# Famous Handgun Flops



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

No, this isn't a beat up Taurus post. I was just thinking that some of the big manufacturers have had their fair share of duds. Smith & Wesson, an icon of handguns, managed to produce the Model 59, which certainly didn't set the wonder nine market on fire. The .22 Escort. Great concealable little .22. It didn't work, and if it did you couldn't hit the floor with it. The Sygma series. Do I have to say anything? Colt, once made great handguns, they also had the Double Eagle, the double action 1911 wannabe. Lost the 1911 grip of course, pointed like hand drill, and had a very interesting 19-22 lb. DA pull. The Sa trigger pull was long, but made up for it by creeping along. Then there was the Colt 2000. a 9MM well behind it's time. The sights seem to disappear, and the ball bearing trigger felt like you were dragging a stick through gravel. I see Sig is taking a beating on their 9MM civilian version of the Army's new holster child, and Glock's keep going off by themselves. Feel free to add any you can think of.


----------



## high pockets (Apr 25, 2011)

AMT AutoMag - didn't seem to survive a lack of popularity.


----------



## blackshirt (Jan 12, 2018)

Original Caracal?


----------



## crewchief (Jul 25, 2018)

I had a SW 5906 and 6904 back in the day. They were pretty good weapons too. I got bucks down and had to sell them both along the way of having kids and a wife!!!


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

crewchief said:


> I had a SW 5906 and 6904 back in the day. They were pretty good weapons too. I got bucks down and had to sell them both along the way of having kids and a wife!!!


Next time around, keep the Smiths and sell the kids. (Not your wife, I hear she's a better shot than you. :anim_lol: )


----------



## Philco (Apr 17, 2012)

Let me add the AMT Backup in .380 to the list. Worst handgun I've ever owned times ten.


----------



## shepsan (Jan 22, 2013)

Diamondback DB380 Semiautomatic Pocket Pistol

Great looking pocket pistol. Looks like a very small baby Glock.

looks are deceiving. The pistol never fired a single round. Everything failed. Went back to MFG numerous times. Was never able to load it, never able to rack the slide, and the dealer was not able to fire the pistol. It simply failed everything. 

Two months after purchase and numerous times back to dealer, they took it back and gave me complete refund.


----------



## tgrogan (Sep 4, 2007)

shepsan said:


> looks are deceiving. The pistol never fired a single round. Everything failed. Went back to MFG numerous times. Was never able to load it, never able to rack the slide, and the dealer was not able to fire the pistol. It simply failed everything.
> 
> Two months after purchase and numerous times back to dealer, they took it back and gave me complete refund.


Sounds like my first 3 marriages...:anim_lol:


----------



## Bigborgel (Jul 3, 2018)

Moist fails I've had were with a Taurus G2C, FTF,FTE and stovepipes, etc. Had everything but a squib load.
The cheaper brands seem to be where fails originate, Diamondback, Keltec, Hi Point, Jimenez and SCCY. Not all of these, but enough of them to raise serious questions.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Bigborgel said:


> ...The cheaper brands seem to be where fails originate, Diamondback, Keltec, Hi Point, Jimenez and SCCY...


Hi-Points don't seem to malfunction much. They seem to be accurate, too.

Of course, the zamak they're made of may not have a long service life...


----------



## 54rambler (Oct 15, 2018)

Chiappa M9-22, a Beretta copy in 22lr. Mine was terrible. Jammed constantly. I took it back to the shop, they had an indoor test target set up. They were back there for 20 minutes. When they came back out, they went right to the cash register and gave me my money back. They have a lot of stuff on the market now, but after that first one, I just don't trust them.


----------



## Outlaw (Feb 5, 2017)

My vote goes to the Taurus Curve, I'm a PT111 fan so I'm not bashing Taurus. But I don't know anyone that owns one, I'm sure the design was expensive to come up with and Taurus will be hard pressed to get a return on investment.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Colt's American Eagle makes a good door stop but that is about all.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Kimber Solo. Great idea, nice dimensions for a small striker fired 9mm pocket gun. But the damn thing doesn't work. For some reason mine always jams after the fourth round? No matter which magazine I use and I've got several. I believe that Kimber stopped making them in favor of the Micro 9. They just came out with an EVO 9 which is also a small striker "nine". But I think I'll pass on that one. 

