kidney dialysis machines and blood diagnostic devices. Our QA procedures gave us a failure rate of less than 1 in a 1000 and that was at the factory - in the field the failure rate was an MTBF of well over 2 years of 24/7 operation. I'm here to tell ya that that equipment was exponentially more complex than the most complex gun ever built with hundreds of more parts which included pumps, optics, motors, electronics etc.
If we could keep failures to less than 1 in a thousand then so can the gun industry. It isn't really that hard. All it takes (assuming good design) is process control, trained machine operators, trained assemblers and a work force that makes quality the prime directive. In the long run a company saves money and increases sales with good QC. We took a $250,000/month warranty expense and after implementing our QA plan over a period of three years turned that into a $50,000/month warranty expense and increased sales by 25%.
But what is one to do. The gun industry is small. I read that less than 20,000 are employed in it in the USA. And they're the only game in town because folks with money aren't jumping on the bandwagon to start up new firearms manufacturing facilities.
It boils down to we're a captive audience with nowhere else to turn. Oh well - at least the industy's poor quality record provides employment for a bunch of gunsmith's.
I own 8 hand guns and 5 long guns all purchased new. Of those I had catastrophic failures occur in a Bushmaster AR-15, a Taurus Raging Bull and a CZ-75. The BM failed right out of the box. The RB after about 200 rounds and a couple of months and the CZ after about 1000 rounds and about 6 months. All failures were related to bad parts. In the BM the ejector and spring were out of spec. In the CZ the trigger was out of spec and in the Taurus a spring and retaining screw were just poorly designed.
3 out of 13 is a 23% failure rate. The odds of a single individual experiencing a 23% failure rate if the gun industry is doing a good job (say real failure rate is <1%) are pretty darn slim.
For example in the last 27 years I've never been without a computer. In that time only 1 has failed and it was 3 years old. If computers had a 23% failure rate within the first 6 months I wonder how many people would be computing today. The same goes for my cars only better. None has ever failed in any way in less than 5 years with one exception. Since I bought my first car in 1974 I've only experience one catastrophic failure (rotten ass lousy British made MG Midget - POS right out of the box - it never worked right - the carburetor even caught on fire once).
Back in the late 80's and early 90's I ran a manufacturing department that made kidney dialysis machines and blood diagnostic devices. Our QA procedures gave us a failure rate of less than 1 in a 1000 and that was at the factory - in the field the failure rate was an MTBF of well over 2 years of 24/7 operation. I'm here to tell ya that that equipment was exponentially more complex than the most complex gun ever built with hundreds of more parts which included pumps, optics, motors, electronics etc.
If we could keep failures to less than 1 in a thousand then so can the gun industry. It isn't really that hard. All it takes (assuming good design) is process control, trained machine operators, trained assemblers and a work force that makes quality the prime directive. In the long run a company saves money and increases sales with good QC. We took a $250,000/month warranty expense and after implementing our QA plan over a period of three years turned that into a $50,000/month warranty expense and increased sales by 25%.
But what is one to do. The gun industry is small. I read that less than 20,000 are employed in it in the USA. And they're the only game in town because folks with money aren't jumping on the bandwagon to start up new firearms manufacturing facilities.
It boils down to we're a captive audience with nowhere else to turn. Oh well - at least the industy's poor quality record provides employment for a bunch of gunsmith's.
Last edited:
bogie
Member
These are devices with close tolerances and lots of moving parts, designed to contain high pressure safely.
Some parts are designed to wear, and be replaced, so that other, more expensive, parts do not require replacement.
Springs are not forever. Likewise with items like extractors, etc...
Some parts are designed to wear, and be replaced, so that other, more expensive, parts do not require replacement.
Springs are not forever. Likewise with items like extractors, etc...
- Status
