What are the REAL gun prices?

[Mac's Precision]

My reply to comments on gun quality in a previous thread makes me want to pose a bunch of questions.

What are modern gun prices supposed to be? Do you..the average consumer ...think that prices are too low? Too high? Or are prices appropriate where they are? Is the gun value today appropriate for your hard earned dollar? Are the gun companies slacking just to hose you...the consumer? Or...are they using CNC processes to make as many guns that are "acceptible" to make money on volume? Do we cut our own throats by complaining about prices and driving the prices down...along with the quality?

Has the gun market prices increased in pace with inflation? Is it reasonable to expect top shelf performance for prices that are below what they should be?

If you bought a Corvette in 1957...you expected top shelf performance. If you want a 2010 Corvette with it's performance... you WILL PAY for it now as it is a "premium" car for premium customers with lots of money.

If you want 1957 gun quality NOW....should we be paying more than we are?

Many guns shoot pretty darn well for the money we pay. They are available in volumes we would have never seen in 1957. Customers used to have to wait for delivery of a certain model...where as we can get most any model we want...any time we want.

If a gun in 1949 took 23 hours wages to buy .....then why do we have issues with spending that same 23 hours of Today's wages to buy the same gun? Is there a value problem? Is todays gun not the same gun from 1949? No...but we aren't paying full price based on inflation. It is ALMOST as good a gun...and we are paying ALMOST what it SHOULD cost.

We seem to have a problem dropping a reasonable price for a firearm...but no problem dropping $35K on a car. But you say..."I can't pay a lot of money for a firearm". "I want Corvette performance.....but I can't spend....$2000.00 for a top shelf rifle" " I bought a Kia....and then have issues with it's quality and mileage" "But I bought a budget minded gun...it SHOULD shoot and function....right?" YES....but if you bought a budget minded car...would you be shocked if it was in the shop several times? My wife bought a Kia several years back....it made it 450 miles...and was in the shop with leaking intake manifold gaskets.

Are budget guns priced under $600.00 ALLOWED to have problems? Are Corvettes not allowed to fail..leak oil..or stall on an onramp? Are ALL older guns BETTER than the new ones? Does anyone recall revolvers with timing issues and shaving lead when new out of the box? Did all old bolt actions drive tacks at 250 yards? Were all old shotguns more accurate on the Skeet range or never miss a duck? Did all repeaters feed perfect....or is it just our imagination?

Is there a reason that manufacturer's custom shops charge full boat prices for customs? Is there justification for custom smiths charging $1500.00 to upgrade your bolt action to Corvette status?

Here is the real question: Is there a value vs price issue? Are the gun makers cutting corners just to stay in business? Are custom guns priced where guns SHOULD be priced and the average priced guns are simply entry level?

What says you?

Cheers
Mac.

 

[wideym]

Add the word "custom" to any product and instantly raises the price, even cars and trucks suffer this dramatic rise in price if you call it "Eddy Bauer Edition" or "Harley Davidson Edition" that in reality only has a different paint job and maybe an added luxury or two without any major performance enchancement.

Many guns are for sale with "custom" enhancements, if you could call them that. Take a Mossberg 500, add a sidesaddle, a clamp on rail, cheap flashlight, and maybe a 3-point sling and blamo-you got a custom shotgun that is going for nearly double the actual cost. Add another $100 if it's been Duracoated in some un-practical paint scheme like desert.

 

[oneounceload]

The gun companies, IMO, are making products the customers are calling for at the price points customers are willing to pay. Big companies, like S&W, Remington, etc., need volume to make a profit, while small one-man custom shops rely on top-dollar custom rigs for the folks willing to pay for it. There seems to be two very distinct segments - at least in the shotgun arena that I am more familiar with. You have the basic companies - Mossberg, Remington, Browning, et al (even though some might make high-end guns in small numbers) who crank out thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of guns a year. Then you have the "bespoke" shops where every aspect of the gun is to the customer's requirements - from the wood selection, barrel length, balance, engraving, etc. Companies like Fabbri, Piotti, Hartmann & Weiss, Hofer, et al might turn out 30 guns per year and yet have waiting lists up to 4 years or more. These guns typically start at $30,000 and can go upwards of $500,000, while the mass-produced stuff tends to start at $300 and go towards $3,000.