I've got three of their 1911's, two micro 9's one micro .380 and a K6s revolver. I've not had one issue with any of them. The K6s is a great revolver by the way. 

The Solo is well made and feels good for such a small pistol but there's got to be something inherently wrong the basic design. Personally I think it's the barrel, with the slide retracted it rattles like a steel ball in a tin can. The gun was purposely designed that way. I have no idea why?


----------



## RUT (Aug 28, 2008)

Remington R51


----------



## win231 (Aug 5, 2015)

54rambler said:


> Chiappa M9-22, a Beretta copy in 22lr. Mine was terrible. Jammed constantly. I took it back to the shop, they had an indoor test target set up. They were back there for 20 minutes. When they came back out, they went right to the cash register and gave me my money back. They have a lot of stuff on the market now, but after that first one, I just don't trust them.


IMO, Chiappa makes so-so guns that may appeal to some people who just gotta have something different & unusual that no one else makes - like the copy of the 30 M1 in 9mm, the revolvers with the barrel below the cylinder, etc. Their guns are high priced & inferior quality.


----------



## berettatoter (Sep 1, 2011)

About 5 or 6 years ago, I had bought a I.O. Hellcat, in .380 Auto. Liked the looks of it...until I took it to the range.  What a POS! I got sucked into that mess, and I.O. would not try to do anything to make the gun run. It would do a whole laundry list of malfunctions, all the time.

I took that piece of junk back to where I had originally bought it, and traded it off. Took another bath on the trade value too...lesson learned.


----------



## penak (Mar 6, 2019)

Remington R51


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

I don’t consider the R51 a flop... It is a very nice gun, I have one and enjoy shooting it. Perhaps their first introduction did not go well,,however, they deserve credit for learning from their mistake and then coming out with a very nice handgun.


----------



## Rock185 (Oct 26, 2012)

Perhaps not so famous, but the Dardick would surely qualify otherwise.


----------



## AZdave (Oct 23, 2015)

Phoenix Arms HP22
It would shoot, but you needed four arms (two with needle-nose fingers) to put it back together.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Rock185 said:


> Perhaps not so famous, but the *Dardick* would surely qualify otherwise.


The "tround" idea was the best part of the Dardick.
The "tround" could've been used to feed the Gatling-inspired rotary cannon used in our ground-attack "Warthog," for instance.
Or it could've been used in a better sub-machinegun. Or even a rifle.
But in Dardick's almost useless pistol, it was a kludge and a failure.


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

AZdave said:


> Phoenix Arms HP22
> It would shoot, but you needed four arms (two with needle-nose fingers) to put it back together.


My Brother bought one for his girlfriend. It had so many safeties she never could figure out how to carry it. I played with it awhile and found that it would pattern (not group) about 18 inches low at 30 feet. I see a lot of these open carried in Wal-Mart nylon holster's. If I owned one I sure wouldn't tell anyone let alone open carry it.


----------



## AZdave (Oct 23, 2015)

Tangof said:


> My Brother bought one for his girlfriend. It had so many safeties she never could figure out how to carry it. I played with it awhile and found that it would pattern (not group) about 18 inches low at 30 feet. I see a lot of these open carried in Wal-Mart nylon holster's. If I owned one I sure wouldn't tell anyone let alone open carry it.


The HP22 had one nice feature, the case had a round key lock on it.

I was safe for about 20 years when I lost the key (but found again). Not even sure I could trade it.


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

I must be the odd man out,, I have Phoenix HP22 and am very happy with it....just takes a few minutes of practice to develop a routine for the safeties..... and I carry mine in a good holster.. It shoots well, and as accurate as yo can expect a gun that small to be.....Also very easy to disassemble and re-=assemble.


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

Slowalkintexan said:


> I must be the odd man out,, I have Phoenix HP22 and am very happy with it....just takes a few minutes of practice to develop a routine for the safeties..... and I carry mine in a good holster.. It shoots well, and as accurate as yo can expect a gun that small to be.....Also very easy to disassemble and re-=assemble.


