Why are handguns so Expensive?

[EricTheBarbarian]

I am fairly new to handguns and shopped around alot before I bought one. I decided on a springfield xd in .45 acp. It ran over $500 and it got me to thinking. Why are quality handguns nearly double the price of a quality rifle? There are many quality rifles to be had in the $300 price range but it doesn't really seem to be the case with handguns. Looking at them I would say it takes alot less material to produce a handgun than a rifle. Just going by the materials used to produce them I would think they would be cheaper than rifles. Maybe theres some type of legislation that inflates the price? If anyone knows why this is, I would like to know.

 

[bear71]

Great question, Eric, I'm looking forward to hearing some answers as well!

 

[carpediem]

No legislation I know of.

I always assumed it was because faster-burning pistols powders create proportionally more pressure, hence the need for strong construction in a compact package = $$$

 

[2TransAms]

Ruger 10/22's and Remington 700's are produced by the thousands. Sell more units at a lower price - Walmart economics.

 

[Beagle-zebub]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe that there is a 10% federal tax on handguns, as well as on ammunition of any kind.

 

[Fn-P9]

A "quality" rifle WILL cost you more than $500. A Remington 700 can go for $600 to $800 easily. An AR15 goes for around $750 to $1500 normally. A $500 XD is a budget handgun. Look at some Kimbers or Ed Browns or colts even. These are all about $1000 plus.You get what you pay for. There are differences between aRemington 710 for $400 and a Remington 700 for $800.

Yes the Savage el chepo .22 in blued barrel for $105 is a good gun for $105 but a $250 10/22 will beat it. You get what you pay for.

O yeah walmart sucks.

 

[McCall911]

Demand!

 

[camacho]

Man, I wish they weren't. Take for instance the Sigs and HKs. Great guns but the price?! I can buy three Mossberg shotguns for that amount. Bummer!

 

[ojibweindian]

Yes the Savage el chepo .22 in blued barrel for $105 is a good gun for $105 but a $250 10/22 will beat it. You get what you pay for.

Quality is subjective and based upon the needs and desires of the individual. For instance, my definition of quality is not figured cherry stocks, deep rich blueing, and tight tolerances, but rather durability and accuracy.

Quite simply, a pretty rifle or pistol that is functionally unreliable and inaccurate is worthless to me.

And, there are rifles out there, i.e. the Savage 110 and Weatherby Vanguard that, while not the prettiest, are certainly durable and accurate, and hence are quality pieces of equipment.

In the example you cited above, I would argue that the "Savage el cheapo .22" is better than the 10/22 simply because it is generally more accurate and reliable, in my experiences with the two platforms.

 

[McCall911]

Why are handguns so Expensive?


Demand!

Having given the short answer, there is another side to it.

When you go to trade a handgun in or sell it outright to a dealer, then expect to receive only about 60 percent of the retail!

 

[nathan]

Maybe the concealability of it in actual use.

 

[carlrodd]

i would go with demand more than anything as well. people that don't know much about firearms, don't frequently buy, and simply want maybe a home defense weapon are most likely to go pick up a handgun of some sort. so manufacturers and retailers see this market and price accordingly.

as far as long arms are concerned, i would say the same thing about ARs. it's so recognisable, and lots and LOTS of new rifle owners just gotta have one, so up goes the price.

 

[MikeS.]

It's the lawyers

I think that the illogical legal mindset has some to due with it. Every firearms manufacturer KNOWS they are going to get sued almost every time someone gets killed with one of their handguns.

Nasty evil handguns jumping out and killing some poor misguided, ignored as a child, bad guy.

And my wife wonders why we carry a 1M umbrella policy.

 

[browningguy]

Without getting into semantics arguments over the definition of quality I'm going with FN P9 on this one. Just don't confuse "quality" with "utilitarian", there is a difference, although most Americans don't seem to recognize that. We tend to accept the lowest common demoninator in everything.

You can buy utilitarian rifles that work for $300, heck, I've got a Vanguard Deluxe I got on sale for $299. But even that isn't a quality rifle, it's utilitarian. It works, but I did have to trim the barrel channel to free float the barrel, and when you pull the action from the stock there is one little dime sized dab of putty that is supposed to be the bedding. The inletting on all of these is mediocre, but good enough to still work, the ones with plastic stocks are flexible, but will work most of the time.

And you can buy utilitarian pistols that work for $300 also. Generally, there are exceptions of course, you spend more to get higher quality. That means fit and finish or some design improvement. The lowest common denomitator is that it works for it's intended purpose, so higher quality often means something related to aesthetics since even the cheapest is expected to work. Higher quality could also mean materials, which once again can cause all kinds of argumaents such as forgings vs. castings, or MIM parts vs. stamped steel vs. machined steel.

 

[Jim K]

One major factor is that with the anti-gun gang and their vicious lawyers ready to sue gun makers out of business, it is almost impossible for gun companies to obtain insurance. So many are going the self-insured route, which means that a big chunk of the cost of a gun goes into a fund to defend the company or pay judgements if necessary. I have heard that in some cases that amounts to close to $100 per gun, but don't know if that is true or not.

