Kel-tec Sub 2000 or Hi-point?

[mcdonl]

Which begs the question, what defines quality?

To me: Reliabilty relative to the intended job. By this I mean, if you are buying a gun to go fight a war in a desert, it needs to be able to handle such conditions and soot everytime you pull the trigger.

Ergonomics - It should be comfortable to shoot in it's intended environment. If you are taking a gun to battle, it needs to carry and shoot well. If you are taking it to the range, or using it for HD... it can be heavier then a battle rifle.

Accuracy - It needs to shoot better then the operator. Period. If you are missing your target because the gun does not shoot straight then the accuracy is bad. As with quality and ergonomics if you are in battle, the gun needs to hit it's target... period. If you are plinking, meh... who cares. If it is a competition gun then thats a whole different matter.

Cost - This depends on it's reliability. If the gun is expected to go to Battle, the need for reliability is going to be greater, hence the cost is going to be greater. If you can deal with a FTL/FTE every few hundred rounds then you can expect to pay less.

So, if I can deal with a misfire every few hundred yards, and the gun is comfortable then TO ME - IN MY OPINION I would rather spend $225 for a brand new gun then $400 +....

Looks, brand and history mean NOTHING to me when it comes to a firearm.

Great question Jshirley! I can't wait to see the answes!

 

[KBintheSLC]

The price you are quoting for the HP is too high. I see them lightly used around here for $150-$175 regularly and new for $200-$225. I prefer the KT due to the better mag availability and cross-compatibility as well as the folding feature. The KT has a pretty lousy trigger and the front sight is a beast to adjust. Other than that, I believe it is made to a higher standard of quality compared to the HPC.