flyfishmatt
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2013
- Messages
- 1
Did you ever notice that when you go on the web to do some research about a new pistol you always run across a thread where one person is hailing the virtues of their new purchase while another is telling the person about their terrible experience with the same model or manufacturer? It often leaves the reader with a sense of bewilderment as they try to separate fact from fiction.
Well folks there is a reason why this occurs so let me explain.
The success of every assembly that is manufactured depends upon the stack up of tolerances of the underlying parts. The process used in manufacturing to determine the success rate is know as statistical process control. When the manufacturer goes into production acceptable tolerance ranges are established for each part. Since hand selecting and fitting is expensive, generally a pistol with a low price point is assembled from parts with "looser" tolerances than say a pistol which will be hand fitted (where the parts are often oversized and hand fitted/assembled). In the budget market, the manufacturer is looking for 100% success in assembly with little or no hand fitting or waste.
In the pistol world when it comes to accuracy, generally the better the fit the better the accuracy. In terms of pistol fit there are three categories of pistol fit. There is the "perfect" fit, "optimal" fit and everything else. The "perfect" fit 1911 (a pistol where each dimension, surface and angle are exactly fit to each other and the design) will not function if even the smallest piece of debris enters into the working surfaces of the pistol. The slide will seize up and stop working. I once spent the better part of 120 hours with lamp black, file, and emery cloth to get a pistol to fit perfectly. I soon learned the pistol was not practical so I was forced to loosen the tolerances ever so slightly to get the pistol to the "optimal" fit.
In the world of manufacturing pistols, it is statistically possible that any single pistol can come together from parts which when assembled will result in a pistol that comes very close to an "optimal" fit. The closer the tolerances are for each part the more likely it is that the pistol will come together close to an optimal fit. Maintaining very close tolerances is very expensive. It requires new machines, sharp tooling and the steel must be consistently sourced. Some manufacturing techniques such a MIM have reduce cost and help tighten up tolerances at what many believe is too great a cost in overall quality (I am staying out of that fight). Generally, the closer the "tolerances" the higher the production cost. The only exception to this rule is triggers, which require some attention to surface quality. Generally, you cannot manufacture a great trigger it must be hand fit.
I often hear people degrade Kimber pistols. One of the best pistols I have ever owned was a Kimber Team Match which out shot my Les Baer (one with the 1 1/2" guarantee). You may ask how is that possible? It is simple, the pistol I had came together from parts that when brought together they were very close to the optimal fit (I understand Kimber does some hand fitting in their production). Now does that mean every Kimber will do that? Of course not. But it can happen and it does with some regularity. The likelihood again comes down to how tightly the tolerances are managed (or hand fitting is used to size the parts). The same holds true for any pistol that is manufactured whether it be a Colt, S&W, Glock, H&K or Sig.
One it comes to hand fitted pistols some of the same rules apply. An outfit like Les Baer owns new state of the art machines. I image because he controls the machining, he can change out the tooling more often to ensure closer tolerances and better surface quality. Outfits that buy their frames and slides from others are dependent upon either total hand fitting or their source maintaining tolerances to their liking. Generally, the likelihood of getting a pistol that is optimally fit is far greater from a hand fit company then elsewhere.
Thus, while price point is often a good measure of likely performance, it is not always the case. So as you read the post of someone buying a budget pistol and getting great results it may not be just a case of extreme "newgunitis." It may just be that the person just happened to get a pistol where the tolerances of the underlying parts came together closer to the optimal fit than others of the same model and from the same manufacturer. Similarly, when you read a post from a person with a bad experience it could be that his/her pistol came from parts that when assembled came in at the other end of the fit spectrum.
Buying a pistol from a reputable manufacturer that is known for producing solid pistols with good accuracy will get you a good pistol. A great pistol comes from either paying for hand fitting or the luck of the draw (pun intended).
The success of every assembly that is manufactured depends upon the stack up of tolerances of the underlying parts. The process used in manufacturing to determine the success rate is know as statistical process control. When the manufacturer goes into production acceptable tolerance ranges are established for each part. Since hand selecting and fitting is expensive, generally a pistol with a low price point is assembled from parts with "looser" tolerances than say a pistol which will be hand fitted (where the parts are often oversized and hand fitted/assembled). In the budget market, the manufacturer is looking for 100% success in assembly with little or no hand fitting or waste.
In the pistol world when it comes to accuracy, generally the better the fit the better the accuracy. In terms of pistol fit there are three categories of pistol fit. There is the "perfect" fit, "optimal" fit and everything else. The "perfect" fit 1911 (a pistol where each dimension, surface and angle are exactly fit to each other and the design) will not function if even the smallest piece of debris enters into the working surfaces of the pistol. The slide will seize up and stop working. I once spent the better part of 120 hours with lamp black, file, and emery cloth to get a pistol to fit perfectly. I soon learned the pistol was not practical so I was forced to loosen the tolerances ever so slightly to get the pistol to the "optimal" fit.
In the world of manufacturing pistols, it is statistically possible that any single pistol can come together from parts which when assembled will result in a pistol that comes very close to an "optimal" fit. The closer the tolerances are for each part the more likely it is that the pistol will come together close to an optimal fit. Maintaining very close tolerances is very expensive. It requires new machines, sharp tooling and the steel must be consistently sourced. Some manufacturing techniques such a MIM have reduce cost and help tighten up tolerances at what many believe is too great a cost in overall quality (I am staying out of that fight). Generally, the closer the "tolerances" the higher the production cost. The only exception to this rule is triggers, which require some attention to surface quality. Generally, you cannot manufacture a great trigger it must be hand fit.
I often hear people degrade Kimber pistols. One of the best pistols I have ever owned was a Kimber Team Match which out shot my Les Baer (one with the 1 1/2" guarantee). You may ask how is that possible? It is simple, the pistol I had came together from parts that when brought together they were very close to the optimal fit (I understand Kimber does some hand fitting in their production). Now does that mean every Kimber will do that? Of course not. But it can happen and it does with some regularity. The likelihood again comes down to how tightly the tolerances are managed (or hand fitting is used to size the parts). The same holds true for any pistol that is manufactured whether it be a Colt, S&W, Glock, H&K or Sig.
One it comes to hand fitted pistols some of the same rules apply. An outfit like Les Baer owns new state of the art machines. I image because he controls the machining, he can change out the tooling more often to ensure closer tolerances and better surface quality. Outfits that buy their frames and slides from others are dependent upon either total hand fitting or their source maintaining tolerances to their liking. Generally, the likelihood of getting a pistol that is optimally fit is far greater from a hand fit company then elsewhere.
Thus, while price point is often a good measure of likely performance, it is not always the case. So as you read the post of someone buying a budget pistol and getting great results it may not be just a case of extreme "newgunitis." It may just be that the person just happened to get a pistol where the tolerances of the underlying parts came together closer to the optimal fit than others of the same model and from the same manufacturer. Similarly, when you read a post from a person with a bad experience it could be that his/her pistol came from parts that when assembled came in at the other end of the fit spectrum.
Buying a pistol from a reputable manufacturer that is known for producing solid pistols with good accuracy will get you a good pistol. A great pistol comes from either paying for hand fitting or the luck of the draw (pun intended).
Last edited by a moderator: