The three pages of threads at the Walther forum is where you really need to be to get the info that you want. And, you will find no love for Umarex there as well, but there is a good amount of actual experience with the gun itself.
Walther CCP
- Thread starter snooperman
- Start date
- Status
I see photos and reports like these and know it is not worth my time and money to experiment with Umarex's newest product:
http://www.waltherforums.com/forum/ccp/40094-ccp-problems-issues-running-thread-2.html#post387865
I hate to burst the bubble of those folks who purchased a CCP thinking it was a real Walther or would exhibit the quality synonymous with real Ulm-manufactured Walther pistols.
The simple fact is that the real Walthers are much better than this.
This isn't even a "High Road/Low Road" issue. If we aren't allowed to formulate and express our own opinions based on the evidence we are presented, what's the point of even having forums like this to help guide our purchase decisions?
gun_with_a_view
Member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2014
- Messages
- 471
Well said.
wally
Member
I guess you missed the part about the slide being easier to rack, which can be a show-stopper for women and folks with impaired hand strength. It also looks like it will cost a bit less based on what I saw at a gun show.
You guessed wrong. I did not miss that part. However, the rough machining of these Umarex guns is resulting of reports of pistols whose slides are not easy to rack.
The PPS doesn't have an overly-heavy recoil spring anyway, and the technique for allowing weaker folks to rack heavier slides is well established:
http://www.corneredcat.com/article/running-the-gun/rack-the-slide/
As far as the price difference - well you very often do get what you pay for, and too many production/quality shortcuts in a defensive can add up to it being not a very good value at all, even if the price is low.
wally
Member
I'm not going by "reports" I racked a CCP and a PPS side by side at a gun show. The CCP was significantly easer to rack.
Established or not, it still requires grip strength that is difficult for many small women and folks with arthritis, if it helps, I'm all for it!
I'm more skeptical of the claims for "lower recoil" as I don't recall my HK P7 as being a particularly "soft shooting" 9mm, but I'd certainly like for it to be true so folks with arthritis and such could use a fully adequate caliber in an easy to carry pistol.
I understand that was a design goal of the CCP and that's good that you found one that was easy to rack. I to have fondled them in stores and also found the slide to be easily manipulated. That still doesn't make it a quality firearm up to the same standards as the real Walthers, and that's still no excuse for the QC issues.
And I don't know about you, but I don't have to money to purchase and evaluate every single pistol out there. So I have to depend on reviews and "reports" from other owner before I make a purchase. And I trust the regulars over at Waltherforums. They know their stuff.
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
Ya'll do know that quality, quality control, and operability are only indirectly related, right?
If it works, who cares if it's Umarex pot metal? The thing's obviously not for show...
You aren't exactly paying for top quality, either...
Is the design tolerant of inconsistent quality? Some rough surfaces and crude tooling may not affect performance, depending on where they are...
I own an R51. After some work (that Remington could have easily done right in the first place), it runs fine. It looks nicer --in terms of visible quality-- than many poly frame guns. It is NOT --repeat, NOT-- a nice pistol, nor could it ever be, the way it was produced. I didn't pay for a "nice" gun, nor did I expect one; I expected function, and essentially got it (I improved what was already a barely passable example into something more legitimate, is all)
American consumers are really bad about expecting that which they don't pay for, aand that which is unreasonable/impossible (going all the way back to "Patent Medicines")
TCB
If it works, who cares if it's Umarex pot metal? The thing's obviously not for show...
You aren't exactly paying for top quality, either...
Is the design tolerant of inconsistent quality? Some rough surfaces and crude tooling may not affect performance, depending on where they are...
I own an R51. After some work (that Remington could have easily done right in the first place), it runs fine. It looks nicer --in terms of visible quality-- than many poly frame guns. It is NOT --repeat, NOT-- a nice pistol, nor could it ever be, the way it was produced. I didn't pay for a "nice" gun, nor did I expect one; I expected function, and essentially got it (I improved what was already a barely passable example into something more legitimate, is all)
American consumers are really bad about expecting that which they don't pay for, aand that which is unreasonable/impossible (going all the way back to "Patent Medicines")
TCB
george burns
Member
I still would like to hear from someone who actually has one.
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
Me too, that is why I started this thread. But mostly what we got was bashing of Umarex and Walther CCP from people without any experience whatsoever with this pistol.
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
That said, I probably started this thread a little too early as this pistol has not been in the market long enough to get meaningful evaluations from those who have them.
You don't need to own one to realize its junk. I can tell that just picking it up. I'm thankful for this, that way I don't waste $400 on an airsoft quality POS from Umarex.
Umarex builds some of the lowest quality pistols on the market today. Why and how people still may $400 for the crap they put on the market, I don't understand.
ulflyer
Member
After handling one in a LGS, I liked the feel and would have bought it had the price been reasonable but they wanted way over MSRP since they were/are "so scarce". Found one review online and the only negative thing I read was that the recoil system caused it to get real hot. Not sure what that translates to in real life. I do agree that $400 is too much when you can get a Ruger LC9s or Kahr CW9 for less than $350 (and any number of other good guns). I have/had both and have/had had no issues. The Kahr is my main CC, either in 380,9mm or 45acp.
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
For clarity, Umarex is a conglomerate that owns Walther and other gun companies in Germany. They bought Walther in Ulm and another company in Arnsberg that makes certain pistols and air rifles several years ago. After my conversation with Walther-Umarex USA, the CCP was engineered and developed by Walther in the Arnsberg plant.
Umarex builds the gun, regardless who and where it was designed. Its very cheaply constructed. The mark Umarex uses is clearly stamped on it also. Its the shield with the three crowns in the center.
Here it is on my "Walther" P22. Check the CCP and all the other Umarex stuff and you'll see it. That includes the M&P22, PK380, and various "Colt" 1911-22 models.
Yes, its a shame Walther was sold to Umarex. There's now a lot of junk on the market bearing a once proud name.
Last edited:
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
If you look on the right side the CCP is stamped "Walther Ulm/Do. Ulm is the City on the Donau river or as we say Danube in Bavaria. You are trying to separate Umarex from Walther. That is like separating Chevrolet from General motors. Whether you like it or not this is a Walther product period.
george burns
Member
So where are the new PPQ's being made and by who
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
The gun is stamped Walther Ulm/Do and it is a walther product.
snooperman
Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 2,143
PPQ is also stamped Walther Ulm/Do and is a Walther pistol.
Its Walther's parent company. They are NOT made to the same standards as a PPQ, P99, or PPS. The gun is very cheaply made, just like the other Umarex pistols. A blind man could tell that just picking the thing up.
Hey, if you want to spend $400 on an airsoft quality gun, be my guess. After all, that's why this junk stays on the market.
Why should the gas retarded system be better than the locked breech system?
It seems to me that the blowback design would be less expensive to manufacture than the Locked breech system, so why are there not more of the blowback pistols made?
Aside from the poor reputation of the manufacturer, it would have to be proven to me that the CCP is any good.
It seems to me that the blowback design would be less expensive to manufacture than the Locked breech system, so why are there not more of the blowback pistols made?
Aside from the poor reputation of the manufacturer, it would have to be proven to me that the CCP is any good.
- Status
