Webbj0219
Member
yeah basically tell the truth about it. Your probably gonna have to sell it dirt cheap as a fixer upper. Maybe sell it to a gunsmith or something. Someone that can fix it and still come out ahead on the deal.
The op didn't want to start a big fight among posters who are brand loyal and those who are not brand loyal. It's a Sig P238 if it really matters. Hope that makes you happyMethinks the OP came to vent rather than for feedback. Still hasn't answered anybody's question about what gun we're talking about.
Sorry; wasn't trying to be a jerk. I'm not familiar with Sigs, but I've worked the kinks out of several less-than-perfect purchases, as have others here on the board. Just thought that, provided sufficient detail, I or others might have been able to help you trouble-shoot the problem. Full disclosure is the way to go, so good on ya. Again, didn't mean to rub you the wrong way. Welcome to the board.It's a Sig P238 if it really matters. Hope that makes you happy.
I stopped taking you seriously when I read Remington. If you read online, there are tons and tons of complaints especially with chamber issues with the 870 Express models, and there are even several with quality control issues on the newer 700's. If you work on them 6 days a week, I suspect you've seen quite a few of these.The short list of guns that I RARELY see with failures...GLOCK, SIG, LEWIS MACHINE TOOL, STAG, DPMS, REMINGTON
J.
Quote:
Methinks the OP came to vent rather than for feedback. Still hasn't answered anybody's question about what gun we're talking about.
The op didn't want to start a big fight among posters who are brand loyal and those who are not brand loyal. It's a Sig P238 if it really matters. Hope that makes you happy
And I did decide to make a full disclosure to the people who might possibly buy it. In other words I got the information I needed from people who could see the big picture without having to get nit-picky about the name of the gun and to those people I say thank you.
Bassically the gun was supposed to be my wife's concealed carry piece but it has failed so much that I can't find it within me to send her out with it even if it were fixed knowing that it has an outstanding failure rate. No amount of fixing will make me trust it.Sorry; wasn't trying to be a jerk. I'm not familiar with Sigs, but I've worked the kinks out of several less-than-perfect purchases, as have others here on the board. Just thought that, provided sufficient detail, I or others might have been able to help you trouble-shoot the problem. Full disclosure is the way to go, so good on ya. Again, didn't mean to rub you the wrong way. Welcome to the board.
J.
Quote: Sorry; wasn't trying to be a jerk. I'm not familiar with Sigs, but I've worked the kinks out of several less-than-perfect purchases, as have others here on the board. Just thought that, provided sufficient detail, I or others might have been able to help you trouble-shoot the problem. Full disclosure is the way to go, so good on ya. Again, didn't mean to rub you the wrong way. Welcome to the board.
Bassically the gun was supposed to be my wife's concealed carry piece but it has failed so much that I can't find it within me to send her out with it even if it were fixed knowing that it has an outstanding failure rate. No amount of fixing will make me trust it.
Bottom line, I am going to lose my butt on the gun because I bought lots of extras to go with it. Such as, $300.00 worth of 380 practice ammo, a supertuck holster, and two extra mags at $40.00 bucks a pop. If I add in the amount of the gun that I traded in I paid $500.00 plus for the gun. By the way the gun I traded in was a glock 26. What can I say I thought I was doing the right thing.:banghead:
I am ready to end this thread and I guess I did want to rant.
I couldn't agree more that in the case of a pistol you intend to carry, an evaluation period of a couple of hundred rounds are in order......but that is distinctly different from blowing a few hundred bucks worth of ammo through it just to "wear it in" to the point it is reliable. It seems like a lot of gunmakers spew that nonsense when they get the call about a new gun, and in my opinion it's just their way of saying "Go Away". I guess the logic is that some guns WILL wear in and right themselves, and so the maker, in those cases, is spared the expense of the shipping and diagnostics.....but when this guy is telling me he can't even get through ONE magazine without a failure, I'd say the prognosis isn't good.Any pistol that a person conceal carries need to have at least a couple of hundred rounds if not SEVERAL hundred rounds put through it. A break-in period is annoying as hell, but on some guns it is a necessity, especially as a CCW. If break-in periods are not do-able then a revolver is in order.
onward allusion said:Any pistol that a person conceal carries need to have at least a couple of hundred rounds if not SEVERAL hundred rounds put through it. A break-in period is annoying as hell, but on some guns it is a necessity, especially as a CCW. If break-in periods are not do-able then a revolver is in order.
dogdollar said:I couldn't agree more that in the case of a pistol you intend to carry, an evaluation period of a couple of hundred rounds are in order......but that is distinctly different from blowing a few hundred bucks worth of ammo through it just to "wear it in" to the point it is reliable. It seems like a lot of gunmakers spew that nonsense when they get the call about a new gun, and in my opinion it's just their way of saying "Go Away". I guess the logic is that some guns WILL wear in and right themselves, and so the maker, in those cases, is spared the expense of the shipping and diagnostics.....but when this guy is telling me he can't even get through ONE magazine without a failure, I'd say the prognosis isn't good.