I'm not seeing many "middle of the road" level guns when it comes to quality O/U or SxS - there are a few trying to balance quantity production with quality production - Perzzi, Kreighoff, Blaser, Guerini, among others are there - but for most folks on this forum, they seem to be well out of reach.

When folks here and elsewhere brag about they bought a cheap Chinese or Brazilian gun that cost 2/3 of the US gun, the companies react by trying to get as close as they can to that price point - that means cutting EVERY corner and eliminating EVERY unnecessary step, while reducing every possible human interaction in the process and having machinery do the work - if the machines are programmed correctly, the end product can be made well and work respectively. If not, then there are issues that will be blasted all over forums like this one as a sign that the gun company has lost all credibility because they can't make a gun as cheap as some foreign company.

Quality costs.............I would rather have a few guns of high quality and longevity that I shoot all the tie, than a safe full of cheap junk I don't shoot because they tend to break often

JMO, YMMV

 

[JohnBT]

To borrow a quote from Arnold Jewell in a magazine interview, when he was asked why his triggers cost so much...

"They cost what they cost."



I think most gun prices are about like they always were when compared to income.

McDonalds paid me $1.15 an hour in 1966 and 1967. Gross, not takehome. According to the 1967 Shooter's Bible, a Remington 700 BDL .30-06 listed for $129.95. That's about 3 weeks' worth of full-time McDonalds takehome back then.

Now McDs pays 7x that much and a Model 700 lists for $927 on rem.com. That works out to 7.13x.

I'm glad I'm not still carrying 100-pound burlap bags of potatos up from the the McD's basement and turning them into fries; even if they were the best fries. Lordy, I hate modernn frozen fries cooked in vegetable oil.

 

[westtx28]

Wow Mac, pretty deep post. Good to read and interesting to think about.

I'm usually of the school of thought that at any given time prices are exactly where they should be. I think there is enough competition in the firearm market that this holds true. Not that it won't change one direction or the other. Something is worth no more or no less than what someone else is willing to pay for it.

That being said though I'm very frustrated as well. Just last week I was looking to pick up another mid-sized .22 auto loader to plink around with. I ended up getting a classic Beretta 70S. Of course I wanted something of quality construction but I also wanted a nice blued finish, something the main manufactures just don't do anymore. I paid a pretty good premium for it but it's what I wanted and I'm happy.

Maybe there are so many ways different gun owners view the purpose of their weapons. Should a gun be form over function, or, function over form. There is no correct answer and many good and valid arguments on both sides.

I personally have a more nostalgic view of firearms and find their beauty as desirable as their functionality. I think nothing looks better than a deeply blued revolver of autoloader. I know that bluing is one of the most un-durable finishes and doesn't hold up to abuse well at all but it's what I want. Unfortunately the manufacturers are forced to produce for the masses who demand the new modern ultra-durable finishes. But that just means I can't always get exactly what I want but that's life and if I want it bad enough I'll either find something old or go to a custom shop.

Like I said, your post was good Mac, and fun to think about on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

 

[Fat Boy]

I don't think companies that manufacture firearms are trying to take advantage of anyone- I think they are following what seems to be the model of many makers of things; make it as inexpensively as possible, utilize less expensive processes (MIM, etc) when possible, and don't be as concerned about quality control.

One "after-the-fact" point that seems to be out there; if original QC is lacking, it may not be such a big deal if you offer a lifetime warranty; in other words, it isn't so important to get it right out the door, just guaranty to fix it if it breaks afterwards...

 

[Fishslayer]

I think a lot of places have been bumping the prices up courtesy of The Annointed One. I would generally say "too high" for new stuff. OTOH they are selling all they can make, so maybe not. Maybe the price is "too high" when guns sit collecting dust.

As for used, good quality S&W wheelguns are not cheap, but still below the cost of a new one. Collector grade, that's another story & not really related to "worth."

What's a pristine 60's vintage Python "worth?"

FWIW I've owned four new Rugers. Three had issues out of the box, one requiring a trip to the factory.