Sorry, didn't mean a hit at you. Just my experience with it and the low cost seems to attract a lot of wannabe gun toter's.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

I owned one of those Chiappa Rhinos, ,357 4". It never malfunctioned while I owned it. The DA trigger pull wasn't two-handed, but it was stiff and gritty. The pseudo-hammer could be 'cocked 'to make it single action, but it wasn't easy. And every time I looked at the gun I was more dismayed by what I was seeing. I took a 1.5C hit when I sold it, and figgered I got off easy.


----------



## berettatoter (Sep 1, 2011)

high pockets said:


> AMT AutoMag - didn't seem to survive a lack of popularity.


Lol. I had an AMT Hardballer .45 ACP that was a POS.


----------



## esmith1721 (Nov 6, 2018)

Tangof said:


> No, this isn't a beat up Taurus post. I was just thinking that some of the big manufacturers have had their fair share of duds. Smith & Wesson, an icon of handguns, managed to produce the Model 59, which certainly didn't set the wonder nine market on fire. The .22 Escort. Great concealable little .22. It didn't work, and if it did you couldn't hit the floor with it. The Sygma series. Do I have to say anything? Colt, once made great handguns, they also had the Double Eagle, the double action 1911 wannabe. Lost the 1911 grip of course, pointed like hand drill, and had a very interesting 19-22 lb. DA pull. The Sa trigger pull was long, but made up for it by creeping along. Then there was the Colt 2000. a 9MM well behind it's time. The sights seem to disappear, and the ball bearing trigger felt like you were dragging a stick through gravel. I see Sig is taking a beating on their 9MM civilian version of the Army's new holster child, and Glock's keep going off by themselves. Feel free to add any you can think of.


Actually the S&W Model 59 was a wonderful Firearm for its time, its still a great gun. True it won't perform quite as fast or agile as the modern plastic wonders, it will still get the job done.


----------



## wirenut (Dec 16, 2015)




----------



## wirenut (Dec 16, 2015)

esmith1721 said:


> Actually the S&W Model 59 was a wonderful Firearm for its time, its still a great gun. True it won't perform quite as fast or agile as the modern plastic wonders, it will still get the job done.


I agree, bought mine in the 70's and it has been flawless.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

wirenut said:


> I agree, bought mine in the 70's and it has been flawless.
> 
> View attachment 17672


Mine are variants of the Model 59. They're a little out dated by today's standards and there's not too many aftermarket parts available. You don't see too many of these guns around anymore. Probably because people hang on to them? But when they come up for sale you can get them for under $400 depending on condition.

At one time they were very popular with law enforcement agencies throughout the country. Especially when they made the transition from revolvers to semi auto's and for good reason.

I rarely shoot mine anymore, but they do work. I would hardly call them a "handgun flop".


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

I nominate...
The Puckle Gun!










No other firearm was designed to fire spherical bullets at Europeans, and cubical bullets at Muslims.

P.S.: The illustration is of a mere replica, on display in a British maritime museum. The original still resides in the armoury of the Tower of London (and I've seen it, "in person").


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> I nominate...
> The Puckle Gun!
> 
> View attachment 17674
> ...


BUT, I'll bet it's not California legal.


----------



## AZdave (Oct 23, 2015)

Tangof said:


> BUT, I'll bet it's not California legal.


It is legal, unless you shoot at Muslims.


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

“‘Hi-Points don't seem to malfunction much. They seem to be accurate, too.
Of course, the zamak they're made of may not have a long service life...”


Steve, I expect better from you,,,,Why can’t some one post a good thing about Hi-Point’s without having to add a detraction, that may or may not be true.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Slowalkintexan said:


> "'Hi-Points don't seem to malfunction much. They seem to be accurate, too.
> Of course, the zamak they're made of may not have a long service life..."
> 
> Steve, I expect better from you,,,,Why can't some one post a good thing about Hi-Point's without having to add a detraction, that may or may not be true.


All Steve did was state his opinion. There's a reason why High Points are cheap, they're made of cheaper materials. So it stands to reason that they "may not have a long service life". One does not have to be a nuclear physicist to figure that out.


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

Desertman, you just proved my point. Thank you.

‘May not have a long service life”....please define your terms.
For comparison,, if a $600 S&W lasts for 100,000 rounds, and a Hi-Point for $130 lasts for 50,00 rounds...which one is the better deal??
Has any one actually worn out a Hi-Point ?
...please, exact numbers from original owners.