Foreign makers don't have that much concern; their overseas assets cannot be seized and their US assets are nothing but a warehouse and an office.

Jim

 

[tnieto2004]

Big bang small size..

 

[mljdeckard]

I agree about the lawyers. It's not enough to make a profit or survive. They must keep the mother of all rainy day funds.

I'm trying to imagine the actual manufacturing cost of say, a Glock, and I can't see where it costs more than $50 to make one. But with all the layers of distributors, everyone gets a cut.

And the truth is, I don't mind paying a reasonable price for a gun and letting people make a reasonable profit. I WANT it to be worth it for them to stay in the business.

 

[chris in va]

There was some discussion a while back about the cost of Glocks. Probably just misinformation but it was determined they cost about $100 to make.

 

[Baba Louie]

In 1916 a miner's hourly wage (to pick one I could find online quickly) was about $0.19.5/hr. or about $7.80 a week assuming a 40 hr week (and I'd bet they worked more like 50 - 60 hrs./wk back then).

In an old 1908 Sears, Roebuck (repro) catalog I've got on the bookshelf, a brand new Colt Cowboy Frontier revolver (SAA or Bisley) cost $15.50 (big sigh), as did a Winchester 1894 rifle (.30-30, w/ 26" octagonal barrel... sigh) but other rifles, like a Trap Door Springfield Gov't .45-70, ran about $2.75 (and they threw in 20 rds of ammo to boot) (and yes it was a surplus rifle bought from Uncle Sam's stocks).

So lets say today you earn minimum wage or round up to $6.00/hr. (easier math for me) $6 x 40 = $240.00/week. Let's forget about buying a new Colt SAA for a minute tho' since it kinda skews things and since Winchester no longer makes, uh, well, let's forget about them and substitute a S&W Model 10 and a Marlin 336. Davidson's listing for each: $499.00 for the Smith or a Marlin 336 at $359.00. Maybe we should use a Moison Nagent or a Swiss K-31 to compare w/ the nasty old surplus Trap Door... (another sigh) at $100.00.

Hmmmm. Looks like about 2+ weeks of your life is tied up in that revolver whether you bought something back then, or today and a little less time to buy a good enough rifle (OK, the Marlin qualifies as a great rifle).

But, to get to the heart of the matter, and as others have pointed out, the labor costs associated with manufacturing one handgun is typically greater than the labor costs associated with the longer arm. Material costs are really minimal in the overall scheme of things but they aren't getting any cheaper. Factor in shipping from overseas. Factor in Supply & Demand. Also, factor in Overhead & Profit for each entity along the way. And last but not least, factor in taxation at each step along the way. (and gov't surplus is a great way to go if you really want something cheap)

A final point. Oversea labor is usually a lot cheaper than US labor with some exceptions, notably European and Japan.

Other than that, I can't think of a really good reason.

 

[Fawkes]

Why are cars expensive? Quality demands price. If you want a beater commuter vehicle, you can get one. Just don't get upset if it leaves you stranded with under 100k. On the other hand, if you want a ride with all the bells and whistles or something that 100k is just broken in, you're going to pay more. In the case of a SD firearm, you are betting with your life. Do you want a Hyundai Accent or a Toyota Camry? Or you can spring for the 3-series Bimmer?

 

[another okie]

Good points, above, plus the handgun the OP bought is semi-automatic, which costs more to make. Try to find a quality semi-automatic rifle that will handle the high volumes of rounds the XD will for the prices mentioned.

 

[RP86]

Although the actual raw materials to make a gun is relatively cheap, there's alot more to it. You have to pay for Brand name, machining equipment, massive amounts of advertising, possible recalls, legal costs, employee's pay checks, quality control, import tax(guns made out of the country), engineering, testing, and the list goes on and on.... Sure the manufacturers are making money, why else would they be making them? Then of course you have Economics 101 with supply/demand and all that fun stuff. You generally have alot more legal problems with handguns, because we all know rifles can't shoot bullets.

-Ryan

 

[20yearvet]

As others have pointed out, the answer is economics. The "lawyer factor" is part of the overall market.

You're comparing handgun prices to rifle prices. It's apples and oranges. There is a rifle market, there is a handgun market. There is a shotgun market. In the bigger picture, there is a firearm market.

The market determines the price. Something is "worth" whatever someone is wililng to pay for it. People are willing to pay $500 for a certain handgun, therefore the market has determined that that certain handgun generally sells for around $500.

 

[lesjones]

Like 2TransAms, I assumed the biggest factor was volume.

There are some inexpensive, mass-produced long guns out there - mostly .22s and pump shotguns. An equivalent on the handgun side would be something like a Ruger .22 semi-auto, which is in the same price ballpark as a Ruger 10/22 rifle or Mossberg 500 shotgun.

 

[Kentak]

I agree with those that say a liability cost is factored in. I don't have hard and fast stats, but I'm willing to venture that handguns are involved in many more accident and malfunction type events proportionally than long guns. That means higher legal costs.

K