Quit buying that brand? No. They made up for a crap QA program with A+ customer service.

To be fair, I had a look at a pre-lock 686 S&W the other day. Can't really compare finish, but the fit of the pieces was visibly inferior to my '64 M28. Actually, the sideplate on my 80's Taurus 669 (686 clone) had a better looking fit than the Smith.

I don't think anybody is "making 'em like they used to."

 

[jeepguy]

if i bought a beretta 92fs for lets say $550 yes i expect it to run right & if it doesnt i expect them to fix it on their dime. if on the other hand i bought a fal for $600 i should expect problems. i just want to get what i pay for regardless of price. i bought a kimber pro carry in feb. it ran great except it didnt like the mag that came with it. so i used my other 1911 mags & purchased some wilsons so no harm no foul. now if i bought a hi point or taurus & it had problems i would not be surprised. which is why i paid more fore my beretta 92 instead of getting the taurus clone. the other thing with the car analogy is most of us have to have a car that does everything we need/want it to. with firearms we usually purchase them for specific tasks. for instance one for carry,one for the target practice,one for long distance rifle shooting,one for home defense so on & so forth. i have 5 rifles & 6 handguns but i only have one jeep. good post though as i like to see how different people look at things from different perspectives.

 

[Bubba613]

If firearms makers are screwing customers, it is the customers' fault for continuing to buy them.
It's a free market out there. I personally think someone would need their head examined for buying a Wilson Combat or Les Baer 1911. But the market has other ideas and those companies stay in business year after year selling their products.
Really no different from the clothing market or the watch market.

I believe we live in a golden age of firearms. They have never been as relatively inexpensive. They have never been as well made and well designed. There are never been as many choices. And there has never been as much opportunity to use them.

 

[westtx28]

I believe we live in a golden age of firearms. They have never been as relatively inexpensive. They have never been as well made and well designed. There are never been as many choices. And there has never been as much opportunity to use them.

Yeah, I think this is a good point. The spectrum from super cheap to wildly expensive is getting wider and wider. Very much like cars. The bottom end automobiles actually have quite a bit of bang for the buck while the prices of exotic supercars are hard to even imagine. Leaves lots of options in between.

 

[CajunBass]

They are what they are. I can either buy them or not.

Seems pretty simple to me.

 

[hoohaa310]

This is all so true. I work at a gun store (gander mountain) and every day we get people who come in and complain. "Oh wow these are way more expensive then they used to be."

My favorite is when an old timer comes in and talks to me for 20 minutes about how he bought such and such a pistol for 54 dollars in 1952.

 

[LeonCarr]

Next time tell him to invent a time machine .

Back in the late 80s when I worked the Sporting Goods Counter at Wal-Mart I had a guy tell me in the early 70s he bought a used Remington 700 BDL .30-06 with Redfield scope, Mounts, and braided leather sling and got change back from 100 bucks. I told him to invent a time machine, go back and buy about 100 of those, and I would take one off his hands.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr


Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[smhbbag1]

The REAL gun prices are what we could get them for if all the burdensome regulation, taxes, permits, fees, etc. were taken out of the prices. The same goes for all businesses. Gun companies have to deal with the same stuff any other business does, plus all the extras.

There is only one reason a new Glock is not $250 or less, and it's not Glock nor the customers who did it.

Yes, gun quality is better than ever before. And yes, gun prices are better, in terms of average wages, than ever before.

But that's what happens over a couple generations in a still-somewhat-free society. But that's not an excuse for them to be as high as they are. We could do a lot better.

 

[Sir Aardvark]

Gun prices are too much.

It's not fair comparing 1957 prices with the prices today, because labor costs have decreased dramatically and efficiency has increased exponentially - by this, I mean that you are now paying one person to monitor a CNC machine that produces 100's of product an hour instead of dozens of people who used to put together 100 of a product in a day.

Workers today are most likely Assembling a firearm than yesteryear's Craftsmen actually Making a firearm.

Tolerances are such on today's CNC and molding equipment that almost no hand fitting of parts is needed to produce a functioning firearm.