----------



## Donel (Aug 17, 2019)

Tell me more about Glocks going off by themselves


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

Every one I've seen, quite a lot actually, shot without any malfunctions. 9MM mostly, but more than a few .45's. As far as wearing out, I don't think that people who buy these guns shoot them enough to wear them out. That probably can be said for 90% of the guns out there. Deer season is coming up. Thinking about it I don't think I have 400 rounds through my Browning BAR .30/06. That's in 35 years!


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

desertman said:


> ...There's a reason why High Points are cheap, they're made of cheaper materials. So it stands to reason that they "may not have a long service life". One does not have to be a nuclear physicist to figure that out.


I stand by my previous assessment, and to it, I now add *desertman*'s supplement.
And to that, I add *Tangof*'s very accurate observation:


Tangof said:


> Every one I've seen...shot without any malfunctions...As far as wearing out, I don't think that people who buy these guns shoot them enough to wear them out...


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Slowalkintexan said:


> Desertman, you just proved my point. Thank you.
> 
> 'May not have a long service life"....please define your terms.
> For comparison,, if a $600 S&W lasts for 100,000 rounds, and a Hi-Point for $130 lasts for 50,00 rounds...which one is the better deal??
> ...


In order to become proficient with a handgun you're probably going to spend at least if not more than $1,000 on ammo. In which case it's penny wise and pound foolish to buy a $130 gun and then spend $1,000 or more on ammo to put through it. It's kinda' like buying a $100,000 vehicle and then putting the cheapest set of tires you can find on it. If someone can afford to put 50,000 rounds out of a $130 gun than they can certainly afford to buy a better gun to begin with.

If someone is too cheap to spend a few hundred dollars more for a better gun than more than likely they'll be too cheap to do any appreciable amount of practicing with it. If they're not willing to spend the amount of money on ammo to become proficient with it then they're probably better off buying a baseball bat other than a gun.

I don't know if anyone has worn out a Hi-Point as I don't know anyone that has one? But I'd be willing to bet that most of the people that buy them rarely if ever fire them at all. I don't know of any military or law enforcement agencies that use them either. If Hi-Points were just as good as the guns that the military and law enforcement currently use, then why don't they use them instead?


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

Because they're ugly?


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Tangof said:


> Every one I've seen, quite a lot actually, shot without any malfunctions. 9MM mostly, but more than a few .45's. As far as wearing out, I don't think that people who buy these guns shoot them enough to wear them out. That probably can be said for 90% of the guns out there. Deer season is coming up. Thinking about it I don't think I have 400 rounds through my Browning BAR .30/06. That's in 35 years!


As someone who buys and collects guns I've got plenty that I've never even fired yet. But over the course of my lifetime I've fired enough rounds out of many of the guns that I own, both revolvers and semi-auto's enough to be proficient with each type and their different actions. I'm sure you've done the same especially if you go out hunting.



Tangof said:


> Because they're ugly?


No, because their life may one day depend on the equipment they carry.


----------



## AZdave (Oct 23, 2015)

Donel said:


> Tell me more about Glocks going off by themselves


Ask the backfliping danced crazed FBI agent.

Ok I don't believe him either. He had to pull the trigger when he pick it up.


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

Steve, thank you.. You just proved my point.:

I don't know if anyone has worn out a Hi-Point as I don't know anyone that has one? But I'd be willing to bet that most of the people that buy them rarely if ever fire them at all. I don't know of any military or law enforcement agencies that use them either. If Hi-Points were just as good as the guns that the military and law enforcement currently use, then why don't they use them instead?

And while I have, in the past, had a lot of respect for you,,, in this particular post, of yours, I think, you are being very judge mental.

I don’t have an axe to grind about Hi-Points,,,, just remember my first comment about them was asking why posters can’t say something good about them, without adding a supposed defect or short coming.


Also if you don’t own one, and have never shot one,, how did you become an expert on Hi-Points...... sounds sorta like a priest giving sex ed lessons.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Slowalkintexan said:


> And while I have, in the past, had a lot of respect for you,,, in this particular post, of yours, I think, you are being very judge mental.
> 
> *Also if you don't own one, and have never shot one,, how did you become an expert on Hi-Points*...... sounds sorta like a priest giving sex ed lessons.


I'm just giving you my opinion. Everyone has one and should be allowed to express it. I never claimed to be an expert on Hi-Points. *However I've never eaten shit before either but I know enough about it to not even try it.* *I've never owned a Ford Pinto either but know enough about them to never buy one.* *I've never been a Democrat before but know enough about them to never vote for one.*

I don't have an axe to grind about Hi-Points either, all I can do is offer my opinions on why I don't think it makes any sense to buy one. That's all that I did. You may not agree, that's okay it doesn't affect my life in any way. Go ahead and buy as many Hi-Points and rave about them to your hearts content. It's your money not mine.


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

Desertman, please, I didn’t say anything about buying Hi-Points and whether I own any or not,,,, isn’t the point...
I tried to make it clear........If you don’t own a gun, or a car, or anything else, how can you be an expert on it...???

Yes, you have an opinion on just about anything, but what is the basis of your opinion.....actual knowledge or just hearsay???

And I think your comment about ‘never eaten shit” is very cute.!


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Slowalkintexan said:


> Desertman, please, I didn't say anything about buying Hi-Points and whether I own any or not,,,, isn't the point...
> I tried to make it clear........If you don't own a gun, or a car, or anything else, how can you be an expert on it...???
> 
> Yes, you have an opinion on just about anything, but what is the basis of your opinion.....actual knowledge or just hearsay???
> ...


I never claimed to be an expert on HI-Points. I only gave my opinion on why I would never buy one. Why is that so difficult for you to understand...??? I tried to make that clear.

My analogy of eating shit is appropriate. But you just don't get it...???

Anyway I'm done arguing with you. It's better for me to just walk away.


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

I started this topic in a somewhat humorous vein, not to start a sniping match. Every manufacturer has had guns that were duds. Plain and simple. You name a company and someone has bought a gun from them that was a piece of junk. I wouldn't condemn the company as whole, just the poor product. I gave my opinion on the Hi-Points. Not junk. Affordable guns that aren't going to be taken to the range and shot 1000 rounds every month. I'll say that of the LEO's I know, a couple hundred, most don't fire their CCW more than 100 rounds a month, be they S&W, Glock, Ruger or whatever. Some a lot less. So this topic really is confined to the gun enthusiasts on this Forum. I doubt anyone here is going to rely on a Hi-Point as their carry gun so point is moot. If you do, and you feel confident, good for you. I pack a 1894 Nagant myself.


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

Desertman,,, How can you give an opinion on something you don’t know anything about,,,,And I am talking about guns here,,,, not your silly scatological reference.


----------



## Slowalkintexan (Feb 6, 2007)

How is an 1894 Nagent MORE reliable than a Hi-Point?

I don’t have a dog in this race, I just enjoy poking fun at you guys with ‘absolute’solid’ opinions on Hi-Points.
And so, Tangof, you comment that ‘real ‘ gun enthusiasts don’t have any ‘truck’ with Hi-Points pretty much makes it clear...that you think they are below the ‘hoi-paloi” of the gun world.


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

Slowalkintexan said:


> How is an 1894 Nagent MORE reliable than a Hi-Point?
> 
> I don't have a dog in this race, I just enjoy poking fun at you guys with 'absolute'solid' opinions on Hi-Points.
> And so, Tangof, you comment that 'real ' gun enthusiasts don't have any 'truck' with Hi-Points pretty much makes it clear...that you think they are below the 'hoi-paloi" of the gun world.


Get off my case about the Nagant. It took a lot of engineering skill to come up with a gun that was slower to load than a Colt single action army when break top and swing cylinders had been around for years and I would bet that double action trigger isn't more than 30 lbs., tops. Anyway, no I wouldn't be carrying a Hi-Point. I wouldn't be carrying a Kimber .45 either. The Hi-Point is bulky, has a poor trigger, and it's cheaply made and poorly finished. In my hands it's not as accurate as I feel comfortable with. I wouldn't carry a Kimber because they mal-function more than usual and I wouldn't feel comfortable with it. Yes, I'm picky as far as carry guns go. I want the best that I can find for ME. And what's with the "Truck" comment? Have you been reading Huckleberry Finn again?