Although CNC machines and tooling aren't cheap, don't think for a moment that companies hurt their bottom line by using them. The first 25 units that pop out of the machine every day will probably pay for any overhead associated with the cost of the machine, the operator, and the tooling - the next 975 made that day are just gravy for the company.

I'm sure it costs Remington less than $70.00 to produce an 870, but final retail price of an 870 Express here in Southern California is $369.00.

And how about Ruger Mini 14's? They are the best $300.00 rifle that $700.00 will buy!
Ruger doesn't use the "lost wax" investment-casting technique because it's expensive - it's not!

Last but not least, how about SIG Sauers XM9 Service Pistol bid to the US Gov't. of $176.33 per pistol? This includes their profit margin! They are still making money at this price! Joe-blow consumer certainly wasn't offered SIG 226's at anywhere near this price. (I know, I know... 1984 prices, doesn't include the $11.00 magazine, etc., etc. - but you get the idea).

What about Quality?

The 870 Express has received multiple complaints about it's rough chambers, burr-filled action, and rust-prone finish - all at a price that you can afford!
And who likes S&W's MIM internals? I had to send back to the factory a 629 that had a bowed MIM hammer that would strike the side of the hammer channel on its way to the firing pin. It is very frustrating to have to send a brand new gun back to the factory for repair due to crappy quality control. (As mentioned previously, the crappy quality was offset by S&W's excellent customer support - but none-the-less, still an irritating experience)

Wishfully thinking, I would expect to see either less expensive guns in today's market, or, guns at the same price but with much greater quality.

 

[oneounceload]

Let's not forget the 11% FET in any price, insurances, taxes, advertising, legal issues, salaries, physical plant, updating tooling and equipment.

Fabbri has been using CNC equipment for over 25 years- his new one cost somewhere around 10,000,000. He produces 30 guns a year - that's a lot of overhead to pay off Too many here just look at the materials and think the product needs to be priced 10% above that number. Doesn't happen. Glock can make a G17 for $52.00, yet they sell for 10 times that by the time you factor everything else into it

 

[Sir Aardvark]

...(Fabbri's new CNC Machine) cost somewhere around 10,000,000. He produces 30 guns a year - that's a lot of overhead to pay off

I really don't see an issue in Fabbri covering his overhead when he has a five-year waiting list for his product and charges up to $300,000.00 for a shotgun.

If Fabbri sells 30 of his $300,000.00 shotguns in one year, then he has made enough money to pay off $9,000,000.00 of his $10,000,000.00 machine.

 

[oneounceload]

They're not ALL that much - some are 1/3 of that, and remember, the outside engraver can cost almost half of that...........but the point was that he was an innovator in the use of modern techniques and equipment - even down to using that equipment to make every part, including the screws

 

[JohnBT]

"If Fabbri sells 30 of his $300,000.00 shotguns in one year, then he has made enough money to pay off $9,000,000.00 of his $10,000,000.00 machine."

He hasn't made 9 million dollars. Do you understand anything about being in business?

What does he use that year to pay his skilled workers, his utility bills, his raw materials costs and insurance and all of that other overhead? Get serious.

 

[HGUNHNTR]

Guns have been selling like hot cakes, so the market suggests that prices are a bit too low. If guns were too expensive we wouldnt' have seen huge sales numbers the last couple years.

Too me a custom gun or car is worth much less to the second buyer since it has been tailored to a specific person. (If it is truly custom, not a package).

Does anyone want to by my custom tailored Diesel jeans? No, didn't think so, not unless you are a 31.5"x 32 3/4".

 

[huntsman]

Here is the real question: Is there a value vs price issue? Are the gun makers cutting corners just to stay in business?

yes just like food companies package less product in same sized containers.

Are custom guns priced where guns SHOULD be priced and the average priced guns are simply entry level?

Custom work should reflect what prices the market will bare, not necessarily entry level as much as utilitarian

 

[BBQLS1]

A Vette and a top notch gun aren't the same thing. Try comparing the price for a top notch custom car vs a top notch custom gun.


As far as I'm concerned, the market will dictate the price. Small arms don't have as much going on as an automobile. They should be cheaper.

 

[BBQLS1]

yes just like food companies package less product in same sized containers.

Until they figure out to make the package smaller and further reduce cost.