----------



## wirenut (Dec 16, 2015)

desertman said:


> In order to become proficient with a handgun you're probably going to spend at least if not more than $1,000 on ammo. In which case it's penny wise and pound foolish to buy a $130 gun and then spend $1,000 or more on ammo to put through it. It's kinda' like buying a $100,000 vehicle and then putting the cheapest set of tires you can find on it. If someone can afford to put 50,000 rounds out of a $130 gun than they can certainly afford to buy a better gun to begin with.
> 
> If someone is too cheap to spend a few hundred dollars more for a better gun than more than likely they'll be too cheap to do any appreciable amount of practicing with it. If they're not willing to spend the amount of money on ammo to become proficient with it then they're probably better off buying a baseball bat other than a gun.
> 
> I don't know if anyone has worn out a Hi-Point as I don't know anyone that has one? But I'd be willing to bet that most of the people that buy them rarely if ever fire them at all. I don't know of any military or law enforcement agencies that use them either. If Hi-Points were just as good as the guns that the military and law enforcement currently use, then why don't they use them instead?


I don't completely understand your thinking.
Why should I pay more for a firearm when there are less expensive ones that serve the purpose and are dependable.
When I started shooting in the 70's there where not many semi's to choose from, I bought a S&W model 59 shown in above post that I still use.
Sure I could have bought a Colt Gold Cup back then, but why my still works well.
I bought a Springfield Range Officer, sure I could have bought a high end 1911, but again this is a dependable firearm for less money why spend more money.
A Ruger LCPII will serve the purpose that a higher end Springfield 911 will do at a few hundred less.
I'm not cheap as your post says because I won't spend a few hundred dollars more.
I am watchful of my money so I can buy more ammo.
Maybe just maybe someone can only spend a few hundred, because they are new to the sport.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Don't forget


Slowalkintexan said:


> I must be the odd man out,, I have Phoenix HP22 and am very happy with it....just takes a few minutes of practice to develop a routine for the safeties..... and I carry mine in a good holster.. It shoots well, and as accurate as yo can expect a gun that small to be.....Also very easy to disassemble and re-=assemble.


Is that handgun part of "the ring of fire ". ?

https://lonelymachines.org/2006/11/19/the-ring-of-fire-lives-on/


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

If you're a gun collector , which sometimes develops into an unintended hobby, lol would you want a collection of hi points? Or smith n Wesson's, 
Colts, berettas, sigs??
When purchasing a firearm I consider , trade in value, long term value,
Reliability is always a must have, 

It seems odd to carry a cheap throwaway gun for self defense. 
Considering.....
Reliability can change without warning. I'd rather rely on quality verses saving a couple bucks.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

We forgot about the TAURUS CURVE. 
Are they still "flying off the shelves" (selling like hot cakes) ??


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Tangof said:


> I started this topic in a somewhat humorous vein, not to start a sniping match. Every manufacturer has had guns that were duds. Plain and simple. You name a company and someone has bought a gun from them that was a piece of junk. I wouldn't condemn the company as whole, just the poor product. *I gave my opinion on the Hi-Points. Not junk. Affordable guns that aren't going to be taken to the range and shot 1000 rounds every month.*


That is my whole point. A lot of people that buy these guns are just looking to buy a gun for self protection. For the most part they have no real interest in guns otherwise why wouldn't they buy something better to begin with? Those are the types of people that buy a gun and just throw it in a drawer and forget about it hoping that they'll never have to use it. In which case they'd be better of buying a baseball bat instead of a gun as I've stated earlier.

If they are truly serious about buying a gun for self protection then they're gonna' take the initiative to go out and become proficient with it. That does cost money, a lot more than $130 that's for sure, at least 10 times the initial cost of the gun.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

wirenut said:


> I don't completely understand your thinking.
> Why should I pay more for a firearm when there are less expensive ones that serve the purpose and are dependable.
> When I started shooting in the 70's there where not many semi's to choose from, I bought a S&W model 59 shown in above post that I still use.
> Sure I could have bought a Colt Gold Cup back then, but why my still works well.
> ...


From the sound of your post you already have some shooting experience. If you want to buy a cheaply made gun that's your right. I don't consider an S&W Model 59, Springfield Range Officer, or Ruger LCPII's to be cheaply made guns. Although they are not as expensive as their higher end counterparts. I would certainly take any one of those over a $130 HI-Point and have confidence in it.

You can get a Ruger EC9s brand new for around $230. Is an extra $100 really gonna' break the bank when you take into consideration that you may be putting over $1,000 worth of ammo through it over the long run?

My responses are directed mostly towards first time gun buyers who may be coming to this forum looking for advice as to what type of gun to buy. Not to those of us that are already have experience shooting handguns.

I never accused you personally of being cheap. I was speaking in general terms to make a point.

"If someone is too cheap to spend a few hundred dollars more for a better gun than more than likely they'll be too cheap to do any appreciable amount of practicing with it. If they're not willing to spend the amount of money on ammo to become proficient with it then they're probably better off buying a baseball bat other than a gun."


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

pic said:


> Reliability is always a must have,
> 
> *It seems odd to carry a cheap throwaway gun for self defense.
> Considering.....
> Reliability can change without warning. I'd rather rely on quality verses saving a couple bucks.*


Someone who gets it. Especially when your life may depend on it. Thank you!


----------



## wirenut (Dec 16, 2015)

desertman said:


> From the sound of your post you already have some shooting experience. If you want to buy a cheaply made gun that's your right. I don't consider an S&W Model 59, Springfield Range Officer, or Ruger LCPII's to be cheaply made guns. Although they are not as expensive as their higher end counterparts. I would certainly take any one of those over a $130 HI-Point and have confidence in it.
> 
> You can get a Ruger EC9s brand new for around $230. Is an extra $100 really gonna' break the bank when you take into consideration that you may be putting over $1,000 worth of ammo through it over the long run?
> 
> ...


I am not saying in anyway you calling me cheap, but most people won't do the research before buying and they look for cheap prices.
They usually end up with a Hi-point or a SCCY because of cost, but my point was that there are quality pieces without spending a bunch one just needs to look.
People need to do research and not have buyers remorse later, if not you get what you pay for and then you deserve it. a little education goes a long way.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

wirenut said:


> I am not saying in anyway you calling me cheap, but most people won't do the research before buying and they look for cheap prices.
> They usually end up with a Hi-point or a SCCY because of cost, but my point was that there are quality pieces without spending a bunch one just needs to look.
> People need to do research and not have buyers remorse later, if not you get what you pay for and then you deserve it. a little education goes a long way.


I can't argue with that.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

pic said:


> Don't forget
> Is that handgun part of "the ring of fire ". ?
> https://lonelymachines.org/2006/11/19/the-ring-of-fire-lives-on/


*Pic*'s link brings up a very well written article which addresses, and fully explains, the important issues in most of the points that you guys are arguing about.

BTW, while discussing cheap pistols...
My wife's personal choice of self-protection weapon wasn't our S&W J-frame, or our Star PD, or one of our three 1911s (including a really nice, custom-made shortie), but rather a Kel-Tec P-3AT.
And, you know, it seems reasonably well made, and it functions reliably. If she or I pulls its trigger, it always goes "BANG!" You can't ask for more than that.
Her P-3AT cost us about $100.00 more than a Hi-Point would have. But the Hi-Point would have been too heavy for her thin body to carry, and probably too large as well.
(I admit that, subsequent to having used it for a while, we invested in about $100.00-worth of accessory improvements. So now it has cost $200.00 more than a Hi-Point.)

I have never owned a Hi-Point, and neither have I ever owned a 1950s Jaguar automobile. But still, I also know that I never would want to use, daily, either one.
Just as the Jaguar would be finicky to maintain, and its Whitworth screw-threads would invite important parts to fall off, the Hi-Point, although reputedly accurate, would not withstand daily practice because of its base material.
I don't have to own one, or even use one, to know those things. Other people have already done that, and I have read their comments. _QED_


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

Excellent. I wish all new potential gun owner's would read it.


----------



## bertha01 (Sep 21, 2018)

Outlaw said:


> My vote goes to the Taurus Curve, I'm a PT111 fan so I'm not bashing Taurus. But I don't know anyone that owns one, I'm sure the design was expensive to come up with and Taurus will be hard pressed to get a return on investment.


+1


----------

